Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout911250.tiff 07/25/91 14:25 $303 229 3579 C I CD i HP - FTC Z002 :_ L,ak'u +x�,dza}9 World Case Wafer Ski Site Phil Yukrar Tu i i Randr Hacking 73.455• + a5Sit5o Weld County Board of Commissioners P.O.90:gas 915 10th Street Windsor,co 80550 Greeley, Colorado 80831 July 25, 1991 Dear Commissioners: This letter is intended to summarize the events that have occurred concerning our project with regard to the Flood Hazard Development Permit we are in the process of preparing. Most of the delay we are encountering can be traced to the confusion in this matte, and the difficulties in procuring the data for the computer simulations we have been asked to perform by FEMA. I will first summarize the sequence of events to this date. 1. June 19: I was informed by Planning there may be a problem with our activities,but we could continue with construction while this problem was being worked out. Planning told me they were having difficulties understanding the requirements of FEMA, and that they were going to meet with them to clarify some of their questions. 2. June 21: A draft copy of the Flood Hazard Development Permit was submitted. No formal response to this permit was received until July 17. 3. July 8: We were issued zoning violation VI-1771 stating that we needed to submit the permit by August 8 or legal action could be taken. This was a surprise to us because we were awaiting a response from the draft copy of the permit we had already submitted. 4. July 9: During contact with the Director of Planning, Chuck Cnnliff, I was told that the violation was Issued because this matter had escalated too far and something needed to be done. Because of FEMA'5 interest in the problem, he suggested I try to clarify the entire situation with FEMA directly, because they understand the regulations better than anyone. Ae of July 9, I could still not get a direct clarification from PCaaning re ding the unclear intent and directives contained in the permit, and I was told that if FEMA was satisfied,that would be adequate. I then contacted FEMA, and talked extensively with John Liou. The conversation is doc- umented in a letter I sent to you, dated July 10. We talked about the computer analysis which needed to be performed, and the differences between the construction phase of a flood- way project and the as-built requirements of permanent floodway structures. Because the differences in the construction phase and as-built specifications are the heart of the confusion regarding the Flood Hazard Development Permit,I was satisfied,after this conversation,that I understood exactly what FEMA was requiring and I could now proceed with the Flood Hazard Development Permit. The minimum steps FEMA requires of our project are: • A computer simulation of the floodway showing no change (rise or fall) in water surface elevations during an intermediate regional flood, after construction is finished. • During construction,steps must be taken to minimize any distortion to the floodway. The methods of minimization Mr. Liou agreed with are outlined in the letter you received dated July 11. The certification needed to satisfy FEMA requires the computer simulation of the flood plain using the EEC-2 computer program. This meant I needed to acquire the data used in the most current floodway study and once the data was procured Mr. Lion said it would take at least a week to perform the simulation. As of today, July 25, I have not been able to get the data. Evidence of my efforts to get the data can be obtained from the Weld County Engineer, because he has been assisting me in this matter to a small degree. y 303 229 3579 PIiGE . 002 nn JUL 25 '91 14: 14 PL0689 4112!)0 U ?7) r f!/16L..1JlCl C�_1 07/25/91 14:26 $303 229 3579 MD i HP - FTC 2003 Because of the difficulties in locating the floodway study data,we have contracted Mike Applegate of Tuttle-Applegate to perform the Flood Hazard Development Permit certification without the computer simulation. This is because the as-built deaign will, if anything, cause a drop in water levels during an intermediate regional flood, and the permit certification requires certification to guarantee no rise in water levels. Mr. Applegate has no problem certifying this fact. The reason there will be a drop,in water levels is because the lakes'surface is lees rough than that of the ground and there should be an slight increase in water velocities,and hence a slight decrease in water levels. John Lion claims this drop will be insignificant, but wants to see the simulation anyway to satisfy FEMA's requirements. Therefore certification as to Weld County's requirements will not need the simulation, but we will perform the simulation due to FEMA's request. Mike Applegate has heen instructed to have the permit finished by August 8, and the computer simulation done as soon as possible, once the data has been procured. It is my intent to show you that I am exercising due diligence in resolving this matter. Clearly, the confusion and FEMA involvement has slowed things down considerably, but progress is being made. hope you will take this all into account when making any resolution concerning my project. R.1'r�ye€Dii Phil Yastrow cc Weld County Deportment of Planning Services Drew ScheRingo, Weld County Engineer Lee Morrison, County Attorney', Office Ben Connell, Connell Resources JUL 25 '91 14: 15 303 229 3579 PRGE . 003 Hello