Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 10/21/2008 - CONSIDERATION OF THE APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL OF THE i ITEM NUMBER: 30 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: October 21, 2008 FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Jim Hibbard Bob Smith Marsha Hilmes-Robinson SUBJECT Consideration of the Appeal to City Council of the Water Board's August 28, 2008 Denial of the Floodplain Variance for a School in the Poudre River 500-year Floodplain. RECOMMENDATION Council should consider the appeal based upon the record and relevant provisions of the Code and Charter, and after consideration, either: 1. Remand the decision if the Council finds that the Board failed to conduct a fair hearing; or 2. Uphold, overturn or modify the Board's decision; or 2. Remand the decision for further consideration of additional issues raised on appeal. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On August 28, 2008,the Water Board considered an application for a variance from the City Code to allow the change of use in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain for an existing structure,located at 720 East Vine Drive, to a critical facility(a charter school) and to allow the same structure to be expanded in the future on 720 East Vine Drive and onto 724 and 750 East Vine for the same use. The Water Board unanimously denied the variance request. The Appellants, representing the Nature School, filed an amended Notice of Appeal with the City Clerk's Office on September 30, 2008, seeking redress of the action of the Water Board which is the subject of this appeal. BACKGROUND The Rocky Mountain Raptor Program is proposing a school with an environmental curriculum in an existing structure and that structure is anticipated to be expanded in the future as enrollment expands. The property is located in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain. i October 21, 2008 -2- Item No. 30 • City Code Section 10-16 includes schools in the definition of critical facilities. • City Code Section 10-81(a) prohibits critical facilities in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain. • City Code Section 10-81(b)prohibits the change of use of an existing structure in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain to a critical facility. • City Code Section 10-46(6) prohibits a change of use or the expansion of an existing structure for use as a critical facility. ACTION OF THE WATER BOARD At the August 28, 2008 regular meeting of the Water Board, the Board considered a request for a variance to the City Code to allow a change of use in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain for an existing structure located at 720 East Vine Drive to a charter school and to allow the existing structure to be expanded onto property located at 724 and 750 East Vine Drive with a future addition for use as a school. The Board considered the testimony of the applicants and staff and voted 8-0 to deny the variance request. ALLEGATIONS OF APPEAL On September 30,2008,an amended Notice of Appeal was received by the City Clerk's Office from representatives of the Nature School. The Appellants allege that: 1. The Board failed to conduct a fair hearing in that evidence presented by staff was substantially false or grossly misleading. 2. The Board failed to properly interpret and apply City Code as set out in Section 2-48(b)(1). SUMMARY OF RELEVANT ISSUES Specific Allegations of Substantially False or Grossly Misleading Evidence, and Staffs Response: The amended Notice of Appeal from representatives of the Nature School allege the following issues and staff'offers the subsequent analysis and response based on the record: Allegation #1 Data and photographs from other drainages, specifically Spring Creek, have no direct bearing on the hydraulic conditions of the site in question. Yet, these photos were used to imply a greater level of risk than we believe exists on our site. In fact, we used data and photographs supplied by the SWUstaf to demonstrate that, contrary to SWU's allegation, our site would NOT have been f ooded during the 1904 f ood. i October 21, 2008 -3- Item No. 30 Staff Response The photos presented for Spring Creek(Slide 16 of staff presentation) showed the debris blockage during the 1997 flood and were presented as a relative situation that can result in a more complex scenario at the proposed school site. As discussed on page 3 of the Staff Memo and on pages 22-25 of the hearing transcript,debris blockage at the College Avenue bridge on the Poudre River,similar to what happened in 1997 at the College Avenue bridge at Spring Creek,would result in more water overtopping College Avenue and flowing down Vine Drive to the proposed school site. The debris blockage scenario would result in increased depths and flows and therefore, increase the risk at the proposed school site beyond what is shown in the official floodplain modeling and mapping. Information related to flooding in other drainages, i.e., Spring Creek and the Big Thompson River, shows that large flood events can and do happen in this area and that the proposed school site is subject to the same types of large flood events. As stated in the Staff Memo on page 3 and as discussed on pages 23-25 of the hearing transcript, this information was given as examples of the possibility of large flood events, their magnitude and their potential impacts. On page 3 of the Staff Memo,the Poudre River Flood History Handout(Attachment 3 of the Staff Memo)and page 21 of the hearing transcript, staff discussed the flood history on the Poudre River and showed an historic photograph with a high water mark on the homes as a result of the 1904 flood on the Poudre River. During the discussion of this photograph, staff made the statement that it was"highly likely"that the proposed school site would have been flooded in the 1904 flood. In response to the Appellants' assertion on appeal that these points were false and misleading,staff has done additional historical research into the 1904 flood on the Poudre River. Newspaper descriptions of the flood and the related property ownerships at the time that staff has identified in this additional research strengthens the evidence that the site of the proposed school was significantly impacted by the 1904 flood, which occurred on May 20, 1904. A May 25, 1904, Fort Collins Weekly Courier article, which is provided with this Agenda Item Summary as Attachment 9, provides a contemporaneous description of the 1904 flood, and specifically describes flooding observations in the vicinity of the proposed school site. An historic map denoting the property ownerships in the vicinity of the school site in 1915 is attached as Attachment 10, and provides a reference point for understanding some of the statements: "The water covered and rushed over all the bottom lands from bluff to bluff,tearing out culverts, headgates and carrying away almost every moveable thing that stood in its way. The river at this point was over a mile wide." "The rush of water was so sudden and unexpected that people had no time to think of anything but personal safety, and are thankful that they were permited to make their escape. A wall of water said to have been 10 or 12 feet high burst out through Poudre Canaon about 4 o'clock in the afternoon and spreading out over the bottom land farms swept away everything moveable.... These[bridges] were soon followed by the College Avenue bridge and the railway bridge on the Wellington branch of the C&S railroad. The northern approach to the Linden Street steel bridge was under water and for a time fears for the safety of the structure itself were entertained. It stood the test,however,and is standing today,as is the Chestnut street bridge.While I October 21, 2008 -4- Item No. 30 the flood was at its zenith communication between the north and south sides of the river was entirely cut off. " "The Russian village near the sugar factory was under water and all the inhabitants, except one family, living in the old Judge Remington house,which stood on higher ground, had to flee for their lives. The water flooded the lower floor of the Remington house, but the occupants stuck to it and passed the night there." "It is impossible at the present time to make a satisfactory estimate of the damage caused, but it will not fall far short of a million dollars and may largely exceed that sum." "Water swept around the sugar factory and prevented the entire force employed there now, including Manager Booraem, Superintendent Westein from getting to their homes. Along in the evening they waded north to the bluff, finding shelter for the night at William Lindenmeier's." [Staff note: see blue-shaded area on Attachment 10 denoting William Lindenmeier property and green-shaded rectangle denoting sugar factory location.] "The beets on the Peter Anderson farm will have to be replaced." [Staff note: see pink-shaded area on Attachment 10 map denoting NE corner of Vine and LeMay.] "Two Russian houses on the Lindemneier place were washed into the middle of the road." "There were six inches of water in the sugar factory and eighteen on the north side. The stored sugar escaped by only six inches." "The dancing pavilion in the grove on the north bank of the river collapsed and fell into the raging flood and was carried away, taking with it a new piano which the owner had just installed." Allegation #2 The city's use of the term `flash flood" in this instance, is grossly misleading, when by the city's own modeling, a 500 year event would appear as a relatively shallow sheet flow at low velocities. Staff Response On page 7 of the Staff Memo and page 21 of the hearing transcript, staff described the expected characteristics of a flood at this site and addressed Section 10-28(e)(9) related to conditions for a variance. A 500-year flooding event on the Poudre River would likely be from heavy rainfall or rain-on-snow. A flash flood,resulting from the rainfall event,would typically be short in duration and the rate of rise would probably be extremely fast and thus, there may be very little to no warning. An event of this magnitude would also contain debris that would magnify the event. When the term"flash flood" is used, it does not indicate the depth of flooding, but rather the rapid rate of rise. The National Weather Service describes a"flash flood" as: I October 21, 2008 -5- Item No. 30 Flash floods occur within a few minutes or hours of excessive rainfall,a dam or levee failure, or a sudden release of water held by an ice jam. (Source: Flash Flood Safety - What You Need to Know NOW!, National Weather Service, www.nss/.noaa.gov/edu/safety/flashflood.html) As described in the 1904 Courier article, cited above and attached as Attachment 9, the 1904 flooding illustrated this concept well. The rush of water was sudden and unexpected, and those affected had little time to prepare, react or respond to the oncoming flood. Staff used the term flash flood only once in the Staff Memo on page 21, and did not use the term during the staff presentation to the Water Board. Allegation #3 SWU's description of the hydraulic mechanism at College Ave. and Vine Dr. during the projected 500 year event was speculative and imprecise. Staff Response The information concerning overtopping of College Avenue and Vine Drive presented in the Staff Memo on pages 2-3 and in the hearing transcript on page18 and pages 22-23 is based on the floodplain modeling and mapping. Staff described the College Avenue bridge as being undersized since it cannot pass even the 100-year flood. The floodplain map(Attachments 4 and 5 of the Staff Memo) was used to illustrate the overtopping location at the College Avenue and Vine Drive intersection and staff described that the floodplain mapping and modeling makes the assumption that the College Avenue bridge is fully open and functioning during a flood. There is no debris blockage assumed. Staff presented photos of the College Avenue bridge and upstream railroad trestle(Slide 14 of staff presentation)to illustrate the possibility of debris blockage on both the College Avenue bridge and the railroad trestle. Staff described that,in the event of debris blockage,additional water would overtop College Avenue and flow down Vine Drive toward the proposed school. A photo of the low spot at the Vine Drive and College Avenue intersection was used to illustrate this scenario (Slide 14 of staff presentation). The applicant presented no technical information contradicting the modeling and mapping presented by staff. Allegation #4 The City provided an approximate food depth at the proposed school site, with no specific water surface elevation reference, and provided no information regarding flow velocities,food duration or hydrographic timing. Staff Response As stated on page 3 of the Staff Memo and on page 19 of the hearing transcript, staff reviewed the flood information for the property. Staff stated on page 19 of the hearing transcript, "The depth of flow for the 500-year floodplain is approximately one foot based off the current mapping and modeling." The 500-year flows were described as being a total of 24,100 cubic feet per second(cfs) i October 21, 2008 -6- Item No. 30 with approximately 1,100 cfs breaking out and going through the proposed school site. On page 7 of the Staff Memo, the hydrograph of a flood due to rainfall was described as typically being of short duration with an extremely fast rate of rise. On pages 21-22 of the hearing transcript, staff described the April 1999 flood that was a result of rain-on snow, as being of short duration—only lasting one day. Contrary to the Appellants' assertions, the floodplain depth of flow and mapping for the site was provided to them by staff several months before the hearing. Allegation #S SWU alleged that no detailed structural analysis had been provided regarding the building at the proposed site. Given the generalized nature of SWU's hydraulic information, the generalized statement that the building appears to be structurally sufficient is appropriate. Staff Response Sections 10-28 and 10-29 of City Code outline the criteria the Water Board must consider when approving a variance. Section 10-28(e)(3)addresses the susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner. On pages 2-3 of the applicant's variance submittal, the applicant addressed this section of code and made the following statement: "The building has the structural integrity to withstand the projected flooding event; some items on the floor inside the building could potentially become wet. ... No major damage is anticipated." On page 6 of the Staff Memo and on pages 30-31 in the hearing transcript, staff discussed the point that the applicant has not provided any details or analyses to substantiate these claims and that no design plans for the addition have been submitted. Staff stated on page 31 of the hearing transcript that the risk of flood damage extends beyond just a single owner; it extends to the teachers and students who will be occupying the school as well as the emergency responders and parents trying to reach the school to help the children. Therefore, as staff further noted at the time,the impact of building damage and life-safety issues are community issues that need to be considered. Allegation #6 The applicant demonstrated that the risk to life and safety at the proposed site during a 500 year food event would be no greater, and in fact less, than the risk currently being accepted elsewhere in the Fort Collins area for similarly classified facilities. Staff Response As stated on page 1 of the Staff Memo and page15 of the hearing transcript, Section 10-81(b) and 10-46(6)of City Code do not allow for a change of use of any existing structure to a critical facility so as to result in a new non-conforming structure or use. As stated on page 5 of the Staff Memo and page 6 of the hearing transcript, staff explained that the purpose of floodplain regulations is to be I October 21, 2008 -7- Item No. 30 proactive by not creating new problems for the future by allowing new high risk development or uses in the floodplain and that the critical facilities regulation is the epitome of these goals. Allegation #7 SWU's use of information from other parts of the US, was grossly misleading by implying that a 500 year flood would occur considerably more frequently. Additionally, by making reference to flood damage that occurred in other drainages, SWU implied that the predicted flood risk at this site would be considerably higher than their own data would indicate. Staff Response As documented on page 3 of the Staff Memo and on page 22 of the hearing transcript,staff clearly stated that the probability of a 500-year flood is 0.2 % in any given year and that there is the same probability each year of the event occurring. However, statistically speaking, this also means that there is the possibility that two 500-year flood can occur back-to-back or that they can be stretched out over a much, much longer period of time, On page 3 of the Staff Memo and page 24 of the hearing transcript,staff presented information to illustrate the risk associated with large floods. This included information on the 1997 Spring Creek Flood in Fort Collins and the 1976 Big Thompson Flood. As an example of not waiting 500-years between floods,it was discussed that the some areas of the Midwest that were flooded this past year have had more than one 500-year flood within a 10- 15 year period. On page 3 of the Staff Memo and on pages 22 and 23 of the hearing transcript, Staff explained how debris blockage at the College Avenue bridge can affect the risk at the proposed school site. There is a high probability of debris blockage at the College Avenue bridge or upstream railroad trestle, which would result in more water overtopping the College Avenue bridge and heading down Vine Drive. The 1,100 cfs expected through the site in the 500-year flood may actually be a much greater amount of water or this same scenario could occur in an even smaller event. Allegation #8 The fact that the proposed site lies within the 500 year floodplain is not contested. However, specific information mitigating the fact that the site is in the 500 yearfloodplain was not considered by the Water Board, which was only interested in enforcing the code without due attention to the merits of the request. The motion to deny the request for variance was passed without any discussion ofthe technical merits ofthe variance request, or regarding the proposed school's value to the community versus actual risk We believe that the risk to life and safety during the projected 500 yr event was grossly overstated. Staff Response All points presented by the applicant in this appeal were presented to and heard by the Water Board during the variance hearing. The Water Board asked questions of both staff and the applicant prior to making their motion to deny the variance request. October 21, 2008 -8- Item No. 30 STAFF SUMMARY Staff believes the Board did not fail to hold a fair hearing and that the Board did not consider evidence that was substantially false or grossly misleading. Specific Allegations that the Water Board Failed to Properly Interpret and Apply the City Code and staff's response: The Appellant has offered no specific allegation or explanation regarding its claim that the Water Board failed to properly interpret and apply the City Code, except to state that it resulted from the failure of the Board to conduct a fair hearing and "the failure of staff to adequately inform and prepare the Water Board about the issue." RELEVANT CODE PROVISIONS FOR COUNCIL REFERENCE: Section 10-16 of the City Code defines critical facilities as: "Critical facilities shall mean ... hospitals,nursing homes,group homes,residential care facilities,congregate care facilities and housing likely to contain occupants who may not be sufficiently mobile to avoid death or injury during a flood; schools; daycare facilities, ..." Section 10-81(a) Critical Facilities. In any portion of the Poudre River 500-year floodplain or zone X shaded area, critical facilities are prohibited. Section 10-81 (b) Change of Use. No person shall change the use of any structure or property located in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain or zone X shaded area so as to result in a new use or new nonconforming structure that is inconsistent with the requirements of this article. Section 10-46(6).No person shall change the use of an existing structure that is not a critical facility to use as a critical facility contrary to the provisions of Article II of Chapter 10 of this Article, or change the use of a critical facility to another type of critical facility, or increase the physical area in use for a nonconforming critical facility, contrary to the provisions of this article. ATTACHMENTS I. City Clerk's Notice of Appeal Hearing. 2. Amended Notice of Appeal—September 30, 2008 3. Water Board Hearing Packet—August 28, 2008 - Staff Memo of Floodplain Variance Request - Floodplain Variance Application Form w/Attachments - Floodplain Use Permit - Poudre River Flood History Handout - Overall Floodplain Map - Floodplain Site Map 4. Water Board Hearing Materials - Staff Power Point Presentation - Applicant Power Point Presentation October 21, 2008 -9- Item No. 30 5. Water Board Hearing Minutes—August 28, 2008 6. Water Board Hearing Verbatim Transcript—August 28, 2008 7. Powerpoint presentation. 8. Additional Information in Response to Allegations. 9. "A Great Calamity Visits Cache La Poudre Valley," Fort Collins Weekly Courier, Page 1 (May 25, 1904) 10. Map of the Irrigated Farms of Northern Colorado, R.W. Gelder, 1915 (Fort Collins Local History Archives) i ATTACHMENT 1 CITY CLERK'S NOTICE OF APPEAL HEARING i ATTACHMENT 1 City of City Clerk's Office Fort Collins 300 LaPorte Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins,CO 80522 970.221.6615 970.221.6295-fax fcgov.com/Cityc/erk NOTICE The City Council of the City of Fort Collins, Colorado,on Tuesday, October 21,2008,at 6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may come on for hearing in the Council Chambers in the City Hall at 300 LaPorte Avenue, will hold a public hearing on the attached appeal from the decision of the Water Board which denied a request for variance to City Code Section 10-81(a) and (b); and Section10-46(6). If you wish to comment on this matter, you are strongly urged to attend the hearing on this appeal. If you have any questions or require further information please feel free to contact the City Clerk's Office (970-221-6515) or the Utilities Department (970-221-6702). Any written materials that any party-in-interest may wish the City Council to consider in deciding the appeal shall be submitted to the City Clerk no later than 12:00 p.m. on Wednesday, October 15 [Section 2-54(b)of the City Code]. Agenda materials provided to the City Council,including City staff s response to the Notice of Appeal,and any additional issues identified by any party-in-interest, . will be available to the public on Thursday, October 16, after 2:00 p.m. in the City Clerk's Office and on the City's website at: http://fcgov.com/cityclerk/agendas.php. The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call the City Clerk's Office(970-221-6515;TDD 970-224-6001)for assistance. Wanda M. Krajicek City Clerk Date Notice Mailed: October 10, 2008 cc: City Attorney Chair, Water Board Appellant/Applicant i ATTACHMENT AMENDED NOTICE OF APPEAL SEPTEMBER 30, 2008 i ATTACHMENT 2 . September 29,2008 RECEIVED Fort Collins City Council SEP 3 0 2008 Fort Collins,CO 80521 CRY CLERK'S OFFICE Dear Sirs and Madam This letter requests that the City Council consider an appeal to the decision of the Water Board that was made on August 28,2009,which denied a request for variance to City Code Section 10-81 (a)and(b),and Section 10-46(6) The variance was requested to allow establishment of a charter school within the Poudre River 500-yr floodplaw This appeal is filed by the following three appellants Judy Scherpelz Mickey Willis Founding Co-Director Founding Co-Director The Nature School The Nature School 2519 S Shields St.#1K-115 2519 S Shields St #IK-115 Fort Collins,CO 80526 Fort Collins,CO 90526 484-7756 690-9661 Tim Merriman • Founding Board of Directors The Nature School 230 Cherry St Fort Collins,CO 80521 484-8283 Judy Scherpelz,Mickey Willis,and Tun Merriman are members of the Board of Directors of The Nature School,a proposed Charter School at the building and property located at 720,724,and 750 E Vine Drive in Fort Collies,Colorado They an penes-m- Interest because they gave testimony at the variance hearing on August 29,2008 Thus appeal is filed because much of the evidence presented by the Stormwater Utility Staff was grossly misleading This evidence included the presentation of data and photographs from other dramages, specifically Spring Creek,that have no direct bearing on the hydraulic conditions of the site in question Yet these photographs were used to imply a greater level of risk than we believe exists on our site. In fact,we used data and photographs supplied by the SWU staff to demonstrate that,contrary to SWU's allegauon,our site would NOT have been flooded during the flood of 19M The city's use of the term"flash flood,,'m this instance,is grossly misleading,when by the city's own modeling,a 500-yr event would appear as relatively shallow sheet flow at low velocities. • SWU's description of the hydraulic mechanism at College Ave and Vine Dr during the projected 500-yr event was speculative and imprecise The city provided an approximate flood depth at the proposed school site,with no specific water surface elevation reference,and provided no information regarding flow velocities, flood duration,or hydrographic timing SWU alleged that no detailed structural analysis had been provided regarding the building at the proposed site Given the generalized nature of SWU's hydraulic information,the generalized statement that the building appears to be structurally sufficient is appropriate The applicant demonstrated that risk to life and safety at the proposed site during a 500- year flood event would be no greater,and in fact less,than the risk currently being accepted elsewhere in the Fort Collins area for similarly classified facilities SWU's generalized information does not successfully reflite tins site-specific claim SWU's use of information from other parts of the U S was grossly misleading by implying that a$00-yr flood would occur considerably more frequently Addinonally,by making reference to flood damage that occurred in other drainages, SWU implied that the predicted flood risk at this site would be considerably higher than their own data would indicate The fact that the proposed site lies within the FEMA-designated 500-yr floodplam is not contested However,specific information mitigating the fact that the site ism the 500-yr floodplain was not considered by the Water Board,which seemed only interested in enforcing the city code without due attention to the merits of the request The motion to deny the request for variance was passed without any discussion regarding the technical merits of the variance request,or regarding the proposed school's value to the community versus actual risk We believe that the risk to life and safety during the projected 500-yr event was grossly overstated Additionally,the Board failed to properly interpret and apply the City Code as set out in Secuon 2-48(bxl) This occurred in part because of the failure of the Board to conduct a fair hearing and the failure of SWU to adequately mfcrm and prepare the Water Board about the issue We respectfully ask that the City Council review tins issue and approve The Nature School's request to establish a charter school at 720-724-750 E Vine Drive Please send any response or nonce of defect regarding this written notice of appeal to Judy Scherpclz,Executive Director, Rocky Mountain Raptor Program,2519 S Shields St.#IK-115,Fort Collins,CO $0526,970-484-7756 Respectfully submitted, r"7jfjc -----+ JMScethilz Mac ey illts �Trm Me ATTACHMENT WATER BOARD HEARING PACKET AUGUST 28, 2008 Utilities C'}"Of electric slormwater wastewater water Fort Collins 700 Wood St. • PO Box 560 Fort Collins,CO 80522 970.221.6700 979.221.6619 fax 970.224.6003 TDD utilities@/cgov.com /cgovcom/utilities MEMORANDUM DATE: August 20, 2008 TO: Water Board THRU: Brian Janonis, Fort Collins Utilities Executive Director d� James C. Hibbard, Water Engineering and Field Services Manager Bob Smith, Water Planning Manager6tiG FROM: Marsha Hilmes-Robinson, Floodplain Administrator µ RE: Floodplain Variance for Raptor Center School, 720-750 East Vine Drive Variance Request Description • The attached application for"Variance to Floodplain Regulations" has been submitted for your consideration and action. Section 10-16 of the City Code defines critical facilities as: Critical facilities shall mean ... hospitals, nursing homes, group homes, residential care facilities, congregate care facilities and housing likely to contain occupants who may not be sufficiently mobile to avoid death or injury during a flood; schools; daycare facilities, ... The application requests a variance to the following sections of City Code as cited below: Section 10-81(a) Critical Facilities. 1n any portion of the Poudre River 500-year floodplain or zone X shaded area, critical facilities are prohibited. Section 10-81 (b). Change of Use. No person shall change the use of any structure or property located in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain or zone X shaded area so as to result in a new use or new nonconforming structure that is inconsistent with the requirements of this article. Section 10-46(6). No person shall change the use of an existing structure that is not a critical facility to use as a critical facility contrary to the provisions of Article 1I of Chapter 10 of this Article, or change the use of a critical facility to another type of critical facility, or increase the physical area in use for a nonconforming critical facility,contrary to the provisions of this article. • • VARIANCE REQUEST.