Big Thompson Recovery Planning Council meetings/notes, Aug.-Oct. 1976

••

•

BIG THOMPSON RECOVERY PLANNING COUNCIL 11EMBERS CARLSON, NORMAN EDDY, DON GAINES, JEAN KIERNES, REG KINSTLINGER, JACK LOPEZ, WILLIAM MERSON, ALAN MICHIE, JOHN ROGERS, WILLIAM ROLD, JOHN SHELTON, JIN SIMPSON, LARRY STILLE, ERNEST TREGENT, HARRY B. WOLAVER, WARREN ALTERNATES (l) SWANSON _• JOHN ( 2) MILLER ADAM _• (J) WARBURTON, BEV 10/20/76

Weld County Commissioner

Federal Disaster Assistance Administration (l) Mayor of Loveland

Big Thompson Canyon Resident (Z) Director, Colo. Dept. of Highways Larimer County Commissioner

Colorado Land Use Commission ( 3) Larimer County Commissioner

U.S. Department of Interior (Regional Council) Colorado Geological Survey

Weld County (at large) Larimer County (at large)

Big Thompson Canyon Resident Mayor of Estes Park

Larimer County Commissioner

Federal Disaster Assistance Administration Big Thompson Canyon Resident

AGENDA

BIG TID1PSON ADVISORY CXMITTI'EE OCTOBER 26, 1976 9:00A.M.

Conservancy District Office, l.Dveland

1. INI'ROOOCI'ION OF NEW MEMBERS TO RECONSTITUTED CUJNCIL

2. REPORT FR!l1 COUNI'Y COORDINATOR, MR. QUIRK

3. GOVERIDR' S lEITER TO PRESIDENI' FORD AND COIDRAOO DELEGATION

4. CANYON RESIDENI'S REPCRT, QUESTIONS, AND CXM1ENI'S

BIG THOMPSON RECOVERY PLANNING COUNCIL OCTOBER 26, 1976

M I N U T E S

The Big Thompson Recovery Planning Council held its first meeting as a reconstituted Council at 9:00A.M. on October

26, 1976, at the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Office. Mr. Michie conducted the meeting.

Introduction of Members

Mr. Michie read the names of the Council membership as follows: Norman Carlson Don Eddy Jean Gaines Reg Kiernes Jack Kinstlinger William Lopez Alan Herson John Michie 'iJilliam Rogers John Rold Jim Shelton Larry Simpson Ernest Stille Harry Tregent Warren Wolaver Alternates John Swanson Adam Miller Bev Warburton

Weld County Commissioner

Federal Disaster Assistance Administration Mayor of Loveland

Big Thompson Canyon Resident Colorado Department of Highways Larimer County Commissioner Colorado Land Use Commission Larimer County Commissioner UoS. Department of Interior Colorado Geological Survey \.Jeld County (at large) Larimer County (at large) Big Thompson Canyon Resident Mayor of Estes Park

Larimer County Cowmissioner

Federal Disaster Assistance Administration Big Thompson Canyon Resident

Colorado Land Use Commission

It was moved and seconded that the new membership be accepted as read. The motion passed unanimously. It was also moved and seconded that Hr. Michie serve as Chairman of the Council. The motion passed unanimously.

Big Thompson Recovery Planning Council

October 26, 1976 Minutes

Page 2

-Project Coordinator

Mr. Quirk stated he had been in contact with various agencies relative to preparing a Composite Recreational Plan for the Big Thompson Canyon. The development of such a plan was to begin soon under the supervision of BOR, and is expected to be completed about December 10, 1976.

In addition, Mr. Quirk is working on an application for a Community Development Block Grant which will provide some assistance for utility improvements in the Canyon.

Mr. Quirk attended a meeting held at Gingery

&

their work should be received within one week, then the engineers will begin the flood plain delineation phase.

Mr. Quirk contacted the Structural Engineers of Colorado and the Architects Association relative to providing assistance on

private bridge design and building reconstruction.

A total of sixteen (16) consultants had responded to the adver-tisement for letters of interest in preparing a land use plan for the Canyon. The consultants will be reviewed this week, and the County will select from these responses. A letter indicating scope of work for the land use plan will be prepared, which the Council will have the opportunity to review. The land use plan is expected to be completed in about four months. Therefore, if the start date is December 1, 1976, the effort should be complete about March 1, 1977.

Mr. Quirk indicated that the HUD 701 grant needed some reworking, and he was going to meet with HUD this week to make appropriate adjustments.

Governor's Letter to President Ford

Mr. Wright read a letter from Governor Lamm to President Ford indicating Colorado will be asking for appropriations for certain programs in the next congressional session. A copy of that letter is attached to these minutes.

Big Thompson Recovery Planning Council

October 26, 1976 Minutes

Page 3

-Mr. Simpson wanted to clarify a misunderstanding relative to land sales. Some canyon residents feel they are being forced into selling their land. It should be emphasized that the program is aimed at assisting those who want assistance, and not to force people to sell their land.

fanyon Residents Questions and Comments

A problem was raised relative to road reconstruction in the Northfork Canyon. Larimer County will be handling the recon-struction. Further, it was indicated that work schedules could be coordinated with the Highway Department to handle traffic next sunnner.

It was further emphasized that no funds are available for private bridges at this time, and if replaced, will have to be at local expense. The County is expected to have bridge designs avail-able for Canyon Residents in about a month. Some of the culverts placed by the County are going out, c.nd these will be replaced by the County.

A specific problem in the Glen Haven area relative to private bridge replacement was brought to the Council's attention.

The area representative indicated that Glen Haven would like to regulate this situation if the County could support them. Larimer County will have their attorney look into the situation. In

addition, the County Attorney will investigate the temporary regulations to see if they apply to side canyons.

Recovery Council Hembers

Mr. Lopez indicated that one of the most frequent concerns of the Canyon residents raised is the replacement of wells and septic systems. He suggested the Community Block Grant be evaluated relative to providing assistance in this area.

Also, Mr. Lopez recommended that informal meetings be held with the Canyon Residents on the flood plain report prior to the public hearings. The Council suggested that Mr. Quirk get-in touch with each area representative prior to the hearings.

Big Thompson Recovery Planning Council

October 26, 1976 Minutes

Page 4

-Mr. Rappe emphasized that Canyon Residents are eligible for assistance for roads and private bridges. Area representatives are to get in touch with Mr. Rappe this week to review assistance required.

Mr. Bower reported on the status of the temporary road in the Canyon. The road is open for general use, and has a gravel surface in most places. The Department expects to sign a

contract soon for surfacing. Also, Mr. Bower indicated he had received unofficial approval of the funds requested for rebuilding U.S. 34. The EIS had not been approved yet. He indicated that private approaches to the highway were probably the County's responsibility.

