FLOOD00308 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e ruling will be submitted to the COE for a formal ruling. It is expected the ruling will be made by the start of next year. It the waters are ruled jurisdictional then a permit schedule will be developed and the required permits from the COE obtained. From the start of project development in 1997 the City and County staff have held numerous small group meeting and five large public presentations on the project. Since November 2000 City and County staff have held series of individual meetings with potentially impacted landowners and conducted three public meetings. The results have been favorable. Those property owners that may be effected by one of rnore of the alternatives under consideration have been informed. Understanding the options has enabled the property owners to weigh the irnpacts and benefits of allowing a detention facility to be built on their site. The last public meeting was held on August 23, 2001. Prior to the meeting, 1,200 invitations were mailed; about 30 individuals attended. The presentation at the rneeting: (I) addressed the configuration and flood threat in the Dry Creek basin, (2) reviewed the project timeline, (3) described the improvements proposed and under consideration, and (4) discussed project funding. Taking into account the sources of local funding, it is apparent that money must be borrowed to enable completion of the improvements. Sources of debt financing for a stormwater utility include the municipal bond rnarket, the Larimer County General Fund, or a loan from another governmental entity. Because of its small size, and the fact that the Larimer County Dry Creek Stormwater Utility will not have a history of operations and collections, selling municipal bonds would be difficult and costly. Bonds are often difficult to obtain for storm water devclopment of any type. The Larimer County Gencral Fund does not have sufficient resources to make a loan of the size needed for the proposed project. A loan from a governmental entity is the only viable course. For that reason, the loan request is being made to the Colorado Water Conservation Board. The costs of the alternatives for flood control for the Dry Creck basin have been estimated. The total Project costs include the construction costs for the common and exclusive flood control features, land easement costs, and appropriate percents for contingencies and engineering fees. These alternative costs are combined with the estimated cost for the water supply pipeline at approximately $6.6 million with easements and the $1 million for the complction of the East Vine Diversion. These total project costs and the benefit to cost ratio are summarized in the following table: . 8