• Allow a change of use in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain for an existing structure located at 720 East Vine Drive (parcel # 97014-23-001) to a school, which is defined as a critical facility per Chapter 10 of City Code. Allow the existing structure at 720 East Vine Drive to be expanded with a future addition for use as a school. Proiect Proposal The proposed project would be located in an existing structure located on the north side of Vine Drive at 720 East Vine Drive. The building is owned by Phyllis Schrader and is currently leased by the Rocky Mountain Raptor Program. The County Assessor's office lists this property as Parcel #97014-23-001, but has an address of 725 East Vine Drive. Staff feels the County has placed the wrong address on the property. However, the parcel number(97014-23-001) and the 720 East Vine Drive address seem to be correct. The addition proposed with the project would be located on a portion of the 720 East Vine Drive parcel and also on two adjacent parcels to the east (parcel #970014-00-020 owned by Phyllis Schrader and parcel #97014-00-924 owned by the Rocky Mountain Raptor Program). The parcel owned by the Raptor Center is located at 750 East Vine Drive. The property at 750 East Vine Drive is a vacant parcel, except for some birdcages. The Raptor Center expects to purchase the property at 720 East Vine Drive. The Raptor Center proposes to change the use of the existing building at 720 East Vine Drive to a school focused on environmental education. The school would be operated by Imagine Schools, Incorporated. The Raptor Center further proposes to expand the school in the future with an addition of approximately 10,000 sq. ft. that would extend to the east onto the two adjacent parcels (parcel#970014-00-020 and parcel#97014-00-924). According to the Latimer County Assessor's records, the existing structure is a 28,408 square foot, slab-on-grade, metal structure constructed in 1980. The exact size and details for the type of construction of the future addition are not available. Staff recognizes the applicant has not provided detailed information as normally provided for floodplain variances. This is because the Raptor Center wants to learn if the concept of a school in the 500-year floodplain would be permitted before limited funds are expended. Attachment 1 is the variance application form and a summary of the reasons the applicant is requesting the variance. Attachment 2 is the floodplain use permit. Floodplain and Flood History Information The existing building is located in the FEMA-designated Poudre River 500-year floodplain. The 500-year floodplain in this area is due to flows that break out of the Poudre River channel at the intersection of Vine Drive and College Avenue with the flow going east along and parallel to Vine Drive. Other portions of the Raptor Center property at 750 East Vine Drive have a 100- year floodplain and floodway from Dry Creek mapped on the property. The building for which 2 the change of use is proposed and the future addition are in the FEMA-designated Poudre River 500-year floodplain. It has been stated by the applicant that the future addition to the school would not be in the FEMA-designated Dry Creek 100-year floodplain. The 500-year flood depth at the existing building is approximately 1 foot deep. The main access roads, Vine Drive and Lemay Avenue, are also in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain. The total 500-year flow on the Poudre River at College Avenue is approximately 24,100 cubic feet per second (cfs). The flow that splits off of the river and goes through this site is approximately 1,100 cfs. The Poudre River has over 100 years of stream flow record. There have been several flood events in the range of the expected 500-year discharge. The first was a flood in 1864 caused by rain on snow. It is estimated that the flow was approximately 21,000 cfs. This was the flood that destroyed the Camp Collins military post near LaPorte, resulting in its relocation to present-day Old Town Fort Collins. The next major flood was the Chamber's Lake Dam failure in 1891. Again, this event had an estimated flow of 21,000 cfs. The largest flood event was the 1904 flood caused by a rainstorm. The discharge for this event was estimated at 25,000 cfs. Historic photos show high water marks on homes in the Andersonville Neighborhood just to the east of this site. Therefore, it is highly likely that the 1904 flood inundated the proposed school site. The most recent flood of note was a 10-year flood in April of 1999 due to rain on snow. Attachment 3 is a handout further describing the flood history of the Poudre River. There are no capital improvements planned that would eliminate or reduce the 500-year floodplain in this area. Therefore, the flood risk at this site is a long-term risk. Attachments 4 and 5 are maps showing the floodplain with respect to the proposed school's location. Risk Associated with the 500-year Floodalain. The 500-year floodplain is the area expected to be inundated by a flood that has a 0.2% chance of occurring in any given year. The probability is the same every year. Therefore, two 500-year floods can occur back to back. Given that a school would be expected to be in operation for at least 30 years, there is approximately a 6%probability of a 500-year flood occurring during that 30-year period. The 1,100 cfs flow through the site assumes that the College Avenue bridge is not blocked with debris. If the College Avenue bridge gets partially or completely blocked with debris,there is the potential there would be more flow in this area, resulting in greater depths and velocities at the proposed school and the surrounding access routes. 500-year floods do happen. Recently, Fort Collins experienced the impact of a greater than 500- year flood on July 28, 1997 on Spring Creek. The 1976 Big Thompson flood is also considered to be a extreme event. This spring, there have been numerous articles and newspaper headlines from the Midwest about 500-year flooding and how it some areas have seen more than one 500- year flood within 10 or 15 years. Although it has been a long time since a flood of this magnitude has happened on the Poudre River, the floodplain regulations are intended to protect public safety and property when flooding does occur. 3 Purpose of the Critical Facilities Regulation The purpose of the critical facilities regulation is to protect those facilities and people that are most vulnerable to the impact of flooding. In general, there are three types of critical facilities: I. Life-safety— schools, hospitals,daycares, nursing homes, group homes.These are facilities where the occupants would have the most trouble evacuating. 2. Emergency Response—Police stations, fire stations, emergency operations centers, utility facilities. These are facilities needed to respond to a flood event. 3. Hazardous materials storage facilities—These are facilities that have a possibility of releasing contaminants. These facilities are currently only regulated in the 100- year floodplain. For life-safety critical facilities, such as schools, a major concern is evacuation. For a school,not only are the students and teachers put at risk, but also at risk are emergency responders and parents who are trying to reach the school to help the children. Even if the school were elevated on fill above the floodplain, the risk associated with evacuation still exists because the surrounding area is flooded. Because critical facilities are those facilities with the most risk, the protection level also needs to be the highest. This is why the floodplain regulations have a complete prohibition of critical facilities in the 500-year floodplain. History of the Critical Facilities Regulation for the Poudre River The critical facilities regulation, a higher regulatory standard than the FEMA minimum, was first introduced to City Code in 1995. Through numerous reviews of the floodplain regulations, the critical facilities regulation has received very strong support from the community, even from those persons who generally oppose floodplain regulations. In 1995, the definition of critical facilities did not specifically mention schools, although it included the language, "and housing likely to contain occupants who may not be sufficiently mobile to avoid death or injury during a flood."This language was, at the time, being interpreted to include schools because of the evacuation issues. In 2000, the Poudre River floodplain regulations were reviewed and revised after a great deal of public input. The 2000 definition of critical facilities was updated to be more specific about the types of facilities that were considered critical facilities. Schools and daycares were the two primary additions to the definition in order to make sure the definition matched the interpretations that were being made. In 2007, the Poudre River regulations were reviewed in order to better align the City and the County's regulations. At this time, Larimer County adopted the City's definition of critical facilities for life-safety and emergency response types of critical facilities, including schools, and also adopted a regulation that prohibits critical facilities in both the 100-year and 500-year floodplains. However, Larimer County did not adopt a regulation for hazardous materials critical facilities. Fort Collins, in order to be more closely aligned with Latimer County, removed the prohibition of hazardous materials critical facilities in the 500-year floodplain, but 4 kept the hazardous materials regulation in the 100-year floodplain. Currently both the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County administer the same life-safety and emergency response critical facility regulation for the Poudre River 500-year floodplain. Throughout discussions with the public, various Boards and Commissions, and City Council,the critical facilities regulation has received strong support because of the risks involved with these types of facilities. Hardship Reauirement This variance request, according to City Code Sec.10-29(c), would not have to meet the hardship requirement of Sec. 10-29(g)(2) because the regulation is more restrictive than the FEMA minimum regulations. Variance Options Staff has compiled the following variance options for the Board to consider: Option#1: Deny the variance request in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain,based on regulations adopted in Chapter 10 of City Code, for a change of use of an existing structure at 720 East Vine Drive (Parcel #97014-23-001) to a school. Deny the variance request in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain for the existing building located at 720 East Vine Drive to be expanded with a future addition for use as a school. Option#2: Grant the variance request in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain to allow a change of use of the existing structure at 720 East Vine Drive(Parcel#97014-23-001) to a school. Grant the variance request in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain to allow the existing building located at 720 East Vine Drive to be expanded with a future addition for use as a school. Staff Recommendation Based on the regulations adopted in City Code,staff recommends Variance Option #1, denial of the variance request. Staff's professional opinion is that the proposed Raptor Center School at 720-750 East Vine Drive should not be allowed based on the life-safety risk associated with this type of critical facility. The applicant has not provided evidence that there is not a flood risk on this property or that the risk has been mitigated. The purpose of the floodplain regulations is to be proactive,reduce the risk from future floods and avoid creating further problems for future generations by not allowing new high-risk development or uses in the floodplain. It is difficult to mitigate the risk of a school in the floodplain and the floodplain regulations are designed to avoid this circumstance by requiring schools to locate outside of the 500-year floodplain. 5 • Staff recommends denial of the variance because several of the necessary considerations and conditions for granting a variance,as outlined in City Code, are of concern or have not been met. These include: t. Section 10-28(e)(2)The danger to life and property due to flooding or erosion damage. The critical facilities regulation, as it relates to prohibiting new schools in the 500-year floodplain, is the epitome of a regulation designed to minimize the life-safety danger associated with flooding. Children will not be able to evacuate on their own. One foot of moving water can easily sweep a child away. In addition, parents will be trying to get to their children and will be at risk due to the surrounding roads being flooded. Although the school may not plan to operate during the summer when the flood risk is the greatest, the threat of flooding begins in April and continues into September. Therefore, the school will be operating during a portion of the year when there is a flood risk. Also, the school could change their operational structure in the future and hold summer classes or go to a year-round schedule. The potential for loss of life or injury associated with a school in a floodplain is staffs single greatest concern about this proposal. This is one of the main reasons why the critical facilities regulation was created. . 2. Section 10-28(e)(3)The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner. The existing building is a metal structure that is not elevated. No details or analyses have been submitted to substantiate the applicant's claims that the building has the structural integrity to withstand the flood and that no major damage is anticipated. Design plans for the future addition are not available at this time. Floodwater, likely contaminated, will enter the building during a flood event. Even a few inches of water can cause serious problems. The occupants of the building will be exposed to the floodwater during the event and clean-up of the site would be necessary after the flood. 3. Section 10-28(e)(4)The importance of the service provided by the proposed facility to the community. A school is an integral service to the community. 4. Section 10-28(e)(5)The availability of alternate locations for the proposed use which are not subject to the flood or erosion hazard. The applicant would like to locate the school next to the Raptor Center to compliment the • environmental learning curriculum, however, alternate sites may be available to accomplish this same objective. 6 5. Section 10-28(e)(7)The relationship of the proposed use with the comprehensive plan and floodplain management program of that area. The current zoning for these parcels is Industrial and a school is an allowed use in the Industrial Zone. However,a school in the 500-year floodplain is not compatible with the City's floodplain management plan. The most basic purpose of floodplain management as stated in Section 10-17 of City Code is to"promote the public health, safety and general welfare and to minimize the public and private losses due to flood conditions in flood hazard areas." The prohibition of critical facilities in the 500-year floodplain is an integral part of the City's floodplain management program. 6. Section 10-28(e)(8)The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency response vehicles. All major road access (Vine Drive and Lemay Ave.) to this site will be flooded during a 500-year flood event on the Poudre River. It takes less than I foot of water to float a car. Staff feels that it is a significant issue that parents, in addition to the emergency responders, will not have safe access to the site. 7. Section 10-28(e)(9)The expected flood elevations, velocity,duration,rate of rise and sediment transport of the flood waters and the effects of the wave action, if applicable at this site. Flooding depths in this area are estimated to be 1-foot. A 500-year flooding event on the Poudre River would likely be from heavy rainfall or heavy rainfall on snow melt. A flash flood, resulting from the rainfall event, would be typically short in duration and the rate of rise would probably be extremely fast and, thus, there may be very little to no warning. Two hours warning based on the gage at the mouth of the canyon is the time that would be available to evacuate the 450 students. An event of this magnitude would contain debris that would magnify the event. Considering the expected characteristics of a flood in the proposed location, the flood risks will be difficult, if not impossible, to avoid or mitigate. 8. Section 10-29(f)Variances shall only be issued upon the determination that the variance is the minimum necessary, considering the flood hazard,to afford relief. The variance is the minimum necessary to allow the proposed school to be located in this location. 9. Section 10-29(g)(1) Variances shall only be issued upon the showing of good and sufficient cause. In this situation, there does not appear to be a good cause that outweighs or overrides the risk and the intent of the critical facilities regulation, which is to protect the life and safety of the citizens of Fort Collins. 7 10. Section 10-29(g)(3)Variances shall only be issued upon the determination that the granting of the variance will not result in any increased flood heights,any additional threat to public safety or to public or private property,any extraordinary public expense,any nuisance or trespass,any fraud on or victimization of the public,or any conflict with existing local laws or ordinances. The threat to public safety is the reason for the prohibition of life-safety critical facilities in the 500-year floodplain. If a school were to be placed in the 500-year floodplain, there is a risk to the students, teachers, bus drivers, emergency responders and parents. On the basis of the analysis outlined above, staff recommends the Water Board deny the requested variance. Attachments: I. Floodplain Variance Application Form w/attachments 2. Floodplain Use Permit 3. Poudre River Flood History Handout 4. Overall Floodplain Map 5. Floodplain Site Map • 8 Floodplain Variance Application Attachment 1 City of Fort Collins Water Board Section A.Owner Information Petitioner name ".OUc.f INN OUN'tV4 t rJ Address A S kq 5 . 5%At cw s 5M_ FA .0-0"1 tJ s G:)fsYt(phone �k R`•L-7-7 5 Owner name P�\\•s 5_& L "*X Address 8C)O Cgav tY C.J6-_ Phone t-1 R-L -cl 7 3 IC- City + Co\ State C_n Zip gys2 c} Legal description and/or address of property -)An /75 0 C_ V i hQ bv- Section B:Proposed Project Information • Description of proposed project(check all that apply): ❑new structure i7laddition Oremodel ❑redevelopment ❑mobile home/building ❑attached garage ❑accessory structure ❑fill ❑excavation Mhange of use ❑other(describe) • Existing use(check one): presidential CMon-residential ❑mixed-use N vacant ground (.t"` v-v- • Proposed use(check one): O residential .non-residential ❑mixed-use ❑other • If non-residential or mixed-use,describe in detail:Naiw a cA^kw \t%a d wrn\Lvovwrmel. • Critical facility? 0(yes ❑no • Type of foundation(check one): lab-on-grade ❑basement ❑crawl space* ❑enclosed area not subgrade ❑other(describe) *If crawl space,submit crawl space worksheet. Remodels and Redevelopment Only Cost of improvement for this project: Section C:Floodplain Information • Lowest existing ground elevation: MSL(mean sea level) • Lowestfinished ground elevation: MSL • Base flood elevation:100-yearflood level 500-year flood level • Regulatory flood protection elevation: • Proposed lowest floor elevation using 10-37(d): (attach drawing) • Floodproofing description(if available): • Section(s)of City Code for which variance is being requested: • What is the variance request?o .,cep vov^t► ay 1M� o.a�h b' .po� wv�s�vuc�;0ti. ei� d- ' I Alw Cv`.�•iCs..l \t'1-u 's S�-�Itr- TPb�t cea0.-�4sc. • What circumstances justify the proposed variance? +r- 4"k*N:% W rrly va�iribti. 2va eA w� alp, ,� o. l0v7 c.o�lwPr R. vrslC , page2 • The applicant hereby certifies that the above information,along with the attached plans and project descriptions, is correct.The applicant agrees to comply with the provisions of the zoning ordinance,building code and all other applicable sections of the City Code,Land Use Code,City Plan and all other laws and ordinances affecting the construction and occupancy of the proposed building.The applicant understands that if this variance is approved,the structure and its occupants may be more susceptible to flood damage and,if in a FEMA floodplain,the cost of flood insurance may increase for the property. Signature of applicant: "Abf+t Date: g • Date application fee paid:t'-l`I-0 ' Date complete application submitted: O Date of variance hearing: Variance: ❑approved ❑denied W 7 Notes/condiditons: N v O If you have questions or need assistance filling out forms,contact Fort Collins Utilities at: • Phone:(970)221-6700 TDD:(970)224-6003 Web:fcgov.com/stormwoter c;ry oc rurt coy;ne E-mail:utilities@fcgov.com Utilities REQUEST FOR FLOODPLAIN VARIANCE ROCKY MOUNTAIN RAPTOR PROGRAM AND THE NATURE SCHOOL The proposed Nature School is a student-centered institution with an integrated environmental curriculum that will operate in cooperation with the Rocky Mountain Raptor Program. This school is intended to become a national model for maintaining a rich standards-based curriculum with an emphasis on environmental education. The school will be characterized by high academic performance, a student-centered,hands-on approach to learning and frequent opportunities to connect academic learning to nature. This K-8 school with a maximum capacity of 450 students will be housed in a renovated facility adjacent to the 27-acre Rocky Mountain Raptor Program site. The proposed school is located in an Enterprise Zone on the edge of downtown Fort Collins in a transitioning, underdeveloped area. This area is close to many community resources including nature areas,the public library and museum, governmental offices,and community theatres. The school site is also located in the historic cultural district of Fort Collins. All these resources will deepen the content-rich curriculum and result in opportunities for high academic performance. TNS plans to renovate the existing commercial building at 720/724 E.Vine Drive to house an environmental charter school, with the option of constructing an addition of approximately 10,000 square feet on the east end of the building(750 E. Vine Dr.)as student enrollment grows. Since the proposed school site is located within the Poudre River 500-year floodplain,The Nature School (TNS) and The Rocky Mountain Raptor Program(RMRP) request a variance to the floodplain regulations 10-81 (Standards for Poudre River 500-year floodplain) and 10-46 (non-conforming structures in the 500-year floodplain). These regulations prohibit construction of a school within the Poudre River 500-year floodplain. TNS and RMRP understand that applications for floodplain variances normally include detailed information about the proposed project. Our purpose in requesting this variance early in the development stage is to determine whether the proposed change of use would be permissible before incurring additional expenses. The proposed charter school would involve cooperation between an educational institution and the adjoining wildlife and nature center that is planned by the RMRP. This cooperative effort would create a school that provides a unique opportunity for the children of our community to be connected with nature as an integral part of their elementary education. Because of the essential relationship between TNS and RMRP, the school must be located adjacent to the RMRP, and thus cannot be planned for an alternative location. Regulations 10-81 and 10-46 prohibit construction of critical facilities within the 500-year floodplain. We request that this regulation not be applied to this project because the term "critical facility"typically applies to buildings designated as active 1 • emergency services facilities. It is not anticipated that this school would be designated as an emergency services facility. We also do not believe that the intended use of the facility presents risk to life or property. The school would not have anyone living in it or staying overnight,thus negating risk to life from a sudden flooding event at night. In addition, the time of year when the 500-year event is most likely to occur(Mid-May through August)coincides with the time of year when school is not in session. In the event of a 500-year flood, gauges on the Poudre River would give at least 2 hours warning. The school would develop an emergency response plan for the evacuation and sheltering of facility occupants in connection with a flood event. The plan would include redundant and alternative means of carrying out evacuation and sheltering, staff training,practice drills, and a communication plan. This plan would be coordinated with parents so that they would know where to go (and where not to go) in the event of a flood, thus further minimizing risk. The Poudre School District already has schools within not only the 500-year floodplain, but also within the 100-year floodplain. The low level of risk(0.2%annually), shallow depths, low flow velocities,and short duration create an extremely limited hazard to lives and property at this location. Because of the time of year and the evacuation plan, lives and the integrity of the structure would not be at risk. The uniqueness and value of the school outweigh the very small risk associated with a 500-year flood event at this site. Floodplain regulations 10-81 and 10-46 are solely the constructs of the City of Fort Collins, which has among the strictest stormwater regulations in the U.S. FEMA does not recognize this requirement. We believe that due to the low probability of a 500- year flood occurrence and the low risk to life or property should such a flood occur, and the new school's great benefit to the community, the requested floodplain variance should be granted. Responses to specific concerns in the regulations: E 1. We do not anticipate any exterior materials would be swept away by floodwaters onto other lands to the injury of others. E2. The danger to life and property due to flooding or erosion damage is negligible. The depth of water and duration of that depth are limited. People inside the school would be safe from harm. The building could withstand the projected flooding with no significant damage. E3. The proposed facility and its contents are not susceptible to significant damage given the depth and duration of the flooding. It is estimated that the maximum depth of water would be approximately 12 inches. Due to the anticipated shallow depth and large aerial extent of floodwater at this location, flow velocities are expected to be minimal. 2 The building has the structural integrity to withstand the projected flooding event; some items on the floor inside the building could potentially become wet—this will be taken into consideration in the configuration and placement of sensitive items and equipment. No major damage is anticipated. E4. The proposed school would be a unique and valuable asset to the community. This school has the potential to become a national model for environmental schools that are co-located with a nature center. E5. The value of this school would be in its connection to the RMRP Wildlife and Nature Center,and thus it cannot be located at an alternate site. E6. The school is compatible with existing and anticipated development—it will work closely with the Wildlife and Nature Center, and it will be an amenity to the residential developments in the area, including the three low-income neighborhoods within one mile of the facility. ET The school is compatible with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning for that area. It will not adversely affect the floodplain management of the area. E8. Access to the school would be from existing Vine Drive. At the peak stage of a 500- year flood event, Vine Drive will have approximately 12 inches of water on it for a brief period of time(hours, not days). Thus safe access to the property for ordinary and emergency vehicles will exist except for the brief period of maximum flood depth. The evacuation plan will ensure that the school staff, students, and parents will avoid dangerous floodwaters, and safety of human lives will be maintained. E9. According to information provided by the City of Fort Collins Stormwater staff,the expected maximum flood depth at this location is 12 inches. Information regarding velocity, duration,rate of rise, sediment transport, and wave action has not been made available. 500-year discharges anticipated by the City of Fort Collins Stormwater staff are 24,100 cfs within the Poudre River, and 1,100 cfs at the proposed school location. 3 Attach$25 application fee,payable to Floodplain Use Permit Attachment City of Fort Collins.If floodplain analysis (City of Fort Collins Code,Section 10-27) is required,attach additional$300 for a total fee of$325. Section A.Owner and Property Information y� Petitionername ILOCV-V MouN-viAt%3 izoi"Vie- t iLOciRY4N1 Address a5t9, S_ 4_s \:s F+_C'o\��Ms Co iNFSPhone ci1O-�18K-71510 Owner name P" l\• s Se ,,cc.d•a.1( Address QUO FN ,C0kk1v%S CO KUSzq Phone LLR-2 —%735 City F: - Co\\\v S State Co Zip $0S2y Legal description and/or address of property_,9.o / 75 O b. V l m E tw%ye- 1� to ROS-Zq Section B:Proposed Project Information • Description of proposed project(checkall that apply): ❑new structure gaddition gremodel ❑redevelopment ❑mobile home/building ❑attached garage ❑accessory structure ❑fill ❑excavation ❑change of use ❑other(describe) • Existing use(check one): El residential %non-residential ❑mixed-use 51vacantground(*tk*%Lre "A'11A0`v_> . • Proposed use(check one): D residential %non-residential ❑mixed-use ❑other • If non-residential or mixed-use,describe in detail: 1,10Ave t Cev%�ef-bo syuk eNV wov w.nKib� C kad�f Y • Critical facility? Wes ❑no Sc lwO • Type of foundation(check one):I�slab-on-grade ❑basement ❑crawl space(attach pg.3,crawl space worksheet) ❑enclosed area not subgrade ❑other(describe) Remodels and Redevelopment Only • Cost of improvement for this project: (submit itemized cost list of improvements) • Value of structure: (submit County assessor's or appraiser's valuation of structure) • Cumulative value of improvements: • Substantial improvement? Dyes Ono Section C:Floodplain Information Vertical Datum Conversion: • Floodplain designation:V&Poudre River ❑FEMAbasin ❑Citybasin NGVD29+3.Oft.=NAVD88 • Floodplain name: S6 a eQ.vw ewo -�tv_ • FEMA base flood elevation (BFE)(ifopplicable): sA NGVD 29 N NAVD 88 • FEMA zone(check one): D A ❑AE ❑AH CIAO rj1X-500 ❑X • City floodplain BFE: (if applicable) hs /A4 NGVD 29 Zone: ❑100-year • Regulatory flood elevation (highest BFE+freeboard) N Iva, NGVD29 t NAVD88 (freeboard requirements on pg.2) • Floodway: Dyes Koo(if yes,include technical evaluation that shows'no-rise"per City Code10-45.) Erosion buffer limit: Dyes Ono page Section D:Regulatory Requiremertts • Structure is:Oelevated ❑floodproofed El vented ❑n/a • If floodproofed,describe method used: • Benchmark used: Elevation of benchmark: NGVD 29 • Lowest existing ground elevation: NGVD 29 Highest existing ground elevation: NGVD 29 • Lowest finished ground elevation: NGVD 29 Highest finished ground elevation: NGVD 29 • Lowest floor elevation(Refer to City Code 10-37(d)): NGVD 29 NAVD 88 • Elevation of garage slab: NGVD 29 NAVD 88 • Lowest elevation of HVAC equipment: NGVD 29 NAVD 88 • Enclosed area(not elevatedorfloodproofed): square feet • Number of vents: Area of venting: square inches • Requesting variance from City Code)(yes ❑no (If yes,attach variance application with additional$300 variance fee. Variance application can be obtained from Fort Collins Utilities. Variance request requires consideration by the Water Board.) • Requesting waiver based on capital project construction in City-designated floodplain Oyes ❑no (If yes,attach waiver application which can be obtained from Fort Collins Utilities.Waiver request requires consideration of Utilities General Manager.) For structures: Attach building plans showing foundation design,flood elevation,floor elevations,HVAC elevations, size and location of vents,floodproofing design and other relevant information. For site work: Attach site and grading plans and other relevant information. For propertyin a floodway: Attach No-Rise Certificate and documentation. Signature of petitioner: Date: 9'-(o-V P Signature of owner. 