Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAMENDED CSURF CENTRE FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY - ODP - MJA110001 - CORRESPONDENCE - DRAINAGE REPORTPage 3 of 3 To: Jon Haukaas; Brian Varrella; Glen Schlueter Cc: Karen Cumbo; Ted Shepard Subject: CSURF Centre for Advanced Technology ODP Jon, Brian and Glen, Regarding the attached CSURF Centre for Advanced Technology GDP (Feb. 2003), are there any General Notes that prohibit any buildings or parts of buildings in the Spring Creek floodplain? Most specifically, please look at notes 1 & 2 and 18 — 23. We would like your answer to this before a meeting mid afternoon today. Thanks, s,we Steve 8/30/2011 Page 2 of 3 Is that correct, Paul or Carrie? Karen Cumbo Director, Planning Development and Transportation City of Fort Collins 970-221-6287 From: Brian Varrella Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 10:44 AM To: Steve Olt; Jon Haukaas; Glen Schlueter Cc: Karen Cumbo; Ted Shepard; Ken Sampley; Lindsay Ex Subject: RE: CSURF Centre for Advanced Technology ODP Steve, I redlined the heck out of these comments in prior reviews of the ODP, but can do it again. Here are the revised notes for the ODP, consistent with the prescriptive regulations of Chapter 10 of City Municipal Code: Note #1: Parcels D and E, and a portion of Parcel F are in the Spring Creek FEMA- Regulatory floodway, and is subject to the requirements of Chapter 10 of the City of Fort Collins Municipal Code. Parcel C is partially located in the FEMA-Regulatory floodway and flood fringe, and also subject to Chapter 10 requirements. New structures in the flood fringe must be elevated at least 18 inches above the 100-year water surface elevations. Onsite detention may be required unless downstream flood storage volume can be maintained, and peak discharges from the site drain to detention areas ahead of peak discharges in the main channel of Spring Creek. Note #2: No changes since not part of Ch. 10 Note #15: No changes, still valid Note #18: Any permanent parking in the floodway will be subject to no -rise standards outlined in Chapter 10 of City Code, and shall be offset by flood storage volume within the same detention area. Notes #19-23: No changes, still valid CSU and CSURF do not need to reserve future development rights for 2 reasons: (1), those rights are reserved by Chapter 10 of City Code and by Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations (or 44 CFR), and (2), the City plans no further projects on Spring Creek to revise floodway or flood fringe mapping on these parcels. The work is complete and awaiting FEMA approval as the Spring Creek PMR, and there will be no substantial improvement of flood hazards on Parcels D, E, and F through that process. Notes are changed herein to reflect this reality. Brian From: Steve Olt Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 10:19 AM 8/30/2011 Pagel of 3 Steve Olt From: Brian Varrella Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 12:59 PM To: Carrie Daggett; Karen Cumbo; Steve Olt; Jon Haukaas; Glen Schlueter; Paul Eckman Cc: Ted Shepard; Ken Sampley; Lindsay Ex Subject: RE: CSURF Centre for Advanced Technology ODP Bottom line per Steve's original question: 1. Any part of any building can touch the flood fringe. 2. Condition of approval for #1 above = lowest floor and utilities (including HVAC) must be constructed at least 18 inches above the base flood elevation. 3. Nothing allowed in the floodway without technical analysis. Maybe that helps. Not sure what to do with the issue of changing ODP notes. This is the first time I have ever had to work on an ODP, so all of this is news to me (thank you all for your patience). I still think Note #1 should change since there is not "newly developed floodplain mapping" as currently stated. Additionally, the statement of "conveyance" it technically incorrect, as the downstream ponds are areas of ponding (or storage), not areas of moving water (or conveyance). The note as it stands right now is incorrect on more than one pertinent detail. Brian From: Carrie Daggett Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 11:05 AM To: Karen Cumbo; Brian Varrella; Steve Olt; Jon Haukaas; Glen Schlueter; Paul Eckman Cc: Ted Shepard; Ken Sampley; Lindsay Ex Subject: Re: CSURF Centre for Advanced Technology ODP I agree with you Karen. Paul? -C From: Karen Cumbo To: Brian Varrella; Steve Olt; Jon Haukaas; Glen Schlueter; Paul Eckman; Carrie Daggett Cc: Ted Shepard; Ken Sampley; Lindsay Ex Sent: Tue Aug 30 10:58:43 2011 Subject: RE: CSURF Centre for Advanced Technology ODP I don't think that staff can unilaterally change the notes. They would have to be amended by whatever authority approved them. Any reference to other standards that may have changed since approval of the notes, such as Chapter 10, would have to comply with those updated standards. E: 11UrOW