Loading...
DR9305-CS 9205121~-~0 TO' SUBJECT: DATE: Alan D. Ratliff, City ManaGer Kenneth M. Griffin, P.E., City EnGineer~! Grapevine SprinGs Park May 12, 1992 On May 7, 1992, Steve Goram, Rick Wieland and myself met with representatives from Dallas County concerning improvements to be made to Grapevine SprinGs Park. In particularly, the meeting centered around some improvements to a section of the park in the floodway. Dallas County has proposed placing 8 to 10 foot of fill approximately 100 to 150 foot wide and approximately 250 foot long in the floodway to reclaim a portion of the bank that has eroded away. In addition to the placement of the fill, Dallas County had indicated they wish to place three pedestrian bridges to access an area which is surrounded on all sides by Grapevine SprinGs Creek. Also, Dallas County stated that they would be fencing a portion of the island to keep people away from steep slopes. At the meetinG, Dallas County was informed that the placement of the fill was in violation of our Floodplain Ordinance. Our ordinance, in effect, states that any work within the floodway requires a technical report showing that the water surface elevation will not be raised because of the improvements. The representatives from Dallas County were informed that to place the fill would require a technical study. The only way to Get around the technical study was if they just stabilized the existing bank without the placement of a substantial amount of fill. The question was raised at the meeting on how access was Going to be provided to this island. At that point, the Dallas County representatives indicated that there would be pedestrian bridges. My concern was that the pedestrian bridges would also be in violation of our Floodplain Ordinance. In looking at the elevations of the proposed bridges, it was apparent that the pedestrian bridges would be approximately 8 foot below the 100 year water surface and would in fact create an obstruction to the flow of water. The Dallas County representatives also indicated that the bridges were not designed to resist the force of the water, therefore the water could in fact damage the bridge, possibly dislodGinG it. The issue of the fence was raised but no comment was made by the City staff on the placement of the fence. I instructed the representatives of Dallas County that I would visit with FEMA as soon as possible, in a face to face meetinG, to discuss these issues to insure that the City was not misinterpreting the Floodplain Ordinance or FEMA's requirements. Memo to Alan D. Ratliff, City Manager May 12, 1992 Page 2 On May 8, 1992, I met with Jack Quarrels and Diane Calhoun with the Regional FEMA office. Both Mr. Quarrells and Ms. Calhoun were very adamant that to be in compliance with our Floodplain Ordinance, the City should not allow the placement of the fill, the pedestrian bridges, or the fence without a technical study showing that there will be no rise in the water surface. Approval of improvements in the floodway without the proper technical information could in fact endanger the City's standing in the program. If FEMA so chose, they could place the City on probation until the problems were rectified. This memo is written to inform you of the current situation. It is quite possible that because Dallas County is involved and because it is the park site, you will be questioned on why the City is unwilling to work with the County in the improvements of the park site. It is not that the City is unwilling to work with the County, it is the fact the proposed improvements are in violation of both the City ordinances and FEMA ordinances in regards to development in the floodway. As you may recall, even the proposed park site that the City is proposing north of Parkway Blvd., has monies appropriated for the needed approvals from FEMA for the development of the floodway. I would be happy to discuss this at your convenience. KMG/ba cc: Steve Goram, Director of Public Works ADRll