HomeMy WebLinkAbout20151498.tiff RESOLUTION
RE: APPROVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION FOR
COUNTY ROAD 34 AND BRIDGE 34/17A (FEMA) AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, pursuant to
Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of
administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and
WHEREAS, the Board has been presented with a Community Development Block Grant
Application for County Road 34 and Bridge 34/17A (FEMA) from the County of Weld, State of
Colorado, by and through the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, to the Colorado
Department of Public Safety, Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management,
commencing upon full execution, with further terms and conditions being as stated in said
application, and
WHEREAS, after review, the Board deems it advisable to approve said application, a
copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Weld County, Colorado, that the Community Development Block Grant Application for County
Road 34 and Bridge 34/17A (FEMA) from the County of Weld, State of Colorado, by and
through the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, to the Colorado Department of
Public Safety, Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, be, and hereby is,
approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board that the Chair be, and hereby is, authorized
to sign said application.
et Cent)AGc+ tniaa 2015-1498
EM0016
BC0045
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION FOR CR 34 AND
BRIDGE 34/17A
PAGE 2
The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted
by the following vote on the 27th day of May,A.D.,2015.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY,COLORADO
ATTEST:dace4v ��,,// EXCUSED
..e&4;4.Cvd� /� Barbara Kirkmeyer,Chair
Weld County Clerk to the Board
/ Mike Freeman, Pro-Te`tt
De Clerk to the oa 'oar.o.
�,L " Sean P.Conway
,� c)
APPROVED TO i `"mot
tit �.� MIN Julie A.Cozad
'5if _ti
County Attorney '' '�' EXCUSED
�� Steve Moreno
Date of signature:
2015-1498
EM0016
BC0045
.� . , Colorado Division of Homeland Security Grant NOI / Application
SIP: Emergency Management CDBG - DR Recover Colorado
9 Y 9
Infrastructure Program
THIS SECTION FOR STATE USE ONLY
DHSEM Identification Number: Colorado Point of Contact:
CDBG-DR Program Manager
Date NOI (Part A) Received: Colorado DHSEM
9195 East Mineral Avenue, Suite 200
Date Application (Part B) Received: Centennial, Colorado 80112
Office: 720.852.6713
Date Next Steps Letter Transmitted: Fax: 720.852.6750
cdps dhsem cdbg@state.co.us
PART A - NOI :
PROJECT OVERVIEW
1 . Applicant Legal Name: Weld County, Colorado
2. Applicant 1 Local Government Private Non-Profit (Attach copy of 501c3, if applicable)
Type:
3. Project Title: County Match FEMA Projects - WELCO18 (665)
4. Proposed Project Total Cost: 265.705.44
CDBG-DR-I Request: 33.213. 18
5. Certifications:
The undersigned assures fulfillment of all requirements of the CDBG-DR Recover Colorado Infrastructure Program as
contained in the program guidelines and that all information contained herein is true and correct to the best of my
knowledge. The governing body of the applicant has duly authorized the document, commits to the non-Federal and State
share identified in the Budget, and hereby applies for the assistance documented in this application. Also, the applicant
understands that the project may proceed ONLY AFTER a GRANT AGREEEMENT is approved.
Weld County Commissioner (970) 356-4000
Mike Freeman , Pro-Tem
Typed Name of Authorized Applicant Agent nth Telephone Number
MAY2 72015
Signature of Authwrized Applicant Agent Date .Sl ie(1
2015-1498
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 1 of 20
a raIS
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI : APPLICANT INFORMATION
I . Applicant Legal Name: Weld County. Colorado
2. FIPS Code: 123 DUNS Number: 07575-7955
3. U.S. Congressional District: 4th Congressman Name:
4. State Senatorial District: 1 Senator Name: Mr. Cory Gardner
5. State Legislative District: 50 Representative Name: Mr. Ken Buck
6. Primary Point of Contact:
The Primary Point of Contact is the person responsible for coordinating the implementation of this proposal, if approval is
granted.
Ms. , Mr. Ed Mrs. II First Name: Roy Last Name: Rudisill
Title: Director Organization: Weld County Office of Emergency Managemc
Street Address: 1 150 O Street
City: Greeley State: Colorado Zip Code: 80631
Telephone: (y t U ) its Fax: (y 1 U )iib- / a Mobile: (9 / U ) 38 " -U E-mail Address: rrudisill(a�co .weld .co
7. Alternate Point of Contact:
The Alternate Point of Contact is the person that can address questions or concerns in the Primary Point of Contact's
absence.
Ms. O \ i r. IN Mt s.n First Name: Barb Last Name: Connolly
Title: Controller Organization: Weld County Accounting
Street Address: 1150 O Street
City: Greeley State: Colorado Zip Code: 80631
Telephone: (y / U)ipb I , s: k / u)iie- 16 Mobile: E-mail Address: bconnolly(C�co.weld .
8. Application Prepared In
XIs. El Mr. ✓ Mi s First Name: Kyle Last Name: Jones
Title: Planner Organization: ARCADIS-US
Street Address:
City: Tallahass( state: FL Zip Code: 32309
Telephone: (b3U )b 1F, ' : \ lohile: (225) 202-3 E-mail Address: kyle . jones(�arcadis-
9. sA tit hurl/ea kpplicant :gent:
\ k. ,/ NIr. Ml, s. First Name: Barbara I ast Name: Kirkmeyer
title: COMMiSSii Organization: Weld County
Street Address: 1150 O Street, P .O. Box 758
City: Greeley state: Colorado Zip Code: 80631
Telephone: v " upofi I . \ : Mobile: E-mail Address: bkirkmeyer(c�co .welc
The Authorized Applicant Agent MUST be the chief executive officer, mayor, etc. This person must be able to sign
contracts, authorize funding allocations or payments, etc.
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 2 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI: PROJECT DESCRIPTION & NATIONAL OBJECTIVES MET
1. Project — Eligible Activity Description:
Describe the proposed project. Explain how the proposed project will address recovery and/or resilience needs in your
community either independently or as part of a larger project. Include a description of the desired outcome and the
recovery objective(s) to be achieved. This narrative should describe the CDBG-DR Eligible Activity.
In an effort to achieve resiliency from the severe storms and minimize risk to the general
public, Weld County addressed severe damage to local roadways, bridges, culverts,
removed hazardous roadway debris, made emergency repairs to paved and gravel
roadways , addressed river embankments/dangerous conditions to the public and made
repairs to emergency response vehicles that were damaged during the Incident Period .
FEMA Categories A, B , C , and E were addressed in the Weld County FEMA Match . CDBG
funds are needed to be applied towards the Weld County FEMA Local Match for the
emergency work that was identified on previously submitted Project Worksheets . All
projects covered under the Weld County Project Worksheets were vital for Weld County to
clear hazardous debris from roadways/creeks/streams and enhance their infrastructure,
river embankments, equipment and roadways . This particular NOI/Application will discuss
\ /\/t= 1 mnis /L:G: C. \ Thr, Drni n4 \ A/nr� n4+r, nhnrl r nrJ non+r ,nc- ,dnfn ;inr•i nnr,rn f ( C
2. Site / Physical Location: Describe the area(s) affected/protected by this project, including location by complete street
address and longitude and latitude (coordinates in decimal degrees).
The latitude is 40 . 233050 and longitude is - 104 .898070 . The attached spreadsheet shows
the Lat/Long coordinates for all of the Project Worksheets and depicts the damage site
locations as identified in the correlating Project Worksheets .
•
3. Population Served: Briefly describe the demographics of the population served or protected by this project. Include
the percent of the overall community population benefiting from this project. Explain your response.
An estimated 90% or more of the community benefited from the proactive work by Weld
County and the removal of hazardous debris and the emergency work/repairs made to the
roadways , bridges, equipment and culverts . The population benefiting from this Match
Project will include an LMI level population percentage that will be directly or indirectly
impacted through this project. This NOI and the associated PW impacted the entire County
and demographic area . White : 67 . 6% , Hispanic: 28 . 3% , Other: 1 .6% , Asian : 1 . 3% , Black :
0 .8% , Native American : 0 .4% . Weld County consists of 99, 317 households with a median
househo d income of $56 589 and the maiori:v of We d Coun:v is owner-occuoied with a
4. Priority of this Project: If you are submitting more than one CDBG-DR Infrastructure NOI, what is the relative
priority of this project? Please indicate the priority as: Priority # of## Projects Submitted.
Priority 14 of 36 Projects Submitted .
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 3 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI : CDBG-DR FUNDING QUALIFICATIONS
Community Development Block Grant — Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) funding can be approved for a project in which
ALL of the following requirements are met The physical location of the activity must be within a county listed in Table I of
the program Recover Colorado Infrastructure Grant Program Guidelines (Guidelines).
1. Connection to Disaster Recovery
CDBG's Disaster Recovery funds must be used for necessary expenses related to disaster relief, long-term recovery,
restoration of infrastructure and housing, economic revitalization, and mitigation from future damages.. The activity
must show a direct link to damages received during one or more of the events listed in Table 1 of the Guidelines. Please
provide a brief explanation of how the proposed acquisition activity: (1) was a result of the disaster event; (2) will
restore infrastructure or revitalize the economy; or will (3) mitigate future damages.
During the incident period of September 11 , 2013 to September 30 , 2013 , Weld County,
Colorado received heavy rainfall and debris in the creeks, streams and rivers which caused
surface gravel removal and scour damage to numerous roads and bridges in Weld County.
This NOI Application request addresses emergency work and the damages that were a
�:r.-. i. r��. . 1 4 r`� ♦� r, � �. .r,r.-. (1 „,-1 :„ T y r` w r.-.i.-.#:r. .-. rn A /
2. Compliance with National Objectives
State recipients receiving allocations under the CDBG-DR program must certify that their projected use of funds
will ensure, and maintain evidence, that each of its activities assisted with CDBG-DR funds meets at least one of
the three National Objectives.
a) Which of the National Objectives are met by proposed project?
t/ j Will benefit low and moderate income (LMI) persons; or
nWill aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight; or
✓ Is an Urgent Need in which meet community development needs having a particular urgency because
existing conditions pose a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community where
other financial resources are not available to meet such needs.
b) How will the proposed project meet the above checked National Objective(s).
See attached LMI data for the Project.
In addition to the LMI data attached , the State of Colorado (according to ACS
2008-2012 5Y) lists Weld County at a 41 .0% LMI . In reviewing the LMI data for this
Project NOI , the PW associated LMI % was 7 . 54% . However, this percentage does not
accurately capture the total number of service areas that are either directly or indirectly
impacted by the FEMA Match Projects . The entire community benefited from the
proactive emergency work by Weld County and the removal of hazardous debris and
the work/repairs made to the roadways, bridges, equipment and culverts thus the
County believes that a higher LMI % should be given for this FEMA match Projects .
The general vicinity of FEMA Match Projects encompasses the entire County and
greatly benefits the entire LMI population for this project, which is why the County
believes that this project not only meets. but exceeds the 50% requirement for meeting
the National Objective . The emergency work/repairs that were made under the WELCO
PW's for the Local FEMA Match drastically reduced hazardous conditions for the
general public and enabled Weld County to focus on resiliency efforts post storm . It is
believed that the service area for Project Site Locations benefited multiple LMI tract
sections and thus a higher weighted percentage of over 50% should be noted for this a
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 4 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
3. Compliance with the primary objective. As indicated in the Guidelines: "A proposed project's benefits to LMI
persons will be an important factor in evaluating potential infrastructure projects. A total of 20% of the Recover
Colorado Infrastructure project funding must benefit LMI persons. Due to the very low percentage of LMI projects
submitted in the first round of infrastructure funding, it is estimated that approximately 25% to 30% of the funding
available in this second allocation must meet the LMI requirement to make up for the deficit."
This section does not need to be completed if the project does not meet this National Objective.
The primary objective for using CDBG Disaster Recovery funds is benefitting, by at least 51 percent, persons of low and
moderate income. The following section provides the information necessary to complete this requirement.
a) Is the proposed activity: 1/ jurisdiction wide D . specified target area
If you checked specified target area, which data source was used? (Note: select the smallest unit of Census data that
encompasses your proposed target area.)
b) Enter the number of households involved in the proposed project. 99 , 317
c) In the space below, describe how the applicant will comply with the requirement that at least 51 percent of CDBG-DR
dollars will principally benefit low- and moderate-income households and persons.
Weld County will comply with the 51 % requirement due to the fact that the PW
associated under this NOI Project for the FEMA County Match is targeted to areas of the
county that qualify as LMI . The justification behind this methodology is that multiple
d) Enter the number of households within each income category expected to benefit from the proposed project.
Incomes above 80% of the County Median 785
Incomes above 50% and up to 80% of the County Median 1265
Incomes at or below 50% of the County Median 2060
e) Which type of income was used to determine the above? (Check only one)
As determined by the American Community Survey (Public Facilities projects)
Annual income as defined for Public Housing and Section 8
,/ Annual income as reported under the Census long form
Adjusted gross income as defined for reporting under IRS
:Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 5 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI: COMPREHENSIVE RISK ANALYSIS INFORMATION
1. Community Hazards Review: Please list and briefly describe in rank order of importance the natural or man-made
hazards in your (the Applicant's) service area.
The hazards identified within this Project for the FEMA County Match for WELCO18 (665 )
would be ranked in the following manner: Flood , Erosion and Subsidence .
The hazards caused significant damage and posed a severe risk to the community for the
designated incident period .
2. High Risk Hazards Addressed by the Project:
Describe how, and the degree to which, the proposed project mitigates high risk hazards. Include damage history, source
and type of problem, frequency of event(s), and severity of damage information, if available.