Mr. Rold stated that the State Geologist's office is completing a geologic hazard study in the Big Thompson Canyon. This study will be complete about the same time as the flood plain study. Mr. Rold also indicated that his office will be available to hold workshops with the Canyon Reside~ts at their request.

RDJ:jlb Attachment

•

e

name mm

IDlU

Dear

date

In the two months following the Big Thompson flood, county officials and state governriient have been working to plan a long-range recovery program for the Canyon and those interests which have been damaged by the disaster. We have been able to move quickly and effectively to solve the short-term problems of interim housing, emergency cash assistance, debris removal,

temporary access and the like. State and Federal Disaster Assistance Admini-stration resources are sufficient to meet these emergency needs. But the long term solution to individuals' needs and to the general public's interest as they enjoy the Canyon in the future will certainly outstrip the ability of State and local government resources.

The Big Thompson Recovery Planning Council, an advisory group to federal, state and local units of government, has identified some key goals in the

recovery effort. These are as follows:

1.) Provide economic assistance to those resident owners who suffered losses in the flood and aid them in this difficult post-disaster recovery period,

2.) Develop and enforce appropriate floodplain management plans to protect the geueral public from future floods, and

3.) Mitigate the impact of the flood's effect upon the Canyon, Estes Park, and Loveland businesses.

The Council is undertaking several efforts to meet these objectives.

One early and obvious recommendation of the Council is that a land acqui-sition effort of selected parcels in the Canyon could go a long way in attaining the first two goals in addition to improving the opportunities for management of public lands lying north and south of the Canyon. The Rapid City, South Dakota, recovery effort depended chiefly on HUD urban renewal funds to acquire floodplain properties, compensate property owners. relocate them, and estab-lish public floodplain parks. Since Larimer County apparently cannot qualify for significant HUD funding from the Better Communities Act, we must seek other feder-al funding feder-alternatives.

.e

-2-The Recovery Council, upon completion of a floodplain study in December will be able to develop a plan which will include financial requirements fo the purchase of private property in the Big Thompson Canyon. We already know that the plan will include funding requests for the below-listed programs. Once the plan is completed we \.Jill be in touch with you to request specific appropriations.

We, thus, will be asking for appropriations for the following programs in the next congressional session:

1.) Funding and authority to the U.S. Forest Service so that Roosevelt National Forest might acquire, either outright or by trade, parcels in the Canyon: and

2.) An earmarked appropriation for Big Thompson Canyon acquisi-tion in the Secretary of Interior's discreacquisi-tionary fund for

the land and water program of the Bureau of Outdoor Recrea-tion.

3.) .An appropriation to Title VIII of the Federal Disaster Assistance Act for public acquisition of private property in the hazardous

floodway.

The irony of the Big Thompson Canyon recovery effort has been that while public entities received 100 per cent federal grants to restore damaged facili-ties, private citizens, many of them elderly, received only loans, some small cash grants, and interim housing rental assistance. We have been very concerned about the welfare and financial difficulties of the citizens in the Canyon. We believe it is good public policy for the federal government to treat its citizens equitably with governmental units. With your help we can attempt to meet the needs of all. CM/mm sent 10/19/76 Sincerely, Richard D. Lamm Governor '·

.•

1.

AGENDA

BIG THOMPSON ADVISORY COMNITTEE

OCTOBER 19, 1976 9:00A.M.

Conservancy District Office, Loveland

STATUS REPORT ON RECONSTITUTION OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE AS REQUESTED BY. COMMISSIONERS.

'• a. Letter from Governor Lamm to Mr. Michie,

b. Arrangements for Transition to New Membership,

c. Meeting Schedule.

2. INTRODUCTION OF MR. ALAN MERSON, CHAIRMAN OF COLORADO LAND USE COMMISSION.

3. REPORT FROM COUNTY PROJECT COORDINATOR (QUIRK)

a. Office Space Arrangements,

b. Meetings with Citizen Groups,

c. Meetings with Representatives of Federal Agencies on Planning,

d. Hiring of Consultants.

4. STATUS OF POTENTIAL FUNDING OF PURCHASE OF LAND IN CANYON BY U.S.F.S.

5. REPORT ON STATUS OF 701 APPLICATION (JOHNSON)

a. Unofficial Approval,

b. Congressional Clearance,

c. Probable Timing,

..

..

•

6. REPORT FROM CANYON RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION AND QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS.

/

7. FIA FLOOD PLAIN STUDY (BURNS)

BIG THOMPSON ADVISORY COMMITTEE October 19, 1976

M I N U T E S

•

The Big Thompson Advisory Committee met at 9:00 A.M. on October 19, 1976, at the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Office. Those Committee members attending were:

John Michie, Chairman of Larimer County Commissioners William Lopez, Larimer County Commissioner

Warren Wolaver, Larimer County Commissioner Jean A. Gaines, Hayor of Loveland

Harry B. Tregent, Mayor of Estes Park

David Shelton for John Rold, State Geologist Eugene I. Jencsok for Felix Sparks, Colo. Water

Conservation Board

Dwight Bower for Jack Kinstlinger, Colorado Department of Highways

Bev Warburton, Colorado Land Use Commission Ernest C. Stille, Big Thompson Canyon Resident Kenneth R. Wright, Governor's Office

Mr. Michie conducted the meeting.

Committee Reorganization

Mr. Michie read to the Commmitee an October 15th letter from Governor Lamm on reorganization of the Committee as requested by the Larimer County Commissioners. A copy of that letter is attached to these minutes. Mr. Wright moved to adopt the

reconstitution and effect transition at the next meeting, and continue with the Advisory Committee structure at this meeting. The motion was amended to invite two Canyon Resident members to participate on the Council, and those members are to be elected by the residents. The motion passed unanimously.

Mr. Alan Merson, Chairman of the Land Use Commission, was intro-duced by Mr. Michie. Mr. Merson was designated by the Governor as one of the three State representatives on the new Big Thompson Recovery Planning Council.

Big Thompson Advisory Committee October 19, 1976 - Minutes Page 2

-Project Coordinator

During the past week Mr. Quirk had contacted several Federal agencies about possible assistance. FDAA has identified approx-imately $6 million that could be used for assistance under a broad range of programs. Work performed by the SCS will be limited to side canyons, and therefore, no money will be spent in the Big Thompson Canyon. A meeting with Bureau of Outdoor Recreation representatives was an encouraging meeting. They indicated assistance would be possible based upon a local land use report and long range master plan. The Commissioners will request by letter that a Recreational Composite Plan be prepared by U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, and State Parks. This plan, which will be available within about 45 - 60 days, will assist in identifying land purchase options and matching fund requirements. The plan should be in the hands of Senators Haskell and Hart in early December for optimized assistance to Canyon residents.

