Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLIND PROPERTY - PDP - 39-94B - LEGAL DOCS - RESPONSE TO APPLICANTMAR-28-2003 FRI 11:09 AM FORT COLLINS UTILITIES FAX NO. 970 221 6619 P. 04/04 beings have a certain amount of instinct to try to "work it out and keep everyone happy" — I don't when it comes to my client's ditches and reservoirs. So, this letter is primarily a "heads up." The "preliminary stormwater release rates" supplied to me by Troy Campbell a few months ago indicate that the preliminary plan is to dump 25.6 CFS into the Number 8 outlet ditch. This is not acceptable. T appreciate that these numbers come from all sorts of engineering magic to come up with the runoff from the storage stones. The reality is that these numbers seldom represent the true situation. A developer has great incentive to keep the numbers as big as possible for strictly economic reasons. I believe we have had the discussion to the effect that it's very interesting that as these ditches have for a hundred years meandered through the farm lands storms have resulted in little, if any, overtopping of the ditches. They were receiving the "historic storm flows" when the grounds discharged into the ditches are developed with each of them dumping this same theoretical historic storm flow into the ditch they begin to overtop. Why has history changed? One extremely important factor relative to what are real storm flows (also meaning historic) is to look at the use of the lands for the decades in the past. Your development has been cultivated since I can remember which starts about 1956. Cultivated ground is a whole different animal that uncultivated natural ("God made") ground as it deals with stormwater. Cultivated (and particularly row crop) fields make a substantial difference in terms of stormwater retention. Each little furrow holds a whole bunch of water which percolates into the soil, evaporates, or flows at a much slower rate into the ditch because it's not gathered up and dumped at a single point. An example of what 1 consider to be good planning as it concerns my clients is what is being done with the Maple Hill subdivision to the south of yours. That project had the entire site plan developed at one time covering the whole project which is approximately the same size as yours. Through cooperative efforts with a developer who genuinely cares about the ongoing welfare of my client's irrigation facilities, we have worked out a plan which will discharge approximately 10 CFS into our ditch which we believe is a flow we can live with as the contribution from that project at such time as all or most of the ground surrounding the ditch is developed. There is another area that you should be sensitive to. My understand is basically the City of Fort Collins wants to have some form of crossing these ditches approximately every 660 feet. This is either a connector street, pedestrian bridge, or something of that sort. That number of crossings across our ditch is not acceptable. Yours very truly, MAYO SOMMERMEYER, P.C. Mayo Sommermeyer MS/Imh PC: Donn Engel Troy Campbell, The Sear Brown Group Robert Smith, Stormwater Planning / Utilities Department, City of Fort Collins MAR-28-2003 FRI 11:08 AM FORT COLLINS UTILITIES FAX NO. 970 221 6619 P. 03/04 TIMo'1'HY J. DOW. MBA, JD PATRICIA'I'. DOW, CPA. JD, LLM• MAYO SOMMERMEYER, PC" OF COUNSEL - iaw AJ*1r=70 PRAMIJ LAW mHaepAS" --ALSO AOMI57FD7O NIACR<t1AW M WMMWii Yvonne Seaman THE DOW LAW MM, LLC ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW P.O. BOX 1372 ,FORT COI•I.INS. COLORADO SOS22-1578 (970) 4984900 Land Acquisition & Planning Director Centex Homes 9250 E. Costilla Ave., #200 Greenwood Village, CO 80112 FAX: (970) 498-9966 E-MAIL: dcw(&4d0W1w*M0*M March 25, 2003 Re: Our client: Windsor Reservoir and Canal Company (WRCC) Project #39-94B Lind Property PDP-Type 2 (LUC) Dear Yvonne: 0 7 CLOCK TOWER SQUARE 323 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524 2312 CAREY AVENUE CHEYENNE. WYOMING $2001 (307)634.1541 My enclosed comment letter to the City of Fort Collins concerning your Phase I on the Lind Property as it relates to our ditch is self explanatory. However,.I would like to pass on some thoughts and concerns that I have based on the information available so far that will probably impact your development plan as you proceed to other phases. I have now been through the comprehensive (meaning one inch thick) drainage plan for Phase I which contains a lot of very good information as it probably relates to the whole project. I have also been through some 73 sheets of drawings supplied to me on the project. Incidentally, there are some pond outlet details indicated on sheet CS903. This sheet was not included in the sec and although it's' not of focus yet it will be in the future. I firmly believe that a development project needs to be planned and approved globally to the extent possible. Of course, my focus is on the impact on our ditches and irrigation facilities. I know what is going to ultimately happen with your project because you are going to want to dump developed stormwater from Phase I along with the other phases into the ditch. However, to make it easy and get Phase I approved it doesn't appear that you have dealt with or choose to deal with.a comprehensive global site plan so were just going to retain the water on Phase I which doesn't.create any problem for the ditch and maybe otherwise. However, as other phases are developed then the impact on the ditch needs to be dealt with. At that point certain commitments and decisions have been made which greatly reduce the flexibility and the ability of the developer to do those things that we feel are required to allow the•ditch to handle their development. In this light everyone is often put under a great deal of pressure to give and compromise because many things cannot be undone or redone and most human