Hazard 1
Flooding caused the most severe damage to Weld County during the designated incident
period and this Project addressed and mitigated against severe flood damage to local
roadways . bridges, culverts, removed hazardous debris along roadways . In addition ,
County Officials ensured repairs were made to paved and gravel roadways for the safety of
the community and addressed river embankments/dangerous conditions to the public and
made repairs to emergency response vehicles that were damaged during the Incident
Period . The repairs made brought the damaged infrastructure back to its pre-disaster
condition in accordance with regulations .
hazard 2
Erosion also caused a severe issue for the County. This Project addressed and mitigated
against severe erosion damage to local roadways, shoulders , and embankments. The work
that was conducted by the County mitigated against any immediate threat/hazard to the
damaged infrastructure and restored the infrastructure back to its pre-disaster condition in
accordance with regulations .
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 6 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Hazard 3
Subsidence was another critical hazard that caused dangerous conditions for the
community . This Project addressed and mitigated against severe subsidence damage to
local roadways , shoulders , bridges and embankments. The work that was conducted by the
County mitigated against any immediate threat/hazard to the damaged infrastructure and
restored the infrastructure back to its pre-disaster condition in accordance with regulations .
Note: If your proposed project addresses more than three Hazards, please provide that information as an
attachment.
3. Elimination of Risk: Does the proposed project result in the elimination of a hazard from your (the Applicant's) service
area? If so, please describe. If not, please estimate the degree to which this project will mitigate the risk from the hazards
identified in Item #2.
The Proposed FEMA Local Match for WELCO18 (665 ) does not completely eliminate the
hazards identified from the service area . The Proposed FEMA Match Project does allow
Weld County to receive a percentage of funds back that the County expended during one of
the most costly disasters in Colorado history however. These types of hazards that
occurred in Weld County and throughout Colorado are truly an act of mother nature and the
County was as prepared as it could have been but the severity/duration of the incident was
of an unprecedented nature . Weld County cannot eliminate the risk of future flooding ,
erosion or land subsidence, but Local Officials can ensure that their community is prepared
for future incident, take the necessary precautions and that their infrastructure is restored
4. Environmental Quality Improvements: Does the proposed project result in an improvement in the quality of the natural
environment in your (the Applicant's) service area? If so, please describe.
Yes; the damages that attributed to the designated incident period and FEMA-DR 4145
were addressed via the previously submitted PW and the work conducted to restore the
infrastructure back to its pre-disaster condition was implemented . The work done at this
site location (see previous attachment for lat/long coordinates ) addressed not only
improvements/repairs made to the infrastructure, but also improvements and repairs to the
river embankments and any potential erosion or subsidence issues that could have
IA!nrcnnnrl if thn flni into hnr4 not tnILnn thn nrn-intit,n rnn-)ci irnc that than' tlirl Q
5. Climate Change Improvements: Does the proposed project reduce or ameliorate a projected impact of climate change
in Colorado? If so, please briefly describe the benefit of the project.
This Proposed Project reduces a projected impact climate change due to the proactive
mitigation measures that were undertaken by Weld County during the designated incident
period . This was accomplished by ensuring that the damaged site location was addressed
as soon , but as safely, as possible . and not to sustain any further impacts to the site
locations or environment that would enable the damage to enhance the projected impact of
any potential climate changes .
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and c-mail submittal. Page 7 or 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
6. Community Process: Does the proposed project include a community planning or involvement process that increases
community resiliency? If so, please briefly describe the process.
This Proposed Project was initiated by County Officials in an effort to achieve resiliency
from the severe storms and also to minimize risk to the community, Weld County addressed
the severe flood damage to the roadways and infrastructure by ensuring that dangerous
conditions for the public were addressed and mitigated properly and efficiently.
7. Reduction in the Costs of Future Response or Recovery: Will the proposed project result in a reduction in the cost
of response or recovery from an incident occurring due to one or more of the hazards identified in Item #1 or #2? If so,
please briefly describe how response or recovery costs will be reduced.
For a small scale flooding incident, yes: however, the flooding that occurred during the
designated incident period was catastrophic and the PW associated with the NOI FEMA
Local Match Request were completed to address the damages .
8. Floodplain/Floodway/Substantially Damaged Properties: Does the proposed project include a property or
properties located in a floodway or floodplain; or not located in a regulatory floodplain but which were substantially
damaged or have a history of damage from at least two disaster events? If so, please identify those properties below.
No: the Proposed Project is for the FEMA Local Match for WELCO18 (665 ) from CDBG-DR
in regards to expenses from CAT C Damage Categories for the designated incident period
for FEMA-DR 4145 .
9. Mitigation Planning:
Does your community have a current FEMA approved multi-hazard mitigation plan? Yes No
Location of proposed project in mitigation plan strategies: Page 139 Section/Part M it i g a ti o n St ra
Is the community a member of good standing with the National Flood Insurance Program? I �i Yes No
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page M of 211
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
10. Community Plan Compliance: Does the proposed project comply with and/or address an issue recognized in key
community plans? Key plans include, but are not limited to: a Comprehensive Master Plan, a Stormwater Management Plan,
a Hazard Mitigation Plans, or key community codes. If so, please describe how the project integrates into the plan(s).
Yes; the Proposed Project complies with all local community plans and this Project
integrates into the Plans because the County addressed the damages to local roadways
and infrastructure and mitigated damages that posed a serious risk/hazard to the
community during the incident period . This FEMA PW was initiated by Weld County and via
this Proposed Project, the County requests that CDBG funds be applied towards the local
FEMA Match for this Project.
11. Environmental / Historic Preservation Issues: Please describe any significant environmental, historic, or cultural features
that may be affected by the project. Please also describe any features that may be improved by the project.
All environmental issues are addressed on the attached Project Worksheet as supporting
documentation . The significant EHP issues were in regards to the Endangered Species Act
( ESA) and EHP Standard Conditions . All items were addressed and any additional
supporting backup documentation can be provided upon request.
12. Permitting: Please list the local, state, and federal permits that will be required to complete this project.
All permitting was addressed on the attached Project Worksheet as supporting
documentation . The significant permitting issues were in regards to the Endangered
Species Act ( ESA) and EHP Standard Conditions . All items were addressed and any
additional supporting backup documentation can be provided upon request. Please see
below for environmental permits that were obtained .
Floodplain Permit
Ann frrnn+
kttach an) continuation% or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 9 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
13. Community Resilience: Please describe how this project will increase the resilience of your community. As defined in the
Guidelines: "Resilience incorporates hazard mitigation and land use planning strategies; critical infrastructure, environmental
and cultural resource protection; and sustainability practices to reconstruct the built environment, and revitalize the economic,
social, and natural environments."
In an effort to achieve resiliency from the severe storms and minimize risk to the general
public, Weld County addressed severe damage to local roadways, bridges, culverts,
removed hazardous debris roadways , made repairs to paved and gravel roadways ,
addressed river embankments/dangerous conditions to the public and made repairs to
emergency response vehicles that were damaged during the Incident Period .
This Proposed Project addresses proactive work initiated by Weld County during FEMA-DR
4145 enabled the community to recover in an expeditious manner and increased the
resilience of the community by incorporating nearly every aspect of sustainability and
revitalizing the community . The community was able to recover quicker due to the proactive
work done through this Proposed Project and the associated PW's.
14. Maps
Please attach the following maps with the project site and structures marked on the map. Use SAME ID number as in
the Individual Property Worksheets.
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). If the FIRM for your area is not published, please attach a copy of the Flood
Hazard Boundary Map (FHBM).
City or county scale map (large enough to show the entire project area)
USGS 1 :24,000 topo map
Parcel Map (Tax Map, Property Identification Map, etc.)
Overview photographs. The photographs should be representative of the project area, including any relevant
streams, creeks, rivers, etc., and drainage areas which affect the project site of will be affected by the project.
15. Additional Comments (Optional): Enter any additional comments related to the proposed project's ability to reduce
hazard risk and increase community resiliency.
This proposed project reduced the hazard risk to the community and increased resiliency by
the work conducted through the PW in correlation with FEMA-DR 4145 . CDBG funds are
being requested to be applied to the local FEMA Match ( 12 . 5% ) for the PW.
All maps are located in project files that were previously submitted and will be provided
upon request.
The entire r.nmmi inity henefited from the nrnartive work by Weld County and the removal del
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 10 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI: DECISION MAKING PROCESS
1. Decision-Making Process:
Describe the process you used to decide that this project is the best solution to the problem. Explain why this project is
the best alternative you considered. Address questions such as:
• Are you focusing on the area in your community that has the greatest potential for losses?
• Have you considered the risks to critical facilities and structures and benefits to be obtained by mitigating this
vulnerability?
• Have you considered those areas or projects that present the greatest opportunities given the current situation(s)
of interest in your community?
• Are you addressing a symptom or the source of the problem? Addressing the source of the problem is a long-term
solution which provides the most mitigation benefits.
• If impacts to the environment, natural, cultural or historic resources have been identified, explain how your alternatives
and proposed project address, minimize, or avoid these impacts.
The Site locations within this WELCO PW in the Proposed Project were identified due to
the high dollar amount of funds that were expended by Weld County to ensure the safety of
the community and also restore county infrastructure back to its pre-disaster condition . This
Proposed Project has site locations across the entire community and service area and it
was determined that a large percentage of the LMI population was impacted by the severe
flooding incident and the proactive work by County Officials enabled the community to
recover quicker, thus allowing the community to sustain resiliency and return operations to
normal .
2. Acquisition Projects - Describe the community's methodology for selecting the properties to be acquired in this application
and how each is ranked (highest to lowest):
N/A
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 11 of 20
- - - _ -- - -
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI: SCOPE OF WORK / BUDGET OVERVIEW / FINANICAL FACTORS
1. Project Scope: Please provide a comprehensive and detailed description of the scope of the proposed project.
Describe each of the project components and the steps necessary to complete that work. If the proposed project is a
funding match for another disaster recovery or infrastructure development program, please identify the
agency, program funds, and project reference number that CDBG-DR funding is intended to support. Also
describe any critical deadlines that must be met to accomplish this work.
This Proposed Project is for the Local FEMA Match for costs for WELCO18 (665 ) . These
costs were incurred as a result of FEMA-DR 4145 . During the incident period of September
11 , 2013 to September 30 , 2013 , Weld County , Colorado received heavy rainfall and debris
in the creeks , streams and rivers which caused severe flooding to and along roadways and
surface streets, and also severely damaged local infrastructure . This NOI Application
request addresses the emergency work / damages that were a direct result of the severe
flooding .
A Scope of Work is included within the PW and addresses the work that was completed .
2. Community Priority: Please describe why this project is a priority for your organization.
This Proposed Project is a priority for Weld County to utilize the CDBG funding as the Local
FEMA Match to offset the costs for the proactive work done by the County to reduce
hazardous conditions to the community .
\ttach am continuation~ or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 12 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
3. Project Cost Summary: Please summarize the major cost components of the project. Please round all values to the
nearest dollar.
a. Planning / Engineering / Design $
,b. Environmental Compliance $ The value of general and/or
c. Real Property Acquisition / Demolition $ professional labor wages must
be tabulated in accordance
d. Closing Costs / Legal Fees $ with the Davis Bacon Act of
e. Housing Program Assistance $ 1931
f. Construction Costs $
g. Project Delivery Costs $
h. Other (specify below) $ 265,705.44
See Protect Worksheet Cost attached) i. Total of a-h $ 265,705.44
j. Duplication of Benefits (if unknown at time of application enter zero). $ 0.00
k. Subtract j. from i. to determine Total Project Cost $ 265,705.44
Notes: Housing Program Assistance costs include the cost of compliance with Uniform Relocation Assistance (URA) and
Comparable Housing Assistance (CHA) requirements. Project Delivery Costs include the costs of project delivery by the
sponsoring organization but do not include administrative overhead.
4. Total Project Cost Allocations
Proposed Project Total Cost: $ 265.705.44
Federal Cost Share: $ 199.279.08
State Cost Share: $ 33.213. 18
$ 33,213. 18
Local Cost Share
5. Basis of Cost Estimate: Briefly describe how the cost estimates listed in #3 above were developed (e.g. lump sum, unit cost,
quotation, etc.).
The Cost Estimates were developed above from actual work that was properly procured
and conducted . They come directly off of what was included on the FEMA approved PW
and the costs are broken down by type of work and site .
6. Project Management: Describe how you will manage the costs and schedule, and how you will ensure successful
performance.
The work for this Proposed Project has been completed or is pending completion . The
12 . 5% CDBG Local Match will be applied towards the Weld County Match for FEMA PW's
and the costs that were previously incurred during the disaster.
Note: The applicant must agree to furnish quarterly reports during the entire time the project is in active status. Quarters end
on March 31st, June 30th, September 30th, and December 31st. Reports are due to the State within 15 days after the end of
each quarter.)
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 13 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
7. Project Maintenance Requirements: The following questions are to give assurance on the project's maintenance over
its useful life. Please answer each question and give a brief explanation.
a. If the project involves the acquisition of real property, what is the proposed land use after acquisition? (i.e., Agriculture,
Recreation, Vacant Land, Park, Wetlands, etc.)
N/A
b. Will the project require periodic maintenance?
No
c. If yes, who will provide the maintenance?
N/A
d. What is the estimated cost of maintenance on an annual basis?
0
Note: Cost of maintenance is considered an application prioritization weighting factor. Projects with high maintenance
costs have a greater risk of future failure due to deferred maintenance. Therefore, the responses provided above should be
as complete and verifiable as possible in order to minimize the likelihood of ranking point reductions due to maintenance
concerns.
8. Additional Comments: Enter any additional comments related to the proposed project's funding, if desired .
CDBG funds are needed for the 12 . 5% Local FEMA Match and the associated PW that is
included in the NOI-Application . It should be noted that a version request was submitted for
this project for work that has yet to be completed . The total obligated amount could change
which would change the 12 .5% Local FEMA Match .