9.4 Date: Gz' 4 �g CFloodplain use permit: ❑approved Odenied: Permit# Date: ' A O 140 Signature of floodplain administrator: Date: 7 w Comments: E O Freeboard requirements:City Code 10-37 Poudre River:Twenty four(24)inches above the base flood elevation. FEMA basin AND City basin floodplains: -New construction and redevelopments:eighteen(18)inches above base flood elevation. -Additions and substantial improvements:six(6)inches above base flood elevation. -Accessory structures:six(6)inches above base flood elevation or meet venting requirements. If you have questions or need assistance filling out forms,contact Fort Collins Utilities at: • Phone:(970)221-6700 • TDD:(970)224-6003 • Web:fcgov.com/stormwater city of Fort colt ns - • E-mail:utilities@fcgov.com utilities Attachment 3 'ouclrc RIVer Floodir>I • ii • The location of the City of Fort Creating Fort ollins H stor q Collins is where it is today because of flooding on the Poudre River. The first Damage was military post, Camp Collins , was extensive in the originally established near the present ' Anderstm ill, day town of LaPorte. It was destroyed neighborhood in 1864 when the Poudre River ' (LemayAve. flooded . Camp Collins was relocated to looking north higher ground near present day Old toward Vine Town in Fort Collins. Dr.) after the flood in 1904. There are several well-documented AMP high water mark large floods on the Poudre River around the turn of the century. A flood in 1891 was due to a dam break on Chambers Lake. The most notable flood was in 1904 . This storm was greater than a 100-year In the April 1999 flood, event and resulted in the death of the Poudre River behind _ / - s �; Fort Collins resident Robert Strauss . the Mulberry Water The Buckingham , Alta Vista and eclamation Facility Andersonville neighborhoods were nad flows ofalmost severely damaged by the 1904 flood . 4, 000 cubic feet per second (cfi). Normal Numerous floods have occurred on river flow at this the Poudre River over time. The chart location is 100 cfi. below shows the highest flows on the Poudre River from 1864 to today. Peak Discharges for the Cache la Poudre River The most recent flood on the Poudre (recorded gage record 1882 to present) River was a relatively small one in 27 the spring of 1999 . It was caused by ' 2e a) rain and snow runoff during a warm L a $ mmm � Peak Discharge ( 1 ,000,cIs) 23 ? 3 g I W m �100•year Discharge (13,300 cis) period in April . The flood lasted only 21 H 0 ' 4 € " Q a few days, but resulted in a great 19 9 W LA deal of bank erosion and threatened 0 17 a @ n many properties. 15Lp � V U = 13 E „ x Although the Poudre River has not Y g g flooded often in recent years, we know a , from the past that large floods on the e Poudre River can happen . Only the m 3 LL L J future will tell how flooding on the 1F Ll Poudre River could change the history W O) ? Of Of < W Of 0) 01 0 V 0) M M co co M W M O 0 � N "M M � � of Fort Collins again . Year Attachment 4 got o i 1( I v c o of r L a ° g E �S g N III W ! ram L o a c Cal8 flj ! OO mamma -0 gal E Fp 3 m $ m u O !jl Z to ° c 0 o A a m ,� 47 m � 5 aa _ d aC r 8 „ III � E III I CL yq x � 8E em 0 01 ! yJe►` D Ea y� a £ � � � 0 ro w••! 5 � — W iSo au Ca L)i g z "' • / // NN '3 U i D N �,0111l O S N SLL P �! > r LL L QI O C om 5 ? � iam Q C 1 J I 0) 0L C O m M N C o >' g3' ' IXEoa wa 1 Z So TES° « HE o6 i r w o a t C c a c m o aE 0 J cooro ao mo 5 7 3 ' LL N H 6 m �'. N H q N W 1 I 1 L _ a 0OO N N H N W H W N J I - �1 ` IL O L C LL -� N 1• Y ' 1 • / �PV W E C 1 0 z I ! I v rn � LD 1 . , ! m ou IMP 0 e 1 P rnM 1 Q L o a �p ------------ — — — -- W C UET f E DR �b �i a) E G. °c 0 CCM 2 / $ o M o Np Iav aE I MO 3 M3WW00 $ m c a m c w L -0 o Nl N I 1 S F- I J y j 4a L° viLL Q 1 I �� 0mm � Od /j ! I O d) a)LL L / 1S 1Z� IQ mmwom f % 0 w =I SHlL 0rn � o0 - a Hl OI ! I pl lEM pVE m C 0 3A � 6E aEi J C U m 0 v� 3Atl AtlW3l N 1S Hl6 ` $y c N ~ C C) IC N U 1 Cow y 2 € .E Q i� c a._ 0 e U) a c o m M 0 • x i �y� 0 1 y C 0. ° af.. 2 �iJl� FLL t°0 w £ U z 1 EI R j Ntl O J • z = I �_ 1S 000 m 1 N O Il w 1S 2!3 1S .� 9 1S AS � ro - --- -- A 381b8 Y a V ai Cri z 380 HM -+ m j zl w p O a° x x CL 210 30 d 3(ll8 S 1 N ti 'd w w 0 fp H J S �s ti =6 LL O Q i O Q m w w MIO UVC130 0 0• ._ a iO+ i O a) 3Atl 30 -IMO N z M N LLOX T 0 Z w a 10 N 3 . Q } IS N N N CPO z Y Y S3M N 1 ' U N w 0 j J Co ? H 1:3 w U Z V i ~: 1 Q I N r--- 1 SIW O� S LL ! !'«! Nl 000M w 00 M I M S �► / lJ � Attachment 5 61 Omo p 13 ° e � o e O O 9 O 0 �p� 0 00 00p ` � mp � oB Opp 00 ``p0 0 p< e po � pOmO� _ _ OD App0pm0 � O w J Z i I TRUJILLO ST J l�` Proposed Future Addition ~ Existing Building = Proposed Change of Use ERO S i i HiahRisk FEMA Flood Risk Map . Floodway - Area of 100-year floodplain with greatest depths and fastest velocities. This information is based on the Federal Emergency Management Flood Fringe - May Include: Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM ) and the City of • Areas of FEMA 100- ear floodplain FEMA Zones A. AE . AO, and AH Fort Collins Master Dramageway Plans This letter does not imply Y P ( ) that the referenced property will or will not be free from flooding or - Areas of City 100-year floodplain including ponding areas and sheet damage. A property not in the special Flood Hazard Area or in a flow areas with average depths of 1 -3 feet. City Designated Floodplain may be damaged by a flood greater There is a 1 % annual chance that these areas will be flooded. than that predicted on the map or from a local drainage problem not Shown on the map This map does not create liability on the Moderate Risk part of the City, or any officer or employee thereof. for any damage that results from reliance on this information. May include: All floodplain boundaries - Areas of FEMA 500-year floodplain (FEMA Zone X-shaded). - Areas of FEMA or City 100-year floodplain (sheet flow) with are approximate . average depths of less than 1 foot . - Areas protected by levees from the 100-year flood. Low Risk 0 125 250 500 Feet U Areas outside of FEMA and City mapped 100-year and 500-year I floodplains. Local drainage problems may still exist. Printed : 10/14/2008 ATTACHMENT 4 WATER BOARD HEARING MATERIALS AUGUST 28, 2008 Floodplain Variance for Raptor Center School 720 - 750 E . Vine Drive Water Board Meeting August 28 , 2008 F�t_�Coll I`1s i Critical Facility Definition City Code Section 1Q- 16 Critical facilities shall mean . . . hospitals , nursing homes, group homes , residential care facilities , congregate care facilities and housing likely to contain occupants who may not be sufficiently mobile to avoid death or injury during a flood ; schools ; daycare facilities , . . . ' r Applicaba�e City Code Sections : • Section 10-81 (a) Critical Facilities . In any portion of the Poudre River 500-year flsea plain or zone X shaded area , critical facilities are prohibited . • Section 10-81 ( b ) . Change of Use . No person shall change the use of any structure or property located in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain or zone X shaded area so as to result in a new use or new nonconforming structure that is inconsistent with the requirements of this article . F�tJoll�ns Applicable City Code Sections ( con ' t ) : • Section 10-46 ( 6} . No person shall change the use of an existing structure that is not a critical facility to use as a critical facility contrary to the provisions of Article II of Chapter 10 of this Article , or change the use of a critical facility to another type of critical facility , or increase the physical area in use for a nonconforming critical facility, contrary to the provisions of this article . F`�orTy.tJ ns Variance Request • Allow a change of use in the Poudre River 500 -year floodplain for the existing structure at 720 E . Vine Dr . ( Parcel #t 97014 -23 - 001 ) to a school , which is defined as a critical facility per Chapter 10 of City Code . • Allow the existing building at 720 E . Vine Drive to be expanded with a future addition for use as a school . [tins M Project Proposal • Change the use of the existing building to a school . rl • Future 10 , 000 sq . ft . addition to the ---�' east . F�t` [tins rlanartab Lou" LfJ I.Ml Y6onhai 10 All r,< r •3 s -- . Fort CoWns ,lip r tit f} Saamw.3c ja M t . J . ...... ... rw - al fryr �� s CityotFortCoWns"latoryFloodplain Tee:r•.rcYne...3 ,. :.r.rrd,. .x,.rae-n-qnq .3.•rn .xxran:eaawvaaua[.e :.i <: Map A(ter try Cr*A Diyersion Project 8 kPtV4 0]VYYf.C4 �.T>!3�'[[[6r•.�{d[y„yRya V*0 . M elC01]Yfl bG.ww�a/.�] ITAr.Y1Yte,�mr,ir'.tt. <Ilay[4{.bl"I.31W VM. 'C Tf,Yete3MYa31a.y Ylr yf. flr _ Y! l(.QKUY11i!!. :4. YYry 7 QQI _ i Information TotalDepth approx . 1 foot viij owl • 00 cfs "'� FF:\I.a hlun[I Vial: Al:yr • =,_.,,... _ mow':' �-r:�__ 178rfCollins r.3. 4 • Over 100-years of streamflow record . • Several flood events in the range of the expected 500-year discharge : Peak Discharges for the Cache la Poudre River (recorded gage record 1982 to present) 27 .- 1864 — Camp Collins destroyed .- 1891 — Chambers Lake Dam Failure 1904 — 21 , 000 cfs due to rainstorm • No capital improvements planned that would eliminate or reduce the 500-year floodplain . F�t_f r 19 17 Is A Year !_ i iF�t-J1 i r: . J 1904 Poudre River Flood LL' Andersonville �T ,9 High Water Mark i AE: , f0 Flood Season r , � r April - --- ► September Rainfall or - Rain - on- Snow April 1999 flooding due to rain-on -snow. Rins .y 500- year Floodplain Risk = Statistics • 0 . 2 % chance of occurring in any given year. • During a 30-year period , there is a 6% probability of a 500-year flood occurring . • 1 , 100 cfs flow assumes College Ave . bridge not blocked with debris . ll1s College Ave . bridge and railroad trestle. P PM _ u IFA I ■P 1 College Ave . looking north toward Vine Dr. `� ~ Risk Examples • Large floods do happen . — 1997 Spring Creek Flood - greater than a 500- year flood — 1976 Big Thompson Flood - extreme event • Some areas of the Midwest have seen more than one 500-year flood within 10- 15 years . R C�1S 1997 Spring " - Creek Flood " { Debris Blocking the College Avenue Bridge Fol t✓ Purpose of Critical Facilities Regulation • Protect those facilities and people that are most vulnerable to the impact of flooding . • Three types of critical facilities : — Life-safety — schools , hospitals , daycares , nursing homes , group homes . — Emergency Response — Police stations , fire stations , emergency operations centers , utility facilities . — Hazardous Material Storage Most Risk = Highest Level of Protection lliI�1s Variance Options Option #1 : Deny the variance request in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain , based on regulations adopted in Chapter 10 of City Code , for a change of use of an existing structure at 720 East Vine Drive ( Parcel # 97014-23- 001 ) to a school . Deny the variance request in the Poudre River 500 -year floodplain for the existing building located at 720 East Vine Drive to be expanded with a future addition for use as a school . [tins T, Variance Options ( c • Option #2 : Grant the variance request in the Poudre River 1 - r • • • r to allow • change ofuse of - existingstructureat , East Vine Drive ( Parcel # 9701423-001 ) to a school , Grant the variance request - Poud - River , 1 r r • / • to allow • building located at / East Vine Drive to • r expanded I future addition • - I school . City• 'rt Collins 19 Applicant Presentation r- �' nww• It - 41�MM/iH- n•..Yaa•y. i Ys11M ��tivrn�� �nwrr wi - • toilins 4di 10 Staff Recommendation Based on the regulations adopted in City Code, Staff recommends Variance Option #1 , denial of the variance request. • Section 10=28 (e)(2-5 , 7=9 ) • Section 1 0=29 ( g )( 1 93 ) r�tf Variance Considerations or Conditions that are of Concern or Have Not Been Met 1 . Life Safety • Access roads flooded . • Children are not able to evacuate on their own . • Students , teachers , parents , bus drivers , emergency responders are at risk . • School operating during portion of year when there is a flood risk . • Minimal warning time . • Debris may magnify the event . Fart o ins Variance Co.n!9,11 era ions or Conditions that are of. Concern or Have Not Been Met 2 . Flood Damage and Mitigation • Existing building not protected . • Structural integrity of building not documented . • Design plans for addition not available . • A school is an integral service to the community . • No capital improvements planned . • No voluntary site mitigation . • Alternative sites may be available . ll1s Staff Recommendation (con ' t) • Not a good cause that outweighs the flood risk and intent of the critical facilities regulation . • Purpose of floodplain regulations : — be proactive , — reduce risk from future floods , and — avoid creating problems for future generations by allowing new high- risk development or uses in the floodplain . • Difficult to mitigate the risk of a school in the floodplain . Therefore , the regulations require schools to be located outside of the floodplain . [lins • ReCommendation • Based on the analysis outlined above, recommendsWater Board deny the requested City • , • r*I ix Water Board Discussi { • ON jMj&F 41•ny Ml4lry . ____ _ _ �� .IIY Q'•J _ • �.r..ytia 4.4v. /..8irf Co 13 APPLICANT POWER POINT Rocky Mountain Raptor Progra , and The Nature School Request for Floodplain Variance The Nature School The Nature School (TNS) is a proposed charter school in the Poudre School District TNS would offer the children of our community a unique opportunity to connect with nature through an environmentally based , student-centered , integrated curriculum Location adjacent to the Rocky Mountain Raptor Program ( RMRP ) nature center would offer frequent opportunities for students to study in an outdoor, nature- based environment. TNS has the potential of becoming a national model for connecting children to global awareness of the environment. TNS supports the Fort Collins vision of a Green Community Financiall Stability Start- up financing for the school' will be through a start- up grant available to new charter schools . Start- up financing for the faicility will be through a local investment group . Long -term financing is through the state per- pupil contribution to the school district .Our analysis shows the school to be financially viable . Responses to Stormwater Utility Comments Corrections * The Nature School will purchase the building at 720 E . Vine Dr . , and approximately 3 acres at 750 E . Vine Dr . * The Nature School Board of Directors will operate the school — no outside management company will be used The Nature School will build an additional 10 , 000 sq . ft . as student enrollment grows Floodplain and Flood Histor The SWU 's analysis conitaiins some information that is subjectively biased and some implications that are not technically supportable . Floodplain Information Project is outside the 100 -yr floodplain . SWU 's expected maximum 500 -yr flood depth at proposed site is approx . 1 ft . 1400t storm depths occur frequently in the Fort Collins area without causing significant problems . SWU mapping indicates that 500 -yr flooding at this location would present itself as sheet flow on the flood fringe . Historic Floods — SWU Report lists 3 events 1 ) 1864 flood in LaPorte . This event resulted in Camp Collins ' relocation to Old Town, which was presumably perceived as a, safer location . Flood discharges have been estimated from, historical accounts, but were not measured . The effect of this event at our location was not documented . 2 ) 1891 Chamber's Lake dam fa"cllure does not qualify as a natural recurring flood event. 3 ) 1904 flood event . Inundated Andersonville, 0 . 4 mile southeast of the site . The TNS site and Andersonville are about the same distance from the Poudre River, but the ground at Andersonville is 9 feet lower than the foundation of our building ; historical photographic record shows the high water line about 5 feet above the ground in Andersonville, which would still be 4 feet below our foundation . . This information indicates that the TNS site would not have been flooded during the 1904 flood . 500 - year Floodplain Risk 0 . 2 % chance of a 12 - inch depth during any given year . 6 % chance of a 12 - inch depth once during 30 - year period . 94 % chance of a 30 -yr period without a 12- inch flood depth . 0 . 04% chance of 2 sequential ( 2 years in a row ) 500-yr events - 1 chance in 250 , 000 , Regardless of recent reported events, probability of a 500 -yr flood is still 1 in 500 , not more frequent . Existing Schools, in Eloodplain CLIP Elementary and CLP Jr. Hiig1hi [located within 100 -yr floodplain . 30% chance of flooding once duringi a 30 yr period, 70% chance of not being flooded Shepardson Elementary & Zach, Elementary adjacent to p, 100 -yr floodway PSD Admin . building located! adjacent to 100 -yr floodway, within 100 -yr floodplaiin Risk to existing schools within floodlprone areas is considered acceptable, and is, mitigated by emergency management planning r City floodplain maps change frequently; number of schools within floodprone areas depends upon map revision City Code Considerations & Conditions Section 10 - 28 ( e ) . 2 ) — Danger to fife and property due to fllooding or erosion damage Evacuation is not being considered as a primary flood response option — given the limited effect of the flood at the proposed site, children will be safer inside the structure . Risk to parents, children , and emergency services personnel would be unnecessarily increased by attempted evacuation during the projected flood event. Evacuation would occur after the flood has subsided sufficiently to allow safe access to the site . The duration of high water is expected to be short, since a fast rate of rise generally means a rapid rate of dissipation . City Code Considerations� & Conditions Section 10 - 28 ( e ) ( 3 ) Susceptiibliillity of proposed facility and its contents to, fl'oodl damage ® The existing structure is steel) frame with sheet steel siding , set on a concrete foundaitioln . Flow velocities and duration have not been provided by SWU in sufficient detail to allow structuirall analysis of the building during the projected flood) event. However, since the structure conforms to city building codes, it is reasonable to expect that it would) easily withstand the projected 1 -foot flow depth . Exposure to floodwater inside the building , if any, will be brief. Improvements to the existing structure and design plans for a future addition will specifically address the effects of a 500 -yr event . AMMM® City Code Considerations & Conditions Section 10 - 28 ( e ) ( 5 ) Availability of alternate locations for proposed use The unique value of The Nature School is in its location adjacent to the RMRP , allowing students to walk onto the nature center as part of their regular classroom activities . Use of an alternate site would negate this unique value . City Code Considerations & Conditions Section 10 - 28 ( e ) ( 7 ) Relationshiip of proposed use with floodlpdain mgt program Given the proposed site configuration and SWU 's information pertaining to the 500 -yr event, we feel that public health , safety, and general welfare are at miiinimal risk in this case . G:. We feel that the risk associated with a 500 -yr ' . . event is, in this case, acceptable . City Code Considerations & Conditions Section 10- 28 ( e ) ( 8 ) Access to property in times of flood o In the event that it becomes necessary, most high - clearance vehicles could negotiate the projected flood depths . . It is not expected that vehicles will be required to negotiate maximum flood depths , since the primary response option is to safely contain the students inside the school . 'q ® TNS's emergency response plan will include concern for the safety of responding parents as well as the safety of their children . The plan will be coordinated with parents so that they will react appropriately. City Code Considerations & Conditions Section 10-28(e)( 9 ) Expected flood characteristics (depths, velocities, duration ) . A 500-yr event would not present itself as an unexpected flash flood . Based on discussion with SWU, staff, the Poudre River gauging system would provide a minimum of 2 hours warning, and very likely more time. • If the 500-yr event exhibits a short duration and fast rate of rise, as SWU's analysis appears to indicate, then the rate of fall would be fast as well . The time of exposure to the 1 -foot maximum flood depth would therefore be brief. . The area to the west of the proposed site contains the Larimer County Fleet Management Yards, which is enclosed by a substantial 7-ft. chain link fence , This barrier would reduce flow velocity and also act as a "trash rack" for floating debris, providing an additional measure of protection for the proposed site . . Considering the expected characteristics of the projected flood event at the proposed location, the flood risks, while present, are acceptable. City Code Considerations & Conditions Section 10 - 28 (f) Variance should be minimum necessary • The requested variance is the minimum necessary to allow the proposed school to proceed in this location . City Code Considerations & Conditions, Section 10 - 29 (g ) ( 1 ) Good ands sufficl.en cause In this situation , the benefits of a unique an valuable asset to the community - one that will most likely become a national model - outweigh the minimal risks associated with the facility . City Code Considerations & Conditions Section 10 - 29 ( g ) ( 3 ) Additional threat to public safety Given the low level of risk associated with the proposed project, a floodplain variance would not cause additional threat to public safety . In this case, the public interest would be better served by allowing an exception to the 500-yr floodplain rule . ATTACHMENT 5 WATER BOARD HEARING MINUTES AUGUST 28, 2008 ATTACHMENT 5 • (Excerpt from the Water Board Approved Minutes, August 28,2008) Floodnlain Variance Hearing—Raptor Center School, 720-750 East Vine Drive Prior to convening the hearing, Chairperson Yadon requested acknowledgement for the record from any Board members who feel they have a conflict of interest in this case. No conflict of interest issues were noted. Quorum was established and the hearing was called to order. Chairperson Yadon requested disclosure for the record from any Board members who had the opportunity to visit the site in question. Board Member Steve Balderson noted his employer has a property in the neighboring area of this site, and he was near the site today for a work- related matter but did not visit the specific site. Board Member Phil Phelan has visited the site also,but not for the intention of this variance. Board Member Bartholow visited the site today on the way to the Board meeting to view the location of the property. He walked the land to note how it fronted the road and what was behind it. He noticed the structures behind the building where raptors are kept and some old irrigation ditches as well as large dirt mounds to the north of the property. He questioned the history and significance of those features. Board Member Bartholow noted nothing substantive during his site visit. Chairperson Yadon asked for comments on these observations and noted an important procedural objective. All considerations by the Board will be based solely upon information brought forward at this hearing. Guest Mickey Willis noted the ditch referred to by Board Member Bartholow was the Josh Ames Ditch, abandoned in 1971, and Mr. Willis has a copy of the City's records on the abandonment. The mounds were part of the sugar beet process and were a reservoir to wash sugar beets. The sugar beet factory was across the street at the old transportation building. Chairperson Yadon requested disclosure for the record from Board members on any ex parte discussions they have had with members of Raptor Center staff outside of this hearing. No Board members present reported participating in any ex parte discussions. Chairperson Yadon asked if any parties and interests opposing this variance were present and would like an opportunity to offer testimony in opposition to the variance. No opposing parties were present. Chairperson Yadon summarized the hearing procedure as contained in the Board by-laws and from other Board training. Step 1: Staff will explain the general nature of the variance request and make their presentation to the Board. Step 2: The Chair will request a presentation and testimony by the applicants. Step 3: In the absence of any parties and interests opposing the request, the Board members will be invited to ask questions of any witnesses, staff or applicants present for the purpose of gaining additional information on the issues under consideration. It was noted this does not constitute the Board's discussion prior to the vote on the variance request. The Chair asked Board members to seek recognition from the Chair prior to calling on a particular witness for the purpose of remaining organized during this phase of the hearing. Also, repetitious • questions should be kept to a minimum. 1 Step 4: Once the Board has concluded their questions of witnesses, applicants will be given the opportunity to give a brief closing statement. Step 5: The Chair will seek a motion and a second on the variance request. Assuming there is a motion that is seconded, discussion will then be conducted. Upon completion of the discussion, the Board will take the vote. The guests listed above introduced themselves. Staff Presentation (Floodulain Regulation Administrator Marsha Hilmes-Robinson): The Board will be considering and taking action on a floodplain variance application for the Raptor Center School located at 720-750 E. Vine Drive. The variance relates to the critical facilities regulation found in City Code and the definition of a critical facility found in City Code Section 10-16. Critical Facility Definition: The definition states, "Critical facilities shall mean...hospitals, nursing homes, group homes, residential care facilities, congregate care facilities and housing likely to contain occupants who may not be sufficiently mobile to avoid death or injury during a flood; schools; daycare facilities, ..." Applicable City Code Sections: Staff reviewed this request based on three sections of City Code with content applicable to the request. 1) Section 10-81(a) Critical Facilities. "In any portion of the Poudre River 500- year floodplain zone X shaded area, critical facilities are prohibited." Chairperson Yadon interrupted to note the arrival of Board Member Eileen Dornfest. With the presentation just underway, he feels it appropriate Board Member Domfest be allowed to participate in the vote. There was agreement from the Board, applicants and staff. Chairperson Yadon covered the same initial disclosure requests with Board Member Dornfest related to ex parte communication with applicants, any site visit made to the property prior to this hearing or any conflict of interest, and she answered negative to all. Chairperson Yadon also provided a summary of Board Member Bartholow's site visit for Board Member Domfest. 2) Section 10-81(b) Change of Use. "No person shall change the use of any structure or property located in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain or zone X shaded area so as to result in a new use or new nonconforming structure that is inconsistent with the requirements of this article." 3) Section 10-46(6): "No person shall change the use of an existing structure that is not a critical facility to use as a critical facility contrary to the provisions of Article II of Chapter 10 of this Article, or change the use of a critical facility to another type of critical facility, or increase the physical area in use for a nonconforming critical facility, contrary to the provisions of this article." 2 . These are the only regulations that apply to the 500-year floodplain. Several regulations referenced in previous variance requests related to floodway, floatable materials, freeboard requirements, and other items are not applicable to the 500-year floodplain. Variance Request: The variance before the Board today is a two-fold request.The first part of the request is to allow a change of use in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain for the existing structure at 720 E. Vine Drive (Parcel#97014-23-001) to a school, which is defined as a critical facility by City Code. The second part of the request is to allow the existing building at 720 E. Vine Drive to be expanded with a 10,000 sq. ft. future addition for use as a school. 500-year Floodplain Information: A photo of the site showing the existing building at 720 E. Vine Drive was shared. Ms. Hilmes-Robinson oriented the Board to the relationship of the site to the floodplain using a color-coded regulatory floodplain map. The site is located north of Vine Drive between North Lemay Avenue and North College Avenue. The Poudre River floodway is represented in dark blue and the 100 year flood fringe in light blue. The site is not in the Dry Creek Floodplain. This variance deals with the 500-year Poudre River Floodplain represented in light green. The area at Lemay and Vine is also in the 500-year floodplain. Two residential neighborhoods are also in the area, Alta Vista and Andersonville to the south. The flows impacting this particular site are related to occurrences at College and Vine. The College Avenue bridge over the Poudre River is undersized, meaning all the water from a 100-year or 500-year flow cannot go through. When College Avenue is overtopped on the north side of the bridge, those flows start to go down Vine Drive. In a 500-year flow, those flows continue down Vine toward this property. Ms. Hilmes-Robinson pointed out three parcels on the map pertaining to this variance request, including the parcel containing the existing building. There are small and large parcels to the east owned by the Rocky Mountain Raptor Center. This mapping is from the FEMA- designated Poudre River 500-year Floodplain and is shown on the FEMA flood insurance study. The depth of flow for the 500-year floodplain is approximately one foot based on current mapping and modeling. The total flow for the Poudre River at the 500-year level is approximately 24,100 cfs with approximately 1,100 cfs flood flow breaking out of the area at College and Vine and flowing down Vine toward this property. Flood History: The City has over 100 years of stream flow record on the Poudre River from the mouth of the canyon. Several flood events in the range of the expected 500-year discharge included: 1) 1864—Camp Collins was destroyed; 2) 1891 —the Chambers Lake Dam failure; and 3) 1904— 21,000 cfs due to a rainstorm. 