Board of Adjustment Agenda and Packet 2016 12 21

Home Browse Search

Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes November 16, 2016 Page 8 of 12 analysis supports the no -rise condition. The finished floor elevation of the addition will match the finished floor of the existing structure and be set at an elevation below what the regulatory water surface elevation is. If the new building is greater than 50% of market value, then the existing entire structure has to be brought into compliance. It is our understanding that it will be a substantial improvement and the entire structure would have to be floodproofed. Those measures will be provided upon construction documents. Commission Questions of Applicant: Campbell asks if you are an engineer in Colorado? Byrne says I am a Colorado civil engineer and work for Martin/Martin Consulting Engineers. I have my professional engineering license and my CFM (certified floodplain manager). I am not the person who will stamp the report, but the principal in my department, Patrick Horn listed on the study. I have prepared most of the analysis under him and with his support. Meseck says the prior studies were done by FEMA before the construction took place of these buildings. Was there any effort to look at what took place in the September 2013 flood? Byrne says there was discussion that the existing building did receive some flooding during the 2013 flood. There was storm water piping that came up through the floor. The red line on the map shows our approximation of the 100 year flood which was exceeded in 2013. It would be somewhere close to that red line. Meseck says the red line is yours and the black line is a FEMA line. Byrne says the orange line, which is difficult to see, is what is considered regulatory by the State and Urban Drainage, the 2014 FHAD, and the 100 year floodplain delineation by their approximation. It is considered a broad study. This is considered a backwater area and a hydraulically disconnected area not conveying storm water. You can fill in that area and not cause an upstream or downstream impact to the floodplain or adjacent property owners. Gorsevski says the floodway appears unchanged by the most recent study. Byrne says it has been changed. The black line is the new floodplain. All of the improvements are outside of the floodway for what is regulatory per the State. Gorsevski says I understand it is included in the floodplain in either pre- or post -study. It is the designation of the waterway, where the actual flood was flowing in the stream system. There are two black parallel lines. That has changed. Byrne says that has been re -delineated and is more accurate. DeJong says with regard to the floodplain study, the document lists principal in charge, Andre Schlappe, PE. You had stated that Patrick Horn is the engineer responsible. Byrne says Andre Schlappe is the overall PM for the site development project and Patrick Horn is the principal on the water resources side. Both Horn and I are CFM. DeJong says I see no responsible party for the data and the conclusions within this study. I see no signature by anyone or a stamp in the Martin/Martin group. Byrne says it is a document that can be stamped and signed. It can be provided but it was not requested. DeJong asks who is the professional engineer responsible for this document? Byrne says it would be Andre Schlappe. He has oversight. DeJong quotes (3) ified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the design and methods of constr ction are in accordance with accepted standards of practice for meeting the provisions of subsection F.2 of this section. Such certifications provided to the director as set forth in Section 17.56.180, is for the floodproofing methods. This floodplain study is not signed or stamped. Zuccaro says I think this is a good observation and oversight by Staff, since we should have requested that they sign and stamp the report. Staff will support the report with a stamp and signature by a Colorado registered professional engineer. I would recommend that this be an additional condition if you approve this. DeJong says will we get something on the record of who is the professional engineer responsible for the document presented to us.