9. Financial / Fiscal Health Factors: Please indicate the total budget (all funds) of your organization. Please describe the
impact of disaster recovery efforts to date on this budget. In addition, if this objective is selected based on the local
governments inability to finance the activity, the municipality must also include in the application package a resolution stating
this fact and supporting documentation such as budgetary information, a description of TABOR restrictions, and the most
recent audit report or approved exemption from audit.
Weld County's total 2015 budget is $307 ,031 , 089 . 00 . The impact of the September, 2013
flooding has primary been on the damage to the county's road and bridge system . The
damage has resulted in Weld County having to transfer $5 million from the Contingency
Fund to the Public Works Fund in 2013 and in 2014 for a total of $ 10 million dollars . Without
assistance from FEMA, FWHA, and CDBG the amount would have several million more .
The impact has also forced the county to shift local resources from projects unrelated to
flooding to deal with the emergency situations created by the flood in both the 2013 and
2014 fiscal years. Even in 2015 the county is still using local resources to recover from the
flooding . Fortunately , Weld County has always been fiscally conservative and budgeted
responsibly. Had the county not taken the responsible approach to its finances county
service would have had to have been cut to cope with the flood recovery.
1AIoid 1 n1 m 1, nnc rofoc i uath r thcs rnn + ct irti . _ _ 1. , i_ - limitc+jnn in +h }n+n Kcscirtian
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 14 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART B - APPLICATION : PROJECT MILESTONES / TIMELINES / TASKS
1 . Timeline / Tasks
Insert the proposed work schedule as tasks to accomplish the overall goal of the proposed activity (i.e., appraisals, title
search, closing, etc.), and provide a description of the task's purpose. This timeline will be used as a measurement tool
for progress in the project's implementation and is included in the required Quarterly Reports. Also, FEMA uses the
timeline for determining the approved period of performance. It will be the basis used to justify delays or extensions, if
necessary, and should be estimated carefully. The first and last entries are state requirements and have already been
entered.
Task 1 :
Grant Process and Environmental Review Timeframe: 3 Months
Task ? : Emergency Repairs- The initial emergency repairs were made directly 1 Completed
g Y P 9 Y p Timeframe.
Task 3 : Permanent Repairs - Becuase the emergency repairs were quick repair Ti Completed
meframe:
Task 4: Additional Permanent Repairs - All the necessary repairs were not com 6 Months
Timeframe:
Task 5:
Timeframe:
Task 6:
Timeframe:
Task 7:
Timeframe:
Task 8:
Timeframe:
Task 9:
Timeframe:
Final Inspection Report and Project Closeout
Task 10:
The Final Inspection Report is a review of the activity s paper documentation.
showing the project was implemented as required. Once the review is completed. the 3 Months
report and findings will be provided to the grantee for review and concurrence. The Timeframe:
State submits the concurrence to FEMA as part of a closeout package to formally
Total Project Timeframe: 12 Months
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and c-mail submittal. Page 15 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
2. Start Date & Pre-Award Costs: The start date for any project begins upon GRANT AGREEMENT approval by the
State Controller. If a different start date or timeframe is needed, provide an explanation below. Also indicate if any pre-
award activities or costs have been incurred or authorized.
The proposed project is for local FEMA match dollars and the majority of the work is
completed ; however, another round of construction will be performed this summer. The
repairs for this site began as soon as the flood waters receded and the county crews were
able to access the site. The initial phase of repairs were emergency in nature and began in
September of 2013 and concluded during November of that same year. Permanent repairs
for this site commenced the following year at the beginning of construction season and
concluded in October of 2014 because of weather constraints . The final repairs will be
completed in October of 2015 . Additionally, cost have been incurred through the preparation
of this NOI Application .
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 16 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Please note that Part B is required for the final Application submittal. Part B sections
may optionally be completed and submitted with the NOI. Please update any Part A
section information when submitting you full Application.
PART B — APPLICATION : ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
1. Environmental Review Background Information & Environmental Review Worksheet:
In accordance with 24 CFR Part 58.22 (see below), all federally funded projects must accomplish an environmental review
prior to beginning any work on a project. These HUD regulations are in place for two purposes:
1 . To ensure federal funds are used to place people of low and moderate income in environmentally safe
conditions; and
2. To ensure federal funds are NOT used to negatively impact environmental conditions that exist near a
project site.
Please note the following limitations on CDBG-DR grant activities pending environmental clearance per 24 CFR Part 58.22.
(a) Neither a recipient nor any participant in the development process, including public or private nonprofit or for-profit
entities, or any of their contractors, may commit HUD assistance under a program listed in Sec. 58. 1(b) on an activity or
project until HUD or the state has approved the recipient's RROF and the related certification from the responsible
entity. In addition, until the RROF and the related certification have been approved, neither a recipient nor any
participant in the development process may commit non-HUD funds on or undertake an activity or project under a
program listed in Sec. 58. 1 (b) if the activity or project would have an adverse environmental impact or limit the choice
of reasonable alternatives.
(b) N/A for DOLA/CDPS projects.
(c) If a recipient is considering an application from a prospective sub-recipient or beneficiary and is aware that the
prospective sub-recipient or beneficiary is about to take an action within the jurisdiction of the recipient that is
prohibited by paragraph (a) of this section, then the recipient will take appropriate action to ensure that the objectives
and procedures of NEPA are achieved.
(d) An option agreement on a proposed site or property is allowable prior to the completion of the environmental review
if the option agreement is subject to a determination by the recipient on the desirability of the property for the project as
a result of the completion of the environmental review in accordance with this part and the cost of the option is a
nominal portion of the purchase price. There is no constraint on the purchase of an option by third parties that have not
been selected for HUD funding, have no responsibility for the environmental review and have no say in the approval or
disapproval of the project.
(e) Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program (SHOP). In accordance with section 11(d)(2)(A) of the Housing
Opportunity Program Extension Act of 1996 (42 U.S.C. 12805 note), an organization, consortium, or affiliate receiving
assistance under the SHOP program may advance non-grant funds to acquire land prior to completion of an
environmental review and approval of a Request for Release of Funds (RROF) and certification, notwithstanding
paragraph (a) of this section. Any advances to acquire land prior to approval of the RROF and certification are made at
the risk of the organization, consortium, or affiliate and reimbursement for such advances may depend on the result of
the environmental review. This authorization is limited to the SHOP program only and all other forms of HUD
assistance are subject to the limitations in paragraph (a) of this section.
(f) Relocation. Funds may be committed for relocation assistance before the approval of the RROF and related
certification for the project provided that the relocation assistance is required by 24 CFR part 42.
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and c-mail submittal. Page 17 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Environmental Review Worksheet
Check ALL of the activities listed below that will be included as part of the project,
REGARDLESS OF THE FUNDING SOURCE:
Q Information and financial services
Administrative and management activities
0 Environmental and other studies, resource identification, and the development of plans and strategies
151 Most engineering and design costs associated with eligible projects
■ Inspections and testing of properties for hazards or defects
b • Project planning
d ❑ Purchase of insurance
c ❑ Purchase of tools
- ❑ Technical assistance and training
>C .E ❑ Interim assistance to arrest the effects of an imminent threat or physical deterioration in which the assistance
w does not alter environmental conditions.
`t.
� Public services that will not have a h sical impact or result in any physical changes (e.g., employment,
physical PP Y g p yment, child
care, health, education, counseling, welfare)
0 Assistance for temporary or permanent improvements that do not alter environmental conditions and are limited
to protection, repair, or restoration activities necessary only to control or arrest the effects from disasters or
imminent threats to public safety including those resulting from physical deterioration
(Must also complete the Regulatory Checklist at the end of Exhibit IV A)
Ea'
_ 0 Operating costs (e.g., maintenance, security, operation, utilities, furnishings, equipment, supplies, staff training
Z .= and recruitment, other incidental costs)
U ❑ Relocation costs
12 Acquisition, repair, improvement, reconstruction, or rehabilitation when the facilities and improvements are in
place and will be retained in the same use without change in size or capacity of more than 20 percent
❑ Special projects directed to the removal of material and architectural barriers that restrict the mobility of and
accessibility to elderly and handicapped persons
0 Acquisition (including leasing) or disposition of, or equity loans on, an existing structure
❑ Acquisition (including leasing) of vacant land provided the structure or land acquired, financed, or disposed of
will be retained for the same use
El Acquisition, repair, improvement, reconstruction, or rehabilitation when the facilities and improvements are in
2 I place, but will change in size or capacity of more than 20 percent
O Acquisition, repair, improvement, reconstruction, or rehabilitation when the facilities and improvements are in
place, but will involve a change in land use, such as from non-residential to residential, commercial to
industrial, or from one industrial use to another
51 Demolition
5 New construction
This checklist must be included with the CDBG application.
Please direct questions to the appropriate contact person below:
DOLA/DLG DHSEM
Steven Boand, State Disaster Recovery Manager
Tamra Norton, Environmental Compliance Officer
Department of Local Affairs Department of Public Safety
1313 Sherman Street, Room 521, Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Denver, CO 80203 9195 E Mineral Ave, Suite 200
303-866-6398 Centennial, CO 80112
tamra.norton@state.co.us 720.852.67 13
steven.boand@state.co.us
DPS/DOLA USE ONLY:
Required level of environmental review: 0 Exempt 0 CESOTT 0 CESTO EA
Reviewed by:
Date of Review:
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 18 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
2. Supplemental Environmental Review Information
Enter any additional comments related to environmental concerns for the proposed project if desired. Please list and attach any
documents or studies that have been prepared that support the Environmental Review Worksheet responses.
All environmental issues are addressed on the attached Project Worksheet as supporting
documentation . The significant EHP issues were in regards to the Endangered Species Act
( ESA) and EHP Standard Conditions . All items were addressed and any additional supporting
backup documentation can be provided upon request. Please see below for environmental
permits that were obtained .
Floodplain Permit
404 Nationwide Permit
Migratory Birds Permit (if needed )
Threatened and Endangered Species Permit
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 19 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART B - APPLICATION : DETAILED PROJECT BUDGET
1. Detailed Project Budget: Please enter or attach a detailed and comprehensive final proposed budget for the project.
Please note that CDBG-DR funds may be limited to the amount submitted with the NOI pending the availability of
additional funding
This Proposed Project is for the Local FEMA Match for costs for WELCO18 (665) . These
costs were incurred as a result of FEMA-DR 4145 . During the incident period of September
11 , 2013 to September 30 , 2013 , Weld County , Colorado received heavy rainfall and debris in
the creeks , streams and rivers which caused severe flooding to and along roadways and
surface streets , and also severely damaged local infrastructure . This Application request
addresses the emergency work / damages that were a direct result of the severe flooding .
A Scope of Work and detailed project budget is included within the PW and addresses the
work that was completed . It is important to note that a version request has been made for this
Project Worksheet and the attached Project Worksheet may not reflect FINAL costs.
lttach am continuation~ or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 20 of 20
N
A
a)
N
a)
E
0
U
C_
E
a)
E
a
C
ea
al
ea
ae
in 13
0 0 Co
c
n y 3 c
a 0 O
N N
o c E 01
o a
- a) E
E o
oE a - 0)II
E 0
o m C ° 2 'Cu
al m 0)- 3
V a a) c O C
• U it; a) J
E E -01) n C
o
O -o o J
E -C
- 0
3 3 3 1 0
O 0 0 3 o a
m
w eo
0 0 0 141 C c
0
C C C E
Uo U U Co
L CI a
IC z
G
� a
O 0 0
0 0 0
2
o0 2 0 0
-J J J J
° ° ° ° o > 0 0 0 0 `e `e o o *° `e
° 0 0 0 0 0 0 c0 o 0 c' 0 0 0D 0 10 \° `Q 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 ° e 0 0 N.