3 There are no capital improvements planned that would eliminate or reduce the 500-year floodplain on this property, so this represents a long-term risk, considering both the history and the future. A graph of peak discharge flows occurring on the Poudre River was shown with a line noting the 100-year discharge at approximately 13,000 cfs. The 500-year discharge would be approximately 24,000 cfs. An event of this magnitude has not occurred in some time, and based on past history, these events can happen, and it's a matter of time before a major event happens again. Ms. Hilmes-Robinson shared a historic photograph of the Andersonville neighborhood to the southeast of the proposed school sight and pointed out the high water mark from the 1904 flood on the Poudre River. Staff draws a conclusion between the 1904 flooding level of this property and likeliness that the school (proposed to the northwest) would have also flooded in 1904. Flood Season: Flood season on the Poudre River generally runs from April to September. For a large magnitude event like a 500-year flood, it would most likely be due to rainfall or rain- on-snow, generally not snowmelt. A photo taken behind the Mulberry Water Reclamation Facility in April 1999 depicted the most recent major flood event on the Poudre River of 4,000 cfs. Peak flow for this rain-on-snow event was about 6,700 cfs,just under a 10-year event, with a short duration of one day. 500-year Floodplain Risk Statistics: There is a 0.2% probability of a 500-year flood occurring in any given year. This probability is constant for every year including back-to-back years or over a longer time frame. However, when studying a 30-year period (the time needed to consider a structure used as a school), there is a 6% probability over the 30-year period of a 500-year flood occurring. When flows of 1,100 cfs coming through the site are studied, based on the existing mapping and modeling, it's important to note the assumption the College Avenue bridge is fully open and not blocked by any debris. If the bridge is blocked by debris, more of the water would come over the top of College and head down Vine Drive. Therefore, the 1,100 cfs may turn into a much greater amount of water even during a smaller event. There is a high probability of this occurring in a 500-year flood event. Ms. Hilmes-Robinson demonstrated where overtopping and debris blockage at the railroad trestle or College Avenue bridge could occur on photos of the College and Vine intersection. Risk Examples: Large floods happen in Fort Collins. The 1997 Spring Creek flood was the biggest event to occur in Fort Collins and was greater than a 500-year flood, both from a rainfall and stream flow standpoint. The 1976 Big Thompson flood was also an extreme event (7.5 inches of rain in 70 minutes.) Some areas of the Midwest have experienced a great deal of flooding this year. Many of these areas have received more than one 500-year flood within a 10-15 year period. Based on floodplain mapping and modeling, this site would be impacted in a 500-year flood. 4 A photo of debris blocking the College Avenue bridge at Spring Creek during the 1997 Spring Creek Flood was shown. It was difficult to see the bridge with this amount of debris jammed against it. Debris blocked a lot of the flow and caused overtopping on College Avenue. Debris blockage such as this is highly likely at the College Avenue bridge at the Poudre River as well. Purpose of Critical Facilities Regulation: The purpose of this regulation is a key issue to this variance request. The regulation is designed to protect those facilities and people that are most vulnerable to the impact of flooding. There are three types of critical facilities: life-safety, emergency response and hazardous material storage. The life-safety category includes schools, hospitals, daycares, nursing homes and group homes. Evacuation is the key issue when dealing with life-safety issues. How do you protect the life-safety of the building occupants but also emergency responders and others arriving to help? In the case of a school, responders would include parents, bus drivers and emergency responders. Emergency response facilities, such as police and fire stations, emergency operations centers and utility facilities are needed before and after a flood. Critical facilities bear the most risk, so they also need to provide the highest level of protection. This is why floodplain regulations have complete prohibition of critical facilities in the 500-year floodplain. Variance Options: Staff has prepared two variance options for the Board to consider. Option 1: Deny the variance request in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain, based on regulations adopted in Chapter 10 of City Code, for a change of use to an existing structure at 720 E. Vine Drive (Parcel#97014-23-001) to a school. Deny the variance request in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain for the existing building located at 720 E. Vine Drive to be expanded with a future addition for use as a school. Option 2: Grant the variance request in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain to allow a change of use of the existing structure at 720 E. Vine Drive (Parcel #97014-23-001) to a school. Grant the variance request in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain to allow the existing buildinig located at 720 E. Vine Drive to be expanded with a future addition for use as a school. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Variance Option#1, denial of the variance request, based on regulations adopted in City Code. There are sections of City Code related to variances which outline considerations and items to be met in order for the Board to consider a variance request. Staff has found Sections 10-28(e)(2-5,7-9) and Sections 10-29(g)(1,3) contain criteria which have not been met related to the variance. The packet before the Board contains a summary of each of the individual Code items and the related concerns. Staff can present these details during another portion of the hearing if desired. Staff concerns are contained in two primary categories: 1) Life Safety: a) Flooding of access roads; b) Children are not able to evacuate on their own, noting one foot of water can easily sweep a child off their feet; c) Students, teachers, parents, bus drivers, and emergency responders are all at risk; 5 d) School would be operating during a portion of the year when there is a flood risk(April and May, a portion of August and September.) Also, procedures may change to allow summer classes in the future; e) There is minimal warning time of about 2 hours from the mouth of the canyon to implement emergency evaluation plans to remove 450 students from this site; and f) Debris may magnify the event. The potential for loss of life and injury is staff s greatest concern about the variance request at this particular site. Life-safety concerns are the primary reason why the critical facilities regulations were adopted. 2) Flood Damage and Mitigation: a) The existing building is not protected from the 500-year flood. Water will enter it, and occupants will be exposed to floodwater during the event and clean up after the event. The floodwaters would likely contain contaminants. There is also potential for mold remediation afterward; b) The applicant has not provided any information as to the structural integrity of the building; c) Design plans for the addition have not been supplied to reviewers; d) A school is an integral service to the community. This variance is not just dealing with a risk assumed by the owner. The risk extends to the students attending and the teachers working at the school, and the emergency responders and parents trying to reach the school to help the children. The impact of the damages to this building does not just go to the property owner, but are a community issue for consideration; e) No capital improvements are planned for this area to eliminate or reduce the 500-year floodplain on this property, so it's a long term risk to be addressed and considered; f) There has been no voluntary site mitigation offered by the applicant; and g) Staff feels alternative sites outside the 500-year floodplain may be available for the school. Summary: In the professional opinion of staff, staff has not found a good cause which outweighs the flood risk and intent of the critical facilities regulation. The intent of the critical facilities regulation is to protect life-safety during a flood event. The overall purpose of floodplain regulations is based on the desire to be proactive, reduce the risk from future floods and avoid creating problems for future generations by allowing new high-risk development or uses in the floodplain. The critical facilities regulation is the epitome of these goals. It is difficult to mitigate the risk of a school in the floodplain. Therefore, the regulations require schools to be located outside the floodplain. In closing,based on the analysis outlined above, staff recommends the Board deny the requested variance. Applicant Presentation: "Rocky Mountain Raptor Program and the Nature School/Request for Floodplain Variance" 6 Judy Scherpelz is a founding member of the Board of Directors of The Nature School (TNS) and director of the Rocky Mountain Raptor Program (RMRP). She is joined by two other founding members of the TNS Board, Tim Merriman and Mickey Willis, as well as Charles Bosley, consultant. The Nature School is a proposed charter school in the Poudre School District(PSD), co- located with the Rocky Mountain Raptor Program, which provides a very exciting and unique opportunity for learning. Many schools in the area have strong environmental programs; however, this school would be truly unique, because it would provide students a rigorous standards-based curriculum which meets all State standards with an overarching environmental theme. In all aspects of their education, students would have a strong environmental grounding to learn the importance of the environment. This is becoming more important in our society today as we look at the environmental challenges to face in the upcoming years. The school has the potential for becoming a national model for connecting children to environmental issues and global awareness to become citizens of the planet. TNS Board members are very excited for the opportunity this format provides and for the national interest in it. They also believe the school supports the Fort Collins vision of a green community. The school has a financially viable future with good sources of start-up financing for the school plus long-term financing through the State based on a per pupil contribution. A review packet distributed in advance of this hearing by the reviewers contained some inaccuracies. The Nature School would be purchasing the building at 720 E. Vine Drive and approximately 3 acres at 750 E. Vine Drive. The Nature School Board of Directors will operate the school. There is no outside management company involved. Currently, the Raptor Program owns the property the building sits on, and the building is owned by another entity. Ms. Scherpelz introduced Charles Bosley to continue the presentation. Mr. Bosley noted some points in the City's presentation are somewhat subjective and others are not entirely complete. Mr. Bosley's purpose for speaking as an engineering consultant for RMRP is to provide information which may lead to a more thorough understanding of the request. The proposed project is located outside the 100-year floodplain. The expected maximum 500- year flood depth at the proposed site is approximately one foot, a storm depth which tends to occur frequently in the Fort Collins area without causing significant problems or long duration. City mapping indicates the 500-year flooding at this location would present as sheet flow near the flood fringe. This type of flow is characterized by low velocities, uniform flow field and diminished sediment carrying capacity. Mr. Bosley addressed the historic floods raised by the City. The 1864 flood resulted in the relocation of Camp Collins to Old Town, perceived to be a safer location. Flood discharges for this event have been estimated from historical accounts, but were not measured. The effect of this event at the proposed school location remains undocumented. The 1891 Chambers Lake event should not qualify as a natural recurring flood event. It was due to an artificially generated dam failure. 7 The 1904 flood event inundated the Andersonville neighborhood, the most well documented of the three events. It is located approximately one half mile southeast of the proposed site and about the same distance from the Poudre River. The ground at Andersonville is 9 feet lower than the foundation of the proposed building, a notable difference. The historical photographic record seen shows the high water line about 5 feet above ground level in Andersonville, which would leave the flood crest 4 feet to go before it reached the level of the proposed property. Based on this information, the proposed site would not have been flooded in the 1904 event. Mr. Bosley referred to floodplain statistics: • The 0.2% chance of 12 inch depth during any given year creates a slightly less than 6% chance of the same 12 inch depth occurring once during a sequential 30 year period, leaving a 94% chance of that same 30-year period without a 12-inch flood depth. • The probability of 2 sequential 500-year events is .04% or 1:250,000 chance. • Regardless of recent reported events elsewhere in the country, the probability of a 500- year flood is still one in 500. This is the specific criteria to which the regulation was written, and Mr. Bosley believes this is the criteria upon which it should be evaluated. Mr. Bosley noted the existence of several schools already in the 100-year floodplain, including Cache La Poudre Elementary and Junior High schools immediately adjacent to the river in Laporte. For these facilities, the odds of being flooded once during a 30-year period are slightly less than 30% with a slightly more than 70% chance of not being flooded in the same 30-year period. Additionally, Shepardson and Zach Elementary schools are adjacent to a 100- year floodway, and the Poudre School District Administration Building is located adjacent to a 100-year floodway within a 100-year floodplain. He brings these items up not to criticize the school district,but to illustrate the fact of existing facilities for which the risk is accepted. The risk is accepted because these facilities are considered valuable enough to accept the risk, and the risk is mitigated by emergency management planning. Mr. Bosley noted City floodplain maps can change. The map he was given to review does not precisely match the map on the Fort Collins web site. As flood control facilities are constructed and modeling is refined, the area should change on the maps, a normal process of changing and updating to be anticipated. However, if floodplain mapping is not completely definitive, then Mr. Bosley believes there should be some latitude for discretion in applying the floodplain regulations. He feels this is one case that calls for such discretion. Evacuation is not being considered as a primary flood response option, because the severity of a projected flood would make it safer to retain students in the school. The City pointed out the extensive risk to responding parents, especially those crossing the river, as well as risk to emergency services personnel. TNS Board members agree and plan for evacuation to occur after the flood crest has subsided sufficiently to allow emergency personnel to establish proper access routes. The existing structure is constructed of steel girder frame with sheet steel siding set on a concrete slab foundation, a type of structure particularly good at withstanding lateral forces. Flow velocities have not been provided by the City's stormwater staff in sufficient detail to 8 allow structural analysis of the building. However, since the structure conforms to City building codes, it is reasonable to conclude the one foot hydrostatic head would possibly be two feet per second velocity and would be small compared to the wind loading each industrial structure is required to withstand per Code. Therefore, lateral loading of the projected flood would not propose a problem to the structure. While exposure to floodwater inside the building is possible, if any, it would be quite brief. Improvements to the existing structure are planned, and design plans for the future addition will specifically address issues related to the 500-year flood. Ms. Scherpelz noted the City reviewer suggested the possibility of alternate locations for this site, and RMRP staff disagrees wholeheartedly on such an option. The value of this school is its co-location with the nature center. Building the school on a different site from the nature center would totally negate the concept of getting students outside daily to experience nature as a part of their education. Other points of consideration were brought up related to Code Section 10-28(e)(7) "Relationship of proposed use with floodplain management program". Given the proposed site, applicants feel public health, safety and welfare are at very minimal risk, and this risk is acceptable associated with flood risk projections. For example, with the issue of access to the property during a flood, the review documents stated most vehicles would not be able to handle a 12 inch flood depth. If evacuation and travel in that area was necessary, most high clearance vehicles could negotiate a 12 inch depth, particularly considering the flood depths will be of very short duration. Vehicles will not be needed on site to negotiate maximum flood depths due to the brief period, and during the period of maximum • flood depth, students would be kept in the school in a safe manner. Once the crest has passed, the nature center would work with emergency response teams and implement community plans to determine the appropriate access route. The emergency response plan would include not only the safety of the students, teachers and personnel inside the building, but also the safety of the community, emergency responders and parents. The school would formulate an emergency response team in partnership with PSD, local and regional response plans, and the plan would be communicated with parents in detail. When speaking to expected flood characteristics, a 500-year event is not going to present as an unexpected flash flood. Based on discussion with SWU staff, the Poudre River gaging system provides 3-4 hours warning at a minimum. Being extremely conservative, the system would provide at least 2 hours warning, sufficient time to enact an emergency plan. A 500-year event exhibits an extremely short duration and fast rate of rise,but an equally short rate of fall. The actual 12 inch depth would be short-lived, so exposure would be extremely brief. The Larimer County Fleet Management yards to the west of the site are enclosed by a substantial 7 foot chain link fence. This barrier can potentially reduce the flow velocity, giving some additional protection to the proposed site. Considering the characteristics of the projected flood and the site, there is some risk,but RMRP staff feels the risk is minimal and acceptable. Related to Section 10-28(f) Variance should be the minimum necessary, RMRP staff have requested the minimum necessary and believe the benefit of this truly unique school is a valuable asset to the community and very likely to become a national model, factors which • outweigh the minimal risk. 9 RMRP staff does not believe this presents an additional threat to public safety. The public interest would be better served by allowing an exception to the 500-year floodplain rule. Questions from Board members: Chairperson Yadon clarified the intent of this discussion time is to be confined to Board questions on testimony received, not to provide new or additional information. If a party has asked a question, and it's apparent there is some opportunity for a question of the other side, in fairness, the question would be welcomed then. Those at the hearing should refrain from a rebuttal process while insuring information the Board needs to make the decision comes forward. Chairperson Yadon issued a reminder to seek recognition by the Chair before your question. Discussion will follow at the point of a motion and a second. Board Member Connor asked two questions: • Definition of a school(to applicant). The City Code is specific in pointing out a school cannot be in a 500-year floodplain. What constitutes a school versus a training center and would that make a difference to this discussion? Ms. Scheroelz: This would be a charter school and part of PSD, so it would be comparable to other district schools with the same standing. • What would be entailed in removing the structure or the property from the 500-year floodplain (to staff)? Ms. Hilmes-Robinson: The property could be elevated with fill and the structure elevated above the fill, essentially creating an island. This would result in a high piece of ground sitting on an island, depending on elevation height, protecting the structure itself from the floodplain. It is staff's opinion this did not mitigate the risk of flooding related to a school due to evacuation issues. Surrounding roads would still be at risk and depending on the amount of free board. Mr. Willis added a comment about the difference between a technical facility and a school. In the particular zoning of the building, City Code allows for technical schools and trade schools. However, the definition used by the City is elementary schools. This school would offer kindergarten through 8`h grade, and the majority of students would be older. There are many definitions of schools, but zoning allows for technical and trade schools in this building. Ms. Hilmes-Robinson noted the existence of two separate codes. Zoning code has far more extensive laying out of different types of schools. As seen from the critical facilities definition in Chapter 10 of City Code, it simply says "schools" for floodplain regulations. It does not differentiate between elementary,junior high and high schools. By staff interpretation, no matter the grade level all the way through high school and even a trade school, this school would be considered a school and subject to the regulation. Board Member Bartholow asked two questions: • Bridge replacement (to staff). Staff mentioned there were no plans to mitigate the flood area, and this is understandable from Utilities' standpoint, but do we know if the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) or the railroad might be replacing either of the bridges in question in the next 5 years?Does the City have any leverage with the railroad on this issue? 10 • Ms. Hilmes-Robinson: Staff is not aware of any plans. The College Avenue bridge is not very old(likely built in the early 1990s), so in considering the lifespan of a bridge and other older bridges experiencing serious issues, Utilities has not heard anything from CDOT or the railroad related to replacing these bridges. Also, there are complex issues involved in dealing with the railroad. • Position of emergency response authorities (to staff). Has staff received an official position from Poudre Fire Authority or other emergency management staff on this particular variance request? Ms. Hilmes-Robinson: Staff has not asked for their position. Board Member Phelan asked two questions: • Changes in the FEMA mapping (to staff). Will the mapping which is coming be based on the work done north of town? Does the mapping change anything with the school's proximity to the floodplain? Ms. Hilmes-Robinson: It does not. The mapping referred to has been approved and adopted. The mapping the Board saw today is this mapping. It relates strictly to the Dry Creek Floodplain and greatly reduces that floodplain, but has nothing to do with the Poudre River Floodplain mapping. We're waiting for digital information to put on the web site from FEMA; this is the only remaining information staff is expecting. The Poudre River will be restudied sometime in the future, and the mapping will likely change,but when that is and what that may hold can't be said at this point. • Have any precedences been set granting any schools variances in the floodplain, such as Liberty Commons near Advanced Energy (to staff)? Ms. Hilmes-Robinson: Those schools are not in the floodplain, and there have been no variance requests come through this Board for a school in the 500-year floodplain**. The schools in LaPorte are older schools and not in the City's jurisdiction. Utilities has a very close working relationship with PSD, and they are cognizant of this criteria. ** For the sake of accuracy, one variance was granted for a school in a floodplain in Fort Collins. Water Engineering and Field Services Manager Jim Hibbard referred to a variance approved for the Wingshadow School in the Dry Creek Floodplain northwest of this site, not related to the 500-year floodplain. The Water Board approved the variance even though it was in the Dry Creek 100-year Floodplain. Based on memory, part of the consideration given to the school was a Utilities capital project planned to remove it from the floodplain. The school participated in installing a warning System in the Dry Creek basin and hired an emergency response consultant to devise an evacuation and emergency action plan for that particular site. Mr. Willis added the City, not FEMA, regulates critical facilities in the 500-year floodplain. This is important to note, because this appears to be the only property in the country with a 500-year critical facility designation associated to it. The property is three-quarters of a mile away from the Poudre River. The City issued a permit to store their hazardous and floatable waste materials near the river in January-February 2007. There are also gas and electric substations and a sewage treatment plant on the banks of the Poudre River. There is a 6% chance in 30 years of water reaching this property, a factor he takes into account in deciding his children will attend the school, and as a • concerned parent, he doesn't put his children in danger. The City's charge is to provide a reasonable expectation of safety to the citizens. This plan is within this expectation. 11 Chairperson Yadon referred to the role of original testimony and, while these remarks are appreciated, there will be an opportunity to recap. The Board was reminded for the record and in the interest of following our procedure, feel free to seek response from the other party if felt to be appropriate. Board Member Waskom asked: • Has Utilities staff conferred with Poudre School District(to staff)? Ms. Hilmes-Robinson: Staff has not directly conferred with PSD. Ms. Scherpelz: The district is aware of this request. • Is it the applicant's position no mitigation is needed for this site (to applicant)? Ms. Scherpelz: That is not the applicant's position. The applicant had asked Water Utilities for more information on flood characteristics so the applicant could devise appropriate mitigation based on the characteristics, and they did not receive the information. As the building and site are designed, mitigation measures are planned. Chairperson Yadon asked: • Debris blockage (to staff). The purpose and intent of the 500-year floodplain regulations speaks to the estimates of a 12 inch flow depth and associated sheet flow velocity, and those estimates are based on the assumption of 0%blockage of the railroad or the street bridge. In the event of some percentage of blockage, the estimates of flow depth and velocity in this area would be expected to increase to some degree, depending on the amount of blockage and the greater overflow. Ms. Hilmes-Robinson: This is correct. The information relates to approximately one foot depth through this area with no channel through. Sheeting occurs through Vine Drive and across the open area. Floodplain modeling and mapping is based on the assumption of no blockage at the railroad trestle or bridge areas. Various situations could create additional flow and this has not been analyzed in detail. The possibility of flow going through the low point to the north is an important factor to consider with the existence of additional blockage. Mr. Bosley: He has not modeled this either. Modeling a blockage of an existing structure is not deterministic, and he agrees if the railroad bridge, College bridge or both were blocked by debris, flow would increase east along Vine Drive. However, given the region is a quarter mile from the intersection of College and Vine to the facility, the sheet flow would have the opportunity to dissipate before increasing in depth. Mr. Bosley cannot predict the increase in depth, because increased discharge is difficult to model. He notes a conservative estimate of adding 500 cfs to the Vine Drive discharge would increase depth a matter of inches. Given that eventuality, there would not be a significant increase in depth in terms of the structure. Board Member Barthalow asked: • The width of a site flow over 1,100 cfs (to staff). Ms. Hilmes-Robinson: (Referred to the overall regulatory floodplain map to demonstrate where the breakout occurs.) This area is fairly wide and relatively flat. In general, the flow then tries to return to the Poudre River. Water breaks out of the river in multiple places. One of those occurs at College and Vine, and some flow tries to get 12 back into the river by overtopping Vine Drive. Other water continues on to create 500- year flooding. There is not a definitive answer. Water Planning and Development Manager Bob Smith added 1,100 cfs represents the flow going east down Vine Drive. The extent of the flow is from Vine north to the edge of the green line on the map. The railroad embankment on the south side of Vine does not allow the water to go across. Chairperson Yadon asked for further questions. There were no further questions, and the applicant was offered the opportunity for a brief closing statement. The applicant's closing statement was given by Tim Merriman, Executive Director for the National Association for Interpretation at 230 Cherry Street,Fort Collins. Mr. Merriman is on the Board for The Nature School and involved with this project primarily due to his work nationally and internationally with nature centers. Recent statistics for math and science skills of American students reflect a ranking of about 20`h in the world. Developing nations achieve better results in science and math programs than the United States. One area of research in his field looks at students who have field trips or hands-on learning opportunities and how they perform on state-wide standards in math and science. Statistics show improved performance when contextual or experiential learning is incorporated, and this type of learning works more effectively than theoretical learning. One other nature center in Palm Beach, Florida has a school on its property built within the last year in an area very prone to hurricanes, and the school has developed hurricane evacuation systems for the school and nature center. Mr. Merriman ran a nature center on the Arkansas River in Pueblo, Colorado for 12 years which was in the 100-year floodplain. The school managed 17,000 students per year on field trips. The property flooded half a dozen times in 10 years, and there was never any danger to students, because staff always knew of any incursions on the property in advance, and students were sent home. The USGS water modeling systems in Pueblo were state of the art. He personally believes Fort Collins is one of those model math and science communities when looking at industry and the intellectual community at Colorado State University. If his children were younger, this is the school he would choose for them and would desire service learning studies with birds of prey for them to help them understand math and science concepts. It would even be a value to the students to study the flood detention for the property and have the parents, community and students involved in discussing mitigation and what to do in a flood event. Children need to be engaged in understanding the danger to them. When other weather events and factors affecting school life in Fort Collins are considered, a one foot incursion on the property is minor. This school is planned to be a state of the art facility in science and math studies with an opportunity to look at mitigation and have an evacuation plan that makes it a zero potential risk for incidents. He feels variances exist in the hands of citizens for good reasons when you make reasonable judgments to allow an exception. In closing, Mr. Merriman and the applicants hope the Board will see the unique and wonderful opportunity here. Moving the school to another site removes the daily experiential opportunity. The challenge to do something constructive and work around any obstacles should be embraced. The applicants hope the Board will approve the variance. Motion for recommendation: A motion on the variance was entertained by the Chair. 