Laserfiche WebLink
rA��•Df c1 <br /> a <br /> c <br /> u � <br /> '/IIINO�Y <br /> November 30, 1998 <br /> PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM <br /> NO. 98-83 <br /> MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council <br /> FROM: James L.Williams, Jr., City Manager ` <br /> Bruce A. McNabb, P.E., Director of Public Works <br /> Stephen P. Swanson, P.E., City Engineer <br /> SUBJECT: Spring Creek Floodplain Amendment <br /> City Project 9631 <br /> This memorandum responds to the questions raised by the City Council at its November 2, <br /> 1998 meeting at which this project was first presented to the City Council for action. Three basic <br /> questions were asked by Council Members. The first was why the amendment was not prepared <br /> and submitted after the improvements were completed in 1989. The second was whether the City <br /> had paid a private consultant for this work and the work was never completed. The third was <br /> about "Task 3" in the agreement and its cost implications to the City. These questions will be <br /> addresssed in the remainder of this memorandum. In addition, much of the general project <br /> backgound information from the October 21, 1998 memorandum to City Council has been <br /> included in this memorandum for Council's information. <br /> The City in 1989 made channel improvements to Spring Creek from Monroe Street to <br /> Martin Luther King, Jr., Drive. These improvements were made to reduce flooding risks to <br /> properties along the creek. This work was done under a State permit. It was a condition of the <br /> permit that the City submit the required material to the Federal Emergency Management Agency <br /> (FEMA) to obtain amendments to the floodplain maps for the applicable segments of Stevens <br /> Creek. The documentation of as-built information and the required hydraulic computations were <br /> essentially compiled at that time, but not put together into an application to send to FEMA. This <br /> work was not included in the contracts with either BGM or Guillou. The City decided not to <br /> proceed with the preparation of the application, at that time, for budgetary reasons. <br />