o re D D o n n 0 0 0 ID 10 rI m a o o Cr Q eD m m N. ri Q Cr CO v W n n n o m o N
N .-� .-� .-. .� ... Q N NI n n Q .-e .. ,-, vl .-4 n ry n � � ri .-+ .� ry 03 m in .-. in .� a Q ri Q 01 '7 N T ao 0o co co r)0 03 m N n n m 00 00 co' O W Cr
W en n n e M m n Vl R Vl N1 W m eO m
co
LLI n m m M m M 00 in in m m 00 M m M m M Q IN en M T N in N N N N N ry Q CO T CO in
0
O
2
0
J
in in in u1 Vl Vl it in O O to in in in ul in O in O vl Vl ul In in 00 0 0 in Vl O in 0 0 0 in in in ✓1 0
in on .--I ri .-i .--1 r to 00 03 n n ul rI ri V1 ri n m n ul en .-I m ID e%) N Vl ill 1D ul 10 l0 1D n ul O M Co
n CO en en M M rn n m m re 4-i N m en en en m n 00 ri 0 0 M n n m .a O O n O n 0 0 n n N n m M m CO M en .--4 .-e N N en m M N m N N N en .--1 N .ti N N N N N '-41-1 ,-I r• .--e
2
0
O
2
0
J
en' VI 0 0 0 0 0 in to in 0 0 in 0 0 0 0 Din in 0 0 0 0 in 0 in 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 in ul in in in
S m 413 U 4.0 ID 10 i0 m O O O O m 10 ID ID O ID 1D ID O in u1 ID O M O 0 n ul in m in in .+ Q m O m0
d"n n 0 0 0 0 o n Q Q Q n Q N. Q VD O •-•O 0 0 M O 1I O Q N ID 10 O VDri Q Q O N. Co n Q
C N N N N N e--1 �--� .--� .-e N N N �-+ N e-e 1-NPti .-i ri ri re ,y
2
Li) O u1 Vl ul Vl ul in en en O O ul u1 ul ul 0 el'1 en 0 O Vl m V) 0 ul ul 0 4.41 411 V1 ul N O O VI m in en in
0 r- 0 ID l0 t0 CD 'D N T m N Ni N. iD 10 1D 00 10 n 0 N in in lD Q al en O in in 01 in Cl n n in n ID N. en
10 n N N N N N %D O 0 00 00 in N Ni N N. NJ en N 00 --e .-i N in La 0 re r+ -i RD ri 10 N N 03 CO Q ID 0
- C-1 ..i .-1 re N N re .y eti
2
O
J
ul LP in in ul in in al 0 0 in ✓1 in in in in u) in CD in in in in in 0 in 0 0 in in in in in 0 0 0 in 0 in 0
in .-e CO CO oI CO 00 In in Vl in ✓1 4t103 CO 03 CI CO 03 ri 111 n n CO 10 co ul n n CO N. CO 01 01 N. in O in u1
0 ul m n n n N n Lf1 ID ID ID ID V1 n n n Q n m eD n m N ID IN r4 N in N ul ID
.-i N .--I el el ei .-I .--i e--I ri N N ti ri .-I ri N N .-r N N .-I .-i .-e M N v-I .-+ .-i e N el N .ti ri ere ri .-e
O in .-+ v-i .-� .+ .i O 0 O .-e - O ri .-i - (NJ - ul u) .-i 0 0 el N en 0 10 00M M 0 M CO CO 0 0 Cl 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ri ri 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .-+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .-a o _
10 n m VI m in u1 1D 0 0 In <n 10 in m in in in n n v1 CO CO in .-e el o 0 00 Co ri CO ri m m 1D 10 O ID O
O O N N N N N 0 N N N N 0 N N N N N O 0 N rJ el N N N N N .-i .--' N f-1 IN ri .-I .--1 0 N o N
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
m m rn M en m er1 en In m CO er1 m er1 en m en en en en M en M en en M m en m er1 en m en en en en en m en en
N NJ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N nJ N N N N N N N N N eN N N N N N N NJ N N N N Q el el .-e .-e .-e r1 re re .-J .-J el ri .-e .-e ri ri el e"a .r erl e-1 .4 ri el e-1 el .-e N .-I eH .-r .+ .-I '-e el .-J el el --e ri
m CO
Y CO CO CO CO CO 00 00 07 CO 00 CO CO CO 0000 CO 03 CO CO Co CO 00 CO 00 00 CO CO CO CO 00 CO CO 00 00 00 03 Oo CO
(J0000000000000000000000000000000000000000
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
et ul ul VI N V1 N VI in N VI VI N VI in V1 VI in in In in in in in in N VI VI N in ul V1 in N in in VI LA N N N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O 0 O O O 0 O O O O O O
m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 000000000000000000000
N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000000000000000
4O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C O O o O 0 o O o C) 0 0 0 0 0 C1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
al tfl m V) Vl vl ul in in V1 m IJl V1 V1 4/1 in in In ✓1 in in LI) ul in ul 4/1 III m Lc' in in in in in in in ul in in in in e-e .-e el el et .-1 .-1 .-I el el e-1 el .-1 el el .-I e-+ el .-1 e-1 .-1 el el el el .y el e-1 el el el .-1
N en Q to .-1 es .-e 4-4 e.i .y N m r-I N — (N e-e — N re --e N M Q e-1 N en Q e-i re .-e --1 e-i eti r-i ey
4
O
A
u
0
J
.-i eel e? Q -t J Q Vl ID N. 03 m O r-1 ri 11 N N u1 ul ID 00 CO S .-e re re ri M rel en en Q m Q ID Pe-Ill 00
e, re ri -+ ti .� -i e-e re -1 .-e .� IN NJ N N N N N N N M rn en en en rn m
a
1.1 2 2 a a 2 a 2 2 a a a 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 -C 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
222222222222222222222222222222222222222
ua w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w
Q LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL u. LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL. LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL
co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0o Q Co ✓1 Q m N N m en N. en N N Q en o ri in IN en M NJ in I-. en ID re 10 0 in Cr, en 0 m en 00 m - u/ CO .-1
Q ul N N it)r-I ul e-i N Q 1 m CO0O l0 Q e7 ul l 0) M O Q O 00 m m en m n O N. Q u1 .-1 N 01 al n n Vl N 10
0J rum M N m m 10 m mn CO CO aJ l0 n Q M N m o0 0 m rn N 00 M t0 LO 00 N ri .7 CO r~ 10 m ri 13 in O ri ri O O C) 'Cr M CO CO 00 'Cr CO CO 00 Q Q O ri CO M M O N 01 0 .-e in in in to m m N O Q N- in CI
Q d' M M M M M Q r-e eti n n Q m M m M 01 Q U N N N m en N r-I O N N N N N O o e7 V N V O
'. as 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6060066066666666006o 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
r0 Cr Q Q a Q Q Q d' Q Q V Q Q Tt Q V Q Q Q Q rt Q a7 Q Q Q Q rY a Q Q V Q Q Q y Q Q Q Q J
0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 Q a
CO CO 0 to 0 0 01 e0 00 m m m N n en N In 10 00 m 01 n 0 N ri O In N Cr, u) in N. Q . . an m N Q co Vl
y NO 0 CO CO O a v o o rl ."'-e � CO CO CO VI COen M 0 in re W el CO IN N. I co r, m 0 0rvo w 0000 en aril 0) r00. (NN
m 1n Cr Q Q v v o o N o 0 0 CO m Co re e N 0 m m a 00 ri m 0 n n oo n m Q 00 ID o n m t0 in N N N N N n O O CO 00 n Q Q Q Q Q 3/4.0 1D CO CO CO N 00 O O m 00 CO 00 00 O 00 03 u'1 n m 10 O
V V V Q V V in in t V V V Q V V ? V Q V d' V V - In it; Q V V V V vi Q V Q a? C V in no 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C e-r ri v-I.-e.-e N e-I r-1 ri ri r e r l ri e1 .-1 .-1 el r-I ri ri r-1 ri N ren4ri ri .-1 elele-1 ri e-i .--I e-1 el ri e-1 el n4
0 ,,,,,. , . , ,
• r
�' — :a 11�� �: _ 1' bpi . 1 'i s1., -...`,w„y.� ,•• n-
t 1 :,� iAnn a• r1I n1 ,1 In, 61I .'1 - • i I t� ti
�I .
• �' % .;. Y - U.Iu. 1111 ILL W W W r.1 .. • , II
1 art
)
n .... i
,ii%`
0 J V . P«, b
t. •
, M1 j ,',•ill U.I
11L LL
? M1 i1/2 1 111
i..11310:44
^474.4
•
^ ► .
- ' a'• 7n 4" r1
^ •
'I r . A tP1
f- a %r
> I limt'?� A. .sit-4';
sit-4'< t
•
.- ,
ii 1
w �y (y r
.a F "' a a
. �{j^•1 E ,. 34,. 14' LL LL LL LL LL 1111 LL LL
r.
a.
:,. ' o
1
4 r*
; •
, .
LL e��_
`9
r j •s J Alt-•"'•
�M 14. •
tor• w Y S
Vas
Z.
,, 7.43.:(:;..1
� � ltiiii&
N U
O
,_ ,_ * . ,,, : ; f', : ' i i i :::: .
l4. l4. -� N. 1. - .w 1
0 1 T Cr)
J t
I
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 1 of 24
► ,!-0 C8 G . 1400665(0)
Applicant Name: Application Title:
WELD (COUNTY) WELCO18 - CR 34 Road and Bridge 34-17A
Period of Performance Start: Period of Performance End:
09-14-2013
Subgrant Application - Entire Application
Application Title: WELCO18 - CR 34 Road and Bridge 34-17A
Application Number: PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00665(0)
Application Type: Subgrant Application (PW)
Preparer Information
Prefix
First Name KATHLEEN
Middle Initial
Last Name RUVARAC
Title TAC BRIDGE SPECIALIST
Agency/Organization Name FEMA
Address 1 9200 EAST MINERAL AVE.
Address 2
City CENTENNIAL
State CO
Zip 80112
Email Deanna.Butterbaugh@state.co.us
Is the application preparer the Point of Contact? No
Point of Contact Information
Prefix
First Name Roy
Middle Initial
Last Name Rudisill
Title Director - OEM
Agency/Organization Weld County
Address 1 PO BOX 758
Address 2
City Greeley
State CO
ZIP 80632
Phone 970-304-6540
Fax
littps://connectl .dhs.gov/emm ie/,Dana I nfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+d'spate h Destination.do?.. . 5/7/2014
-
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 2 of 24
Email rrudisill@weldgov.com
Alternate Point of Contact Information
Prefix
First Name
Middle Initial
Last Name
Title
Agency/Organization
Address 1
Address 2
City
State
ZIP
Phone
Fax
Email
Project Description
Disaster Number: 4145
Pre-Application Number: PA-08-CO-4145-RPA-0088
Applicant ID: 123-99123-00
Applicant Name: WELD (COUNTY)
Subdivision:
Project Number: WELCO18
Standard Project Number/Title: 399 - Road System Damage
Please Indicate the Project Type: Neither Alternate nor Improved
Application Title: WELCO18 - CR 34 Road and Bridge 34-17A
Category: C.ROADS & BRIDGES
Percentage Work Completed? 94.0
As of Date: 11 -19-2013
Comments
1
Attachments
Document Hard Copy File
User Date Type Description Reference File Name Action
KATHLEEN 02-25- Location WELCO18 Location Map.pdf
RUVARAC 2014 Map Map (126.78 kb) View
Damage Facilities (Part 1 of 2)
Facility Site
Number Facility Name Address County City State ZIP Previously Action
Damaged?
1 Location 1 - CR 34 east of Bridge Weld CO No
2 Location 2 - Bridge 34-17 A over St. Vrain River Weld CO No
https://connect I .dhs.gov/emmie/,DanaInfo=isource.fema.net.SSL+dispatch Destination.do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 3 of 24
Comments
Attachments
User Date Document Type Description Hard Copy File Name Action
File Reference
KATHLEEN 02-25- WELCO18_CR34 over St.
RUVARAC 2014 Photos Vrain River Photos. pdf View
(564. 10 kb)
KATHLEEN 02-25- Photos Applicant Photos Applicant photos.pdf(2.91 View
RUVARAC 2014 Mb)
KATHLEEN 02-25- Bridge Bridge Inspection Report.pdf View
RUVARAC 2014 Survey/Document (2.35 Mb)
Post Storm
KATHLEEN 04-15- Bridge Bridge Inspection Post Storm WEL034 0-017 View
BROWN 2014 Survey/Document Report 0A.pdf(54.54 kb)
KATHLEEN 04-15- Bridge Streambed WEL034 0-017 OA
BROWN 2014 Survey/Document History streambed history.xls(38.00 View
kb)
Facility Name: Location 1 - CR 34 east of Bridge
Address 1 :
Address 2:
County: Weld
City:
State: CO
ZIP:
Was this site previously damaged? No
Percentage Work Completed? 95.00 %
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00665(0):
Location 1 — CR 34 Roadway east of Bridge
Begin
Lat: N40.23281
Long: -W104.89100
Location: End
Lat: 40.23305
Long: -104.89807
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00665(0):
During the incident period of September 11 . 2013 to September 30. 2013,
Weld County. Colorado received heavy rainfall and debris in the creeks,
streams and rivers which caused damage to numerous roads and bridges in
Weld County. This project worksheet addresses damages to CR 34 roadway
east of bridge approach and Bridge WEL034.0-017.0A over St. Vrain River,
in Section 16, T3N. R67W.
Flooding of the St. Vrain River resulted in damages on CR 34 include
washout of asphalt, roadway base and embankment material on the
eastbound and westbound travel lanes at seven (7) locations east of the
https://connectl .dhs.gov/emm ie/.Danal n to=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatch Destination.do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 4 of 24
bridge.
Asphalt Patch 1 on westbound roadway and shoulder measured 231 ft L x 10
ftW = 2,310 SF x 0.575 ft D = 1 .328.3 CF x 146 LB/CF x 1 ton/2000 LB =
97.0 tons asphalt
Embankment Material lost in asphalt patch 1 is estimated 231 ft Lx 10 ft W x
1 .5 ft D = 128.3 CY.
Asphalt Patch 2 on eastbound and westbound roadway and shoulder
measured 311 ft L x 25 ft W = 7,775 SF x 0.575 ft D = 4,470.6 CF x 146
LB/CF x 1 ton/2000 LB = 326.4 tons asphalt
Embankment Material lost in asphalt patch 2 is estimated 311 ft L x 25 ft W x
1 .5 ft D = 431 .9 CY.
Asphalt Patch 3 on eastbound and westbound roadway and shoulder
measured 25 ft L x 27 ft W = 675 SF x 0.575 ft D = 388. 1 CF x 146 LB/CF x 1
ton/2000 LB = 28.3 tons asphalt
Embankment Material lost in asphalt patch 3 is estimated 25 ft L x 27 ft W x
1 .5 ft D = 37.5 CY.
60 LF of 30 inch CMP was washed away with the flood waters and not
recovered.
18 inch Rip Rap at north and south ends of culvert was washed away with
the flood waters. 15ftinLx15ftinWx1 .5ftDx2 ends = 25.OCY
Asphalt Patch 4 on westbound roadway and shoulder measured 19 ft L x 4 ft
W = 76 SF x 0.575 ft D = 43.7 CF x 146 LB/CF x 1 ton/2000 LB = 3.2 tons
asphalt
Embankment Material lost in asphalt patch 4 is estimated 19 ft L x 4 ft W x
1 .5 ft D = 4.2 CY.