13 Board Member Connor moved the Board deny the variance request in the Poudre River 500- year floodplain,based on regulations adopted in Chapter 10 of City Code, for a change of use of an existing structure at 720 E. Vine Drive to a school and also deny the variance request in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain as to the existing building located at 720 E. Vine Drive to be expanded with a future addition for use as a school. The City Code uses very strong language and is very explicit about having this kind of structure in the 500-year floodplain. Board Member Johannes Gessler seconded the motion. Discussion on the motion: Board Member Connor noted his desire to support this wonderful concept and proposal and feels there is a strong case to appeal to the next level to challenge whether the City Code is overly restrictive. This is not the Board to override the guidance provided in the City Code regulations. He would like to support it and would enjoy involvement in some of the activities, but cannot support this variance request given the way City Code is currently written. Board Member Bartholow basically agrees with Board Member Connor and is very sympathetic to the goals of the school. The applicants brought up some very good points, but the regulations are there for a very good reason through some difficult lessons the City has learned. He recognizes some uncertainties and gray areas between the mapping,modeling and all aspects. He would personally entertain another opportunity to look at this variance if the applicants prepared an emergency response plan in conjunction with the appropriate emergency response authorities and demonstrated good faith in the structural plans for the existing and future buildings. Chairperson Yadon asked whether Board Member Connor and Board Member Gessler would consider a friendly amendment to the wording of the motion. He suggested wording to be added to reflect there has not been a sufficient showing of good and sufficient cause to grant this particular variance in both points (conversion of existing facility and expansion of this facility as a school in the 500-year floodplain), and the granting of the variance in fact would present an additional threat to public safety and the public in general beyond the current condition at the site. Board Member Connor did not agree to the friendly amendment. The second part of the statement gives him concern. Vote on the motion: Seeing no other discussion, a vote was taken, and it passed unanimously (8 for, 0 against.) Submitted by Robin Pierce, Executive Administrative Assistant Fort Collins Utilities A Approved by the Board on J NS , 2008 Signed Otic'n 41n� $ Robin Pierce ate 14 ATTACHMENT WATER BOARD HEARING VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT AUGUST 28, 2008 ATTACHMENT Utilities Cityof electric stormwater wastewater water Fort Collins 700 Wood Street PO Box 580 Fort Collins,CO 80522 970.221.6700 970.221.6619—fax 970.224.6003—Too utilities®lcgov.com icgoecorNutilities MEMORANDUM TO: Marsha Hilmes-Robinson, Floodplain Administrator FROM: Robin Pierce, Executive Administrative Assistant Ap DATE: 10/9/08 SUBJECT: Transcript of Floodplain Variance Hearing: Modification to Identify Speakers A verbatim transcript was requested from Meadors Court Reporting of a floodplain variance hearing conducted at the August 28, 2008 Water Board meeting for the Rocky Mountain Raptor Center and Nature School. The transcript was prepared from audio tape, and therefore, the transcript does not identify speaker names to the proceedings. Using the approved Board minutes of the same floodplain variance hearing, I have entered the names on a transcript copy for use as reference by City Council members when the appeal of this hearing decision goes before them for consideration at their October 21, 2008 meeting. • COPY TAPE TRANSCRIPTION OF WATER BOARD MEETING Held on August 28 , 2008 Transcription services provided by: Meadors Court Reporting, LLC Court Reporting & Legal Video Services 315 West Oak Street, Suite 710 Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 (970) 482-1506 or(800)482-1506 Fax: (970)482-1230 e-mail: meadors@reporterworks.com Nat r: L" OCdo-W 1 1 (Commencement of tape. ) 2 /��IYI � �OC&7SPEAKER: If we just go ahead and take a pass 3 through on the food here reasonably quickly and 4 efficiently, and if it works for -- for our guests -- I 5 know it does for the Board but if -- if we can eat while 6 we ' re conducting business we ' ll move things along and 7 not take up any more of -- of your time than necessary. 8 So feel free to -- to line up and -- and smells like 9 some good food so -- 10 (Several minutes of background 11 talking/noise . ) 11" (194mv, SPEAKER: Both our guests and it looks like 13 the Board are already taken care of food-wise. We ' ll go 14 ahead and -- and call the meeting to order, and the 15 first order of business will be public comment . It is a 16 finite period. If there are any members of the public 17 who would like to address the Board on a matter other 18 than the variance, there will be opportunity for 19 witnesses, a few comments with regard to variance . So 20 are there any public comments? 21M) (, 1,M's SPEAKER: It ' s good food. Thanks y' all . 22 OU9x (Jodm) SPEAKER: All right . Seeing none we ' ll move 23 to the next item which is the approval of the minutes 24 for the meeting of July 24, 2008 . Is there a motion on 25 approval of the minutes? 2 1 /)'►d4t C0n17'SPEAKER: I ' 11 move . 2 Dyjf � d 'SPEAKER: Is there a second? 3 d,0�1Y1•I GLu`l"h[UC-Y�EAKER: Second. 4 ()^/Xa(,{(61M SPEAKER: Is there any discussion, 5 corrections of the minutes? 6 SPEAKER: John ' s always the guy that 7 (inaudible) akkiI lJG aloalsPEAKER: No . I have none . Look good. 9 J("( " SPEAKER: Okay. Seeing that, all those in 10 _OffavUU�o�r/ /ys�ay� 1aye . 11 (�.J(�G(.�G� (�.c.0 ) SPEAKERS : Aye . 12 ]" (, adm SPEAKER: Opposed. Thank you. Okay. Next 13 order of business is the floodplain variance, and what I 14 would like to do is -- is briefly run through, for all 15 of our benefit, the procedure that we will use for the 16 hearing and -- and take care of a couple of housekeeping 17 items as we do that, and then we ' ll -- we ' ll go ahead 18 and ask our -- our first witnesses to make their 19 presentation. At this point, before I actually convene 20 the hearing, I ' d just like to -- to make the -- provide 21 the opportunity to the Board if there is anyone who 22 feels they have a conflict of interest on this matter, 23 this would be the appropriate time to -- to acknowledge 24 that . Seeing none we ' ll move ahead. 25 We do have a quorum, so I ' ll go ahead and -- 3 1 and call the hearing to order. Next item of business is 2 that there are two -- two opportunities that I can 3 present . If anyone took an opportunity to take a site 4 visit this would be an appropriate time to -- to 5 disclose that to the Board and -- and to offer any of 6 the information that you might have gathered from that 7 visit so that we ' re starting out on a -- on an even 8 platform for everyone . So anyone visit the site for 9 this purpose? 10 ? SPEAKER: Any of us you mean? 11 on SPEAKER: Yes, the Board. 12 +� ? SPEAKER: Okay. 13 _(�� ,Y] � /� SPEAKER: Okay. Anyone else? 14 GCVt �yQMSSPEAKER: Am I clear as to a piece of 15 property nearby. I was in the neighborhood but I didn ' t 16 visit the -- 17 Oat Y000-F1 SPEAKER: Okay. 18 Phil Phela-ei SPEAKER: Yeah. I visited too but not with 19 the intent of today' s variance . D°x O (,jack-n SPEAKER: Okay. John, in accordance with 21 some of the retraining some of us just took, what would 22 be appropriate is if you -- if your -- if the purpose of 23 your visit was to gain some familiarity with the 24 information relevant to the hearing it ' s appropriate if 25 you would just share with us what -- what you might have 4 1 learned from that visit, and then we will then offer 2 each of the parties, staff, applicant, if there are any 3 third parties of interest, an opportunity to offer 4 thoughts on what you might have learned or that evidence 5 that,,�^_yo�uuumig�h�t) bring forward from that visit . So -- 6 Jobil / 1f-a1@ AKER: Sure . I think I understand that . 7 I -- I just drove over there today on my way to the 8 board meeting . I wanted to make sure I knew where it 9 was and what the general lay of the land was . I parked 10 in the parking lot and -- and basically just walked the 11 length of the property and looked to see how it fronted 12 the road, what was behind it, and I saw some of the -- 13 the structures behind where apparently the raptors are 14 kept and fed. I looked, in particular, or tried to 15 understand in particular some things I didn' t quite 16 understand. Apparently there ' s some old irrigation 17 ditches and some small and some quite large, or at least 18 some mounding of dirt that looked fairly significant and 19 I didn ' t quite know what the history of that or the 20 significance of that was . This would lie to the north 21 of the property in general . Other than that, you know, 22 I really didn' t -- I don' t think I have anything at all 23 substantive to offer. 24 Oryv godm SPEAKER: Okay. Thank you. Are there any 25 other parties to the hearing who would like to offer any 5 1 -- any thoughts on -- specifically on those observations 2 that -- that John indicated just in the way of evidence 3 that would help all of us to -- to again -- again the 4 objective is that all of our considerations are only 5 going to be on information that comes to us in this 6 hearing and this is a way to just make sure that we all 7 end up on an even surface. 8 Ml1� t0j//I,SPEAKER: And I ' ll address the irrigation 9 ditches that you ' re referring to. That was the Josh 10 Ames Ditch. It was abandoned in 1971, I believe it was . 11 And -- 12 �� SPEAKER: Can I make a suggestion? 13 rnl'�k* WI 66 SPEAKER: Uh-huh. 14 "UU '1odm SPEAKER: Since we haven ' t actually started 15 the hearing process maybe it would be good to sort of 16 hold that for the presentation and questions . 17n71 �I��15 SPEAKER: Okay. 18 (� J Jj q WI/1IS SPEAKER: But I 'm not doing the presentation. 19 I 'm just addressing his -- 20 YodM.SPEAKER: Right, but this was the part of the 21 meeting where the Chair is conferring with the rest of 22 the Board about these things? 23 MIC�I tJIdhl 5 SPEAKER: Did you just ask if the -- the 24 ((�__audience had -- 25 I.o(x SPEAKER: I -- I -- I did, Carrie, and I 6 • 1 wasn ' t -- I -- that was my understanding that it -- if 2 -- if there was that information is that -- 3 Ca rn'e PEAKER: You -- you can do it at this part 4 of the meeting or you can do it later on -- 5 tt)I J Jj 5 SPEAKER: Okay. 6 " �Lo »i SPEAKER: -- during the -- that part and I 7 apologize for that . 8 SPEAKER: Great . I think it was just that 9 onel clarification. 10 SPEAKER: Yeah. It was just the irrigation 11 ditch is abandoned, and I have a copy of the abandonment 12 from the city records . And the mounds, that was part of . 13 the sugar beet process . It was a -- it was made as a 14 reservoir basically. Those mounds were built up like 15 that to wash the sugar beets so it ' s a residual process 16 of working with the sugar beet factory that was across 17 the street, the old transportation building. That was 18 the sugar beet factory in Fort Collins. 19 00Ltq L0L(0-r1SPEAKER: Okay. Thank you. Next item of 20 business would be similar to disclosure of any site 21 visits . I ' d like to provide an opportunity if any of 22 the board members have had what are termed ex parte 23 communications, and I think in simple language that just 24 means discussions specifically on this matter that ' s 25 before us at the hearing outside of this hearing 7 1 process . If so, we ' d like you to disclose those . And 2 again, just as John did, just offer what the -- the key 3 relevant elements of that discussion may have been, and 4 then during parts of the hearing we ' ll provide an 5 opportunity for additional or rebuttal discussion of 6 those points . Any ex parte discussions anyone needs to 7 disclose? I see none . We ' ll move ahead. 8 I 'm just going to ask if there are any 9 parties in interest opposing this request of variance? 10 Is -- is anyone here who would like an opportunity which 11 you would be afforded to offer testimony in opposition 12 to the variance? I see none . We ' ll move ahead. 13 At this point I want to summarize the -- the 14 procedure we ' ll use for the rest of the hearing and -- 15 and I will try to -- to help us stay on track and -- and 16 perform in accordance with this procedure that comes out 17 of our bylaws and -- and some other guidance that the 18 Board has received appropriately in our training. 19 First of all, we ' re going to ask the staff to 20 explain to the Board the general nature of the variance 21 request and to make their formal presentation to the 22 Board. That ' s Item 1 . Then we ' re going to request a 23 presentation by the applicant, afford them the 24 opportunity to offer their testimony. And then in the 25 absence of any parties ' interest opposed, at that point, 8 • 1 and only at that point, I ' ll invite the Board to -- to 2 call and ask questions of any witnesses that are 3 present, staff or applicant, to further understand the 4 -- the issues that we ' re -- that we ' re taking under 5 consideration here . And during that discussion I would 6 ask that in order just that we stay organized and stay 7 on track that the Board seek the recognition of the 8 Chair prior to calling or asking questions of -- of 9 witnesses . And I ' d also very much appreciate if -- if 10 all of us would do our best to -- to not be any more 11 repetitive in our questioning than we need to be 12 (inaudible) that ' s certainly fair and important, but in 13 the interest there and time and staying on track if we 14 can get all the questions out and all of the information 15 gathered but maybe we can do that close to one time 16 through, that would be great for running on time . 17 Once the Board has had the opportunity to -- 18 to call and ask questions of witnesses, I ' ll stress at 19 that point that ' s what that is . That ' s gaining 20 additional information. That is not the Board' s 21 discussion prior to the vote . That will come just a 22 little bit later . But after the Board has called and 23 asked questions of any witnesses, then we ' ll provide a 24 brief opportunity for a closing statement by the 25 applicants if they would like to provide one . There ' s 9 1 no obligation but you will -- you will have that 2 opportunity if you' d like . And then finally the Chair 3 will seek a motion, a second of the variance and 4 assuming there is a motion and seconded, then we ' ll 5 conduct our discussion and upon concluding that 6 discussion we ' ll take our vote. 7 So that ' s the process . With that, I ' d invite 8 staff to explain the general nature of the variance 9 request and provide us the presentation . 10 &ffIP-�gdLtt SPEAKER: May I make one suggestion? I think 11 you might want to make sure that the record has the 12 information about who all has spoken, and I 'm not sure 13 that we ' ve got that . So you might want to have -- it' s 14 Mickey, right? 15/7�1 �Ltt/(�{)II�IS SPEAKER: Uh-huh. I 'm Mickey. 16QVTIe L SPEAKER: And did -- did you -- we should 17 make sure that the record shows that -- 18 S SPEAKER: I -- she already took my name . 19�tffrk- Q)J31�e SPEAKER: -- you were -- 20 �"/1 P/UrSPEAKER: I took all their names . 0 21 1"- D9g9t7tSPEAKER: It ' s on the record that you -- 22 Pal'n RerU SPEAKER: Yes . 23 l.[ f 1Q &�SPEAKER: It ' s on the tape? 24 PObl'n Pj6fCE SPEAKER: It ' s not taped so if you want -- 25 j2VT7PLQ16$t4�SPEAKER: Why don' t you get it on the tape. 10 • 1 I 'm just suggesting that you get it on the tape -- 2 D/4 (O/ SPEAKER: Sure . May -- maybe the quick way 3 to do that -- and my apologies that we didn' t do this 4 before -- could we just have a quick introduction of our 5 guests -- 6 I ' - ' , SPEAKER: Absolutely. IMIL 7 1/g6M SPEAKER: -- and introduce yourselves and -- 8 UU SPEAKER: Mickey Willis . 9 SPEAKER: Tim Merriman. 10 SPEAKER: Judy Scherpelz . 11 SPEAKER: Charles Bosley. 120 //1 *1tr17 SPEAKER: And may we presume that you ' re -- . 13 you ' re here on -- on behalf of the variance request? 14 VOLnOo6 SPEAKER: Yes . Yes . 15 Q�, 1 q�„ SPEAKER: Okay. Great . Thank you. Marsha, 16 �i``f OOyou could introduce yourself, too . 17 SPEAKER: Good evening, Mr . Chairman and 18 members of the -- the Water Board. My name is Marsha 19 Hilmes-Robinson. I 'm a floodplain administrator here at 20 the Utilities Department, City of Fort Collins . Tonight 21 before you is an application for a variance to 22 (inaudible) the Raptor Center School at 720-750 East 23 Vine Drive . We ' re going to start by giving you some 24 background information on the property and the issues 25 (inaudible) for the variance . The variance is related • 11 1 to the critical facilities regulation that is found in 2 City Code . And within that regulation the key -- one of 3 the key pieces of that is the definition of what a 4 critical facility actually is . And that ' s found in City 5 Code Section 10-16, and that definition says that 6 critical facility shall mean to include hospitals, 7 nursing homes, group homes, residential care facilities , 8 congregate care facilities and housing likely to contain 9 occupants that may have trouble -- may not be 10 sufficiently mobile to avoid death or injury during a 11 flood. Also, schools and daycare facilities . 12 So with that definition in mind we then look 13 at the applicable code sections that relate to this 14 variance and there ' s three different code sections . The 15 first is Section 10-81 (a) and that is -- it says, in any 16 portion of the Poudre River 500-year floodplain or zone 17 X shaded area, critical -- it helps if I move the 18 slides, huh? 19 � Ld yy SPEAKER: Marsha, can I -- can I interrupt 20 you just one brief moment? Tropp, I$'/"�'1.Q5-Qp�/fa,p�PEAKER: Sure. � yX (�J 22 (/�/�(y&)I)SPEAKER: There -- Eileen has just joined us 23 and the hearing' s already convened. Unless there is 24 objection from anyone on the Board, it ' s -- it ' s the 25 Chair ' s judgment that Eileen has joined us early enough 12 1 in the hearing that -- that it -- it would, I think, be 2 appropriate for her to participate in the hearing. If 3 there ' s anyone who feels that -- that there ' s any 4 problem with that or who -- who questions that decision, 5 please let me know and I ' d be happy to discuss it . But 6 if a board member comes in too far into the process and 7 hasn ' t had the benefit of hearing key discussion and 8 testimony then the Chair ' s preference would be that they 9 probably not participate in that . Are -- are you 10 folks -- 11fJ�kJJJU)�'11i'5 SPEAKER: Can we ask them if they agree with 12 the variance? If they do they can stay and if they -- r�' 13 ' , u� �y/dp7) SPEAKER: I -- I ' d have to check, Robert ' s, 14 but I think probably -- 15 mt(�ltutU111I S SPEAKER: I had to try. �y 16 /'�i y/AJJ tj/od M SPEAKER: Okay. At this -- 1 'd� ✓r41-AYll5-)20hjhSSo-PEAKER: Mr. Chairperson, I ' d be happy to go 18 back to the slide with the definition of (inaudible) 19 UWI WV1110y,SPEAKER: Let ' s do that . Mike did you -- 20 rn06 Cpnna SPEAKER: I just -- one point you went 21 through the lists with us to see if anyone had -- 22 09U5VW40-)l SPEAKER: Good point . 23 ml/ nQ/1r)0/-SPEAKER: -- conflict or -- 24 ()/v Up Lod9h SPEAKER: If folks will give me the 25 '-forbearance . Eileen, we just provided an opportunity if 13 1 you feel that you might have a conflict of interest with 2 this matter? 3 �A'IQ,,t) J)orOk YEAKER: No, I don ' t believe so. 4 oQtq 110dM SPEAKER: Okay. The second question is not 5 an interrogation but just provide me the opportunity -- 6 it ' s appropriate if you did take a site visit for the 7 express purpose of seeing the site outside of the 8 process of this hearing but it -- as background for it 9 to disclose that and tell us what you saw, what -- what 10 information you gathered. i&'IuhBorr //tS+ SPEAKER: I have not been to the site . 12 {��.vin,Il ,,,SPEAKER: Okay. And then finally if you' ve 13 --��h^^a�,d`"��anny'' ex parte communications, discussions with the 14 applicant or others about this variance outside of the 15 hearing. &/U, D(9r/yJ��S'-SPEAKER: Nope . 17 [)p( Q 0, �/(,tlw� SPEAKER: Okay. Thank you. Yes? 18 V ? SPEAKER: Can you summarize also the 19 discussion about the irrigation ditch? 20 xi SPEAKER: My understanding is that John did 21 make a brief site visit on his way over to the meeting 22 and the one piece of information that he observed that 23 we felt -- that he felt was relevant to share with us 24 with just the observation of what looked like an 25 irrigation ditch and then some mounded material portion 14 1 of the site and what, I guess, here in -- in support of 2 the applicant offered an explanation that it -- that was 3 the Josh Ames Ditch which was -- has been abandoned for 4 some number of years and that the mounded material was 5 either earth or organic material from prior operations 6 of the sugar beet factory in the vicinity. So we -- we 7 learned that from John' s site visit . 8 Marsha, it -- it would probably help if you 9 just wanted to jump in. to Ib*IW5-/CnnOh/n-!� PEAKER: I ' ll start over . How ' s that? 11 D " J ��tctM SPEAKER: Thank you. 12 UU (Voices speaking over one another . ) n'1` 4� U {h SPEAKER: I didn ' t have the slides going 14 right here myself and it ' s an opportunity to get back in 15 the groove here . So again, Mr. Chairperson and members 16 of the Board, my name ' s Marsha Hilmes-Robinson, and I 'm 17 the floodplain administrator for the City of Fort 18 Collins Utilities Department . And now before you today 19 is a floodplain variance for the Raptor Center School at 20 720-750 East Vine Drive . This variance relates to the 21 critical facilities regulation in City Code, and that 22 critical facilities regulation is tied to the definition 23 of a critical facility. Section 10-16 of City Code 24 defines critical facilities as, in part, hospitals, 25 nursing homes, group homes, residential care facilities, 15 1 congregate care facilities and housing likely to contain 2 occupants that may not be sufficiently mobile to avoid 3 death or injury during a flood. It also includes 4 schools and daycare facilities . 5 There are three sections of City Code that 6 are applicable to this variance . The first is Section 7 10-81 (a) and -- and this section of code says, in any 8 portion of the Poudre River 500-year floodplain or zone 9 X shaded area, critical facilities are prohibited. The 10 second section of code, Section 10-81 (b) , and that ' s 11 really to change of use related to a critical facility, 12 it says, no person shall change the use of any structure 13 or property located in the Poudre River 500-year 14 floodplain or zone X shaded area so as to result in a 15 new use or new nonconforming structure that is 16 inconsistent with the requirements of this article . 17 When we talk about inconsistent requirements of this 18 article we ' re referencing back to Section 10-81 where it 19 says critical facilities are prohibited in a 500-year 20 floodplain. 21 The third section of City Code that applies 22 is Section 10-46 and this says that no -- no person 23 shall change the use of an existing structure that is 24 not a critical facility to use as a critical facility 25 contrary to the provisions of this article, Article II 16 1 of Chapter 10 or change the use of a critical facility 2 to another type of critical facility, or increase the 3 physical area in use for a nonconforming critical 4 facility, contrary to the provisions of this article . 5 These are the only regulations that apply to 6 the 500-year floodplain. The regulations we dealt with 7 in the past related to the floodway and the rise, 8 freeboard requirements, freeboard requirements, 9 floatable materials ; all that is not applicable in the 10 500-year floodplain . They are not required by Code . 11 The variance request before you today is 12 really a -- a two-fold request . First is to allow a . 13 change of use in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain 14 for the existing structure at 720 East Vine Drive to a 15 school which is -- and school, again, is defined as a 16 critical facility per Chapter 10 of City Code . The 17 second part of this is to allow the existing building at 18 720 East Vine Drive to be expanded with a future 19 addition for use as a school . We ' re dealing with both 20 those issues during this variance request . 21 This is a photo of the site which shows the 22 existing building that is at 720 East Vine Drive . This 23 is Vine Drive right out here . Again the project 24 proposal is two-part . First, the change of use of the 25 existing building to a school, and then the second part 17 1 is a future 10, 000 square foot addition to the east and 2 that would be on this end of the property. 3 This slide shows you a map -- a floodplain 4 map of the area and I 'm going to be able to get you 5 oriented with the site location relative to the 6 floodplain over here. So first of all, the site is 7 located just north of Vine Drive . This is Lemay Avenue . 8 This is -- am I in the right place -- College Avenue. 9 This is Vine Drive . You ' ll see the floodplain areas 10 that -- that relate to this or -- or (inaudible) to the 11 site . First you have this floodplain shown here with 12 the dark blue and light blue . This is actually the Dry 13 Creek floodplain. The floodway is shown in dark blue. 14 The 100-year flood fringe is shown in the light blue. 15 So this is related to the Dry Creek Floodplain. The 16 site is actually not in the Dry Creek Floodplain. It ' s 17 the Poudre River that we ' re dealing with for this 18 variance . 19 The Poudre River is here to the west . In 20 dark blue is the floodway. The light blue is a major 21 flood fringe, and the green that extends far to the east 22 here is the Poudre River 500-year floodplain. So the 23 500-year Poudre River floodplain is what we ' re -- we ' re 24 looking at relative to this particular property. You' ll 25 see that the streets of Lemay and Vine are also in the 18 1 500-year floodplain, and you have the two residential 2 neighborhoods in the -- in the area . You have the Alta 3 Vista neighborhood in here and then you have the 4 Andersonville neighborhood just to the south . The flows 5 that impact this particular site are related to what is 6 happening at College and Vine . And at College and Vine 7 you have the bridge -- the College Avenue bridge of the 8 Poudre River, the Poudre River going through that bridge 9 but all of the water is not able to flow through there . 10 It is undersized and cannot handle the entire 100-year 11 flow or the 500-year flow. 12 And so what happens is that College Avenue 13 actually gets overtopped on the north side of the bridge 14 and those flows then start to go down -- go down Vine 15 Drive . In the 500-year you have those flows continue to 16 further down Vine Drive towards this property. 17 This next slide shows a more detailed map of 18 the site so as we zoom in you' ll see, again, this is the 19 Poudre River 500-year floodplain shown in the green. 20 The 100-year is for Dry Creek and is not part of what 21 we ' re talking about here today. The existing building 22 is located right here on this parcel . There ' s 200 23 parcels that are also involved with this variance 24 request . 25 We have this L-shaped parcel to the east, and • 19 1 you have the much larger parcel to the east which is 2 owned by the Rocky Mountain Raptor Center. So you have 3 the parcel with the existing structure, the small one to 4 the east, and then the large one to the east with the 5 addition on the east end of -- of the building would be 6 involved with all three parcels . This is the FEMA 7 designated Poudre River flood -- 500-year floodplain . 8 This map is shown on the FEMA flood insurance study. 9 The depth of flow for the 500-year floodplain 10 is approximately one-foot based off the current mapping 11 and modeling . The total flow for -- in the Poudre River 12 at the 500-year level is 24, 100 cfs with approximately 13 1, 100 cfs breaking out of -- out of that area out by 14 College and Vine and flowing down Vine Drive towards 15 this property so that the site flow, as we call it, is 16 approximately 1, 100 cfs . 