Mr. Lopez stressed the need for providing access to properties and investigating low cost combined bridges, i.e., one bridge serving perhaps 10 residences.

Mr. Wright emphasized the value of the Advisory Committee on such matters as coordination on channel restoration work. Mr. Quirk stated that the work was intended to define the stream where it was not well defined, and to prevent further damage.

Colorado Water Conservation Board is holding a technical meeting on Friday, October 22, to review a preliminary report on the flood. The report presents the hydrological findings.

701 Grant Application Status

Mr. Johnson reported on the status of the 701 grant. Indications were that "unofficial" approval had been acknowledged, and that

the dollar amount would not be significantly different from that requested. However, the grant required Congressional clearance for final approval, which is exp.ected soon.

Big Thompson Advisory Committee

October 19, 1976 Minutes

Page 3

-Canyon Residents Concerns and Comments

Canyon residents are expressing increasing concern about the flood plain report and lack of information. They would like the planning and regulation process to be speeded up so that they in turn could make their plans.

Many would like to reestablish bridge access to their property. Mr. Burns reviewed the process for submitting plans and requests and the County review requirements. He emphasized that the

County has in effect a temporary zoning ordinance until February 11, 1977. A new zoning regulation will have to be enacted prior to February 11. Tentative dates for public hearings have been set for January 26, 1977 for the Planning Commission, and January 31, 1977 for the Board of County Commissioners. Mr. Burns also stated that building permits could be issued for structures that received 50% or less damage.

It was stressed that a newsletter transmitting information to the Canyon residents was needed. Mr. Michie indicated that the Planning Department would prepare a newsletter with appropriate laws and regulations. However, the Big Thompson Action Group is about to commence a regular newsletter, therefore the effort can be combined for information dissemination.

Mr. Jencsok stated that the flood plain mapping contract would be completed on November 8, 1976, and that the flood plain study would be complete about January 1, 1977 with a preliminary report by Colorado Water Conservation Board about December 22, 1976. Earlier, however, releases of the flood plain maps will be made to agencies as they are completed in phases.

Mr. Michie and Mr. Wright reemphasized the purpose and goals of the Advisory Committee, as being essentially guidance in orderly, safe, and sound restoration and assisting in identifying financial aid sources.

Canyon residents also expressed concern over the flood plain regulation and what laws allowed the regulation. Some indicated they desired to keep their property. Mr. Wright briefly reviewed the requirements for flood plain management and regulation. There are Federal and State laws requiring flood plain designation. The County has no choice but to conform to laws of the land. Building cannot be done in the floodway. Structures with 50% damage or less can be rebuilt, but insurance will be high and value lower because of non-conforming use and hazard.

Big Thompson Advisory Committee

October 19, 1976 Minutes

Page - 4

-Miscellaneous

Ms. Warburton briefed the Committee on possible mechanisms for money donations to be earmarked for land acquisition. The County Commissioners can set up an earmarked fund program for acquisition of lands for open space and recreation. These funds could also be used for matching grants. These donations do meet criteria for donor tax deductions. Problems do exist with specific money donations and the long term aspect of the fund. This is a good way to assist property owners financially. Mr. Bower indicated the Highway Department has tentatively

established October 25th as the road opening date. He also stated the Department would like to pave the surface of the temporary road if additional federal funds are available. This would allow additional design and construction time for the permanent highway.

RDJ:j lb Attachment

RICHARD D. LAMM

Governor

EXECUTIVE CHAMBERS

DENVER

October 15, 1976

Mr. John Michie, Chairman

Larimer County Board of Commissioners County Courthouse

Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Dear Commissioner Michie:

I have reviewed the recommendation of the Larimer County Commissioners asking that the Big Thompson Advisory Committee be reorganized and renamed the Big Thompson Recovery Planning Council. The Advisory Committee is an ad hoc advisory body created by the County Commissioners and me to coordi-nate recovery efforts. Because it is the opinion of the Commissioners that a reformed group would be a more effective coordinating body, I have no objection to this change, assuming, of course, that it does meet the needs of yourself and your fellow commissioners relative to effective restoration efforts.

The composition of the Recovery Planning Council would be as follows: Three Larimer County Commissioners

Mayor of Loveland or his designee Mayor of Estes Park or his designee

A representative (non-elected official) from the Big Thompson Canyon

One Weld County Commissioner

One at-large representative from each county Two federal representatives

Three state representatives

I would strongly urge that an additional representative from the Big Thompson Canyon be added to the one mentioned above and that both of these representa-tives be elected by Canyon residents through the Big Thompson Action Group. I shall, however, leave this decision to you. I have written the Weld County Commission to designate its Commissioner representative and its at-large representative. I have also written Don Eddy, FDAA Regional Director, asking him to sit on the Council, and have asked Dr. Rulon Garfield to desig-nate a representative from the Mountain Plains Federal Regional Council. The state representatives will be Mr~Jack Kinstlinger, Director, Department of Highways; Mr. Alan Merson, Chairman, Land Use Commission; and Mr. John Rold, representative from the Department of Natural Resources (or the.ir alternates}. Mr. Ken Wright has recommended to me that these state agencies would most

I

-Mr. John Michie October 15, 1976 Page two

provide planning assistance to state agencies and to the Council and will coordinate state efforts. Mr. Wright has suggested that his effectiveness can be increased by being relieved of his administrative duties as co-chairman of the Committee and that he would concentrate on providing tech-nical assistance to my office, state agencies, and the Council. To accommo-date him, I would ask, John, that you serve as Chairman of the Council. Ken, of course, will continue as my consultant on this project, and I fully

expect that he would be present at all Council deliberations and be a key participant in the planning process of the Council and the county.

"'

Though we are calling this group a Recovery Planning Council and even though its membership resembles that of a Title VIII (PL93-288} Council, I am sure you realize that this group is not a Title VIII Council. Unfortunately, Congress has not appropriated monies to make Title VIII a viable alternative. Therefore, I could not establish by law a Title VIII Council. I am glad to establish this group which follows a Title VIII format in the event Title VIII was ever activated in the future by the federal government.

I am pleased that the county has contracted planning assistance in the person of Mr. Quirk. The question of which entity is responsible for local planning, that is, the county itself or Larimer-Weld Council of Governments, is a matter which you and your fellow Commissioners can best decide as being most respon-sive to your needs.