Damage Description and Dimensions: Asphalt Patch 5 on westbound roadway and shoulder measured 18 ft L x 3 ft
W = 54 SF x 0.575 ft D = 31 . 1 CF x 146 LB/CFx 1 ton/2000 LB = 2.3tons
asphalt
Embankment Material lost in asphalt patch 5 is estimated 18 ft L x 3 ft W x
1 .5 ft D = 3.0 CY.
Asphalt Patch 6 on westbound roadway and shoulder measured 117 ft L x 11
ft W = 1 ,287 SF x 0.575 ft D = 740.0 CF x 146 LB/CF x 1 ton/2000 LB = 54.0
tons asphalt
Embankment Material lost in asphalt patch 6 is estimated 117 ft Lx 11 ft W x
1 .5 ft D = 71 .5 CY.
Asphalt Patch 7 on westbound roadway and shoulder measured 24 ft L x 3 ft
W = 72 SF x 0.575 ft D = 41 .4 CF x 146 LB/CFx 1 ton/2000 LB = 3.0 tons
asphalt
Embankment Material lost in asphalt patch 7 is estimated 24 ft Lx 3 ft W x
1 .5 ft D = 4.0 CY.
Embankment material was also lost at three additional locations on the north
and south shoulders outside of the limits of the asphalt patches.
North shoulder = 195ftLx8ftWx2ftD = 115.6CYand 1 .207ftLx14ftW
x2ftD = 1 ,2511CY
South Shoulder = 721 ft L x 14 ft W x 2 ft D = 747.7 CY
Location 1 Total Asphalt = 514.2 Tons. Total Embankment Material = 2.795.4
CY. Total 30 inch CMP = 60LF. Total Rip Rap = 25CY
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00665(0):
WORK COMPLETED
Location 1 — CR 34 Roadway east of bridge
1 — Fill embankment material lost in roadway travel lanes. embankment and
https://connect I .dhs.gov/em m ie:- . Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination.do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 5 of 24
shoulders — 2,795.4 CY x 1 .82 (Conversion Factor CY ABC Class 6 Material
to Tons = 5,087.6 tons x $33.70/ton (COOT Item Number 304-06000
Aggregate Base Course Class 6 x 2 due to economies of scale as compared
with number of CDOT annual projects) = $171 .452. 12
2 — Install asphalt on eastbound and westbound travel lanes = 514.2 tons x
$81 . 70/ton (COOT Item Number 403-33741 Hot Bituminous Pavement
(Grading S) (75) (PG 64-22) = $42,010. 14
Scope of Work: 3- Install 60 LF of 30 inch CMP x 90.00/LF (COOT Item Number 603-10180)
= $5.400.00
4 — Install Rip Rap north and south ends of 30 inch CMP = 25.0 CY x
$83. 17/CY (Rip Rap 18 inch CDOT Item Number 506-00218) _ $2,079.25
Location 1 Total: $220,941 .51
Hazard Mitigation Proposal
Is effective mitigation feasible on this site? Yes
If you answered Yes to the above question. the next question is required
Will mitigation be performed on this site? Yes
If you answered Yes to the above question. the next question is required
Do you wish to attach a Hazard Mitigation Yes
Proposal?
If you answered Yes to the above question, the next two questions are required
Work To Be Completed
The applicant has indicated that the installation of turf
reinforcement mat on the roadside shoulders and embankment
slopes will re-direct channel flow across the slopes reducing
erosion at the facility and alleviating future damages.
1 ) Turf Reinforcement Mat — 2.200 ft in length x 10 ft average
width within the right of way on the north shoulder (downstream
side) = 2,444.4 SY x 1 .2 factor for toe in excess of material =
2,933.28 SY x $10.00/SY (COOT Item Number 216-00301 ) =
$29.332.80
This HMP is considered cost effective per FEMA Disaster
Please provide the Scope of Work for the estimate: Assistance Policy 9526. 1 . Section VII . B. 2. Certain mitigation
measures (Appendix A). determined cost effective, as long as
(maximum 4000 characters) the mitigation measure does not exceed 100°'0 of the eligible
cost of the eligible repair work on the project.
Appendix A. 5. Gabion baskets. rip rap. sheet piling, and
geotextile fabric installation- installation to control erosion.
Location 1 — SOW Items #1 and 2 = $213.462.26
$29.332.80/$213,462.26 = 13.7%
The net cost of mitigation/cost of damages is 13.7% < 100%.
This HMP is for cost estimating purposes only. The Final
design is the obligation of the Applicant and/or their agent.
Would you like to add the Hazard Mitigation No
Proposal as a cost line item to the project cost?
GIS Coordinates
Project Location Latitude Longitude
CR 34 roadway east of bridge 40.23281 - 104.891
Facility Name: Location 2 - Bridge 34-17 A over St. Vrain River
Address 1 :
https://connect I .dhs.gov/emmie/.Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatch Destination .do?. .. 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 6 of 24
Address 2:
County: Weld
City:
State: CO
ZIP:
Was this site previously damaged? No
Percentage Work Completed? 5.00
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00665(0):
Location 2 — Bridge WEL034.0-017.0A over St. Vrain River
Lat: N40.23306
Location: Long: -W104.89915
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00665(0):
The concrete and steel bridge, 294. 1 ft in length x 30. 1 ft in width, consisting
of six (6) spans traverses the St. Vrain River. Structure components consist
of a four (4) inch asphalt deck on a 6 inch concrete deck supported by four
(4) — 47 ft — 6 inch long - 7 ft wide exterior and 8 ft wide interior x 30 inch
deep prestressed concrete double tee girders in each span. five (5) 20 inch x
20 inch concrete cap on five (5) 8 inch x 8 inch steel H piles with precast
concrete panels and two (2) 16 inch x 20 inch concrete cap on five (5) 8 inch
x 8 inch steel H piles with concrete backwalls. The bridge is flanked on both
sides with a galvanized w-beam on steel posts.
1 . Damages observed at the bridge include voids behind the backwall of both
the east and west abutments. The missing material is estimated to be 30 ft L
x 9 ft W x 1 ft D = 10.0 CY per abutment x 2 = 20CY.
2. Rip Rap was washed away at the northeast wingwall of the north abutment
estimated to be 15 ft L x 5 ft W towards the channel x 1 .5 ft D = 4.2 CY.
3. Erosion at the base of the piers as shown below [77CY]:
3a. Pier 2 [in the bridge report] estimated to be 25LF x 3FT wide x 3FT
deep/2 = 112.5CF/27 = 4.2CY use 5CY
Damage Description and Dimensions: 3b. Pier 3 [in the bridge report] no scour shown on Streambed History Table
3c. Pier 4 [in the bridge report] estimated to be 25LF x 9FT wide x 9FT
deep/2 = 1012.5CF/27 = 37.5CY use 38CY
3d. Pier 5 [in the bridge report] estimated to be 25LF x 6.5FT wide x 6.5FT
deep/2 = 528. 1CF/27 = 19.6CY use 20CY
3e. Pier 6 [in the bridge report] estimated to be 25LF x 5.5FT wide x 5.5FT
deep/2 = 378. 1CF/27 = 14.0CY use 14CY
4. Rip rap and soil/seed cover washed away at the southwest and southeast
wingwall/embankments estimated to be 30LF x 15FT wide x 1 .5FT deep/27 =
25CY each x 2 = 50CY [rip rap]. Soil washed away estimated to be 30LF x
15FT wide x 4/12FT deep/27 = 5.5CY x 2 = 11 CY
5. Debris was deposited at the bridge location that is incidental to the
project. The quantity is estimated at 10CY.
Recent bridge inspection report was provided by the applicant dated May 8.
2012. The bridge was built in 1960 and had a sufficiency rating of 63.4 in
2012. structurally deficient.
https://connect I .dhs.gov/emmie/,Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatch Destination.do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 7 of 24
2012 inspection notes of elements include: replacing inadequate bridge and
approach rail. bridge deck pavement crack sealing and filling potholes, rust
on all guide rail posts noted near deck connection, spalls with exposed
reinforcement on concrete diaphragms. water stains on diaphragms and
prestressed girder ends, rust noted on steel H piles. No significant defects
were noted on the precast concrete panels between H piles at the
abutments. The deck condition is noted as in satisfactory condition (6) on a
scale of 0 to 9. The superstructure is noted as in satisfactory condition (6)
and substructure is noted in poor good condition (4). The channel banks
were observed to be good condition with minor problems (7). Maintenance
items included bridge deck repair sealing cracks in asphalt surface. replacing
bridge and approach railing and replacing damaged concrete in piers.
Applicant submitted Bridge Inspection Report dated 9/26/13 that indicates
scour at the piers. In addition, Streambed History data was submitted that
shows various amounts of scour occurred at specific piers since the 2012
report. therefore Item #3 above was added after a site visit occurred on
3/21 /14.
The Applicant has provided pictures of the road and bridge facilities
documenting damages. These photos are attached to this project worksheet.
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00665(0):
Location 2 — WEL034.0-017.0A over St. Vrain River
WORK COMPLETED
2. Installed Rip Rap [recycled concrete] NE Wing = 4.2CY x 1 .82 = 7.64T x
$15.00 = $114.60 [Weld unit price for Concrete Tearout $7.50 x 2 = $15.00 to
allow for installation cost.] Note: Recycled concrete was installed temporarily
as post storm protection.
WORK COMPLETED TOTAL = $114.60
WORK TO BE COMPLETED
1 . Install 20.0 CY flow fill behind both west and east abutment walls x
$90.00/CY estimated (Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. Denver,
CO) = $1 ,800.00 - $2.000.00
2a. Remove recycled concrete [Item 2 above in Work Completed] that was
Scope of Work: placed temporarily at the time of the repair immediately after the event.
4.2CY x 1 .82 = 7.64 TONS x $7.501T = $57.30 (Unit price of $7.50/T is the
same as the installation cost shown in Item 2)
2b. Install Rip Rap NE Wing = 4.2 CY x $83. 17/CY (Rip Rap 18 inch CDOT
Item Number 506-00218) = $349.31
2c. Install topsoil over rip rap. 15FT x 5FT = 75SF x [4"/12] = 25CF/27 =
0.93CY use 1CY x $10. 11 /CY = $10. 11 CDOT 207-00205 [$10. 11 x 2 for
small job = $20.22]
2d. Install seeding. 75SF/43560 = 0.0017 AC x $545.81 /AC = $1 .00 CDOT
212-00006 [use $10.00]
2e. Install soil retention blanket. 75SF/9 = 8.33SY x $2. 15/SY = $17.91
CDOT 216-00042 [use $40.00]
3. Install rip rap at piers. 77CY x $83. 17 = $6.404.09
https://connectl .dhs.gov/emm ie/,Dana It tb=isource.fema. net,SSL+dispatchDestination .do?. .. 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 8 of 24
4a. Install rip rap at southwest and and southeast wingwalls/embankment.
50CY x $83. 17 = $4. 158.50
4b. Install topsoil over rip rap. 11CY x $10. 11 /CY = $111 .21 CDOT 207-
00205
4c. Install seeding. 900SF/43560 = 0.02AC x $545.81 /AC = $10.91 CDOT
212-00006
4d. Install soil retention blanket. 900SF/9 = 100SY x $2. 15/SY = $215 CDOT
216-00042
5. Remove debris incidental to the project. 10CY estimated at $500 to
remove.
Note: Applicant is responsible for disposing debris at a certified disposal site.
WORK TO BE COMPLETED TOTAL = $13,876.54
Location 2 Total: $114.60 + $13,876.54 = $13.991 . 14
Project Notes
1 . During repair or reconstruction. applicant may incur additional costs
related to clearing and grubbing. dewatering. placement of topsoil. erosion
and sedimentation control, sanitary facilities. mobilization and flagging/traffic
control. Such costs are generally addressed in the "in-place" unit costs of
repair or reconstruction items. and not specifically addressed in the Scope of
Work. However, if a project requires an extraordinary use of any such item, to
where a specific reference in the PW should be considered. applicant is
advised to contact Colorado Department of Emergency Management
requesting a revision to the PW's Scope of Work.
2. The Applicant will notify FEMA and the State of their intent to perform
permanent work related to this site before any work commences in the field.
Failure to do so may jeopardize the sub-grant for permanent work related to
the work in this sub-grant.
3. Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.42, Grantees and Subgrantees are required to
retain records. including source documentation, to support
expenditures/costs incurred against the grant award, for 3 years from the
date of submission to FEMA of the final Financial Status Report.
4. The applicant must obtain all required federal. state. and local permits
prior to the commencement of work.
5. The subgrantee is requesting direct administrative costs that are directly
chargeable to this specific project. Associated eligible work is related to
administration of the PA project only and in accordance with 44 CFR 13.22.
These costs are treated consistently and uniformly as direct costs in all
federal awards and other subgrantee activities and are not included in any
approved indirect costs.
6. Project was reviewed for 406 Hazard Mitigation and a hazard mitigation
proposal is attached to this project worksheet.
7. The applicant is aware that all projects are subject to an insurance
review as stated in 44 C. F. R. Sections 206.252 and 206.253. If applicable, an
insurance determination will be made either as anticipated proceeds or actual
proceeds in accordance with the applicant's insurance policy that may affect
the total amount of the project.
8. The applicant is required to adhere to State and Federal Government
https://connectl .dhs.gov/em m ie/,DanaInfo=isource.tema.net.SSL+dispatchDestination.do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 9 of 24
Procurement rules and regulations and maintain adequate records to support
the basis for all purchasing of goods and materials and contracting services
for projects approved under the Public Assistance program. as stated in 44
CFR 13.36. The applicant has advised they have followed their normal
procurement procedures.
Hazard Mitigation Proposal
Is effective mitigation feasible on this site? No
If you answered Yes to the above question. the next question is required
Will mitigation be performed on this site? No
If you answered Yes to the above question. the next question is required
Do you wish to attach a Hazard Mitigation No
Proposal?
