Tbh, my heart's not in it, but I'll tweet when they get to the council discussion over options.
Also, the flood wall can only go partially in CDOT's right of way. The rest will have to go in open space
Should staff proceed with a design that puts the floodwall on open space?
What’s the better change to accommodate CU: Land use changes, or change to 500-yr design to 100-yr or more?
The council will debate land use changes vs. changing the detention area. Right now, it's big enough for a 500-yr storm. It could be made smaller, for a between 100-yr and 500-yr storm
I'm sorry, dude, and followers.
Council will revisit that later in the evening.
500-yr storm is 0.2% chance of happening every year; 100-yr is 1% chance.
Public (129 acres)
Parks, Urban, Other (65 acres)
Open Space- Other (118 acres)
Planning Board public hearing to approve/deny (2 months)
City council public hearing (two months)....
Arthur: 3 qs. Knowing what we know about CDOT's position, are you comfortable with us ... figuring out if we can make the flood wall work in open space?
Draper:"This is an expensive adjustment. We'll have to build a not inexpensive road over the dam at the city's expense. It's not a cheap road."
Draper: We discussed it amongst ourselves.... millions of dollars. "It's not insignificant."
"These are just things to think about. But this is doable."
Draper: I don't think we object. It's a matter of cost, availability of dirt, etc.
Weaver: That's not my recollection.
Weaver: It would seem crazy to me to build something this big and not put access off 93 as well. I don't think we have a transportation plan.
Draper: That would get rid of a lot of problems. (Laughs)
Brockett: It sounds pretty awful. But my understanding was that (decision) came from a pretty short discussion.
Brockett: I'm just saying, from a thorough analysis says.
Arthur: "We'd be taking the most sensitive stretch of this" (land) and having to put something there.
John Potter: (that's the guy I didn't name earlier! I knew I knew him!) We're not in the flood mitigation space. That's not what we do.
Burke: The issue now is if there are going to be additional impacts to open space (5 acres) where would they go now to make up that?
"Everybody wants the same land," Yates jokes. "It's like the Middle East."
Potter: We'd try to transplant them. Without much hope, but we'd try.
Don D'Amico corrects her. She was looking at the orchid habitat, which is concentrated along the highway.
Morzel: Where do you hit collapse?
D'Amico: We're still working through the impacts.
Burke: idk. Were there any options we threw out for cost considerations that compare to what we're doing now?
Jones: Given that we don't have a better option, yes.
Jones: Wait. You're giving your opinion
Jones tries to interrupt again.
So that's where we are. Council still not agreeing that CU should get to use the amount of its own land that it says it needs. *le sigh*
Arthur: We do
Jones: That's a political decision.
Weaver agreeing. It will show the tradeoffs.
Staff continuing conversations with open space RE: flood wall and possible mitigation. Staff working on options that give CU the acreage they need by shrinking detention (but getting as close to 500-yr as possible) or doing some land use swaps.
Arthur: If we are continuing to go with general concept we've discussed, all of the work we're doing still fits within this option so we can keep plugging along.
No, Jones says.
Draper: There are other things we can talk about.
Jones: I thought you didn't want it.
Draper: No, we never said that.
Jones: I'm confused now.