I trust this organizational arrangement will be successful in finding solutions to the recovery problems caused by the flood. I see the major task of the Council as follows:

1. Follow through on the completion of the flood plain study and effective flood plain regulation,

2. Proceed with federal agencies to develop a land trade/land acquisition program by the U.S. Forest Service in an imaginative manner if funding permits,

3. Identify best way to assist canyon residents in economic recovery,

4. Assist loveland and Estes Park in overcoming tangential adverse impacts, 5. Assist in the formulation of an effective long-range master plan for

restoration, and

6. Assist in the U.S. 34 replacement effort.

..

Mr. John Michie October 15, 1976 Page three

usurp the legal responsibilities of state and local units of government. It has played an important role in coordinating planning efforts, and I look forward to continued fruitful cooperation.

Sincerely,

J

·r?~-

Jc

\)~~

Ric ard D. Lamn Go!l rnor

~ ' I RICHARD D. LAMM Governor

~l!tNIJt~

Mr. John Michie, Chairman

Larimer County Board of Commissioners County Courthouse

Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Dear Commissioner Michie:

I have reviewed the recommendation of the Larimer County Commissioners asking that the Big Thompson Advisory Committee be reorganized and renamed the Big Thompson Recovery Planning Council. The Advisory Committee is an ad hoc advisory body created by the County Commissioners and me to coordi-nate recovery efforts. Because it is the opinion of the Commissioners that a reformed group would be a more effective coordinating body, I have no objection to this change, assuming, of course, that it does meet the needs of yourself and your fellow commissioners relative to effective restoration efforts.

The composition of the Recovery Planning Council would be as follows: Three Larimer County Commissioners

Mayor of Loveland or his designee Mayor of Estes Park or his designee

A representative (non-elected official) from the Big Thompson Canyon

One Weld County Commissioner

One at-large representative from each county Two federal representatives

Three state representatives

I would strongly urge that an additional representative from the Big Thompson Canyon be added to the one mentioned above and that both of these representa-tives be elected by Canyon residents through the Big Thompson Action Group. I shall, however, leave this decision to you. I have written the Weld County Commission to designate its Commissioner representative and its at-large representative. I have also written Don Eddy, FDAA Regional Director, asking him to sit on the Council, and have asked Dr. Rulon Garfield to desig-nate a representative from the Mountain Plains Federal Regional Council. The state representatives will be Mr~Jack Kinstlinger, Director, Department of Highways; Mr. Alan Merson, Chairman, Land Use Commission; and Mr. John Rold, representative from the Department of Natural Resources (or their alternates). Mr. Ken Wright has recommended to me that these state agencies would most

Mr. John Michie October 15, 1976 Page two

provide planning assistance to state agencies and to the Council and will coordinate state efforts. Mr. Wright has suggested that his effectiveness can be increased by being relieved of his administrative duties as co-chairman of the Committee and that he would concentrate on providing tech-nical assistance to my office, state agencies, and the Council. To accommo-date him, I would ask, John, that you serve as Chairman of the Council. Ken, of course, will continue as my consultant on this project, and I fully

expect that he would be present at all Council deliberations and be a key participant in the planning process of the Council and the county.

Though we are calling this group a Recovery Planning Council and even though its membership resembles that of a Title VIII (PL93-288} Council, I am sure you realize that this group is not a Title VIII Council. Unfortunately, Congress has not appropriated monies to make Title VIII a viable alternative. Therefore, I could not establish by law a Title VIII Council. I am glad to establish this group which follows a Title VIII format in the event Title VIII was ever activated in the future by the federal government.

I am pleased that the county has contracted planning assistance in the person of Mr. Quirk. The question of which entity is responsible for local planning, that is, the county itself or Larimer-Weld Council of Governments, is a matter which you and your fellow Commissioners can best decide as being most respon-sive to your needs.

I trust this organizational arrangement will be successful in finding solutions to the recovery problems caused by the flood. I see the major task of the Council as follows:

1. Follow through on the completion of the flood plain study and effective flood plain regulation,

2. Proceed with federal agencies to develop a land trade/land acquisition program by the U.S. Forest Service in an imaginative manner if funding permits,

3. Identify best way to assist canyon residents in economic recovery,

4. Assist Loveland and Estes Park in overcoming tangential adverse impacts, 5. Assist in the formulation of an effective long-range master plan for

restoration, and

6. Assist in the U.S. 34 replacement effort.

~

usurp the legal responsibilities of state and local units of government. It has played an important role in coordinating planning efforts, and I look forward to continued fruitful cooperation.

AGENDA

BIG THOMPSON ADVISORY COMMITTEE OCTOBER 12, 1976 9:00 A.M.

Conservancy District Office, Loveland

1. LARIMER COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT

ON CANYON OWNERSHIP MAPS (REX BURNS) A. USBLM LAND SURVEYS (K. WRIGHT)

2. FLOOD PLAIN MAPPING PROGRESS REPORT (CWCB

& FIA)

B. FLOOD HYDROLOGY ANALYSES C. SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETION

3. LARIMER COUNTY COORDINATOR REPORT, W. QUIRK

BIG THOMPSON ADVISORY COMMITTEE

October 12, 1976

M I N U T E S

The Big Thompson Advisory Committee met at 9:00A.M. on

October 12, 1976, at the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Office. Those Committee members attending were:

John Michie, Chairman of Larimer County Commissioners William Lopez, Larimer County Commissioner

Warren Wolaver, Larimer County Commissioner Jean A. Gaines, Mayor of Loveland

Harry B. Tregent, Mayor of Estes Park John Rold, State Geologist

Dwight M. Bower for Jack Kinstlinger, Colo. Dept. of Highways Larry Lang for Felix Sparks, Colo. Water Conservation Board Bev Warburton, Colorado Land Use Commission

Larry Simpson, Northern Colo. Water Conservancy District

Reg Kurnes for Ernest C. Stille, Big Thompson Canyon Resident Kenneth R. Wright, Governor's Office

Mr. Michie conducted the meeting.

Larimer County Planning Department

Mr. Rex Burns presented a map prepared by the Larimer County Planning Department showing private and public land ownership patterns in the Big Thompson Canyon. In addition, the Highway Department is preparing ownership maps, and they are working with the County Planning Office. Mr. Burns stated that

prelim-inary interpretations showed some subdivisions to be totally destroyed, and that there were errors in recording early deeds. Copies of the maps will be .sent upon request with payment to cover printing costs.