If you answered Yes to the above question. the next two questions are required
Please provide the Scope of Work for the estimate:
(maximum 4000 characters)
Would you like to add the Hazard Mitigation No
Proposal as a cost line item to the project cost?
GIS Coordinates
Project Location Latitude Longitude
BR 34-17A over St. Vrain River 40.23306 -104.89915
Special Considerations
1 . Does the damaged facility or item of work have insurance coverage and/or is it an insurable risk No
(e.g. , buildings. equipment. vehicles. etc)?
2. Is the damaged facility located within a floodplain or coastal high hazard area and/or does it have yes
an impact on a floodplain or wetland?
If you would like to make any comments. please enter them below.
(maximum 4000 characters)
Zone B - Areas between limits of the 100 year flood and and 500 year flood: etc. Flood Map Panel 0802660615C
dated September 28. 1982
3. Is the damaged facility or item of work located within or adjacent to a Coastal Barrier Resource No
System Unit or an Otherwise Protected Area?
4. Will the proposed facility repairs/reconstruction change the pre-disaster conditions (e.g., footprint. No
material. location, capacity, use of function)?
5. Does the applicant have a hazard mitigation proposal or would the applicant like technical Yes
assistance for a hazard mitigation proposal?
6. Is the damaged facility on the National Register of Historic Places or the state historic listing? Is it No
older than 50 years? Are there more. similar buildings near the site?
7. Are there any pristine or undisturbed areas on. or near. the project site? Are there large tracts of No
forestland?
8. Are there any hazardous materials at or adjacent to the damaged facility and/or item of work? No
9. Are there any other environmental or controversial issues associated with the damaged facility Yes
and/or item of work?
If you would like to make any comments. please enter them below.
(maximum 4000 characters)
EHP to conduct review
Attachments
https://connect I .dhs.gov/emm ie/,Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatch DestinationJo?. .. 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 10 of 24
User Date Document Type Description Hard Copy File File Name Action
Reference
KATHLEEN 02-25- Environmental/Historic EHP email approval of View
RUVARAC 2014 Document TRM.pdf(94.76 kb)
KATHLEEN 02 25- Floodplain Firmette.pdf(272.78 kb) View
RUVARAC 2014
For Category C, D, E, F, and G Projects only
Is effective mitigation feasible on this project? Yes
If you answered Yes to the above question. the next question is required
Will mitigation be performed on any sites in this Yes
project?
If you answered Yes to the above question . the next question is required
Do you wish to attach a Hazard Mitigation Yes
Proposal?
If you answered Yes to the above question. the next two questions are required
03/04/14 - Brian W. Drost, 406 Specialist - revised HMP (see
attachments): The applicant has indicated that the installation of
turf reinforcement mat on the roadside shoulders and
embankment slopes will re-direct channel flow across the slopes
reducing erosion at the facility and alleviating future damages.
1 ) Turf Reinforcement Mat — 2,200 ft in length (total
embankment damaged. Site 1 , N shoulder) x 10 ft average
Please provide the Scope of Work width within the right of way on the north shoulder (downstream
for the estimate: side) = 2,444.4 SY x 1 .2 factor for toe in excess of material =
2,933.28 SY x $10. 15/SY (CDOT Item Number 216-00301 .
2013 thru 03/31 ) = $29,772.79 Location 1 - SOW Items #1 and
2 = $213.462.26 $29,772.79/$213,462.26 = 13.95% This HMP
is considered cost effective per FEMA Disaster Assistance
Policy 9526. 1 . Section VII . B, 1 - 15% Rule. The net cost of
mitigation/cost of damages is 13.95% < 15%. This HMP is for
cost estimating purposes only. The Final design is the obligation
of the Applicant and/or their agent.
Would you like to add the Hazard Mitigation Yes
Proposal as a cost line item to the project cost?
Hazard Mitigation Proposal - 0909
Unit Unit of Unit Subgrant Cost
# Code Material and/or Description Quantity Measure Price Budget Type Estimate Action
Class
' Version 0 '
1 9999 Turf reinforcement mat (CDOT 2013 2933.28 SY $ 10. 15 $ 29,772.79
thru 3/31 /13, 216-00301 )
Total Cost: $ 29,772.79
Comments
Attachments
User Date Document Type Description Hard Copy File File Name Action
Reference
KATHLEEN 02-25- Mitigation WELCO18_HMP.pdf(60.48 View
RUVARAC 2014 Proposal kb)
https://connectl .dhs.gov/em m ie/,DanaInfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination.do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 11 of 24
Cost Estimate
Is this Project Worksheet for
(Preferred) Repair
Material Unit Unit of Subgrant Cost
Sequence Code and/or Unit Price Type Estimate Action
Quantity Measure Budget Class
Description
*** Version 0 *'`*
Work Completed
1 9999 Site 1 - 1 LS $ CONSTRUCTION Work $ 220,941 .51
Location 1 220.941 .51 Completed
2 9999 Site 2 - 1 LS $ 114.60 CONSTRUCTION Work
Location 2 Completed $ 114.60
Work To Be Completed
Site 2 - Work To
3 9999 Location 2 1 LS 13,876.54 CONSTRUCTION Be $ 13.876.54
Completed
Other
Direct
i 4 9901 Administrative 1 LS $ 1 .000.00 INDIRECT Other $ 1 .000.00
Costs CHARGES
(Subgrantee)
Total Cost : $ 235,932.65
Insurance Adjustments (Deductibles. Proceeds and Settlements) - 5900/5901
Unit Unit of Unit Subgrant Cost
Sequence Code Material and/or Description Quantity Measure Price Budget Type Estimate Action
Class
Total Cost : $ 0.00
Hazard Mitigation Proposal - 0909
Unit Unit of Unit Subgrant Cost
Sequence Code Material and/or Description Budget Type Action
Quantity Measure Price Estimate
Class
*** Version 0 ***
Turf reinforcement mat
1 9999 (CDOT 2013 thru 3/31 /13. 2933.28 SY $ 10. 15 $ 29.772.79
216-00301 )
Total Cost : S 29/72.79
il
Total Cost Estimate:
(Preferred Estimate Type + Insurance Adjustments + Hazard Mitigation Proposal) $ 265,705.44
Comments
Attachments
User Date Document Description
Hard Copy File
Type p Reference File Name Action
Miscellaneous Weld County - 2013 CDOT View
KATHLEEN 02-25- Average Unit Prices.pdf(37.37
https://connectl .dhs.gov/emmie . Danalnfo=isource. fema.net.SSL+dispatchDestination.do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 12 of 24
RUVARAC 2014 kb)
KATHLEEN 02-25- Calculation Direct
KATHLEEN
C 2014 Sheet Administrative WELCO18_DAC.pdf(18.78 kb) View
Costs
Existing Insurance Information
Insurance Type Policy No. Bldg/Property Content Insurance Deductible Years
Amount Amount Amount Amount Required
Comments
On file at JFO
Attachments
Comments and Attachments
Name of Section Comment Attachment
Project Description WELCO18 Location Map.pdf
WELCO18 CR34 over St. Vrain River Photos.pdf
Applicant photos.pdf
Damage Facilities Bridge Inspection Report.pdf
Post Storm WEL034 0-017 0A.pdf
WEL034 0-017 OA streambed history.xls
Special Considerations EHP email approval of TRM.pdf
Firmette.pdf
Mitigation WELCO18 HMP.pdf
Cost Estimate Weld County - 2013 CDOT Average Unit Prices.pdf
WELCO18 DAC.pdf
Insurance Information On file at JFO
Form 90-91 Weld County PW CR 34 Roads Bridge 34-17A Welco018 signed.pdf
Bundle Reference # (Amendment #) Date Awarded
PA-08-CO-4145-State-0051 (50) 05-01-2014
Subgrant Application - FEMA Form 90-91
Note: The Effective Cost Share for this application is 75%
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
PROJECT WORKSHEET
DISASTER PROJECT NO. PA ID NO. DATE CATEGORY
WELCO18 123-99123- 11-19-2013 C
FEMA 4145 - DR -CO 00
APPLICANT WELD (COUNTY) WORK COMPLETE AS OF
11-19-2013 94
Site 1 of 2
DAMAGED FACILITY
COUNTY Weld
Location 1 - CR 34 east of Bridge
LOCATION LATITUDE LONGITUDE
40.23281 -104.891
https://connect I .dhs.gov/emmie/,Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination .do?.. . 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 13 of 24
PA-08-CO-4145-PW 00665(0):
Location 1 — CR 34 Roadway east of Bridge
Begin
Lat: N40.23281
Long: -W104.89100
End
Lat: 40.23305
Long: -104.89807
DAMAGE DESCRIPTION AND DIMENSIONS:
PA-08-CO-4145-PW 00665(0):
During the incident period of September 11, 2013 to September 30, 2013, Weld County, Colorado received heavy rainfall and debris in the creeks,
streams and rivers which caused damage to numerous roads and bridges in Weld County. This project worksheet addresses damages to CR 34
roadway east of bridge approach and Bridge WEL034.0-017.0A over St. Vrain River, in Section 16. T3N, R67W.
Flooding of the St. Vrain River resulted in damages on CR 34 include washout of asphalt, roadway base and embankment material on the
eastbound and westbound travel lanes at seven (7) locations east of the bridge.
Asphalt Patch 1 on westbound roadway and shoulder measured 231 ft L x 10 ft W = 2,310 SF x 0.575 ft D = 1.328.3 CF x 146 LB/CF x 1 ton/2000
LB = 97.0 tons asphalt
Embankment Material lost in asphalt patch 1 is estimated 231 ft Lx 10 ft W x 1.5 ft D = 128.3 CY.
Asphalt Patch 2 on eastbound and westbound roadway and shoulder measured 311 ft L x 25 ft W = 7,775 SF x 0.575 ft D = 4,470.6 CF x 146
LB/CF x 1 ton/2000 LB = 326.4 tons asphalt
Embankment Material lost in asphalt patch 2 is estimated 311 ft L x 25 ft W x 1 .5 ft D = 431.9 CY.
Asphalt Patch 3 on eastbound and westbound roadway and shoulder measured 25 ft L x 27 ft W = 675 SF x 0.575 ft D = 388.1 CF x 146 LB/CF x 1
ton/2000 LB = 28.3 tons asphalt
Embankment Material lost in asphalt patch 3 is estimated 25 ft L x 27 ft W x 1.5 ft D = 37.5 CY.
60 LF of 30 inch CMP was washed away with the flood waters and not recovered.
18 inch Rip Rap at north and south ends of culvert was washed away with the flood waters, 15 ft in L x 15 ft in W x 1.5 ft D x 2 ends = 25.0 CY
Asphalt Patch 4 on westbound roadway and shoulder measured 19 ft L x 4 ft W = 76 SF x 0.575 ft D = 43.7 CF x 146 LB/CF x 1 ton/2000 LB = 3.2
tons asphalt
Embankment Material lost in asphalt patch 4 is estimated 19 ft L x 4 ft W x 1.5 ft D = 4.2 CY.
Asphalt Patch 5 on westbound roadway and shoulder measured 18 ft L x 3 ft W = 54 SF x 0.575 ft D = 31.1 CF x 146 LB/CF x 1 ton/2000 LB = 2.3
tons asphalt
Embankment Material lost in asphalt patch 5 is estimated 18 ft L x 3 ft W x 1.5 ft D = 3.0 CY.
Asphalt Patch 6 on westbound roadway and shoulder measured 117 ft L x 11 ft W = 1,287 SF x 0.575 ft D = 740.0 CF x 146 LB/CF x 1 ton/2000 LB
= 54.0 tons asphalt
Embankment Material lost in asphalt patch 6 is estimated 117 ft Lx 11 ft W x 1.5 ft D = 71 .5 CY.
Asphalt Patch 7 on westbound roadway and shoulder measured 24 ft L x 3 ft W = 72 SF x 0.575 ft D = 41 .4 CF x 146 LB/CF x 1 ton/2000 LB = 3.0
tons asphalt
Embankment Material lost in asphalt patch 7 is estimated 24 ft L x 3 ft W x 1.5 ft D = 4.0 CY.
Embankment material was also lost at three additional locations on the north and south shoulders outside of the limits of the asphalt patches.
North shoulder = 195 ft L x 8 ft Wx 2 ft D = 115.6 CY and 1 ,207 ft L x 14 ft Wx 2 ft D = 1,251.7 CY
South Shoulder = 721 ft L x 14 ft W x 2 ft D = 747.7 CY
Location 1 Total Asphalt = 514.2 Tons, Total Embankment Material = 2,795.4 CY, Total 30 inch CMP = 60LF, Total Rip Rap = 25CY
SCOPE OF WORK:
PA-08-CO-4145-PW 00665(0):
WORK COMPLETED
Location 1 — CR 34 Roadway east of bridge
1 — Fill embankment material lost in roadway travel lanes, embankment and shoulders — 2.795.4 CY x 1.82 (Conversion Factor CY ABC Class 6
Material to Tons = 5,087.6 tons x $33.70/ton (CDOT Item Number 304-06000 Aggregate Base Course Class 6 x 2 due to economies of scale as
compared with number of CDOT annual projects) = $171 ,452. 12
2 — Install asphalt on eastbound and westbound travel lanes = 514.2 tons x $81.70/ton (CDOT Item Number 403-33741 Hot Bituminous Pavement
(Grading S) (75) (PG 64-22) _ $42,010.14
3- Install 60 LF of 30 inch CMP x 90.00/LF (CDOT Item Number 603-10180) = $5,400.00
4 — Install Rip Rap north and south ends of 30 inch CMP = 25.0 CY x $83.17/CY (Rip Rap 18 inch CDOT Item Number 506-00218) = $2,079.25
Location 1 Total: $220,941.51
Site 2 of 2
DAMAGED FACILITY:
https://connect l .dhs.gov/emm ie/,Danalnfo=isource.fema.net.SSL+dispatchDestination.do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 14 of 24
Location 2 - Bridge 34-17 A over St. Vrain River
COUNTY: Weld
LOCATION: LATITUDE: LONGITUDE:
40.23306 -104.89915
PA-08-CO-4145-PW 00665(0):
Location 2 — Bridge WEL034.0-017.0A over St. Vrain River
Lat: N40.23306
Long: -W104.89915
DAMAGE DESCRIPTION AND DIMENSIONS:
PA-08-CO-4145-PW 00665(0):
The concrete and steel bridge. 294.1 ft in length x 30.1 ft in width, consisting of six (6) spans traverses the St. Vrain River. Structure components
consist of a four (4) inch asphalt deck on a 6 inch concrete deck supported by four (4) — 47 ft — 6 inch long - 7 ft wide exterior and 8 ft wide interior x
30 inch deep prestressed concrete double tee girders in each span, five (5) 20 inch x 20 inch concrete cap on five (5) 8 inch x 8 inch steel H piles
with precast concrete panels and two (2) 16 inch x 20 inch concrete cap on five (5) 8 inch x 8 inch steel H piles with concrete backwalls. The
bridge is flanked on both sides with a galvanized w-beam on steel posts.
