Thread by @shayshinecastle

Yo, #Boulder. I hope you're all cozy at home, bc tonight's city council meeting is going to be *long* and full. We're getting started a bit early for a briefing on the South Boulder Creek flood work. Here's where we stand on that: boulderbeat.news/2019/02/06/bou…

City's first briefing in "several years" Jane Brautigam said. Attendance on behalf of council is voluntary. Half the council is here (Yates, Carlisle, Nagle and Weaver) so far.

No reference materials provided by staff. There is a presentation, but I don't have a copy of that either, so my tweets might be fewer and farther between since I need to take good notes.

Jones and Morzel here now. Going through the history of how we got here now. Molly Scarbrough reminding council that it was the 2015 city council who directed staff to move ahead with an option that included a floodwall in the U.S. 36 right-of-way.

Chatting CDOT approval now. The CDOT right of way line might need to be moved, Scarbrough is saying.

CDOT verbally agreed to keep working with Boulder.

Scarbrough: Ppl at all levels of CDOT are paying attention.

Douglas Sullivan, I believe, engineering project manager, chatting now. Talking about the scope of work. Reminder that preliminary design will take 1 yr - 15 mos.

More likely 15 months, Sullivan said.

Final design will take another year to 18 months.

Sullivan: "At this point in the conversation, we're talking about a range, not a number" when it comes to cost.

Chambers are quite full, especially for this early. Whole group with signs just came in. Younger people; I can't see their signs.

Sullivan sounds very stern as he's chatting about the costs and reminding council that they are estimates; they will change.

Estimates are for construction; land acquisition, open space enhancements, etc. are NOT included.

Weaver: Biggest concern for us right now is CDOT. We have already operated under the assumption that they would be happy to have flood mitigation there. Where are they on the upsides of this plan?

Sullivan: City has tried to highlight positive accolades that we're funding this. On some level they were concerned about "precedent" it sets for the rest of the state.

Chatting a bit about ground water monitoring at CU South now: saturation, creek flow, etc. City has installed meters there to keep track of those things, plus some wells on CDOT and CU land that info will be pulled from.

Morzel, on the project timeline: I don't see anything about when and if OSMP land might be disposed to CDOT. And where would that fit into the discussion?
Scarbrough: Current concept doesn't require that. That's still what we're working toward.

Scarbrough: "There are points we hope to get greater commitment from CDOT along the way. If we get to a point we think we can not move forward with concept, one option is to move floodwall on OSMP land."

Jones: In terms of next steps, when is our next briefing?
Brautigam: March 19 during Budget 101. But on this topic, there isn't one scheduled. If we are wanting regular updates, we need to figure out when and how to do that.

Jones: Just keep us abreast.
Scarbrough: As we know more, we'll let you know.

Hey @threadreaderapp please unroll. Thank you!