Big Thompson Advisory Committee October 12, 1976 - Minutes Page 2

-Colorado Water Conservation Board

The mapping contractor has completed necessary field surveys. They should be producing maps this week, with an expected completion date of November 8. Mapping will be produced for the Narrows first so the Highway Department can use this information in their design work.

The Board is coordinating activities relative to producing a flood hydrology report and arriving at the 100-year flood flow. The CWCB will meet with agency experts and others to review the consultants report and evaluate the reasonableness of the 100-year event. In addition, Mr. Lang relayed to the Committee some unusual hydraulic aspects of the July 31 flood, such as the flood waters having an elevation.l4 feet higher on one side of the river than the other.

Project Coordinator

Mr. Quirk stated that he had obtained office space and his new address would be the Larimer/Weld Council of Governments Office Building, Room 215, Greeley, phone 667-3873.

Mr. Quirk indicated that the County will probably be getting some 701 funds, however, the amount would probably be less than that requested. Therefore, the budget was being reviewed in light of this information. In addition, Mr. Quirk had

advertised for planning consultants to notify the County by October 20th of their interest to participate in Big Thompson Canyon planning.

Mr. Quirk had met with William Rogers, Federal Regional Council Representative, to brief him on the general planning framework. Also, Mr. Quirk will meet with the major Federal agencies this week and next week.

Highway Department

The Department is hoping to open the temporary road through the Canyon on October 22, 1976. They will leave up appropriate signing, and specifically notify users of gravel conditions and possible hazardous conditions.

The Department will submit the final EIS this week, along with letters received, and will request that a public hearing not be held.

Big Thompson Advisory Committee

October 12, 1976 Minutes

Page 3

-Considerable survey work has been completed j ne Canyon,

and the Department finds the Highway alignmer ~n some cases does not agree with recorded location and ri: ~-of-way. They have completed major cross-section work in t: ~ Narrows and are waiting on the final 100-year flow from _he experts. Then the Department will complete design work in segments as soon as the EIS is approved.

General Matters From Committee

Ms. Warburton suggested that possible fund donations could be earmarked for assisting with local matching funds for local acquisition in the Canyon. She will look into the mechanics of such a program and advise the Committee and the County.

Mr. Kurnes reviewed the status of fund pledges and actual money dispersed. He also suggested that area chairman in the Canyon receive minutes of the Advisory Committee. Mr. Johnson informed him that this was being done. The Canyon Association had voted to submit three names to the Advisory Committee for consideration of additional representation. It was suggested that a decision on additional representation be postponed until the Governor has taken action on the request to reconstitute the Committee.

Commissioner Lopez suggested that the Governor's Representative convey to the Governor the request for additional representation, and Mr. Wright stated that he would do so.

Mr. Rold stated that flood plains are of State wide concern and are viewed as natural hazard areas. Further, evalution of

flood plains is a State wide effort based on legislation. Commissioner Wolaver stated that flood plain regulations must result in compensation to private property owners who would not be able to rebuiid on their land in the floodway.

It was suggested that more interaction between the Advisory Committee and the Canyon Residents be initiated. An exchange of meeting minutes will be made. To properly relate the

feelings of the Canyon residents to the Committee, they will be placed on the agenda for each meeting.

Reverend Bob Schelling is conducting an intensive fund ra~s~ng

drive to provide financial assistance to private individuals in the Canyon. They also have established a skills bank to provide assistance during reconstruction.

RONALD C. McLAUGHLIN KENNETH R. WRIGHT HALFORD E. ERICKSON DOUGLAS T. SOVERN JOHN T. McLANE WILLIAM C. TAGGART THOMAS W. MORRIS JIMMIE 0. WHITFIELD ASPEN OFFICE .JGHT-McLAUGHLIN ENGINEERS ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 2420 ALCOTT STREET DENVER, COLORADO 80211 ( 303) 458-6201 STEAMBOAT OFFICE P, 0 , BOX 5220

• COMPLETE ENGINEERING SERVICES IN THE SPECIALTY FIELDS OF

WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION WATER AND SEWAGE TREATMENT SEWAGE COLLECTION AND REUSE INDUSTRIAL WASTES

STORM DRAINAGE FLOOD CONTROL AND

OTHER WATER-ORIENTED PROJECTS

DILLON LAKE OFFICE

P, 0, BOX 8028

ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 STEAMBOAT VILLAGE, COLORADO 80499 FRISCO, COLORAOO 80443

BIG THOMPSON ADVISORY COMMITTEE (Wright Recommendation)

October 12, 1976

I, Reconstitute Advisory Committee to Big Thompson Planning and Recovery Council as requested by Larimer County Commissioners. The Council would, however, have 2 Big Thompson Canyon residents elected by the

Canyon Residents Association rather than I appointed by the Commissioners. 2, The State representation on the Recovery Council will be made by:

Mr. Alan Merson - Chairman, Land Use Commission (Alternate: Beverly Warburton)

Mr. John Rold - State Geologist

Mr. Jack Kintslinger- Executive Director, Colorado Department of Highways

3. Mr. Kenneth R. Wright will continue as special assistant for the Big Thompson restoration. He is responsible for coordinating the State efforts, assisting Larimer County, provision of flood plain manage~ ment planning services, and coordination between the Federal agencies and the State on matters effecting the restoration planning. Mr. Wright will attend the Council meetings as the coordinator and technical con-sultant for the State efforts.

•

A G E N D A

BIG THOMPSON ADVISORY C0~1ITTEE

OCTOBER 5, 1976 9:00 A.H.

Conservancy District Office, Loveland

1. REPORT FROM FDAA - MR. DON EDDY

2. REPORT FROM U.S. FOREST SERVICE DISTRICT

-MR. AUSTIN CONDON

3. REPORT ON CONTRACTING AGENCY REVIEH

4. PROJECT COORDINATOR - STATUS REPORT

5. UPDATE REPORT ON TEMPORARY ROAD

6. QUESTIONNAIRE STATUS REPORT

BIG THOMPSON ADVISORY COMMITTEE October 5, 1976

M I N U T E S

The Big Thompson Advisory Committee met at 9:00 A.M. on October 5, 1976, at the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District office. Those Committee members attending were:

John Michie, Chairman of Larimer County Commissioners William Lopez, Larimer County Commissioner

Warren Wolaver, Larimer County Commissioner Jean A. Gaines, Mayor of Loveland

Harry B. Tregent, Mayor of Estes Park

David C. Shelton for John Rold, State Geologist Jack Kinstlinger, Colo. Department of Highways Bev Warburton, Colorado Land Use Commission

Larry Simpson, Northern Colo. Water Conservancy District Ernest C. Stille, Big Thompson Canyon Resident

Kenneth R. Wright, Governor's Office

Mr. Michie conducted the meeting.