1 . Damages observed at the bridge include voids behind the backwall of both the east and west abutments. The missing material is estimated to
be 30ftLx9ftWx1 ftD = 10.0 CY per abutment x 2 = 20CY.
2. Rip Rap was washed away at the northeast wingwall of the north abutment estimated to be 15 ft L x 5 ft W towards the channel x 1.5 ft D = 4.2
CY.
3.Erosion at the base of the piers as shown below [77CY]:
3a. Pier 2 [in the bridge report] estimated to be 25LF x 3FT wide x 3FT deep/2 = 112.5CF/27 = 4.2CY use 5CY
3b. Pier 3 [in the bridge report] no scour shown on Streambed History Table
3c. Pier 4 [in the bridge report] estimated to be 25LF x 9FT wide x 9FT deep/2 = 1012.5CF/27 = 37.5CY use 38CY
3d. Pier 5 [in the bridge report] estimated to be 25LF x 6.5FT wide x 6.5FT deep/2 = 528. 1CF/27 = 19.6CY use 20CY
3e. Pier 6 [in the bridge report] estimated to be 25LF x 5.5FT wide x 5.5FT deep/2 = 378.1 CF/27 =14.0CY use 14CY
4. Rip rap and soil/seed cover washed away at the southwest and southeast wingwall/embankments estimated to be 30LF x 15FT wide x 1.5FT
deep/27 = 25CY each x 2 = 50CY [rip rap]. Soil washed away estimated to be 30LF x 15FT wide x 4/12FT deep/27 = 5.5CY x 2 = 11 CY
5. Debris was deposited at the bridge location that is incidental to the project. The quantity is estimated at 10CY.
Recent bridge inspection report was provided by the applicant dated May 8, 2012. The bridge was built in 1960 and had a sufficiency rating of 63.4
in 2012, structurally deficient.
2012 inspection notes of elements include: replacing inadequate bridge and approach rail. bridge deck pavement crack sealing and filling potholes,
rust on all guide rail posts noted near deck connection, spalls with exposed reinforcement on concrete diaphragms, water stains on diaphragms
and prestressed girder ends, rust noted on steel H piles. No significant defects were noted on the precast concrete panels between H piles at the
abutments. The deck condition is noted as in satisfactory condition (6) on a scale of 0 to 9. The superstructure is noted as in satisfactory condition
(6) and substructure is noted in poor good condition (4). The channel banks were observed to be good condition with minor problems (7).
Maintenance items included bridge deck repair sealing cracks in asphalt surface, replacing bridge and approach railing and replacing damaged
concrete in piers.
Applicant submitted Bridge Inspection Report dated 9/26/13 that indicates scour at the piers. In addition, Streambed History data was submitted
that shows various amounts of scour occurred at specific piers since the 2012 report, therefore Item #3 above was added after a site visit occurred
on 3/21/14.
The Applicant has provided pictures of the road and bridge facilities documenting damages. These photos are attached to this project worksheet.
SCOPE OF WORK:
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00665(0):
Location 2 — WEL034.0-017.0A over St. Vrain River
WORK COMPLETED
2. Installed Rip Rap [recycled concrete] NE Wing = 4.2CY x 1.82 = 7.64T x $15.00 = $114.60 [Weld unit price for Concrete Tearout $7.50 x 2 =
$15.00 to allow for installation cost] Note: Recycled concrete was installed temporarily as post storm protection.
https://connect I .dhs.gov/emmie/,Dana[nfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatch Destination.do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 15 of 24
WORK COMPLETED TOTAL = $114.60
WORK TO BE COMPLETED
1. Install 20.0 CY flow fill behind both west and east abutment walls x $90.00/CY estimated (Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver,
CO) = $1 .800.00 - $2,000.00
2a. Remove recycled concrete [Item 2 above in Work Completed] that was placed temporarily at the time of the repair immediately after the event.
4.2CY x 1.82 = 7.64 TONS x $7.50/T = $57.30 (Unit price of $7.50/T is the same as the installation cost shown in Item 2)
2b. Install Rip Rap NE Wing = 4.2 CY x $83.17/CY (Rip Rap 18 inch CDOT Item Number 506-00218) = $349.31
2c. Install topsoil over rip rap. 15FT x 5FT = 75SF x [4"/12] = 25CF/27 = 0.93CY use 1CY x $10.11/CY = $10.11 CDOT 207-00205 [$10.11 x 2 for
small job = $20.22]
2d. Install seeding. 75SF/43560 = 0.0017 AC x $545.81/AC = $1 .00 COOT 212-00006 [use $10.00]
2e. Install soil retention blanket. 75SF/9 = 8.33SY x $2.15/SY = $17.91 CDOT 216-00042 [use $40.00]
3. Install rip rap at piers. 77CY x $83.17 = $6,404.09
4a. Install rip rap at southwest and and southeast wingwalls/embankment. 50CY x $83.17 = $4,158.50
4b. Install topsoil over rip rap. 11CY x $10.11/CY = $111 .21 CDOT 207-00205
4c. Install seeding. 900SF/43560 = 0.02AC x $545.81/AC = $10.91 CDOT 212-00006
4d. Install soil retention blanket. 900SF/9 = 100SY x $2.15/SY = $215 CDOT 216-00042
5. Remove debris incidental to the project. 10CY estimated at $500 to remove.
Note: Applicant is responsible for disposing debris at a certified disposal site.
WORK TO BE COMPLETED TOTAL = $13,876.54
Location 2 Total: $114.60 + $13,876.54 = $13,991.14
Project Notes
1. During repair or reconstruction, applicant may incur additional costs related to clearing and grubbing, dewatering, placement of topsoil, erosion
and sedimentation control. sanitary facilities. mobilization and flagging/traffic control. Such costs are generally addressed in the "in-place" unit costs
of repair or reconstruction items, and not specifically addressed in the Scope of Work. However, if a project requires an extraordinary use of any
such item, to where a specific reference in the PW should be considered, applicant is advised to contact Colorado Department of Emergency
Management requesting a revision to the PWs Scope of Work.
2. The Applicant will notify FEMA and the State of their intent to perform permanent work related to this site before any work commences in the
field. Failure to do so may jeopardize the sub-grant for permanent work related to the work in this sub-grant.
3. Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.42, Grantees and Subgrantees are required to retain records, including source documentation, to support
expenditures/costs incurred against the grant award. for 3 years from the date of submission to FEMA of the final Financial Status Report.
4. The applicant must obtain all required federal, state, and local permits prior to the commencement of work.
5. The subgrantee is requesting direct administrative costs that are directly chargeable to this specific project. Associated eligible work is related
to administration of the PA project only and in accordance with 44 CFR 13.22. These costs are treated consistently and uniformly as direct costs in
all federal awards and other subgrantee activities and are not included in any approved indirect costs.
6. Project was reviewed for 406 Hazard Mitigation and a hazard mitigation proposal is attached to this project worksheet.
7. The applicant is aware that all projects are subject to an insurance review as stated in 44 C.F.R. Sections 206.252 and 206.253. If applicable,
an insurance determination will be made either as anticipated proceeds or actual proceeds in accordance with the applicant's insurance policy that
may affect the total amount of the project.
8. The applicant is required to adhere to State and Federal Government Procurement rules and regulations and maintain adequate records to
support the basis for all purchasing of goods and materials and contracting services for projects approved under the Public Assistance program, as
stated in 44 CFR 13.36. The applicant has advised they have followed their normal procurement procedures.
Does the Scope of Work change the pre-disaster
conditions at the site? Yes No Special Considerations included? Yes No
Hazard Mitigation proposal included? Yes No Is there insurance coverage on this facility? Yes No
PROJECT COST
ITEM CODE NARRATIVE QUANTITY/UNIT UNIT PRICE COST
' Version 0 'ti'*
Work Completed
https://connectl .dhs.gov/emm ie/,Dana[nfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatch Destination .do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 16 of 24
1 9999 Site 1 - Location 1 1 /LS $ 220.941 .51 $ 220.941 .51
2 9999 Site 2 - Location 2 1 /LS $ 114.60 $ 114.60
Work To Be Completed
3 9999 Site 2 - Location 2 1 /LS $ 13.876.54 $ 13.876.54
Other
4 9901 Direct Administrative Costs 1 /LS $ 1 .000.00 $ 1 .000.00
(Subgrantee)
5 0909 Hazard Mitigation Proposal 1 /LS $ 29.772.79 $ 29,772.79
TOTAL COST $ 265,705.44
PREPARED BY KATHLEEN RUVARAC TITLE TAC BRIDGE SPECIALIST SIGNATURE
APPLICANT REP Roy Rjdisill TITLE Director - OEM SIGNATURE
WELD (COUNTY) : PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00665
Conditions Information
Review Name Condition Type Condition Name Description Monitored Status
This review does not address all
federal. state and local requirements.
Acceptance of federal funding
Standard requires recipient to comply with all
Final Review Other (EHP) Condition #2 federal. state and local laws. Failure No Approved
to obtain all appropriate federal,
state and local environmental
permits and clearances may
jeopardize federal funding.
Any change to the approved scope
Final Review Other (EHP) Standard of work will require re-evaluation for No Approved
Condition #1 compliance with NEPA and other pp
Laws and Executive Orders.
Gravel/borrow materials for work to
National Historic be completed must be obtained from
Final Review Other (EHP) Preservation Act one of the following pre-approved No Approved
sources: (SHPO approved source, pp
(NHPA) CO Licensed Pit, commercial source.
contractor or county Stockpiles).
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION: 7.
Contact the Service immediately by
telephone at (303) 236-4773 if a
Preble's is found alive, dead, injured.
or hibernating within the project area.
Please also contact the Service if
any other listed species are found
within the project area. 8. To the
maximum extent practicable, limit
disturbing (e.g. . crushing, trampling)
or removing (e.g. , cutting. clearing)
all vegetation . such as willows, trees,
shrubs. and grasses within riparian
and adjacent upland habitats. a.
Restrict the temporary or permanent
removal of vegetation to the footprint
of the project area. b. Minimize the
use of heavy machinery and use
smaller equipment when possible. c.
https://connectl .dhs.gov/emmie/,Danaln fo=isource. fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination.do?. . . 5/7/2014
I
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 17 of 24
Soil compaction : Temporarily line
access routes with geotextiles or
other materials, especially in wet.
unstable soils to protect roots and
the seed bank. 9. Use the attached
table to track the acres or square
feet of riparian and upland habitats
temporarily or permanently affected
by the response activities. a.
Temporary Impacts: Native
vegetation and habitats will
reestablish following rehabilitation
(e.g. , access route that is
rehabilitated with native. weed-free
seeds and plants). b. Permanent
Impacts: Riparian or upland habitats
will not return as a result of project
activities (e.g. . road surface.
concrete footings) 10. Track the
volumes of any water from onsite
sources stored or used for dust
abatement. soil compaction.
concrete mixing. or other activities.
11 . Locate, store, stage. operate,
and refuel equipment outside of
riparian or adjacent upland habitats.
a. Operate equipment from
previously disturbed or modified
roadbeds or road shoulders above
the riparian habitats. b. Limit the
Endangered number of entrance and exit points
Final Review Other (EHP) Species Act leading into the project area. c. No Approved
(ESA) Stockpile topsoil and debris outside
the riparian corridor and protect from
stream flows or runoff. 12. During the
Preble's active season (May 1
through November 1 ) , work only
during daylight hours to avoid
disrupting Preble's nocturnal
activities. 13. Promptly remove
waste to minimize site disturbance
and avoid attracting predators. 14.
Cover exposed holes or piles of
loose dirt with boards. tarps. or other
materials to prevent entrapment. 15.
Use best management practices
(BMPs) to limit construction-related
disturbance. such as soil
compaction, erosion. and
sedimentation. and to prevent the
spread of invasive weeds; a. Soil
compaction: Establish one access
route for workers, vehicles. and
machinery. preferably along a
previously disturbed surface or route.
b. Soil compaction: Temporarily line
access routes with geotextiles or
other materials, especially in wet.
unstable soils. c. Weed control:
Wash and inspect vehicles and
equipment before entering or leaving
the project area so that they are free
of noxious weed seeds and plant
https://connect I .dhs.gov/emmie/, Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatch Destination .do?. .. 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 18 of 24
parts. d. Weed control: Use only
weed free certified materials.
including gravel. sand, top soil. seed.
and mulch. 16. Complete
construction before beginning
restoration or enhancement
activities.
