Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPARAGON POINT PUD PRELIMINARY - 48 91A - CORRESPONDENCE - STORMWATER-RELATED DOCUMENTSryry f�. • hWF ���1�`f 3 City of Fort Collins Utility Se .es Stormwater MEMORANDUM cc• SAC -zr V_64.-� TS Sa 1C W DATE: June 26, 1991 TO: Steve Burkett, City Manager Diane Jones, Acting Development Services Director Steve Roy, City Attorney John Duval, Assistant City Attorney Mike Powers, Director of Cultural, Library and Recreational Services Tom Peterson, Planning Director If THRU: Rich Shannon, Utilities Director FROM: Bob Smith, Stormwater Utility Manager RE: Trilby and Lemay Property - Follow-up On May 24th I sent out a briefing memo regarding the floodplain implications for the property south of the Southridge Golf Course and north of Trilby Road (see attached). As a result of this memo additional questions were received. I would like to offer the following as a response to those questions. 1. Have you discussed the floodplain options with the property owner? We have had meetings with the property owner's representatives) on several occasions over the past three years. During these meetings we discussed the same information as covered in the initial memo. Recently the owner did retain a consulting engineering firm (RBD, Inc.) to assist —them n---their-analysis-on-the-various parameters that impact the developability of the property. 2. What does this mean for the development of the property? Because the _existing floodplain is such a large area, increased costs would be incurred to reclaim the area located in the existing floodplain. However, this must be weighed against the sensitive natural areas that have been identified on the site. From a floodplain stand point a balanced earth work or cut and fill operation will be necessary. Balanced means that no more fill can be brought into the area and any fill needed to reclaim areas must be excavated from the site in the floodplain. More fill can not be placed in the floodplain than what's taken out because any additional fill would raise the water surface elevation and thus increase the flood hazard. 235 Mathews • P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 0 (303) 221-6589 The extent of the operation will depend on the objective or purpose of the project. For example, less dirt work would be necessary to reclaim a portion of the site as compared to reclaiming the maximum necessary to achieve the maximum development density, i.e., more open space less dirt work. 3. Is a large percentage of the land undevelopable without substantial drainage improvements? There is no definite answer because it depends on how you define developable and the amount of ground you, the developer, could live with in open space. Also which ground could you let flood on an infrequent basis. For example, all of the site could be developed if open space was allowed near the channel, and higher in the floodplain could be parking areas or parks that could flood on an infrequent basis, and at, or above the floodplain would be your building envelopes and transportation systems. To access the higher bluff area along the east side of the site a bridge would be necessary to cross Fossil Creek. Ponding depths in the over bank areas range from about 7 feet near the culvert at Trilby Road to 0 feet at the floodplain edge. 4. What is the rough estimate of the improvement costs? I would like to break this down to two areas, future conditions and existing conditions. For future conditions, the Fossil Creek basin would reimburse the property for the right of way necessary for the ponding from the floodplain generated considering ultimate development in the basin less existing floodplain limits. This is some 12 acres, and is estimated to be some $84,000. This is money that would be paid to the developer through a basin reimbursement. They could do what they saw fit with the money, as long as the floodplain generated from future conditions is preserved on that site. they could be expected to pay some $5/cu. yd. to excavate, fill and compact the material. The level of this operation will depend on the site they choose. The level of effort could no floodplain improvements would be $0 expended, or maybe just $84,000 or 16,800 cu. yds., of dirt work, or the upper end would be whatever the market will bear for the final development of the property. For this upper level I don't have a good answer without doing a development analysis for the site which would include all costs including water, sewer, streets, electric, natural areas mitigation, etc. weighted against the income for the final development, through either sale or lease.