17 From a flood history perspective, we have 18 over a hundred years of stream flow records on the 19 Poudre River . This is from the mouth of the canyon, and 20 so it ' s a fairly substantial record that we have 21 available to us to look at the long-term history of -- 22 of flooding. 23 There are several flood events in the range 24 of the expected 500-year discharge . Three of those, the 25 first one being back in 1864 . This is when the military 20 1 camp or Camp Collins was destroyed near the town of -- 2 of Laporte . The military camp was then relocated up on 3 the higher bank to the present day Fort Collins area . 4 The second event was the Chambers Lake Dam failure and 5 that was in 1891, and the third event was in 1904 , and 6 there was about 21, 000 cfs that came down the river at 7 that time and that was due to a rainstorm. 8 The key point in this area is that there are 9 no capital improvements planned that would eliminate or 10 reduce the 500-year floodplain on this property, so this 11 is a long-term risk that we have to look at, looking at 12 -- at both the history as well as the future. 13 This slide shows a graph of those peak flows 14 that have occurred on the Poudre River. The red line 15 shows the 100-year discharge up here about 13, 000 cfs . 16 The 500-year discharge would be at 24 , 000 cfs on this 17 range . Again, these are the three peaks that we talked 18 about earlier that would be in the range of -- of a 19 500-year flood. You ' ll see that we ' ve had a long time 20 since we ' ve had anything of -- of that magnitude to 21 occur, but based on past history we know that these 22 things can happen . These events do happen, and it ' s 23 just a matter of time before a major event happens 24 again. 25 This slide shows a historic photograph of the 21 1 Andersonville neighborhood, and this area is just to the 2 southeast of the proposed school site. This is a photo 3 from after the 1904 flood on the Poudre River which 4 shows the high water mark right here along this 5 building. 6 And -- so based off of this photo we can draw 7 the conclusion that if this area was flooded during the 8 1904 flood it ' s very likely that the area where the 9 school is proposed just to the -- just to the northwest, 10 would also have been flooded in the 1904 flood. 11 The flood season on the Poudre River 12 generally runs from April through to September . For a 13 large magnitude event like we ' re talking about, a 14 500-year, most likely it would be due to either rainfall 15 or rain-on-snow, probably not really due to just 16 strictly snowmelt . That ' s generally not going to be a 17 large magnitude event . 18 This is a photo taken in April of 1999 when 19 we had, kind of, the last major flood event on -- on the 20 Poudre in recent times . This is taken behind the 21 Mulberry treatment plant, and the flow in the river in 22 this picture is about 4, 000 cfs, and the peak for this 23 event was about 6, 700 cfs, just under a 10-year event 24 for this -- for this event, and it was rain-on-snow for 25 the April ' 99 flood. Very short duration -- lasted 22 1 really about a day -- but it was very quick. 2 When we look at the 500-year floodplain, 3 trying to share with you a little bit of the -- of the 4 probability or the statistics behind that event, we ' re 5 looking at a -- a 0 . 2% chance of the 500-year flood 6 occurring in any given year . So you have the same 7 probability each year of that event occurring. You can 8 have two 500-year floods occur back-to-back or you can 9 have them stretched over a much, much longer time 10 period. 11 When you take and look that -- at that over, 12 for example, a 30-year period -- this would be the time 13 when you ' d expect a structure that ' s being used for a 14 school to be in existence and would be used for that -- 15 that purpose -- you' re looking at a 6% probability over 16 that 30-year period of a 500-year flood occurring. So 17 this is -- is getting to the risks and what might occur. 18 Again, it ' s all a probability. 19 However, when you look at the flows that are 20 coming through the site and you have the 1, 100 cfs, that 21 is based off of the existing mapping and modeling, but 22 the one important factor related to that, is that it 23 makes the assumption that the College Avenue bridge is 24 fully functioning, it ' s fully open and is not blocked by 25 any debris . If that bridge were to be blocked, more of 23 1 the water would come over top of College Avenue heading 2 down Vine Drive and so that 1, 100 cfs may actually be a 3 much greater amount of water or even a smaller event or 4 certainly a high probability of -- of that in a 500-year 5 flood. 6 These are some photos of the College Avenue 7 and Vine Drive intersection and area. First of all, we 8 have the Poudre River, and this is looking downstream. 9 We have first the railroad trestle bridge and then the 10 College Avenue bridge just downstream. So you actually 11 have two places where debris can get hung up and cause 12 blockages . First would be on the trestle or on the 13 College bridge . This then, is the area just to the 14 north where you see the -- the low spot coming through 15 that would have water overtopping College and heading 16 down Vine . 17 This is where that next photo takes off, and 18 you can see, this is standing at kind of the edge of the 19 College Avenue bridge, kind of the northern edge, 20 looking then towards the -- the north and slightly to 21 the west . This is where you ' d see overtopping to the 22 railroad track right there in -- in the background. 23 You' d have overtopping the railroad track, overtopping 24 College and then going down Vine Drive here . 25 Large floods do happen. They' ve happened 24 1 right here in our own backyard. The 1997 Spring Creek 2 flood really is the biggest event that has hit Fort 3 Collins, and it was greater than a 500-year flood, both 4 from a rainfall standpoint as well as from a stream flow 5 standpoint . So this was not that long ago that this 6 event occurred on a different stream but certainly 7 impacted a good portion of -- of Fort Collins . The 1976 8 Big Thompson flood was also an extreme event . They had 9 up to seven and a half inches of rain in 70 minutes, so 10 a very short timeframe for that to occur . 11 Some areas of the Midwest this year, as 12 you ' ve probably all seen on the TV news and in 13 newspapers , have experienced a great deal of flooding. 14 Many of these areas have received more than one 500-year 15 flood within a -- a 10-15 year period. So again, these 16 events can -- can happen. It ' s just a matter -- a 17 matter of when. We can again know that it ' s been a long 18 time since flooding has happened on the Foudre, but it ' s 19 just a matter of -- of when that next event will occur. 20 And based on the floodplain modeling and mapping we see 21 that this site would be impacted in a 500-year flood. 22 This is a picture of the College Avenue 23 bridge at Spring Creek from the days after the 1997 24 flood on Spring Creek. Hard to even see the bridge . 25 This is the College Avenue bridge . This is the -- all • 25 1 the debris that got penned up against the bridge 2 blocking a lot of that flow. Water went up and over top 3 of College Avenue during this particular event . Again, 4 these -- these events do happen and debris blockage such 5 as this is highly likely at the College Avenue bridge at 6 the Poudre River as well . 7 The purpose of the critical facilities 8 regulation is -- is key here, and this first statement 9 really summarizes what that purpose is . And it ' s really 10 to protect those facilities and people that are most 11 vulnerable to the impact of flooding. And there ' s -- 12 there ' s three types of critical facilities that are 13 included in -- in the definition. 14 The first is life-safety. These are schools 15 which we are talking about here tonight . It also 16 includes hospitals, daycare, nursing homes, group homes . 17 The key issue when dealing with life-safety critical 18 facilities is evacuation and how do you get these folks 19 out of these facilities and protecting their life-safety 20 but also that they' re -- when we ' re dealing with the 21 evacuation, you' re not only dealing with the occupants 22 of the building, but you ' re also dealing with the 23 emergency responders and others that are trying to come 24 to help. In the case of a school, this would be 25 parents . This would be bus drivers and emergency 26 • 1 responders . So life-safety, you -- you ' ve got the 2 evacuation issues that are -- are a critical component 3 to that . 4 In addition, there ' s two other types of 5 critical facilities, emergency response critical 6 facilities . These are more government related 7 facilities -- police stations, fire stations, emergency 8 response centers -- facilities that are going to be 9 needed before and after a flooding operations . Then you 10 also have hazardous materials storage . 11 When we ' re dealing with critical facilities, 12 they have the most risk. It comes back to the first . 13 statement of protecting those facilities and people that 14 are most vulnerable to the impact of flooding. So when 15 you have the most risk you also need to provide the 16 highest level of -- of protection, and this is why 17 floodplain regulations have complete prohibition of 18 critical facilities in the 500-year floodplain. 19 Staff has compiled two variance options for 20 the Board to consider . The first one is Option Number 21 1, and that is to deny the variance request in the 22 Poudre River 500-year floodplain based on the 23 regulations adopted in Chapter 10 of City Code for a 24 change of use of an existing structure at 720 East Vine 25 Drive to a school, and also to deny the variance request • 27 1 in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain for the existing 2 building located at 720 East Vine Drive to be expanded 3 with a future addition for use as a school . So Option 4 Number 1 is for denial of the variance . 5 Option Number 2 is grant the variance request 6 in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain and to allow a 7 change of use of the existing structure at 720 East Vine 8 Drive to a school, and also to grant the variance 9 request in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain to allow 10 the existing building located at 720 East Vine Drive to 11 be expanded with a future addition for use as a school . 12 Those are the two options that staff has prepared for 13 you tonight . 14 Mr. Chairperson, would you like me to 15 continue with the staff recommendation at this time or 16 l�would you like to go -- 17 � w �Wm SPEAKER: Yes . I think -- I think, Marsha, 18 the procedure that I outlined before would be we ' ll take 19 your complete presentation now and then applicant will 20 have an opportunity for their -- W446L, 14iln.2S — SPEAKER: Sure. No problem. So the staff �QQbI 11Sa-� 22 recommendation is based on the regulations adopted in 23 City Code . The staff recommends variance Option Number 24 1, denial of the variance . There are sections of City 25 Code related to variances that outline considerations 28 • 1 and items that need to be met in order for the Board to 2 consider a variance, and staff has found that Sections 3 10-28 (e) 2-5, 7-9 and Section 10-29 (g) 1-3, we find that 4 in our professional opinion we have concerns about these 5 sections -- that there -- some of these sections may not 6 be meeting the criteria for granting the variance . 7 We have, in your packet, put together a 8 summary of each one of these individual Code items and 9 passed our concerns about those for the presentation 10 tonight . What we have done is summarize those concerns 11 into really two main categories . If the Board would 12 like, later we can go through any individual particular . 13 section of Code and our concerns . We have slides 14 available to outline those. We can go back to those 15 later if you ' d like . 16 But we really see that we have concerns and 17 feel that certain conditions have not been met related 18 to life-safety. Again, life-safety is the reason for 19 the critical facilities regulation. This is what it is 20 -- is truly all about . And we find that there -- there 21 are concerns related to access roads being flooded on 22 the map that we presented earlier which showed Vine 23 Drive as well as Lemay Avenue being flooded during a 24 500-year event . 25 So this is going to inhibit access to those 29 1 sites or access to the school site for emergency 2 responders and parents getting to the site. Children 3 are -- are not able to evacuate easily on their own. 4 These are -- are elementary school students . Easily one 5 foot of water can sweep them off their feet and take a 6 child away. 7 As stated earlier, it ' s not just the students 8 that are at risk but also we have teachers, parents, bus 9 drivers, emergency responders that are all at risk when 10 you have a school in a floodplain. The school will be 11 operating during a portion of the year when there is a 12 flood risk. We ' ve seen that the flood risk goes from -- 13 from April to September. 14 The key flood risk time, of course, is during 15 the summertime but you -- as we ' ve seen in the April ' 99 16 flooding we do have flooding examples that have occurred 17 earlier. So you certainly have the school operating in 18 April and May, a portion of August and September . In 19 addition, in the future of the operational procedures of 20 the school might -- 21 ,f (Tape turned over. ) rnQ,l - 1�'IlyMs �L SPEAKER: -- there ' s minimal warning time in Bold lis Cfh 23 this area . If we have two hours of warning time from 24 the mouth of the canyon that ' s -- that ' s about it, and 25 that ' s not much time to implement an emergency 30 1 evacuation plan to remove 450 students from their site . 2 And again, debris may magnify the event . We may have 3 actually more water coming down Vine Drive through this 4 site if the College Avenue bridge is blocked with -- 5 with debris . 6 So again, the potential for loss of life and 7 injury is really staff ' s greatest concern about this 8 proposed variance at this particular site . This is one 9 of the main reasons why the critical facilities 10 regulation was adopted originally is to protect 11 life-safety. 12 A second major issue for the staff has 13 concerns about is related to flood damage and 14 mitigation . The existing building is not protected from 15 the 500-year flood. Water will enter it . We will have 16 the occupants exposed during the event, to the 17 floodwater . We will also have clean up to deal with 18 after the event . The floodwater is probably going to 19 have contaminants in it so you ' re going to have those 20 issues to deal with as well as the possibility of -- of 21 mold remediation afterwards as well . 22 In addition, the applicant has not provided 23 any information related to the structural integrity of 24 the building . That has not been documented. Design 25 plans for the addition have not been supplied. They' re 31 1 not available at this point in time. School is truly an 2 integral service to the community. With this variance, 3 we ' re not dealing with just the risk that a single owner 4 is taking on this particular school or on this 5 particular property. 6 The risk extends much further. It extends to 7 the students that are going to that school . It extends 8 to the teachers that are working there . It extends to 9 the emergency responders and parents that are going to 10 try to reach the school to help those children. So this 11 -- the impact of the damages on this building, the 12 impact of life-safety issues do not just go to the 13 individual property owner but are truly a community 14 issue that needs to be considered. 15 There are no capital improvement plan -- 16 capital improvement plans for this area that would 17 eliminate or reduce the 500-year floodplain on this 18 property. So again, this is a long-term risk that needs 19 to be addressed and -- and considered. There has been 20 no voluntary site mitigation offered by the applicant, 21 and staff feels that alternative sites may be available 22 outside the 500-year floodplain that the school could be 23 located at and, therefore, minimize and reduce the risk 24 of flooding to the school . 25 So in summary, related to staff 32 1 recommendation is that staff has not found, in our 2 professional opinion, a good cause that the applicant 3 has provided related to this particular variance and 4 this particular property that outweighs the flood risk 5 and the intent of the critical facilities regulation. 6 Again, the intent of the critical facilities regulation 7 is life-safety danger due to flooding . 8 On a larger view, the overall purpose of 9 floodplain regulations can be summed up as when you' re 10 looking at floodplain regulations you ' re trying to be 11 proactive . You' re trying to reduce the risk from future 12 floods and you ' re trying to avoid creating problems for 13 future generations to deal with. You ' re not wanting to 14 allow new high-risk development or uses in the 15 floodplain, and critical facilities regulation is really 16 the epitome of these goals . It is to try to reduce 17 future risk of floods and being proactive, again, 18 looking to the future . 19 It is difficult to mitigate the risk of a 20 school in the floodplain. Therefore, the regulations 21 require that schools be located outside the floodplain . 22 And in -- in closing, again, based on the analysis that 23 we ' ve outlined above, staff recommends the Water Board 24 deny the requested variance . Thank you . 25 U SPEAKER: Thank you, Marsha . At this point 33 1 we ' ll offer the applicants their opportunity to make 2 their presentation. And if -- if there ' s more than one 3 of you who are going to speak if you could introduce 4 yourselves as -- as you begin, I ' d appreciate it . 5 SPEAKER: Hi . My name is Judy Scherpelz, and 6 I 'm a founding member of the Board of Directors of The 7 Nature School, and I 'm the executive director of the 8 Rocky Mountain Raptor Program. And I am here with 9 Charles Bosley, the water consultant, Tim Merriman, who 10 is also a founding member of the Board of The Nature 11 School, and Mickey Willis, who is also a founding member 12 of the Board of The Nature School . We appreciate the 13 opportunity to come and talk to you about this project 14 tonight . 15 The Nature School is a proposed charter 16 school in the Poudre School District, and the really 17 exciting thing about the school is that it would be 18 co-located with the Rocky Mountain Raptor Program' s 19 Nature Center on Vine Drive . 20 Many of the schools in our area in the Poudre 21 School District have strong environmental programs; 22 however, this school would be truly unique because it 23 would give children the opportunity to have not only a 24 rigorous standards-based curriculum that ' s challenging 25 that meets all of the requirements of state standards, 34 1 but it would also have an overarching environmental 2 theme so that children in all aspects of their education 3 would have a strong environmental grounding so that they 4 would learn the importance of the environment in all 5 aspects of their learning. 6 And this is so important in our society today 7 when we look at the environmental challenges that we ' re 8 going to have in the upcoming years . It ' s going to 9 truly make our children able to handle these challenges 10 that are coming forward. 11 The -- what makes this school so special is 12 the fact that it is co-located with The Nature Center • 13 and that ' s a really important thing that we -- we want 14 you to keep in mind; that you ' re looking at what would a 15 midlevel project school need. 16 We feel that The Nature School has some 17 potential for becoming a -- truly a national model for 18 connecting children to environmental issues, to global 19 awareness, to truly becoming citizens of the planet . 20 And we ' re very excited about the support that we ' re 21 getting nationwide for this -- the interest in this type 22 of school . 23 And we also -- The Nature School really 24 supports the Fort Collins vision of being a green 25 community here . There are so many things going on right 35 1 now in the -- the community and we feel that this fits 2 very, very nicely in everything that -- that we ' re 3 heading towards . 4 Just to -- to give you a little background of 5 the school, there ' s good sources of start-up financing 6 for the school and for the facility itself, plus 7 long-term financing through the State on a per pupil 8 contribution, so that we do see this school as having a 9 financially viable future . So this is something that we 10 looked at very hard in terms of long-term budgets to see 11 that there is a -- a really good, stable future for this 12 school . 13 A couple things that I wanted to comment on . 14 There was a review packet that went around to -- to 15 everyone ahead of time . And there were some 16 inaccuracies that I wanted to discuss . It ' s The Nature 17 School that would be purchasing the building and the 18 acreage on Vine Drive, and it ' s The Nature School Board 19 of Directors that will be operating the school . There 20 is not going to be an outside management company if this 21 is all (inaudible) represent The Nature School . 22 And again, The Nature School would be 23 building the additional square footage. Currently the 24 Raptor Program owns the property. The building is owned 25 elsewhere and The Nature School would be buying those -- 36 1 the property and the -- and the building, to pursue 2 (inaudible) . 3 So at this point I 'm -- I 'm going to turn 4 this over to Charles Bosley (inaudible) . 5 �j SPEAKER: One of the points that was brought 6 up by the City' s presentation are somewhat subjective 7 and others are not entirely complete . That ' s my purpose 8 in speaking here today, is as an engineering consultant 9 for the Raptor Program, is to provide information which 10 may lend you a more thorough understanding of the 11 request . 12 The proposed project is located outside the . 13 100-year floodplain . The (inaudible) utilities expected 14 maximum 500-year flood depth at the proposed site is 15 approximately one foot, a storm depth which tends to 16 occur reasonably frequently in the Fort Collins area 17 without causing significant problems as long it doesn ' t 18 last for a long duration. 19 City mapping indicates that the 500-year 20 flooding at this location would present itself as sheet 21 flow near the flood fringe. This type of flow is 22 characterized by low velocities, uniform flow field, and 23 diminished sediment carrying capacity as well as 24 diminished carrying capacity (inaudible) . 25 The City reviewer brought up these three 37 1 historic floods . I ' d like to address those in a little 2 more detail . The 1864 flood which caused relocation of 3 the whole town or the old Camp Collins was moved to a 4 perceived safe location. The flood discharges from this 5 event have been estimated from a historical account but 6 were not measured, and the effects of this event at our 7 location or the proposed location remains undocumented. 8 The 1891 Chambers Dam failure should not 9 qualify as a natural recurring flood event because it 10 was artificially generated. 11 The 1904 flood event which did, in fact, 12 inundate Andersonville . This is probably the most well 13 documented of the three events . It is located 14 approximately one-half mile southeast of the proposed 15 site . It ' s about the same distance from the river. The 16 difference, though, being that the ground at 17 Andersonville was nine feet lower than the foundation of 18 the building of the proposed site . 19 The historical photographic record which you 20 have seen shows the high water mark at Andersonville 21 approximately five feet above ground level which would 22 leave the flood crest four feet to go before it reached 23 the level of the proposed property. So based on this 24 information, it would indicate that the proposed site 25 would not have been flooded in the 1904 event . 38 • 1 The floodplain statistics, I ' d like to 2 (inaudible) on those just a bit . The . 2% chance of a 3 12-inch depth during any given year creates a slightly 4 less than 6% chance of that same 12-inch depth occurring 5 once during a sequential 30-year period leaving a 94% 6 chance of that same 30-year period without the 12-inch 7 depth. 8 Since back-to-back floods were mentioned 9 specifically by the City reviewer, I would like to point 10 out that the probability of two sequential 500-year 11 events is . 04% or one chance in 250, 000 . It ' s certainly 12 possible but not (inaudible) . . 13 Regardless of recent reported events 14 elsewhere in the country, the probability of a 500-year 15 flood remains 1 in 500 , This is the specific criteria 16 to which the regulation was written, and I believe this 17 is the criteria upon which it should be evaluated. 18 We do have existing schools in the 19 flood-prone areas within the Fort Collins area, the most 20 notable of which are, of course, the Cache La Poudre 21 Elementary and Junior High School which are located 22 within the 100-year floodplain immediately adjacent to 23 the Poudre River in Laporte . For these facilities, the 24 odds of being flooded once during a 30-year period are 25 slightly less than 30% with a slightly more than 70% 39 1 chance of success during that same period. 2 Additionally, we have Shepardson Elementary 3 and Zach Elementary which are adjacent to a 100-year 4 floodway, and the Poudre School District Administration 5 Building which is located adjacent to a 100-year 6 floodway within a 100-year floodplain. 7 I bring these items up not to criticize 8 Poudre School District but to illustrate that -- that we 9 have existing facilities for which the risk is 10 acceptable . This risk is accepted because these 11 facilities are considered valuable enough to accept the 12 risk and the mitigation was done by emergency management 13 planning. 14 The final point on this slide I ' d like to 15 bring up, is that the City floodplain map could change . 16 As a matter of fact, the map I was given to review does 17 not exactly match the map which you find and bring up on 18 the Fort Collins website . This is as it should be 19 because as the flood control facilities are constructed 20 and flow data is refined and modeling is refined, the -- 21 the area should change on the maps being, though, that 22 if the floodplain mapping is not completely definitive, 23 then I believe there should be some latitude for 24 discretion in applying the floodplain regulations, this 25 being possibly one of the cases for our discretion 40 1 (inaudible) . 2 Evacuation in -- in this case is not being 3 considered the primary flood response option because the 4 severity of the projected flood would make it safer to 5 retain the kids inside the school . It ' s felt, as has 6 been pointed out by the City, that it would be extensive 7 risk to responding parents, especially those who cross 8 the river as well as risk to emergency services 9 personnel . It ' s felt that in this particular case 10 evacuation after the flood crest has subsided 11 sufficiently to allow emergency personnel to establish 12 proper access routes would be the preferred option. . 13 The existing structure -- you ' ve seen a 14 photograph of it -- is steel girder frame with sheet 15 steel siding set on concrete slab foundation with 16 vertical plates . This particular structure is 17 particularly good at withstanding lateral forces . The 18 flow velocities have not been provided the storm water 19 utilities in sufficient detail to allow the structural 20 analysis of the building; however, since the structure 21 conforms to City building codes it is reasonable to 22 conclude that the one-foot hydrostatic head (inaudible) 23 would be possibly two-feet-per-second velocity head 24 would be small compared to the wind loading of each 25 industrial structure is required to withstand per the 41 1 Code. So the lateral loading of the projected flood 2 could not cause a problem with the structure . 3 The exposure of floodwater inside the 4 building while possible, if any, would be quite brief as 5 it is planned to evacuate the kids after the flood event 6 (inaudible) to do so. Improvements to the existing 7 structure which are planned and design plans for the 8 future addition particularly will specifically address 9 issues related to the 500-year flood and the appropriate 10 conditions . 1* 6 Ch,(A�ad3,SPEAKER: Review has suggested that there are 12 alternate locations that are available for this site 13 which we disagree wholeheartedly with because the value 14 of the school is that it is co-located with The Nature 15 Center . Building the school on a totally separate site 16 with The Nature Center would totally negate the concept 17 of getting kids outside daily on a regular basis to 18 experience nature as an important part of their 19 education. So alternative sites are not an option in 20 this case . 21 Other points of consideration that were 22 brought up, Code Section (e) (7) Relationship of the 23 Proposed Use with a Floodplain Management Program. 24 Given the proposed site, we do feel that the public 25 health, safety, and welfare are at very minimal risk in 42 1 this case and that this risk is -- is acceptable and 2 associated with what is projected here . 3 For example, we ' re looking at one of the 4 issues, is access to property in times of flooding and 5 the review documents stated that most of the vehicles 6 would not be able to handle the -- the 12-inch flood 7 depth. 8 If evacuation -- if travel in that area was 9 necessary, most high-clearance vehicles could negotiate 10 a 12-inch depth of water, could negotiate these 11 projected flood depths, especially when you realize that 12 those flood depths are going to be of very, very short 13 duration. We ' re not talking days . We ' re talking very, 14 very, very short time. 15 Again, it ' s not expected that we ' re going to 16 need vehicles on-site negotiating maximum flood depths 17 because it ' s going to be so brief a period, and during 18 that period of maximum flood depths the kids would be 19 kept inside the school in a safe manner. 20 Once that crest has passed, then The Nature 21 Center would be working with emergency response teams, 22 the plans going on in the community, to determine the 23 appropriate access routes . The emergency response plan 24 would be looking at not only the safety of the children 25 and the teachers and the personnel inside the building, • 43 1 but also the safety of the community emergency 2 responders and the parents . 3 The plan -- the emergency response team that 4 the school would formulate would be done in conjunction 5 with -- to keep consistent with Poudre School District 6 with local and regional response plans and would be 7 coordinated and communicated with the parents so the 8 parents know where to go, where not to go, and how to 9 stay safe . So those certainly can -- can be 10 communicated. 