PRE-CONSTRUCTION DESIGN : 1 .
Design the project to avoid and
minimize the permanent and
temporary impacts to riparian and
adjacent upland habitats. a. Before
construction. identify and prioritize
riparian and adjacent upland habitats
within the project area. Design the
project so that it avoids these
habitats whenever possible. b.
Minimize the amount of concrete.
riprap. bridge footings. and other
"hard." impermeable engineering
features within the stream channel
and riparian or adjacent upland
habitats. c. Use bioengineering
techniques to stabilize stream banks.
d. Minimize the number and footprint
of access routes. staging areas, and
work areas. e. Locate access routes,
staging areas, and work areas within
previously disturbed or modified non-
habitat areas. f. Maintain habitat
connectivity under bridges or through
culverts by installing ledges or dry
culverts adjacent to the culverts with
Endangered water flow. g. Avoid fragmenting
Final Review Other (EHP) Species Act linear riparian corridors. 2. Install No Approved
(ESA) limits of work fencing (e.g. . orange
barrier netting or silt fencing) ,
signage, or other visible markers to
delineate access routes and the
project area from habitats. Use this
fencing to enforce no-entry zones. 3.
Hold a preconstruction briefing for
onsite personnel to explain the limits
of work and other conservation
measures. 4. Follow regional
stormwater guidelines and design
best management practices (BMPs)
to control contamination, erosion,
and sedimentation. such as silt
fences. silt basins, gravel bags. and
other controls needed to stabilize
soils in denuded or graded areas.
during and after construction. 5.
Locate utilities along existing road
corridors. and if possible. within the
roadway or road shoulder. a. Bury
overhead utilities whenever possible.
b. Directionally bore utilities and
pipes underneath habitats. 6.
Develop and implement a habitat
restoration plan that addresses site
preparation . planting techniques.
control of non-native weeds, native
littps://connectl .dhs.gov/emm ie/,Dana(nfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatch Destination .do?. .. 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 19 of 24
seed mixtures, and post-construction
monitoring.
POST-CONSTRUCTION : 17. Upon
project completion, revegetate all
disturbed areas with native shrubs.
trees, and grasses. a. Rip
compacted access routes prior to
replanting with native vegetation. b.
Fill and reseed with weed free
material and native seed mixtures. c.
Endangered Consult the Service before finalizing
Final Review Other EHP Species Act a seed and plant list. 18. Bury riprap.
(EHP) p No Approved
(ESA) then plant with native riparian
vegetation. 19. Rehabilitate adjacent
habitats impacted by floodwaters to
restore connectivity and prevent
future impacts from erosion or
sedimentation. 20. Consider
monitoring the revegetated areas for
success. The Service can help
establish success criteria during the
consultation process.
The applicant should implement
appropriate FWS conservation
measures identified in the
Emergency Consultation between
FEMA and USFWS. dated
Endangered September 24. 2013. to the extent
Final Review Other (EHP) Species Act possible; including a post-
p construction estimate of the amount No Approved
(ESA) of habitat affected by the emergency
response, an evaluation of how
conservation recommendations were
implemented, and the results of
implementation in minimizing
adverse effects.
If ground disturbing activities occur
during construction. applicant will
monitor ground disturbance and if
Final Review Other (EHP) Standard any potential archeological No Approved
Condition #3 resources are discovered. will pp
immediately cease construction in
that area and notify the State and
FEMA.
If ground disturbing activities occur
ii during construction. applicant will
monitor ground disturbance and if
EHP Review Other (EHP)
Standard any potential archeological
Condition #3 resources are discovered. will No Recommended
immediately cease construction in
that area and notify the State and
FEMA.
This review does not address all
federal. state and local requirements.
Acceptance of federal funding
Standard requires recipient to comply with all
EHP Review Other (EHP) Condition #2 federal. state and local laws. Failure No Recommended
i1 to obtain all appropriate federal.
state and local environmental
permits and clearances may
jeopardize federal funding.
https://connect I .dhs.gov/emmie/,Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination.do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 20 of 24
Any change to the approved scope
EHP Review Other (EHP) Standard of work will require re-evaluation for No Recommended
Condition #1 compliance with NEPA and other
Laws and Executive Orders.
Gravel/borrow materials for work to
National Historic be completed must be obtained from
EHP Review Other (EHP) Preservation Act one of the following pre-approved
sources: (SHPO approved source. No Recommended
(NHPA)
CO Licensed Pit, commercial source.
contractor or county Stockpiles).
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION: 7.
Contact the Service immediately by
telephone at (303) 236-4773 if a
Preble's is found alive. dead, injured.
or hibernating within the project area.
Please also contact the Service if
any other listed species are found
within the project area. 8. To the
maximum extent practicable. limit
disturbing (e.g.. crushing, trampling)
or removing (e.g. , cutting. clearing)
all vegetation. such as willows, trees,
shrubs. and grasses within riparian
and adjacent upland habitats. a.
Restrict the temporary or permanent
removal of vegetation to the footprint
of the project area. b. Minimize the
use of heavy machinery and use
smaller equipment when possible. c.
Soil compaction: Temporarily line
access routes with geotextiles or
other materials, especially in wet.
unstable soils to protect roots and
the seed bank. 9. Use the attached
Endangered table to track the acres or square
EHP Review Other (EHP) Species Act feet of riparian and upland habitats No Recommended
(ESA) temporarily or permanently affected
by the response activities. a.
Temporary Impacts: Native
vegetation and habitats will
reestablish following rehabilitation
(e.g. , access route that is
rehabilitated with native. weed-free
seeds and plants). b. Permanent
Impacts: Riparian or upland habitats
will not return as a result of project
activities (e.g. , road surface.
concrete footings) 10. Track the
volumes of any water from onsite
sources stored or used for dust
abatement. soil compaction.
concrete mixing. or other activities.
11 . Locate, store. stage. operate.
and refuel equipment outside of
riparian or adjacent upland habitats.
a. Operate equipment from
previously disturbed or modified
roadbeds or road shoulders above
the riparian habitats. b. Limit the
number of entrance and exit points
leading into the project area. c.
Stockpile topsoil and debris outside
https://connect I .dhs.gov/emmie/..Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination.do?. .. 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 21 of 24
the riparian corridor and protect from
stream flows or runoff. 12. During the
Preble's active season (May 1
through November 1 ) . work only
during daylight hours to avoid
disrupting Preble's nocturnal
activities. 13. Promptly remove
waste to minimize site disturbance
and avoid attracting predators. 14.
Cover exposed holes or piles of
loose dirt with boards. tarps, or other
materials to prevent entrapment. 15.
Use best management practices
(BMPs) to limit construction-related
disturbance. such as soil
compaction. erosion. and
sedimentation. and to prevent the
spread of invasive weeds: a. Soil
compaction: Establish one access
route for workers, vehicles. and
machinery, preferably along a
previously disturbed surface or route.
b. Soil compaction: Temporarily line
access routes with geotextiles or
other materials, especially in wet.
unstable soils. c. Weed control:
Wash and inspect vehicles and
equipment before entering or leaving
the project area so that they are free
of noxious weed seeds and plant
parts. d. Weed control: Use only
weed free certified materials.
including gravel, sand, top soil. seed.
and mulch. 16. Complete
construction before beginning
restoration or enhancement
activities.
PRE-CONSTRUCTION DESIGN : 1 .
Design the project to avoid and
minimize the permanent and
temporary impacts to riparian and
adjacent upland habitats. a. Before
construction. identify and prioritize
riparian and adjacent upland habitats
within the project area. Design the
project so that it avoids these
habitats whenever possible. b.
Minimize the amount of concrete.
riprap, bridge footings. and other
'hard," impermeable engineering
EHP Review features within the stream channel
and riparian or adjacent upland
habitats. c. Use bioengineering
techniques to stabilize stream banks.
d. Minimize the number and footprint
of access routes. staging areas. and
work areas. e. Locate access routes,
staging areas, and work areas within
previously disturbed or modified non-
habitat areas. f. Maintain habitat
connectivity under bridges or through
culverts by installing ledges or dry
culverts adjacent to the culverts with
https://connectl .dhs.gov/emm ie/. Danal n f-o=isource.fiema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination .do'?. .. 5/7/2014
-
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 22 of 24
water flow. g. Avoid fragmenting
linear riparian corridors. 2. Install
limits of work fencing (e.g. , orange
barrier netting or silt fencing) ,
signage, or other visible markers to
delineate access routes and the
project area from habitats. Use this
fencing to enforce no-entry zones. 3.
Hold a preconstruction briefing for
onsite personnel to explain the limits
of work and other conservation
measures. 4. Follow regional
stormwater guidelines and design
best management practices (BMPs)
Endangered to control contamination, erosion,
Other (EHP) Species Act and sedimentation, such as silt
p No Recommended
(ESA) fences. silt basins. gravel bags. and
other controls needed to stabilize
soils in denuded or graded areas.
during and after construction. 5.
Locate utilities along existing road
corridors. and if possible. within the
roadway or road shoulder. a. Bury
overhead utilities whenever possible.
b. Directionally bore utilities and
pipes underneath habitats. 6.
Develop and implement a habitat
restoration plan that addresses site
preparation. planting techniques.
control of non-native weeds, native
seed mixtures. and post-construction
monitoring.
The applicant should implement
appropriate FWS conservation
measures identified in the
Emergency Consultation between
FEMA and USFWS. dated
Endangered September 24. 2013. to the extent
EHP Review Other (EHP) Species Act possible; including a post-
EHP construction estimate of the amount No Recommended
(ESA) of habitat affected by the emergency
response, an evaluation of how
conservation recommendations were
implemented, and the results of
implementation in minimizing
adverse effects.
POST-CONSTRUCTION : 17. Upon
project completion, revegetate all
disturbed areas with native shrubs.
trees, and grasses. a. Rip
compacted access routes prior to
replanting with native vegetation. b.
Endangered Fill and reseed with weed free
EHP Review Other (EHP) Species Act material and native seed mixtures. c. No Recommended
(ESA) Consult the Service before finalizing
a seed and plant list. 18. Bury riprap.
then plant with native riparian
vegetation. 19. Rehabilitate adjacent
habitats impacted by floodwaters to
restore connectivity and prevent
future impacts from erosion or
sedimentation. 20. Consider
https://connectl .dhs.gov/emm ie/, Danal nfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatch Destination .do?. . . 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 23 of 24
monitoring the revegetated areas for
success. The Service can help
establish success criteria during the
consultation process.
Internal Comments
No. Queue User Date/Time Reviewer Comments
05-01 -2014
6 Award Review SYSTEM 09:57 PM ACCEPTED
GMT
Final Reviewer finds eligible the application and approves the
funding of this CAT-C project worksheet based on the
04- 18-2014 applicant having performed all required procurement
5 Final Review PALACIO 11 :47 PM procedures, perform all required special considerations
JOSE GMT recommendations such as permits to address EHP
considerations and securing all actual cost documentation for
the financial reconciliation of this project. Task Force Leader-
J . Palacio 04/18/2014
Category C , 95.0% Complete, Weld County. The applicant
used force account and contract labor and equipment to
replace eroded embankment. road base. shoulder material,
and asphalt, replace a 30" Corrugated Metal Pipe, and replace
washed out rip rap surrounding the CMP along County Road
34 and on the NE wing wall of the CR 34 bridge spanning the
St. Vrain River. The applicant will use force account and
contract labor to refill voids behind the abutments of the bridge.
Mitigation : The applicant will install turf reinforcement mats on
the roadside shoulders and embankments in order to re-direct
channel flow and reduce localized erosion.
- dsharon - 03/07/2014 14:37:28 GMT
Project site work is not in a mapped wetland. - dsharon -
03/06/2014 20:09:28 GMT
The entire community will benefit from the completion of this
DELAUNE 03-07-2014 project. - dsharon - 03/06/2014 20:09:46 GMT
4 EHP Review 04:28 PM Action is addressed under the attached Emergency
JONATHAN GMT Consultation between FEMA and USFWS. dated September
24, 2013. The consultation includes conservation measures
intended to minimize impacts to the federally listed Preble's
Meadow Jumping Mouse, Ute's Lady's Tress and Colorado
Butterfly Bush, and Designated Critical Habitat protected under
the ESA. - dsharon - 03/06/2014 20:04:52 GMT
Project is located in Zone A, FIRM panel 0802660750C, dated
September 28th. 1982. Per 44 CFR Part 9.5 (g) Step 1 : Project
repairs are determined to have no effect on floodplain or
wetlands provided that the repairs remain in the existing
footprint and do not impact previously undisturbed areas. No
further floodplains review is required. - dsharon - 03/06/2014
20:09: 12 GMT
The scope of work has been reviewed and meets the criteria of
the 2013 signed Programmatic Agreement, Item III : Section A.
B, C, G , and H agreed to by FEMA and the SHPO. - dsharon -
03/06/2014 20:02:25 GMT
03-06-2014
Initial Review 3/6/2014: EHP rework comments have been addressed. Mark
3 (EHP Rework) SPAHR MARK G6T PM Spahr, FEMA PAC
MMitigation DROST 03-04-2014 The Hazard Mitigation Proposal is approved - Brian W. Drost,
2 Review BRIAN GMT PM 406 Specialist
Applicant's property insurance through the CAPP risk pool
https://connect I .dhs.gov/em m ie/,Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination.do?. . . 5/7/20 14
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 24 of 24
Insurance GILLIAM 03-03-2014 affords no coverage for bridges, roadways or embankments.
1 02:05 PM Insurance proceeds are not anticipated, and there is no
Review ROBERT GMT insurance purchase requirement.
https://connectl .dhs.gov/emm ie/,Dana[nfo=isource. fema.net,SSL+dispatch Destination.do?... 5/7/2014
Hello