U.S. Forest Service Report - Mr. Austin Condon

Mr. Condon briefed the Committee on the possibilities of land exchange or direct acquisition. Pure land exchanges between private parties and the USFS are possible, however it is a long. drawn out process based on past experience. Each property has to be evaluated, be of equal value, and the exchange must be of public benefit. For instance, the USFS would be looking for areas

that would include right-of-way to other National Forest land.

Another option would be direct purchase of land in the Big Thompson Canyon. This option could be implemented relatively quick. For ease of execution it would be best to consolidate land into one parcel for purchase. The USFS would normally be looking for land that would make land patterns less complicated, enhance scenic views, and provide much needed access to public lands.

Big Thompson Advisory Committee October 5, 1976 - Minutes

Page - 2

-Mr. Lopez requested that the USFS update its evaluation of the Canyon and identify land that would be possible for exchange or purchase options. There was general consensus on this point.

Division of Wildlife Report - Mr. Darryl Todd.

Mr. Todd briefed the Committee on the status of the Big Thompson Canyon relative to fisheries. The Division has fisheries and

wildlife data on the Big Thompson Canyon prior to the flood. They have made an estimate of $4 million to rebuild the stream to fishery status, however no funds are available at this time. The Division has not been looking at any formal plans as of yet.

_,)

Highway Department - Status Report

Mr. Bower reported that there was no real change in the status of the temporary road. The debris hauling should be complete by the end of the week, and then the gravel operation will start about October 11.

The Department received two letters in response to the negative declaration EIS. Mr. Bower felt that the concerns of these

responses could be handled, and the statement would be submitted after meetings with those persons. If a public hearing is required a minimum of 45 days delay will be incurred. The Department will have conclusions on Highway 34 opening by the end of November.

Project Coordinator Report

Mr. Quirk'has hired Steve McMillan as assistant project coordinator. Mr. Quirk's activities have included additional assistance to Canyon residents, staff and office space allocations studies, coordination, and meetings on Committee reconstitution as described in Title VIII of PL 93-288.

Mr. Quirk presented a summary of a policy and management structure for reconstituting the Advisory Committee. It was recommended that the Committee be reorganized under Title VIII and be called the Big Thompson Planning and Recovery Council. The composition of the Council would be three County Commissioners, Mayors of Loveland.and

Estes Park. one canyon representative, one Weld County Commissioner, one .x. citizen each from Larimer & Weld County, two Federal representatives,

and three State representatives. The Council would be responsible for preparing a recovery plan and requesting Federal assistance. The council would work with the Larimer/Weld COG staff in develop-ment of plans, however, COG would not be the impledevelop-mentation agency. Mr. Quirk recommended to the Committee that they request the

Big Thompson Advisory Committee

October 5, 1976 Minutes

Page 3

-Ms. Warburton reviewed the role of the State in recovery planning and assistance. All members of the Committee have a statutory role, and the County is a branch of State Government. Each State agency has a defined role and responsibility by statute. Ms. Warburton felt that reorganization might be a step backward, and stressed the necessity for cooperative effort and moving forward with the difficult job ahead.

Mr. Eddy of FDAA briefed the Committee on the role of Federal Agency disaster assistance, and stressed the need for local decisions relative to planning and restoration. Once this is known the Federal agencies can identify specific programs and allocate funds. Mr. Eddy felt the present Committee had appro-priate structure, and that reorganization would cause delay. Concern was raised relative to the legal status of the present Committee to receive funds and implement planning programs. Mr. Eddy felt that HUD could decide or advise on the legal status of the Committee necessary to implement programs, but that no problem presently existed.

Commissioner Wolaver recommended that the three Commissioners and two Mayors decide what to recommend to the Governor relative to reconstitution of the Committee following completion of the Big Thompson Advisory Committee meeting.

Mr. Wright felt that reorganization would not create any major changes, except perhaps establishing additional red tape and delays. The Committee does have status since it was appointed by the Governor and the County Commissioners. Mr. Wright stated that the County should receive assistance funds directly and implement local government programs.

Mr. Gaines reaffirmed Commissioner Wolaver's recommendation to decide on the request to the Governor relative to reconstitution of the Committee after the meeting.

Mr. Eddy again stressed the urgency of the situation, and emphasized the present Committee organization has the necessary structure to function properly.

Big Thompson Advisory Committee

October 5, 1976 Minutes

Page -

4

-Miscellaneous

Some discussion was heard concerning the Canyon road block, proper signing, and adequate police enforcement. The County was going to look into the problems further and provide advice

and assistance.

Results of the survey of the Big Thompson Canyon were briefly reviewed. A copy of that summary is attached to these minutes.

RDJ:j lb Attachment

•

RESULTS OF SURVEY OF BIG THOMPSON CANYON OCT 4 data are from 301 surveys returned, 600 are expected.

AGE DISTRIBUTION _RESIDENCE

No. %

0-10 31 5 332 are full time residents

11-20 72 13 240 are part time residents

21-30 25 4 age distribution is similar,

31-40 39 7 the part time residents tend

41-50 75 13 be somewhat younger. 51-60 138

24~

total from 301 surveys

reported from full time, retired residents DAMAGES NEEDS LOSSES $6,667,500 4,600,500 643,500 1,423,500 TOTAL

Full Time, not retired Full Time, retired Part Time

Financial, Material, Labor Assisstance, Debris Removal (mostly·com-pleted?), and Building and Repairs continue to head l·ist.

Half have lost bridges, landscaping and trees.

A third have lost refrigerators, stoves, propane tanks, wells, electricity, carpentry, or furniture.

OPINIONS

In the flood way, 51% (of 290) wish to rebuild as before the flood, 44% desire some rebuilding and some parks along the river, 5% are in favor of no building along the river.

53% (of 340) are not willing to sell their land to the government, 31% would at pre-flood value, 16% would at current value or in exchange for other land. Very few are willing to donate land for open space.

If their property is not sold to the government, 1/3 (of 297) planned to rebuild, 1/3 leave as is, 1/4 didn't know, and a few planned to sell to someone else (as of the dates the surveys were filled in).

86% (of 322) favor the pre-flood location of the highway, improved to modern standards.

74% (of 313) favor the pre-flood design.

79% (of 309) preferred the pioneer road be open only to residents and official business, until the permanent road is finished. Disc~ssions

in the Big T Action Group Meetings may have changed this desire.

'

.

_{. .}

S.,.tA.,~

.

1cr-:

A~

1

-~)~

(iJ-.4'-..d

c~.