11 Now when we ' re talking about expected flood 12 characteristics, a 500-year event is not going to 13 present itself as an unexpected flash flood. We ' re not 14 suddenly going to look out the window on a sunny day and 15 see a wall of water coming. That ' s not how this flood 16 is going to work. 17 Based on discussion with storm water staff, 18 the Poudre River gauging system gives typically three to 19 four hours warning at least . Being extremely 20 conservative we ' d still have at least two hours of 21 warning which would be enough. And this system is 22 extremely sophisticated, and we believe that there -- 23 there is going to be time . Plus, as we know the 24 rainfall events that we' re talking about, there ' s -- 25 there ' s time . We know that -- we know that the storm' s 44 1 coming. It doesn' t suddenly happen on a sunny day when 2 -- when nothing else is going on. 3 The 500-year event exhibits an extremely 4 short duration and fast rate of rise, but equally short 5 rate of fall . So, the actual 12-inch depth is going to 6 be very short-lived. The waters will rise and they will 7 -- they will fall very, very quickly. So the exposure 8 is going to be extremely brief. 9 The area west of the site is the Larimer 10 County Fleet Management yards enclosed by a -- a very 11 substantial seven-foot chain link fence . This barrier 12 can reduce the flow velocity (inaudible) and the 13 floating debris and -- and problems that would be going 14 on giving some -- some potential additional protection 15 from -- from the site . Considering the characteristics 16 of the projected flood and the -- the site itself, while 17 there is some risk, it doesn' t -- it is minimal and 18 acceptable . 19 Other points of -- of the Code Section (f) , 20 the variance should be the minimum necessary, and we 21 have requested the minimum necessary variance . We do 22 believe that in this situation the benefits of this 23 truly unique school at this site is such a valuable 24 asset to the community, the one that could very likely 25 become a national model, very much outweighs the minimal 45 1 risks associated with it . 2 We do not believe it presents an additional 3 threat to public safety and, in fact, we feel very 4 strongly that the public interest would be better served 5 by allowing an exception to the 500 floodplain rule and 6 feel that that small risk is very acceptable in this 7 case . Are there any questions?n_ 8 &" U" Vadm SPEAKER: Does that conclude your 1__ Q 9 presentation? o { .5&V9 Lt 3, SPEAKER: Yes . 11 (�%A�Vadm SPEAKER: Okay. Thank you. Okay. At this 12 point, it ' s the opportunity for board members to call 13 and ask questions of any of the witnesses who have 14 testified at the hearing. It would be my interpretation 15 -- and -- and I ' ll seek Carrie ' s advice if I misspeak 16 here -- that -- that again, the intent here is -- is not 17 for the parties to provide new and additional testimony 18 beyond what board members may -- may inquire about. 19 We ' ve had the opportunity to receive your 20 testimony, so if we could intend, at least, to confine 21 the discussion here now, the Board questions, and -- and 22 then receive your responses . If there ' s additional 23 information in response to that question that certainly 24 would be welcome then. In the interest of fairness I -- 25 I would try and -- and ask the Board' s cooperation if 46 • 1 one party is asked a question and it ' s apparent that 2 there ' s, in fairness, at some opportunity for a question 3 of the other side but we don' t have a -- a kind of a 4 tit-for-tat rebuttal process but we ' ll certainly try to 5 be fair to ensure that the information that we need to 6 make a decision comes out . 7 And then one final reminder that this is 8 asking of questions and receiving responses from -- from 9 the folks who have been providing the testimony. We ' ll 10 have our discussion at the point where we have a motion 11 and a second. 12 So at this point -- and I would ask that if . 13 you have a question, if you ' d seek recognition from the 14 Chair and that way we just kind of keep it moving along. 15 So are there any questions of any of the parties from 16 the Board? Mike . 17 SPEAKER: I -- I have two -- two questions . 18 The first question revolves around the definition of a 19 school . ��X 20 � / � On SPEAKER: And -- and, Mike, it would probably 21 be helpful if you might want to -- to direct that to -- 22 %'Ja Conni- SPEAKER: Well, I 'm not sure . I think either 23 party might have a -- an opinion on this question so I 24 guess I ' d like to direct it to both. 25 Q2 ta, YMM SPEAKER: Okay. 47 1 ? SPEAKER: I think that ' s -- 2 SPEAKER: Thank you. 3 ,00/),,�,,rSPEAKER: So the City Code is pretty specific 4 about pointing out that a school can ' t be in a 500-year 5 floodplain . So what constitutes a school versus a 6 training center and would that make a difference in -- 7 in this whole discussion? ✓ 8 i XI gadv)SPEAKER: Marsha had the first opportunity 9 for presentation so maybe the applicant would like to 10 respond first and then staff. v P 5ckQ/Yl&i2o, SPEAKER: This school would be as a charter 12 school . It would be another school, a part of the 13 Poudre School District, so it would be comparable to the 14 other schools in the district so it would have the same 15 standing. 16 '4�n n�SPEAKER: Okay. So I think -- I think that 17 answers my question. I guess my second question is 18 specifically for Marsha, and that is what would be 19 entailed in removing the structure or the property from 20 �Jthe 500-year floodplain? �r" �tYle SPEAKER: The property could be elevated with p,61 n5 cr-, 22 fill and the structure elevated above that fill, but 23 it ' s basically going to create an island. 'i' 24 )'4e4�onnor SPEAKER: Uh-huh. YWd�X 1V rY195 — SPEAKER: And so you ' re going to have a high Rob)'n5 Cs'n 48 • 1 piece of ground sitting on an island, depending on how 2 high you elevate it would be how -- how protected the 3 structure itself is from the floodplain. It would be 4 staff ' s opinion that that did not mitigate the risk of 5 flooding related to the school because of the evacuation 6 issues related to that; that you would still have the 7 surrounding roads at risk and depending on the amount of 8 -- of free board you would have to consider that as part 9 of, �your analysis . SPEAKER: I -- I have a part -- answer to 11 this, too, because in part I don ' t think you got a 12 complete answer on what the difference between a 13 technical facility is and a school would be. For 14 instance, in this particular zoning of this building, 15 the Code allows for technical schools . It allowed for 16 trade schools . It allowed for other types of schools . 17 The definition used by the City, however, is elementary 1188 schools and -- Yw4a+`Wryw-5 I—, SPEAKER: This would -- this would include Rbb)h 5!S'-� 20 elementary schools . 21m��/ �r'r 'Ir) SPEAKER: This is -- but this is also 22 kindergarten through eighth grade and so the majority of 23 the classes would be older kids in this , but it would be 24 -- it would be a school -- I mean there ' s -- there ' s 25 many definitions of -- of schools, but in particular the 49 1 zoning allows for technical schools, trade schools in 2 this building. The -- the floodplain issues -- well, 3 we ' ll go on. I ' ll get to the point -- 4 D - J gar)gn SPEAKER: Marsha . ri'l5 - SPEAKER: If I could then clarify on the Rahj'ns Cr-, 6 school issue . There ' s two separate codes that you' re 7 then dealing with. You' re dealing with the zoning code, 8 which has a far more extensive laying out of different 9 types of schools where, as you ' ve seen from the 10 definition of critical facilities in Chapter 10 of City 11 Code floodplain regulations, simply says schools . 12 It does not differentiate between elementary 13 school, junior high and high school, et cetera . This is 14 clearly, by our interpretation of staff, no matter what 15 grade level, all the way certainly up through high 16 school and even into a -- a trade school, by this 17 definition would be considered a school and would be 18 subject to the regulation. 19 OW5 pp� ��'�.l.�Oii SPEAKER: Good questions . John. John EW0v) SPEAKER: I have two questions for Marsha. 21 --" J qcc' SPEAKER: Okay. &hfi aJaew SPEAKER: Marsha, you ' ve mentioned that there 23 were no plans to mitigate the flood area here, and I 24 understand that from a utilities point of view, but just 25 wondering if you know whether CDOT or the railroad might 50 • 1 be replacing either of the bridges in question, in the 2 next five years let ' s say? SPEAKER: I 'm not aware of any plans . The S V 4 College Avenue bridge is not that old. It ' s probably -- 5 Bob, maybe you can help me here . It was before my time 6 but not too far before so probably early ' 90s -- JV"°' l/ Q�bLt7� SPEAKER: Uh-huh. Yeah. Maybe 20, 25 years . MX-Skql-h /r► t,5 - SPEAKER: -- I would guess . So that, you G?ab, n 5 wn 9 know, when you look at the lifespan of a bridge that ' s 10 -- with all of the other bridges that they have troubles 11 to deal with, we have not heard anything from CDOT 12 related to -- to this bridge, and I have not heard • 13 anything from the -- &&I-Q10td SPEAKER: Just slight follow-up on that . 15 Does the City have any leverage with the railroad on 16 that particular issue, that is to say, if flooding is a 17 ' I possibility? mojr! @ 1411r1'C'�',nSSPSPEAKER: Dealing with the railroad is a 19 very, very difficult issue. JJA r) Barwq,/,SPEAKER: Okay. 21 SPEAKER: (Inaudible) jolf,R) 1()�,j SPEAKER: Okay. Uh-huh. My second question 23 is, have you gotten an official position from the fire 24 department or the emergency management folks about this 25 particular variance request? • 51 (W.4ak IrYLP-S � SPEAKER: We have not received any official Rabe ns O-„ 2 position on this . JpHn 0�194-' SPEAKER: And you did ask for one? ,lwir�{-H'/t"Y�25 — SPEAKER: We have not asked for one, �� �� ww 12abl n jS 5 actually. 6 /),(�,O3LJSPEAKER: Any other questions? 7 }hil PVV� latj SPEAKER: I have some for Marsha . Marsha, 8 that -- we ' ve heard about the changes in the FEMA 9 mapping that -- that would be coming based on work that 10 has been done up -- up north of town. Is that going to 11 change any of this school ' s proximity to floodplain? rfVfj�Xkh /MP-S ' SPEAKER: Not at all . That mapping has been 13 adopted. It has been approved. The mapping that you 14 saw on the board today is that mapping. It was related 15 strictly to Dry Creek. It greatly reduced the Dry Creek 16 floodplain. Didn' t have anything to do with the Poudre 17 River floodplain mapping. 18 The only thing we ' re waiting for FEMA on, is 19 the digital information, so that we can put that digital 20 information up on our website . All we have are the 21 paper maps from them to go off of at this point . We ' ve 22 created these based off the data that was submitted to 23 them from our digital -- digital information. If that 24 mapping is approved, it ' s set, it ' s done . There ' s 25 nothing else new coming related to that . Someday again 52 1 the Poudre River will be restudied and the mapping 2 probably will change, but when that is, or what that 3 might hold we -- we can' t say at this point . 4 Phil pIiai, SPEAKER: Okay. And then has there been any 5 precedents set granting a school in this 500-year 6 floodplain? I 'm -- I 'm just thinking in particular of 7 like Liberty Commons that ' s down there near Advanced � 88,E f'I I�'"-Energy? r �r� )"S — SPEAKER: They are not in a floodplain at RObi,175 O-xn 10 that site . There have been no variances to come through 11 this Board for a school in the 500-year floodplain. The 12 Cache La Poudre schools are in Laporte . They ' re old 13 schools and so they' re not in the City' s jurisdiction. 14 They were, again, built a long time ago . We 've had a 15 very close working relationship with the Poudre School 16 District . They know this criteria . They have been 17 cognizant of it, so we haven ' t had that issue come up. 18 ,lm th'b&' VC)SPEAKER: Marsha, you did -- wasn ' t related 19 to the 500-year Poudre River floodplain but you did have 20 a variance that was approved for the Wingshadow school 21 which was a school that was in the Dry Creek Floodplain 22 a little bit north and west of this site and the Water 23 Board did approve a variance for that particular school 24 even though it was in the Dry Creek 100-year floodplain. 25 And just based upon my memory and Bob might 53 1 be able to help us here, part of the consideration that 2 was given to that school was that there was this capital 3 project coming that was going to take it out of 4 floodplain . They -- they participated in and installed 5 a warning system up in the Dry Creek basin to give them 6 additional time to do that . They hired an emergency 7 response consultant to devise the evacuation plan and 8 emergency action plan for that particular site . 9 So just in -- in the sake of accuracy, I 10 would like to point out that as far as I recall, there 11 was one variance that was granted for a -- a school in a 12 -- in a floodplain in Fort Collins . Imes ' SPEAKER: Thank you, Jim. I 'm sorry. I -- I P�bb) h$cr ., 14 forgot that one . 15 ;2 SPEAKER: Okay. I won ' t forget that one . `S SPEAKER: Can I say something, too, to your 17 question about the -- the FEMA regulations . FEMA 18 doesn' t regulate critical facilities in a 500-year 19 floodplain, the City does, and that is a pretty 20 important piece because this appears to be the only 21 property we can find in the country that has a 500-year 22 critical facility issue on it . 23 We ' re three-quarters of a mile away from the 24 Poudre River . The City has -- has issued themselves 25 last -- I think it was January or February of 2007 -- 54 1 that they can store hazardous waste materials . They can 2 store floatable waste materials . You've got a gas 3 substation, an electric substation, sewage treatment 4 plant all on the banks of the Poudre River, and those 5 are fine . 6 But we ' re three quarters of a mile away and 7 an extremely slight chance of water ever getting to us 8 and, you know, a 6% chance in 30 years and our kids are 9 going to go there . I don ' t put my kids in danger, and, 10 you know, the City is -- I ' ve worked with a lot of City 11 boards and been to a lot of City meetings and the City' s 12 charge is to provide a reasonable expectation of safety . 13 to its citizens . We are within that . 14 W �,{/ dOl SPEAKER: I -- I appreciate that and I -- I 15 wou(�l�-dQU-ask all of us, though, that testimony that we ' ve 16 already heard will -- we appreciate that, and you' ll 17 have an opportunity to -- to recap . And I would also 18 again just reiterate with the Board if you have a 19 question of one side or the other, again, in the 20 interest and for the record and following our procedure, 21 feel more than free to seek response from -- from the 22 other party if you feel that ' s appropriate . Any other 23 questions from the Board? 24 &O_80L*1 SPEAKER: As a follow-up on John' s question I.t1Ctcs�C.E?'r�-, 25 for Marsha and that is he was asking about if he 55 1 conferred with City safety. Is -- have you conferred 2 with Poudre District like they have? � ,w - Pob n,,n /� S' AK nn,,55ts� 11I ) ER: Poudre Fire Authority? SPEAKER: No . Poudre School District . SPEAKER: Poudre School District? Staff has 05 trr, 6 not directly conferred with the Poudre School District . RjqPhVJO,Q&O SPEAKER: They' re aware of this request? VyVyy� �yy1QS-�jb� nSSPvAKER: I have to assume that, but that is 9 -- is truly an assumption. We have not had any 10 conversations . 11 t)'jU( SPEAKER: Are you going -- is that a question 12 you might ask of the applicant? W� l 5 �p,��. SPEAKER: They are aware of this request . Qp tih U) SPEAKER: Okay. And then a question for the 15 applicant. Is it your position that no mitigation is 1� ""16 needed for this site given the (inaudible) ? ti( la 6ChVtf d3, SPEAKER: No . No, that is not our position . 18 We had asked Water Utilities for more information on 19 flood characteristics so that we could devise 20 appropriate mitigation based on the -- the 21 characteristics and we did not receive that information 22 to respond to -- for mitigation, but we recognize that 23 as we design buildings, we design site, that certainly 24 there are measures that we can take . �, p��,(Q y�25 SPEAKER: Any other questions by the Board? 56 1 DAi Yode?i SPEAKER: I would ask one, Marsha, and if 2 applicant has -- has thoughts or a response we would 3 welcome those, too . It ' s kind of a little more 4 conceptual question if you could help me . 5 In terms of the purpose or the intent behind 6 the 500-year-floodplain regulations, there ' s a lot of 7 discussion and testimony that is very helpful that 8 speaks to the -- the estimates as I would understand 9 them to be of a flow depth, in particular, the 12-inch, 10 and some testimony as to, I believe, an estimate of what 11 the -- the sheet flow velocity of that might be and then 12 coupled with that, my understanding would be that -- 13 that those estimates are based and if you could confirm 14 this for me on -- on an assumption of 0% blockage of the 15 railroad and/or street bridge and that in the event of 16 some percentage of blockage of those -- those estimates 17 of flow depth and possibly velocity in this area 18 would -- would be expected to increase to some degree 19 depending on the amount of blockage and the greater 20 overflow. 21 I think I ' d ask Marsha first and then maybe 22 welcome a -- a thought from the applicant . ft 1�'Irnt_5 -- SPEAKER: All the statements you made are n5 o-1, 24 exact y correct . The information that we have is 25 approximately one-foot of -- of depth through this area . 57 1 We don ' t have a -- a channel going down this area . It ' s 2 sheeting down Vine Drive and across this -- this open 3 area . The floodplain modeling and mapping is based off 4 of no blockage at either the trestle, the railroad 5 trestle, or College Avenue . 6 How much additional flow would go down in 7 various different situations has not been analyzed in 8 detail but it -- it certainly is a factor that we feel 9 is important and needs to be considered that we have 10 that additional blockage, the low point to the north is 11 where that additional flow would go through. 12 C 0 Yad.Un SPEAKER: Any response? 13 7 SPEAKER: Sure. 14 C W LtO 6C6/�SPEAKER: I haven ' t modeled that either 15 because modeling a blockage of an existing structure is 16 not completely deterministic, and I do agree that -- 17 that if the railroad bridge or the College Avenue bridge 18 or both were blocked by debris that would increase the 19 flow east along Vine Drive; however, it ' s a quarter mile 20 off of Vine Drive and the intersection of College and 21 Vine Drive to the facility and the aerial extent of that 22 region is such that the sheet flow would have a chance 23 to dissipate before increasing in depth . 24 How much the increase in depth would be, I 25 can' t tell you, because I can' t model or have difficulty 58 • 1 modeling the increased discharge . I would estimate 2 conservatively that you could add 500 cfs more to the 3 Vine Drive discharge and -- and have depths increased on 4 the order of inches without a numerical analysis, but I 5 would say given that eventuality you ' re looking at an 6 increase in depth, but not a significant increase in 7 depth in terms of the structure . 8 (�(, (,/ or) SPEAKER: Thank you . Any other questions by 9 `^'theU Bll//000''a""�rd? JAn kof+ Q/o-W SPEAKER: Unfortunately, that reminded me of 11 one . Marsha, in your presentation you mentioned a site 12 flow, S-I-T-E, flow of 1, 100 cfs . What -- what width is • 13 that? How do you determine that? ( �yytQ SPEAKER: If I can go back to one of the 15 maps, I ' ll give you a rough idea. So if we look at this 16 map again, being the floodplain map of the College and 17 Vine area, the overall map, and this is where that -- 18 that breakout occurs . You have Vine Drive here and you 19 have this area extending out from here . 20 So it ' s a fairly wide area. And the area out 21 there is -- is relatively flat . In general, the flow is 22 then trying to get back down to the Poudre River. So 23 you have multiple places where water breaks out of the 24 river. One of those is -- is right here at College and 25 Vine and some of it goes -- tries to get back into the • 59 1 river right over top of Vine, fairly close . 2 Others of that continues on and that ' s what 3 creates -- creates this flooding for the -- the 4 500-year . So in -- it ' s this section you have 5 additional flooding down here from water that ' s breaking 6 out of the Poudre River through -- through this area and 7 -- and all eventually making its way back down to the 8 river near the Mulberry area. Does that help a little 9 bit? 10 SPEAKER: Well -- trW6U AjyytQ$ - SPEAKER: I don' t have a definitive answer Qcbin5 cm 12 to -- to say a width or -- Bob, if you have any other 13 insight into this one I can turn it to you. 14 63%C)b 145p A K E R: Basically I think what -- what 15 1, 100 cfs is the flow that ' s going down Vine Drive to 16 the east . The extent of that flow is from Vine Drive on 17 the map, north, to where the edge of the green line is . 18 � SPEAKE ause the railroad embankment on 19 the sou is deofVine is is water -- 20 $CLf� SPEAKER: It won ' t let it go across . rW l-hj" SPEAKER: So right here . So it ' s really here �1'ns�+ 22 to the north . 7 23 , I_ SPEAKER: Yeah. rW�l mes SPEAKER: You have then other breakouts that R016!,ri 5onn 25 are shown in the model for this flow through here . 60 • 89XHiGL1&tA) SPEAKER: Thank you. 2 / ot4yad4g)ISPEAKER: Any other questions? Okay. See 3 now at this point we provide an opportunity for a brief 4 closing statement by the applicant, if they' d like and 5 if it -- if it would work for you if -- if one of you 6 could be the spokesman, we ' d appreciate that, but if -- 7 if more than one of you need to offer us a final comment 8 -- I 'm just trying to be brief. And if we could get 9 your name, too . 10 Ti'm (Yl2 /'InSPEAKER: Sure . 11 .O , SPEAKER: Thanks . 12 SPEAKER: My name ' s Tim Merriman. I 'm the • 13 executive director of the National Association for 14 Interpretation at 230 Cherry Street, Fort Collins . I 'm 15 on the school board and involved in this project because 16 I work nationally and internationally with nature 17 centers . 18 There ' s about 2 , 000 in the United States . If 19 you look at recent statistics on math and science skills 20 of American students, we rank about 20th in the world. 21 There ' s all sorts of developing nations that have better 22 math and science programs than the United States . 23 One of the areas of research in my field is 24 to study how kids who have field trips or hands-on 25 learning opportunities perform on statewide standards in • 61 1 math and science . And the answer is , they perform 2 better. The contextual learning or experiential 3 learning works better than theoretical or classroom 4 cognitive studies . 5 But the point of all that is, I think I can 6 name one other nature center in the United States that 7 has a school on its property. It ' s in Palm Beach, 8 Florida . It was built within the last year . And by the 9 way, it ' s in a very hurricane prone area and they have 10 all sorts of hurricane evacuation systems in place but 11 they have to for the school and the nature center . 12 I ran a nature center in Pueblo, Colorado for 13 12 years on the Arkansas River and the 100-year 14 floodplain. I had 17, 000 kids a year out for field 15 trips and our property flooded half a dozen times in ten 16 years . We never had any danger to the students because 17 we always knew it was coming . 18 The USGS water modeling systems in Pueblo are 19 state of the art . That was one of the places they 20 developed some of these charting systems . And we always 21 knew in advance of any incursions on the property and we 22 sent the kids home . 23 I -- I personally believe -- I think of Fort 24 Collins as one of those model science/math communities 25 when you look at the industry that ' s here, when you look 62 1 at the intellectual community at the university, and 2 when you look at the ability of us to cope with what I 3 view as a fairly minor problem in this situation. 4 If my kids were young -- they' re not -- 5 they ' re older and one of them is a science professional, 6 this is the school I ' d want them to go to because I 7 would want them doing the kind of service learning 8 studies with birds of prey to help them really 9 understand the math and science concepts that exist . 10 I -- I think that what would even be of value 11 in the school is to study the flood potential for the 12 property and actually have the parents and the community 13 and the children involved in talking about mitigation. 14 What do we do in case there ' s a flood? 15 And I don ' t think that ' s a bad thing. I 16 think children need to be engaged in understanding the 17 danger to them and -- and understanding, in this case, a 18 fairly low probably of any -- that actually affecting 19 their school life . When I look at all the other things 20 that affect school life in Fort Collins like snow and, 21 you know, the other kinds of weather events that come 22 along -- 23 (Tape change . ) faM rI.P.I ntra4i SPEAKER: -- this land is going to be a 25 state-of-the-art facility in science and math study, and 63 1 I think there ' s an opportunity to really look at how you 2 mitigate the effects of -- of this and have an 3 evacuation plan that -- that makes it a zero potential 4 for incidents in flooding for any child. 5 And I think variances exist in the hands of 6 citizens for good reasons . There are times when you 7 make reasonable judgments to do something different . 8 We ' ve already heard one example of a school in a 9 100-year floodplain. We hope that you will see the 10 opportunity here . 11 Moving this -- this school to another site 12 absolutely removes the -- the opportunity for 13 experiential learning on a daily basis for students at 14 this school . This is a unique, wonderful opportunity 15 and we should embrace the challenge that goes with it 16 and do something constructive to work around it . I hope 17 you ' ll approve it . 18 Ojj)J(, a6(O 1 SPEAKER: Thank you. At this point the Chair 19 would entertain a motion on the variance. 20 rni /j��hygdrSPEAKER: I 'm going to move that the Board 21 deny the variance request in the Poudre River 500-year 22 floodplain based on the regulations adopted in Chapter 23 10 of City Code for a change of use of the existing 24 structure at 720 East Vine Drive to a school and also 25 deny the variance request in the Poudre River 500-year 64 1 floodplain as to the existing building located at 720 2 East Vine Drive to be expanded with a future addition 3 for use as a school . And subsequent to that, I ' d like 4 to make some comments as well . That ' s my -- that ' s my 5 motion . 6 0"(Odm SPEAKER: Mike, if -- if the Board will allow 7 the �- ^the Chair just a little bit of discretion, it 8 would be helpful for the record if -- if as part of the 9 motion, we can at least kind of summarize some of those 10 points that we think are -- that you may find key in 11 terms of -- 12mJ'Jt&nQ21- SPEAKER: In -- in my mind, Doug, and maybe 13 a lot of points in a lot of other people ' s minds, but in 14 my mind there has been one major point and that is that 15 the City Code uses very strong language and is very 16 explicit about having this kind of structure in a 17 500-year floodplain. 18 We may or may not agree with that City Code, 19 but the City Code is very explicit and I think -- 20 personally, I think there have been a lot of good points 21 brought up why this school should be built, but it 22 doesn ' t override that one -- that one critical factor in 23 my mind. I -- I don ' t know if anybody else would like 24 to, you know, have some thoughts about what other things 25 ought to be included in that . 65 1 DDtA�(PCI n SPEAKER: And by Robert ' s Rules of Order does 2 that -- not real, real sharp here, but let -- let ' s go 3 ahead and see if there ' s a second to the motion and does 4 anyone need a summary or restatement of the motion or 5 are we clear? Is there a second on the motion? 6 JohaOrts SPEAKER: I second the motion. 7 ^ , , _A._ SPEAKER: Is there a discussion on the 8 rnyL",,Im'lottK�(i1S,�,o�nG?tom n 9 rM'11 W// nr1&C SPEAKER: Yes . 10 V0LU%J0d077 SPEAKER: Okay. 11rnI'UJ�On nor SPEAKER: Have -- having made the motion 12 I ' ll also do a few comments here . First of all, I think 13 the concept, the proposal, the objectives are laudable 14 and I would love to be able to support the -- the 15 proposal . And would I think that there is a fairly 16 strong case to -- to appeal to the next level and -- and 17 say the City Code is overly restrictive and it ought to 18 be -- it ought to be (inaudible) . 19 But I think the City Code being what it is, 20 is strictly influencing my opinion that I don ' t think 21 this is the board to override that strong a guidance to 22 the City Code . So -- I -- I ' d love to support it . I 23 wouldn ' t even mind getting involved in some of the 24 activities and what have you, but I just can' t -- I just 25 can ' t support the variance (inaudible) stated. 66 JO nO ea�/Ou1SPEAKER: I wanted to add to that just a 2 little bit, not too much. I basically agree with Mike . 3 I think -- I think the -- I 'm -- I 'm very sympathetic to 4 the goals here that you guys are trying to pull off, and 5 I think you' ve brought up some very, very good points . 6 I really do. 7 But the regulations are there for a good 8 reason, and unfortunately, because of some bad lessons 9 that the City has learned, I do recognize that there are 10 uncertainties and gray areas all the way around between 11 the mapping and modeling and, you know, and everything. 12 And I personally would at least entertain 13 another opportunity to look at this variance, if you as 14 applicants, prepared an emergency response plan in 15 conjunction with the appropriate emergency authority 16 folks . I 'm not exactly sure who those are, but if you 17 were to work with them and develop a plan that they 18 could buy into and that you demonstrated good faith in 19 terms of the plan, structural plans for your existing 20 and new building then I think, speaking for myself, I 21 could entertain the opportunity to look at a variance at 22 another time . 23 ` bu" Lpd cn SPEAKER: Any other discussion? 24 ►1- ntJ 04(trh SPEAKER: I guess the -- the Chair -- and if 25 ' there ' s counsel that I 'm overstepping authority let me • 67 1 know -- but I -- I would ask the mover and the seconder 2 if they might consider a friendly amendment to a little 3 bit of the wording in the motion, and I ' ll offer that 4 and -- and if you' d let me know. 5 And that suggestion would be that -- that 6 there has not been a sufficient showing of good and 7 sufficient cause to grant this particular variance in 8 both those points, the conversion of the existing 9 facility and the expansion of the facility as a school 10 in the 500-year floodplain and that the granting of the 11 variance, in fact, would present an additional threat to 12 the public safety and to the public in general beyond 13 the current condition at that site . So I just thought 14 I ' d ask if the mover and seconder would consider this 15 friendly amendment . Cq/7Ihcr SPEAKER: I don ' t think so, John, especially 17 the second part . I think that has some concerns with 18 the way that ' s phrased and what have you. Now we can 19 withdraw the motion for another on the floor if the -- 20 if you feel more comfortable with that, but that goes a 21 little bit farther than what I had in mind when I made 22 the motion. 23 QX)-$V J" SPEAKER: Well, there is a motion on the 24 floor. There ' s a second. Any other discussion? All 25 those in favor of the motion please say aye . 68 • 1 (&aldOW) SPEAKERS : Aye . 2 SPEAKER: Opposed? Okay. Thank you . 3 (End of discussion. ) 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 • 69 STATE OF COLORADO ) COUNTY OF LARIMER ) TRANSCRIBER'S CERTIFICATE I, Valerie Mitchell,hereby certify that the foregoing transcript has been transcribed under my supervision to the foregoing 68 pages and that said transcript has been transcribed as accurately as possible, to the best of my abilities, given limitations of the uncontrolled environment and tape quality of those proceedings. I further certify that I am not related to, employed by,nor of counsel to any of the parties or attorneys herein nor otherwise interested in the outcome of the case. Attested to by me this 25th day of September, 2008. Valerie Mitchell Meadors Court Reporting, LLC 315 West Oak Street, Suite 710 Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 (970) 482-1506 ATTACHMENT 7 STAFF POWERPOINT PRESENTATION Floodplain Appeal for Nature Center School 720 =750 E . Vine Drive City Council Meeting October 21 , 2008 [tins Subject for Discussion • Consideration of the appeal to City Council of the Water Board ' s August 28 , 2008 denial of the Floodplain Variance for a school in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain . F� [tins Water Board Action • On August 28 , 2008 , the Water Board considered a request for a variance from Chapter 10 of City Code to : 1 . Allow a change of use at 720 E . Vine Drive to a charter school , and 2 . Allow the existing structure to be expanded onto adjacent property located at 724 and 750 E . Vine Drive with a future addition for use as a school . • Water Board voted 8-0 to deny the variance request . f Critical Facility Definition City Code Section 10 = 16 Critical facilities shall mean . . . hospitals , nursing homes , group homes , residential care facilities , congregate care facilities and housing likely to contain occupants who may not be sufficiently mobile to avoid death or injury during a flood ; schools ; daycare facilities , . . . F�t [1 Applicable City Code Sections : • Section 10-81 (a ) Critical Facilities . In any portion of the Poudre River 500-year floodplain or zone X shaded area , critical facilities are prohibited . • Section 10-81 ( b ) . Change of Use . No person shall change the use of any structure or property located in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain or zone X shaded area so as to result in a new use or new nonconforming structure that is inconsistent with the requirements of this article . [tins Applicable City Code Sections ( con ' t) : • Section 10-46 (6 ) . No person shall change the use of an existing structure that is not a critical facility to use as a critical facility contrary to the provisions of Article II of Chapter 10 of this Article , or change the use of a critical facility to another type of critical facility , or increase the physical area in use for a nonconforming critical facility , contrary to the provisions of this article . FCity of [ins Project Proposal Changeof the existing building • school . �• - Future 10 , 000 sq . - addition to the F8r Collins 1 W a R000hm LeyeM rr w va-�. eeweaa L uuyre _ ®OR .Ca'•L7S.S.a.'SC...'3� i ! nrsr a :yen IfO rr• w...+...—re... C _ rwa.w:y.tr.of aty 1T n V aMl� 5_ I ., G 1MyI k @ raraauwaai W I E f \ n _ u_ mM.R 6•. { l y = aA711•L 11Q - 1 3 iff ErY City of Fort Collins Regulatory Floodplain , nrt• atdrn Dozed ,+re .a<ea =me,a+:,V.r.,e-7e�e,I�vAF >, IC=. evn, :=F��.-a„-�nef Map After Dry Creek Diversion project Re.441fnkcs a"�'eD •e'�e'are '^f iv1Cr' "DzmD�na",e,e�'Dec emse :r II ct De tee�^ Iwcc esneen. n=o gnr. nre aaecu cam «e&nd"6a' e a ee Jealrnea e[W ow, rm x aaMean ov a nxe OID enr AP Meopl on ndanty nu:caa:me wremeaar acu aamm Omar na m»+a ne woe - n mncme ra>eemMorme anane — are appmxemam Del.aa+i artsaarctee rea 0.tr" et'ye nt a ma bin mwca v On ela�al cn. .�- 4 500 -year Floodplain Information =_fir Depth = approx . 1 foot e . ] �■ Total Flow = 241100 cfs Site Flow = 1 , 100 cfs F�t Discussion -�t [t1 ATTACHMENT8 Additional Information in Response to Allegations Additional Information in Response to Allegations City Council Meeting October 21 , 2008 r Applicant Allegations • Allegation # 1 — Data and photographs from other drainages, specifically Spring Creek, have no direct bearing on the hydraulic conditions of the site in question. Yet, these photos were used to imply a greater level of risk than we believe exists on our site. In fact, we used data and photographs supplied by the SWU staff to demonstrate that, contrary to SWU 's allegation, our site would NOT have been flooded during the 1904 flood. • Response - - Spring Creek Information - The purpose of the information was presented as a relative situation that can result in a more complex scenario. — 1904 Flood - Research into the 1904 Flood strengthens the evidence that the proposed school site was significantly impacted by that flood. i"�tfollins 1 Risk Examples • Large floods do happen . . 1997 Spring Creek Flood - greater than a 500 - year flood . 1976 Big Thompson Flood - extreme event • Some areas of the Midwest have seen more than one 500 -year flood within 10 - 15 years . rF`�tollins + 1997 Spring `� • ,` �. Creek Flood no, Debris Blocking the College Avenue Bridge ratollins Flood History • Over 100 -years of streamflow record . • Several flood events in the range of the expected 500 -year discharge : ➢ 1864 — Camp Collins destroyed ➢ 1891 — Chambers Lake Dam Failure ➢ 1904 — 21 , 000 cfs due to rainstorm • No capital improvements planned that would eliminate or reduce the 500-year floodplain . ollins r�i � ;.a ss� • sT6110001001 IM a K� iw IN0 irn � � � n � i � r■ wwnrw<w■ � wr � III ■ ■ R i nn011 ' M ■ RI IIII ■ ' I ' - rlfjll 1 , 1 P111111 7 MR Ili , _R _fl_ - 11 � i ilili _ r iiiin 1111h 1904 Poudre River Flood Andersonville High Water Mark ollins May 20 , 1904 Poudre River Flood Information ollins ■ "Map of the Irrigated Farms of Northern Colorado, 1915 " Prepared by R.W. Gelder 1 I met ■ e Courtesy of Fort • �a • • i • ' �� Collins Local U . 19 a • a + 8 ♦ History Archive i�� ■ • [! t•fell • ■ ! , Proposed Natu City of Fort Collins Accounts of the May 20 , 1904 Flood Fort Collins Weekly Courier, May 25 , 1904 "A terrific rain storm raged in the mountains a few miles west of Fort Collins , all of Friday afternoon which undoubtedly precipitated an immense volume of water which rushed off an already swollen stream , producing the flood . " f1 40 Accounts of the 1904 Flood Fort Collins Weekly Courier, May 25 , 1904 "The water covered and rushed over all the bottom lands from bluff to bluff, tearing out culverts , headgates and carrying away almost every moveable thing that stood in its way . The river at this point was over a mile wide . " fig Accounts of the 1904 Flood Fort Collins Weekly Courier, May 25 , 1904 "There were six inches of water in the sugar factory and eighteen on the north side . The stored sugar escaped by only six inches . " "Water swept around the sugar factory and prevented the entire force employed there now , including Manager Booraem , Superintendent Westein from getting to their homes . Along in the evening they waded north to the bluff, finding shelter for the night at William Lindenmeier' s . " ratollins Accounts of the 1904 Flood Fort Collins Weekly Courier, May 25 , 1904 "The beets on the Peter Anderson farm will have to be replaced . " ( NE corner of Vine and LeMay ) "Two Russian houses on the Lindenmeier place were washed into the middle of the road . " fly "Map of the • Irrigated Farms of ML Northern GPM Colorado , •L 1915 " Prepared by • - R.W. Gelder 1 { �� ■ 1, �� Courtesy of Fort • �• A ■ R • ' i �� Collins Local • • • • • • ' �' History Archive * rF�tr ■ �y 1904 Poudre . ,. - River Flood - College Ave . looking north gap Fort Collins Flood, 1904, Agricultural Archive, Colorado State University Archives and Special Collection City of oltins 1904 Poudre River Flood Railroad • _ downstream of College Ave . washed out . ratollins Applicant Allegations ( con ' t) • Allegation #2 - The city's use of the term "flash flood" in this instance, is grossly misleading, when by the city's own modeling, a 500-year event would appear as a relatively shallow sheet flow at low velocities. • Response — Staff feels the terminology is appropriate given the nature of these types of events. The National Weather Service describes a "flash flood" as: "Flash floods occur within a few minutes or hours of excessive rainfall, a dam or levee failure, or a sudden release of water held by an ice jam. " rat,follins � Applicant Allegations (con ' t) • Allegation #3 - SWU 's description of the hydraulic mechanism at College Ave. and Vine Dr. during the projected 500-year event was speculative and imprecise. • Response — The information concerning overtopping of College Avenue and Vine Drive is based on the floodplain modeling and mapping. In the event of debris blockage, additional water would flow down Vine Drive toward the proposed school. i"�tfollins 1 r 6, i�tiSC.. • 1eMEN S [e Locffiion ' _ 1 3111�1�*!lFIR y Piw' 4U 111 III IAA ORION . . . . 100f_ . . _ . .. College Ave . bridge and railroad trestle . College Ave . looking north toward Vine Dr. ~- 1997 Spring Creek Flood .� elk Debris Blocking the College _ Avenue Bridge ollins Applicant Allegations (con ' t) • Allegation #4 — The City provided an approximate flood depth at the proposed school site, with no specific water surface elevation reference, and provided no information regarding flow velocities, flood duration or hydrographic timing. • Response — The depth of flow for the 500-year floodplain is approximately one foot based off the current mapping and modeling. The 500-year flows are described as being a total of 24, 100 cubic feet per second (cfs) with approximately 1 , 100 cfs breaking out and going through the proposed school site. �"�tfollins 1 500 -year Floodplain Information '= Depth = approx . 1 foot III Total Flow = 24 , 100 cfs Site Flow = 1 , 100 cfs Mi= oltins Applicant Allegations (con ' t) • Allegation #5 — SWU alleged that no detailed structural analysis had been provided regarding the building at the proposed site. Given the generalized nature of SWU 's hydraulic information, the generalized statement that the building appears to be structurally sufficient is appropriate. • Response — The applicant has not provided any details or analyses to substantiate the assertion of structural stability of the building during flooding events. i"�tfollins 1 Applicant Allegations ( con ' t) • Allegation #6 — The applicant demonstrated that the risk to life and safety at the proposed site during a 500-year flood event would be no greater, and in fact less, than the risk currently being accepted elsewhere in the Fort Collins area for similarly classified facilities. • Response — The purpose of floodplain regulations is to be proactive by not creating new problems for the future by allowing new high risk development or uses in the floodplain. ollins ■ Purpose of Critical Facilities Regulation • Protect those facilities and people that are most vulnerable to the impact of flooding . • Three types of critical facilities : — Life -safety — schools , hospitals , daycares , nursing homes , group homes . — Emergency Response — Police stations , fire stations , emergency operations centers , utility facilities . — Hazardous Material Storage Most Risk = Highest Level of Protection ratollins ■ Applicant Allegations ( con ' t) • Allegation #7 — SWU 's use of information from other parts of the U. S. was grossly misleading by implying that a 500-year flood would occur considerably more frequently. Additionally, by making reference to flood damage that occurred in other drainages, SWU implied that the predicted flood risk at this site would be considerably higher than their own data would indicate . • Response — Information presented illustrated the risk associated with large floods. This included statistical information on the 500-year flood, information on the 1997 Spring Creek Flood, the 1976 Big Thompson Flood and recent flooding in the Midwest. ollins c+�yof rat,f� 500 -year Floodplain Risk - Statistics • 0 . 2 % chance of occurring in any given year. • During a 30-year period , there is a 6 % probability of a 500-year flood occurring . • 1 , 100 cfs flow assumes College Ave . bridge not blocked with debris . ratollins Risk Examples • Large floods do happen . — 1997 Spring Creek Flood - greater than a 500 - year flood — 1976 Big Thompson Flood - extreme event • Some areas of the Midwest have seen more than one 500 -year flood within 10 - 15 years . rF`�tollins Applicant Allegations (con ' t) • Allegation #8 — The fact that the proposed site lies within the 500-year floodplain is not contested. However, specific information mitigating the fact that the site is in the 500-year floodplain was not considered by the Water Board, which was only interested in enforcing the code without due attention to the merits of the request. The motion to deny the request for variance was passed without any discussion of the technical merits of the variance request, or regarding the proposed school's value to the community versus actual risk. We believe that the risk to life and safety during the projected 500-yr event was grossly overstated. i"�tfollins 1 Applicant Allegations (con 't) Allegation #8 ( con 't) • Response — All points presented by the applicant in this appeal were presented to and heard by the Water Board. The Water Board asked questions of both Staff and the applicant prior to making their motion to deny the variance request. rat,follins � ATTACHMENT "A Great Calamity visits Cache La Poudre Valley," Fort Collins Weekly Courier, Page 1 (May 25, 1904) I;rititled Article ATTACHMENT 9 Publication : Fort Collins Weekly Courier (Fort Collins, La rimer County) ; Date : 1904 May 25 ; Section : Front Page; Page Number : 1 AcrlveF [AT AL. AM IT ISITS C 9 C H L4 POUDRE Thousan& of Acres of Fr�iit u Lan d Devastated F ightfoods �---woes wrecked, fridges Destraed, �iead- ga.tes Washed Out , Ditches Damaged and Live Stock Drowned. kl�**4 GORES OF fl0.N# ELESS AND DESTITUTE PEOPLE, UNFORTUNATE VICT1411S OF CRU VRC?J' �,N1ST ACES , REQUIRE PRWIPT RELIEF. DAMAGE WILL EXCEED 19000� 00 A %vu(l , roaring, su ryi ul ; �►�srsµ � ,� � , � down through the Cache la Poudre val - ley Friday afternoon and evEai doincr local : ulWaa d #; rvage to property , 117ouses terxt-� -cu , l�rta•n �, sL 1� , €ees and brif),mes 1• ere swept frofn their r-noorion ; and dashed to p1er.'es by the anon y wateTS , Thous €cads of acres of the tbuice�st garden and farm la-ads in tbeoa valiey eovw Bred with ] ucorian � crops, were laid x as: a leaving ivIreck and desolation triumpbant. httn•//www r..nlnradnhictni• rnpuri nanPre arty/ ADA 7 Ar+ nn„ 9cL-, ,V�lAa ".._f"TXXTOfl nincIrlrtin0 Untitled Article 01 d toners sad• tnaI I V.aa i. u:; V. V1h6 flood experie:tced siaca the memorable Pond of 1891 , . T. ben the hettom lands were covered with rater f.azn duff to. blipT. The effects of Pr day 's uneon trot led rush of water, however, are inilniwly : ore (I 'M tstroas than resulted frorx: 13oods of 1S+ 'l, as there wera bat few penple 31vir' g in the valley then and ;ewer farms to be devastnti�d. On the present v^eaeina st=es of families wero 1fri ►•en from their homes in ;rent haste, siren compelled to wade through muddl• water waist deep to places of 'safottiy' i eaFly' all of thAir . i eloo;ia s, expect what they had va their 1)acks at tho Illoil ent, Were Itytt to T )ee3t's3te the pla,y- ` ttiDrs . of the rolli fjaCcd . Cat' L)e, harses, logo and chickens wero Cau boo In the swirliro ;Later and carri .rl to ilesti`ucLiolI. There Ara but two hrltl ,r� P7 left stiiri aip ,. fre =.tt the ca rion to r= repley iilid 0111V or) df tl: ese: the Chestnut str Set brtdre is in a :; ;agee condition for t mv el . The tt ate : cavered and ri~ :,hed ov !ar all of thr, flash haztotu lands frcil42 i III L: _i to blul , tzartrr ttt c; niverts . beadripran F and e; Lrr4� ink: � wav ulr►jaRt CVC1 • it JV11l ,te tbinl * 111154t S ' Ooj in its w:rrtr . "L ..Q rivor : ` tbl'S f�zt it �: vacp,) ;. grqrd .nnSP and i'• : ' . d:] 'S3 , from t ;t .' eat �r �tt� t ; tc: Vie4 .Jut �t 3'; attr+, �* e i ) ractiv-11, s, ruilled , z1ad 1- -o r"VA build , >it; �s de rvzi: K . than peopia liad no 11me to think cC an kjnnnz but l,t- rzor; al and nre ` vei:l Ott • ted to = ako, tbei : PsorPru . , _S :all of warLi' r raid to have bev ,l or 3 '} 410e6-1lzi ;; 1x btnto %. a' clock in the afternoou a ud tpre�. out over the bottonn lard farms. swept http ://www.coloradohistoricnewspapers .orglAPA26300/PrintArt.asp?SkinFolder=CHNCO. . . 9/25/2008 Untitled Article aw ny ■1bou t everything wa a '.,le . The modes bridge at Shipps foil with it � rach. rind its tiiubers Ior ring ap inst the ;talel bridge at 13e141 ue caused it to gii`e ; [#: r� Abe wreck. text S.~ air' and the wooden bZrld,rea at Liperte, at Arm stroDg 'e, crc=Aicr; and the W atroui la.ndze fell =tiws to tbo relentless fury of the can gushing water. These were soon fol - fowed 4Y the C ollel:e aveaulo bridgo and and the rallwav bridge on the NVellintoD branob of the 04 & S. railroad . The northern npproach to th42 Linden street steel bridge was under rater and for P. time fears for the safety of the structure itself were entertained, it stood the test, howea er, and is 9tandi :; gy today, as is the AA he Chestnut street bridge . While the flood Was at its Zenith cornmunicati4on between the north and sou4h sides of the river was entirely cut oir. Water swept around the sugar factory and prevented the entire force em p ley ed there now, i n - ciudin :; am magrer BooT'new , Superinten - dent W etstein. frow getting to their homes. Along to the evening they w adw ea north to tine bluff, 143dtn ; sfirltUr for the might at .Will2am Lindenrnier '.. The Russian village Dear taA sager fa ,, tory was -under water and all the inhabitants, except one family, 1i ing iu 4he old • O*dge l mingtoa house, which stood on higher ground , had to flee for their lives. The water flooded the lower floor of the Remington house, but the occupants stuck to it and passed the night there, The dancing pavilion ita the ' grave on tha north bank of the river oollangM http://www.coloradohistorienewspapers. org/APA26300/PrintArt. asp?SkinFolder=CHNCO" , 9/25/2008 Untitled Article Publication : Fort Collins . Weekly Courier ( Fort Collins, Larimer County) ; Date : 1904 May 25 ; 5ectivn :.Front Page ; Page Number : 1 Acti�naP�per And fall into the ragin .7 head wind was . carried away, taking with It a neer OF= which the c owner had just installed . 0 hr; s 61 nson s Reuss way under water to the whidows and Mrs. :11ason and bet childrr u spent the night there aloiic•, ,'Mr Mason being caught ou tho Opposite Fido of the biter, '1 ho Mason family spent tht% : i ;; ht in rear and tremblinry on the secon; fir of Choir house , Tae vi : lapr;a of Lnport% was under two feet of cater but happily no lives ivere; lost. The new lown of Wellin ;; ton in the Boxelder ral - IeNm wa.c also flooded and considorahlo daw. age done io houses and their coal tentli , .rk porticn of tbp railroad tract and eouio or the bridges and Culverts were gashed out , Among those near the city who are Y the greatest sufferers are Capt. S . Ge Webb ; 11mr Lizzie liliii , C. W. Chieker- ing, H . 1?. 'rzc. ktpr, C : io , J. H . Frauce , Adam Shipp, Robert lValker, Bruce 10'rot'ltt, Baker and Tanner . '. hou SRads of people lined the raver bank for bourl. 4durivri the heirrhth of the # land watching tho wark of destruc - tioti. TLe flood reaiuht{ d I 17i� �£�� r stage in Oout d o'elnek in the eveolar and then blveeZ a slowly to dubs±de. Thi $ wornir the stream , tliougli unusually high , : s con fined tc its banLraj taut i o 6solati�{onyyitfirrLo� uayht in its allewi V inood poreipL:� 1s fa 4Si*"`Y. lie5trl :.' l jug CadW . Tjll7 t) V'0' i .iful V4aJIL&V IVltli ita %Venitli of vlroX. iniv C. 9'op , happy l•c01110S and ear3ten1 aad 7'P:iClt' r .,, , a Wa :ELn, covered 11 itU Avrecl>' rd 1x ;: iidings , debris arid [nud. ii. : s � : G. C'n • zri;s can ? l_ t at hoTl '_ 4 x1len zhk? flood �cruse tarpo hi tti , but 3ii'� i? 1i7 ;1' �l't'1 C' all 1 ii gi? tie il . l di4' : iE . 41 ' lrl3 [I#! L°�`a ,qfi_' ii Co ilk `, : : : �C' i4' �lcifi f3 : Lr i ;; f fh .+ \ .. . . .� . %NOW •. U LY k . 1 hI nY . Il .� •'. � vf• ♦ � ff ' • S1 �a . http ://www.coloradohistoricnewspapers.org/APA26300/PrintArt.asp?SkinFolder=CHNCO" , 9/25/2008 tv a Ca M. ilwit r 7 rr d- F . y w 0 P4 ty d i7 r • r-h p p ' - w . .. h {, G; r"r ti i `. Y r; A. In rr ❑ rr co eD • .Cq ? +„J�� T r ��" r n Yi w 'rF 7 0 J: j p a 1rj WJ 16 W C ram, p "` r 'M r ' F y M '" �+ r_ w cr �!" rr 0 t pt Q b'' r* C C6 rr ,�,, '.](] ',;; , h r-r "Y �• +� '� , owb C5� - �; �' r�.•�,, r '� J. , J. D R „ � ! T �3 R� !► Ant ED Cn t'7• i? ni I . / � . r: 1A r r 3� w lr UI .+ r` 0 F+. '��. c• O V V y./ Ewa. D �w, O ► Y La's �. &'S CJ L 41 y N ET 1r • b. p =A ..Ir � � � N• � � Co f"! 0, tz r"1 CS r-r W �%w ��` a.l• mow•. � I��y� '�; y,. � eA f `� ' i 4 '14 {d " I gmt n" ^- • ` . ' • ED;..• phom i—S L'? �„� 0 10 d. h ! y. � � � fyy �+ � y � L..� � F�•,a wa w• � "! has F�.�.. � ;Ti � .+ � L o �� "� C' !w 14 "3� Cr i+r'J+ S� M M VY p� � � ;r+ �- rp VIP p -x Cd f` �? n [tic ^ , * Q. m rr, Qo ; � �'' iM : ^ I 0lit as �+ 1nK ►b ti r� ,. o* us r+ Fs r Ct p imo d CL Dy w tic: ..ti r- ;� 3' "� Q ti 10 Y' r� �q r�M CDF� t ; •- ro ti �- . . . n•. A p 'A1 m . GT ra t� ! CY C7 u, ° r° r r .w ta' fA ! d� ". `� ea• 0, �3 � a-f �` �� � �. �' a rt e7 awl r,}' Q' Chi { M+ cT "I ti (D CD •I, bills . r 40 l • N• P• . VT rr; {� Pot [p CL, © �' . ' (j" .`.* �w-�� ,_7 p ff "� �• 7 G ti� ti �• #} R r �yfly, Cj� O 0 R ��� rr 6 � r C:. � C� F+ V 3l7 �7 .� r� Y.' 4� c " �yy �L [T •�'u W .M � . fr. ". � f� y i+. C+ 11 s a { r H! C ► CT- I C� CI C•r= e-F L7. "�' pi w �� t"C a"5 +ti ,r.'+l 13� k �O•Y ""' it; �` :� Q " � = . �� r`"•. � l Q F.l .Y V .J O .CD n O N i LA N J O 00 tag Pr G a el 0 CD Lo q4 VM a 1� � tD G' (IQ ow*I0A � m re x s.r �► Cs� G C CD 8 rw fi7 oftCD in a w R. 40 0 0 COD a a I� n x z n oN d 00 4L NY ..... '7 Q ^* ry v... ... . ,r . r� .'7 'd �� 0 C: j". �,' '7] M Cr +.+� ID C .'�? ' © to `�' rr CL � �]a � � � � r r � � � � � � � G1 Cf! � f>� 7 �r CD C] G3 ►7 r« m Ep U) M C. F' �' ' "" Cy E3 rh 0 .0 0 +� µ� � t5 i � 77 ter c+ d M � � �3 � O f� a r* [si rf +'� Ci r'' �� �' ' m 'AJ re ■• • ! 'Jir 1Ay O ^3 tr �; Q' v., v. u 'G C , * , . Ci. y r; p- ti O C► ; �. R► r r r* o n C. G 4 t 17 C.�+ a C z W p P C CL OF Ta n G p ( M ►'! �04 �• � +-- � � 0 'ma ts � ... m � �. � U3 � ro � 3 5 CD "'` `• rr '+fl+ �� A «fDr q p- cr r b cr �T i7 +y �: w C" p r7, ' i]+ 0 p. w+ rt -{7 '� .c� u Q. 'rf �• {�t�". tf; .�.' . rr �..°a K `*� [# e•r .�... LC .� W ,m a4� pG d . . � p ycr°y c aC]pn ( D PD� 7� Cf r(D7 t o �r Xy . Cr ° CD ,�. . •r1 C: +� r+ L�J. . . ..� O O q U� l0 4 �1+ � C3' Cho O 0 73 ' lw . CL r M Vi �' r•• C$ G 't O .... +ems �] #p "' tm gowA rZ!� Ja i 3 c to 1`rtA C3. W 1.' P C7 O ""w L.1 "t a "� w rl [�D Mr 0 Crx� '�* �� p . + :_' ' 3 rt � Caf '�" t - r r^� ' r . ", . + i , , LYx+ W►+ R• aft D _ D i Q� " a . ] C L . �+ 7 1 ~ c-r y D 0 ,C w . « 3 7 `rt p Oe�7 a 7Q v rm Gp El C� eD M p 0 C� rr P + � + D < " a G QCr In r arr w. a y a n x N n a Ln ti a ur N �4tCD a oa IWO era 1. m C y w by' • Fa• r.. r,. .* 1 �+y ['Sa t-•w +M• w.... rJ . p �. ►.. . i+... I-'t ot t 1`.'R- r.7 • r i� +� �� • Q rj le v ""'♦ Q !'t C 1' r� 9M4 i .. i Ity�i .\ . �'t w r+ �j R" i J ` }r".•. rc • �+ N: " f 1•+ _ r f--i O ram' CA a • s .i /�� �- + , . .. .. , +: C, Q r� � r, ��w C _ �. p fw /u�, p /„4R �- to wn r'i BMW +~a MY li _� F; �' • F•. r y w� • �. i.i rY m 0 +w V. Z a �w� Yl1 ^NW � SY tJ a (0 + n 4 r . �, r+ ►yl O + ! ` rS W tr .CL .r �� 1 #MOM In , +•,,, % tom - CT. r• r.� •-tw ..... 44 W r ` •— ..r. L+► sue, !lJ [ ram . I• Ui ?••-t firr • 1,K ;- t� C, i, ��,. C• i J ', Cp - : �r• r»�, p ,,, r :� CA � I iP , r� . o Qr� .r ti . . CD '� i ,/ 0 �' 'A +6 can .w..r 1 G C'C %WB'; w ❑ a Cr O ram` • [� w CLBIB� ^I G' S' jr, r" w :S �« �': C1 rri1+ fy �. J",1 �r 1+7 �_''_ d�/1 G P" r e -� • � y ❑ t + + , � �^ C'+• tCO I n b !3 + . �• Q � . rf �1 C•v * t : tl} C� O $` p R'► �+ } � �; ' �• CSa C 7 A � Al +4 r` .r•�. �If co Li w� �J et r., �� �'j . rf 5 �:� rc'~ �` Q' :140 �+ CA OF C? [� Y a tY C] :y Gla a 0 1�J ►Y � •y y. w. 0 a � � � � M L •`! CO) r . •r . - st I �` ay C7 %.dw � •� lD CC1 C� t + y Jq .A yy�" 0 a t� ■r rT Y•• W �, ' `J 7 • y IA �&AP4 �• 1 X {.w} �'+ +' �j iy r•A Y! 'w ~ ••� 4V LJ 4! C n• rr I s pG u C L"r Q SI1 e r ii }}�/�.. µ*xa � . + b -+ rt40 ,..» t w SS {'w �' e+ `r` wwt .i 1r+ {�Y " * +w `+ �!eml Pat Con O a.r C F(D II n a �a N C1� N Ca Q 00 O �r "; f +* w '•� , ' rr •� e►� rr, Cr C5 �� w• e4 { V! tG �ro 4 1 +.� ;7 `VW tib$6 �', ♦�!■F CrE �"""i Q i� 1 � . y�� (max je v. Ul C .Y. . Q d R © w %10 ""' Q � U7 r• �' CO []7 "^kQ � ►—+ i3 CE? ew� CSC w W car . CL � ; CL m :.r M m cap Cool , 0 Ul � o a� ra te N R .� r rt C d M p, ma y' �y .: a !�= s+ tx . er �� ❑ p r M.. [� rs d .;J. G �~ 0 O C 10 G 7 Q" r 3l 4� ••! �. r * 'y � �+ C ors CL '-"� . !� � C �� 4 D Ci W '� � g [tq an ► p +•s Sj ' ay # v `� rr ' .` cx �" m 0r Z) in40 E w. Now C7y "ti r. . e~h [r ; ( Q r.+• � r+ sr�. • "'j a... W, 1, ►�' *, 01 ty. El tz, �t" �►yy p ��ryy r� r T �r I w m �. O ��f M i= m e. ED+� CD g r'h �' tR . M� 0 Q ri � W we F j W ►mir U . N { + t+ � t � � • � •! �r �fA � r* [a Ocr t3 m G � ,cy eo a Ta M r,r O tr 6i u p _ rt rw . d Hwy. cqqb� �+ + r V4 {n 03 02 �; 0 �.... C fl7 A7 [7 �y � wy (' to Q � (� �„� Qf rJ �✓ f'F P4 �"'� •�'� d F� �y. 0i. J 0 CDtop- a W* C�1m p m � .. a � o �, ►� � ° a ss 4m c A C : to Q tD ff '�, �, �, "' o,C Owrn w C: � CJ W d u� in r*L •J Ln CL ►Cb Oo n x z a a r . C (�, 4t L1. d►5 : Q a . , ;3 .® C .w- is' 0 y � M. a" 04 !� C " � G bi cD O `Y G3 {'� p b G' O G r� a' : * Ci r,� C / 3 G rr w r* rw U) T �i aw. pr. tQ }w 4'T M 4 . �A �y �+ C"Tdri ' �. ..: W �' '. y w.+ �+ Q r� (7 {[t twe '^'^' w �� r• �i La/ ps f!J w. t/ 1"F. wa r... a .J ' r' '. t"F ►'! W '� O V' ' CLi7yr [fyt G "s UOr .L Z a � Q m tj � �: rF O . ,s JJ 4"` l s � # �r r 1L it Wom'rW ' r CD 0 r C7 ry I 0 u �� Ca. 0 ^ r i { Gr [ r+ t3j, G7 m N, pp r r Rro v G C w _ _ -_ ��'. �.� r+ Clr M• �' a. 7 r. !� � � t Ct sID Ln w ry �► �. 'J{ r: Q p wl. �--� "Y OD Ia �; .. w. . ... iS! M r+ to r$ Fla L (i rr Tr C6 w p ww d + w .� �' +� !A �.t G7 ,"'v p7 C..1 (3 '�^1 rDD r� F� / „Wi r.r. TxJ u ....� ', u' ' c C s�o ; 's mp " EF .,, t FDO PEI no eb 'a '- '� l� • .yr C � p �� ►y c ... v b „� �... m tr, cr ..R. 174 m 0 a OPEN cp C '- �' rr »l M p.� r � cx d rp IV 6 L^' G C? _ , w 0 r� �p �C i:k cp• 7, Cr a Gr � ` w p � '+C D ME&DRer V, '� P: G "+ O '. C rA ' D rr z7 [� m i + @ �. is emom � CL S � o �c v x m aCD � n N n 0 m N U � t O � + 'a 00 � � r y ' w ,-,` ,'-f rp, }w� mov*+ �► rr� w� �; -� > r t +" t ;•.? 'W ��' �: p, 1� �r " D s' -r C' '' 4 4+ +r `� i� r y at S w. Jt t; r! . + 4 ;4 Co pro �"i -� . Y " :... w M ;� - •� , r_ y 3 •" 4a C]. r r 7'3 tfi .''. :... �' « • - • — -� � r. `; J .' in A • � ^ fr r..' 1 N • �y .�..e r_I s�•+�•W�f r .r. bl. �+ is " =- = ~' r .•1 '� % i P: 1-. j i ; � C=' ,� »' 19" [ r� �-r n Ip x rf .. . . _ r . . our O L" i+ S' .� {� � ^i C ' f~r il. C� .. 7 J r 0 ram+. �- � � Q �. fb' 7� P. Flo .r l� "'"-� 0 fro 0 r� .� t{, r— [J: r+ C`3 C"Ys Q �Y CO cr /�►: , /r� Q p s+ w 1 111" n rr.•a, y. I. Ifa �; '7 }► .�. �"' .r "1 `' ^� ^'. h r= .."'�. "+I C1 .r. �i r• R'► `� Wrl Ir-a ij` TM 4 •' dr }'�1 •r �' (gyp n. r ►3 Y„� f r •.� [� >I �•*i •fc �r �y ` L rya Jf! W y.x M d 9 a a W rf' ]< r y fr :� f� �' i+ G' ►"i 4 , 4 i7 C "F 4INd 0 G " G lit .. . , rp 1, '" r•' �.. . r :r �.. J 1 ] . :.� � � �. ifC N � " C'r f C't •,r,, . CO aA r Q = '! �'- y� R •�'1 C" r4 I7 = �" G or C III q rA {•r (: •' i� �_ � n r G I . :"! G .x � .A co `� rw ►•it y `-7 +' S 1 f C,7 ill. rve m Fi+ R"1= OO'^. ` .� ,^.• r. w - r . Li w .�. jti 'R �„ ccu ;-� W r "��' :m .� r r, F�1 -� Q •-: . . . r. MCI va .1�� - y fir ice` ►x .;�•y. �a r� ;„ Ma r .� ' r w �f bb ti. ~ P7t ..fir' r6*- Cn y�y /�� + 4�'�yi In �' �y �.u�.1 - n•= M M r] �J �'�*' � w � • •M ' ' � CL 4 ` y7 V � ' �Y 1NMM1 hJ {J V •; Y.I `.tr - Y{ + • ' r. .r {1• P" , . 1 wO 0 ~ .�.. 4. 0 Cd' ' Q ("� �� C-11 �' C: L'i 'Cr7 up ,`r O +y C? i. yy w .. G w M et 'A {"w m 'r��r �7 p �� c-r p 4 ' ^I r "�' Cl ►+ rY h �"M L^ �! T� i tz� u �: rt PA C1 � !"ON A ' P N � 1 WNh PIS bwAd +�� VP :� r .-r r►-� r . ." . fS . r }= rr j+ f: : r'' Q+ a { � m j ` " '-d {j 1+•.. r . p ;,: ..,. .*.., ,� ..S r"v G �.'a ��-+ V] C+ • . '� •� rp . w z 1 , rs '+ ., ., d7 nr, ,. , ►/.? a• r. w �0 itsy .-r �• Poll P � /►o-•�wP r�rn aw i N IMF C� ` ' Y I 1 1 y x a W IMJ L 1 LrV iW 1Mpt �p ran � _ ��1 W LY 4Y � MAY 1 Y CN W Q M • P'. p-} L6.rr.^^, �My • ' it Q CL ff n x z r r "` " Cs cD t5' C► x3 .� �' "i � i� CD i �[^l, ya. r► �'. `A + D ,'�„ r"" "y �"' �•`i'. �L zy } p' '"" t,+ 'Ti T 'r p r; .. C UD ® C� 1+r it p• w:. . tl r sm •f�"r. {G .mow, ry. .r..�' �. a CfS a�"y {� .�•a {� 1�. 1'.+ rl � ' "�f' • n Y•-r i w �� �. .it V t i}•LL CD rt prCD .Q.,. 31i p '[3 �, G cry M C � Cr q t'3'9 L" is M = .. r w 1: 0 r- 7 p ;• r: ... i o t 4 t * a ° o ., . Q .o Cf ► h..* " , a r. d : + 'ti cZ +Lti r. t O '* .�:. rr r d � p '-� . , ,,� I� b ' C7` C} "+ c� a. PM7' p. � pj ;.� *yqp 04 ta t7 F � W G7 CS to O C3 "; m d d ,• rn tor� r�r p ,-r : . `� , Ya [ A �. = ` � . ,� cr rr jag so t " p3 L3 cr ! . 4m to4M Ca .? tr C6 ' '{ � 3 sr _ : +,, . r w CY (v . � fool C , VIPA j J* r it r . �; r . S C' • 946 *crg OW YL !* p Qrr !t W � , : fl w+. Y"� rp M+ {(J {rJ tr . � ') Q [mot+ 7 [ • s C: ppY�Y 0 O 1, rw •-ri C: r sQ 0 r�r +�1 p� `aUQ OF) rw- ~ 13 ma CW pf� f~L � Wo � ( + .may tit 06 m ca to m p ►q . . . pY' c N €� tie m *�' ems^ n^ «i i3• '� b t4 r�r C�. "' C5 " ► Cl' ' "* cr `• i 0 d A� Ci Lin L,7. ITI ..r C9 I I n n ATTACHMENT 10 Map of the irrigated farms of Northern Colorado R. W. Gelder, 1915 (Fort Collins local history archives) ATTACHMENT 10 "Map of the Irrigated Farms of Northern Colorado , 1915" Prepared by R .W . Gelder Courtesy of Fort Collins Local History Archive tiz l t es . / 7 . refopt s t. , - - • t - - � - „f,lls , AMMAR Vine Dr. y � � "r ,off . , r w r r44 �, College Ave. CO IL - -- _ -.� , + LeMay Ave. Corr iJ a R V% _ Sugar Factory * Proposed Nature School