4-~ .j~ ·_:p~

~J.j.A..

TO: Larimer County Board of Commissioners

William Lopez John Michie Warren Wolaver

Jean Gaines, Mayor of Loveland Harry Tregent, Mayor of Estes Park

Ernie Stille, Big Thompson Canyon Association

FROM: Willard Quirk

Big Thompson Flood Recovery Coordinator

DATE: September 30, 1976

SUBJ.: Recommendations of the Ad Hoc Committee

,c_

k)7cJ-Attached are the draft recommendations of the Ad Hoc Committee regarding policy and management structure.for the

Big Thompson Long-Range Redevelopment Effort. We have

con-ferred ori two occasion~ with Mr. Ralph Hardin, the Larimer

County Attor~ey and l1is st~ff, regarding t~e legal aspect of

Title VIII of the Disaster Relief Act Amendments of 1974

(Public Law 93~288). A. legal abstract is being prepared by

Mr. Hardin for your review.

Apparently there is some question as to the suitability of Section 802 of Title VIII of the Act, irrespective of the

l~gal question, which we are exploring with the appropriate

federal representatives.

However, from a practical standpoint in terms of policy and management structure, the Ad Hoc Conuni ttee feels that the establishment of the Recovery Planning Council, under Title VIII ·or in such a way as to meet with the intent of Title VIII, is

highly desirable. WQ:psj Enc.

_1L

L.~...

~

.tt

?Jt

7 ..._

u/

.4-t ...

.R

-.£

t!.S..

p~ ~,#

19~

>

~ ;t:

""r.d-~. -c~~

~

t~~

~~

DRAFT RECOMHENDATIONS OF THE

AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR POLICY AND MANAGEHENT STRUCTURE -FOR THE

BIG THOMPSON LONG-RANGE REDEVELOPMENT EFFORT

POLICY BODY NOMENCLATURE

It is recommended that the title for the policy organ-ization regarding the long-range Big Thompson recovery effort be The Big Thompson Recovery Planning Council (Big T RPC).

LEGAL AUTHORITY

It is recommended that the Big Thompson Recovery PJanning Council be established under Title VIII, Section 802 of the Disaster Relief Act Amendments of 1974 (Public Law 93-288), or under an organizational structure which meets the intent

of the act. It is further recommended that the Larimer-Weld

Re~io~al Council of Governments, acting through the Big

Thompson Recovery Planning Council, be designated as the multi-jurisdictional organization for the purposes of long-range planning and administration of federal and state 'funding assistance for the Big Thompson flood recovery effort.

COMPOSITION OF TilE BIG THOMPSON RECOVEHY PLANNING COUNCIL It is recommended that the composition of the Big Thompson Recovery Planning Council be as follows:

Three commissioners from Larimer County The Mayor of Loveland or his Designee The Mayor of Estes Park or his DPsignec

A representative {non-elected offici~l) from the Big Thompson Canyon .

One Weld County Commissioner

One At-Large Representative from·each county (representing general citizen interests)

7wo ...

/!

i3

~V~/t:tL

..,..tt~g:Gi' ~ , . . , State representa t i v·e

₆₍₎

1 cc-::- ,

f/;

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BIG THOMPSON RECOVERY PLANNING COUNCIL The Big Thompson Recovery Planning Council shall assume -responsibilities as generally defined in Section 802 of

Public Law 9 3-28 8. More specifically, the Recovery ·Planning

Council

(1.) "Shall review e~~isting plans for the affected

area; and (2.) May recommend to the Governor and

responsible local government such revisions as i t determines neqessary for the economic recovery of the ar~a, including the development of new plans and the preparation for a recovery investment plan for the

five-year period following the declaration of the major

disaster. The Recovery Planning Council shall accept

as one element of the recovery investment plan deter-minations made under Section 402 (F) of the Disaster Relief Act of 1974 (pertaining to repair and restora-tion of damaged facilities, debris removal, temporary housing assistance, and other emergency assistance)." The Big Thompson Recovery Planning Council shall prepare a recovery investm<?nt plan and recommend the. revision, dele-tion, reprogramming, or additional approval of federal aid projects and programs within the area:

11 (A.) for which application has been made, but approval

not yet granted, (U.) for which funds h~ve been oblig~ted

or approval granted, but construction not yet begun, and

(C.) for which funds.have been or are scheduled to be

approtionec1 v.;rith1n the five years after U1e declaration

of the di~;uster, (D.) whj ch hayc othen.'ise been available

to the area under any state schedule or revised stute schC'dule of priorities, or (E.) which may rectson.:lbJ.y be antjcipated as becoming pvztilable unc1cr existing progrZ1ms."

OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES FOR TilE !3IG TIIOHPSON RECOVERY PLANNING COUNCIL

The Chai~1ah of the Recovery Planning Council should be

a Larimer County commissioner. The Recovery Planning Council

should meet at a minimum of twice monthly on Tuesday mornings at 9:00 a.m. at the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy

District, 1250 North Wilson Avenue, Loveland, Colorado.

Each of the members of the R~covery Planning Council has a

voting status. The Recovery. Planning Council should encourage

representatives from various state and federal agencies and the public to attend these meetings and provide input.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE LARIMER-WElD REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS The Larimer-Weld.Regional Council of Governments is the

official metropolita~ area/regional clearinghouse for federal

funding assistance pursuant to the Office of Management and

Budget A-95 Circular. The Larimer-Weld COG's recommendations

to appropriate State and Federal agencies are only advisory

in nature. Future Federal funding for long~range

redevelop-ment related to the Big Thompson Flood Recovery Effort, i.e., community development funding, etc., will be reviewed by the Larimer-Weld COG pursuant to the OMB A-95 requirements.

RELATIONSHIP DE'l'i'JEEN TilE L~\IRCOG GOVERNING BOARD AND THE

RECOVERY PLANNING COUNCIL - POLICY ~mTTERS

Recommendations of the Recovery Planning Council which result in funding from state or federal sources to local units of government would routinely be referred to the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments under the OMB

Recovery Planning Council not resulting in federal or state

funding~ but in actions of federal and state agencies

which have regional impact, would be forwarded to the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments for comment.

RELATIONSHIP BET\'JEEN FEDERAL AND STATE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Pl{0GRM1S AND FUNDING ASSISTANCE \.VI'l'll THE BIG THOHPSON RECOVERY PLANNING COUNCIL

It is recommended that all technical assistance, planning, and financial assistance be coordinated with and channeled

through the Recovery Planning Council. To facilitate the

proper coordination amongst various units of government and

priv~te concerns, a cooperative agreement should be drafted

and entered into by the Governor of Colorado, the Federal Regional Council, and the Larimer-Weld COG--Recovery Planning

Cbuncil. The cooperative agreement would specify that all

programs and analysis currently or in the future undertaken by various units of government and. private concerns toward the redevelopment effort would be cleared through the Recovery Planning Coordinator.

RELATIONSHIP BETh'EEN THE LI'JRCOG AND THE RPC-1\.DHINISTRATIVE, RESOURCE, AND FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING SUPPORT

The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments would provide administrative support for the Recovery Planning

Council. A temporary Big Thompson Recovery Planning

Depart-ment would be established within the Larimer-\\feld Regional Council of Governments and assigned a Recovery Coordinator. The existing Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments' staff would provide technical expertise in the development

-4-of appropriate plans and programs for the long-range

re-development and ~conomic recovery effort. The Larimer-Weld

...,.

Regional Council of Governments' Governing Board would determine the extent to which exiting COG staff would be involved in the planning and redevelopment effort and .adjust its priorities accordingly.

The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments, acting through the Recovery Planning Coordinator, would prepare appropriate plans and grant applications on behalf of the local implementation agencies for federal and state assistance and propose legislation if applicable.

The Larimer-Weld coG·would receive and dispurse federal and state grant.assistance funds for planning and

implemen-tation related to the Big Thompson Recovery effort. The COG

wou.td not be the implementation agency, but pass through all implementation funds to the appropriate units of local

government or private organizations .if appropriate:

Finan-cial management of federal, state, and local funding

assis-tance would be carried out throug~ the Larimer-Weld Council

of Governments.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE ECONOMIC RECOVERY COORDINATOR The Recovery Planning Coordinator is responsible for reporting and providing technical input to the Re.covery

Planning Council. The Recovery Planning Coordinator will be

responsible for the preparation of a recovery investment plan and other planning documents pertaining to long-range

redevelopment. To facilitate these effort~, the Recovery

-5-'

.

Planning Coordinator and staff would be responsible for

coordinating ~ll information currently being generated by

various state and federal agencies and organizations and private concerns integrating this information into the appropriate long-range planning document.

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE RECOVERY PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Recovery Planning Coordinator will require staff support to insure that the necessary planning and adminis-tration is undertaken in a timely fashion and that maximum

and effective utilization of av~il2ble federal funds is

accomplished. At a minimum, the.Recovery Planning

Coordin-ator will require an assistant coordinCoordin-ator, an executive secretary, and such dther personnel as is deemed necessary

to fulfill the recovery effort. The Recovery Planning

Coordinator should have full authority to make the determin-ation as to specifically what qualificdetermin-ations and experience would be required and to employ individuals to fill the

positions at his disc~etion. The Recovery Planning

Coordin-ator will follow the Equal Opportunity Employment Procedures. The Recovery Planning Coordinator would be empowered to utilize professional consulting firms to assist in various

aspects of the plann~ng effort. A Co~nittee of.technicians

or professional persons should be formed to assist the Recovery Planning Coordinator in selecting and contracting consulting firms.

To facilitate the collection o{ information which is

..

_-.

..

•

that a representative from the Larimer County Planning

Department be assigned as a liaison to the Recovery Planning

Department for a period of one year. The selection of the

individual assigned to the Recovery Planning Coordinator should be made by the Larimer County Commissioners with the concurrence of the Recovery Planning Coordinator.

It should be fully understood that the Recovery Planning Department is a temporary department assigned to the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments for the purposes of

long-range redevelopment planni~g aDd implementation. All

employees of the Recovery Planning Department would·be hired with that understanding.

OPERATIONS

Office space should be provided at' the Larimer~Weld

Regional Council of Governments offices at 201 East Fourth Street, Loveland, Colorado, for the Reciovery Planning

Coordinator and his staff. A minimum of four separate

offices with a reception area for the executive secretary would be required.

A fiscal account should be established specifically for

the Recovery Planning Department to include funds necessary

•

for the day-to-day operations of the Department (i.e.,

copying and reproduc.tion, telephone comrnunica tions, postage,

travel, etc.). A field office should be maintained in Estes

Park supported by a secretary to insure effective communications within the region.

AGENDA

BIG THOMPSON ADVISORY C0~1ITTEE

SEPTEMBER 28, 1976 9:00 A.M.

Conservancy District Office, Loveland

1. REPORT ON U.S. HIGHWAY #34 PIONEER ROAD STATUS -DWIGHT BOWER

2. REPORT ON U.S. HIGHWAY #34 PLANNING AND DESIGN.

CONSIDERATION OF POTENTIAL TEMPORARY USE NEXT SUMMER.

3. STATUS REPORT - WILLARD QUIRK

4. MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS FROM MEMBERS

BIG THO}WSON ADVISORY CO~ruiTTEE

September 28, 1976 M I N U T E S

The Big Thompson Advisory Committee met at 9:00A.M. on September 28, 1976, at the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Office. Those Committee members attending were:

John Michie, Chairman of Larimer County Commissioners William Lopez, Larimer County Commissioner

'Harren ~vo laver, Larimer County Commissioner Harry B. Tregent, Mayor of Estes Park

John Rold, State Geologist

Dwight Bower for Jack Kinstlinger, Colo. Dept. of Highways

Eugene Jencsok for Felix Sparks, Colo. Water Conservation Board Bev Warburton, Colorado Land Use Commission

Ernest C. Stille, Big Thompson Canyon Resident

Larry Simpson, Northern Colorado Conservancy District Douglas Sovern for Kenneth Wright, Governor's Office Mr. Hichie conducted the meeting.

Status of Pioneer Road and Highway Planning

The Highway Department has not worked on the Pioneer Road since the last meeting because of the debris removal from the Canyon. The Department still plans to place gravel on the road surface once the debris hauling is complete. Concern was raised from the floor regarding the Department's use of the term "Pioneer Road" which leaves a bad impression of actual road condition. It v1as suggested that the term "temporary road" would be more

appropriate. · ·

The Highway Department is in a phase of planning and evaluation relative to Highway #34. Each highway bridge will be evaluated relative to its ability to withstand a 100-year flood. During the design phase the Department will be utilizing mapping from the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) with some additional survey work in the Harrows. They expect the first m.apping to become available in one or two weeks. The Department is also studying geology in the Canyon and looking into retaining wall design. The Department is also studying factors affecting tempo-rary use of the highway and will have completed evaluation and recommendation within about .60 days. It was also suggested that the Department should consider incorporating areas or zones of safety along the Canyon.