The News, Talk, Sights and Sounds of the Warfleigh Neighborhood
We knew this was coming. See link below. The ACE is willing to construct and provide federal funding for the Westfield Boulevard alignment, but the city is saying "no thanks". They are willing to wait another 20 years and allow each of us in Warfleigh to pay thousands of dollars annually in FEMA flood premiums, just because Rocky Ripple didn't like the ACE plan and were willing to scream about it. They were louder than us. Warfleigh was indifferent. They won.
So how do we convince the Corps to update their maps to remove our designation as a flood plain since the portion of the project that affects *our* houses is complete? Isn't there a group investigating that option?
Quite frankly, we had leadership issues in the past with regard to this issue. That failure has set us back greatly and I do hope they hurt us all.
The city seems to be dismissing the Westfield alignment mostly bc the loudest complainers are actually BT residents along Westfield. They want to keep the overgrown honeysuckle and power lines as-is.
If the ACE and city are pursuing the west bank alignment, that will likely get RR even more fired up, so we need to be louder than them when the fight comes back around.
But our FIRM has not been updated to show the levee exists at all.
Alternative 1 (No Action)
Adoption of this alternative essentially continues the recommendations presented in the 1996 GRR and
EIS and adopted under the 1997 ROD, which terminates this Phase 3B/South Warfleigh
Section of the Project south of the Riviera Club property. The existing ground elevation at this location is lower than the elevation needed to reach a 300-year level of protection.
As a result, the downstream end of the Project, as shown in the 1996 GRR and EIS,
would not provide the full flood risk management benefits to the communities of Broad Ripple,
W arfleigh, and South Warfleigh.
So basically, it doesn't exist until it is finished
Christopher, I'm not trying to be a pill, but in a discussion we had last fall - when I was deeply, deeply investigating into this - I posted this:
As I recall some of the text in BW12 allows for neighborhoods to petition FEMA/NFIP to adjust their rates based on protection measures that are in place even if not yet completed, and there is assistance for neighborhoods who want to dispute the FIRM maps. So we may end up needing to work together to get Warfleigh specifically studied while this whole levee completion saga drags on.
The link to the discussion is http://www.warfleigh.net/forum/topics/additional-flood-wall-option-...
I need to go back and look at BW to remember where I read this, but I'm pretty sure we have the ability to petition for a hardship exception or something based on either/both an not-complete project and our flooding history. I'll see what I can find.
I agree it needs to be looked into. In emailing the MKNA board rep who is assigned to go to flood meetings etc - he said this:
"Nothing seems to have changed about the City exploring a map change to exempt some of your area"
..Seems worth looking into
You are correct. We're back to square one with the Corps needing to complete a new feasibility analysis. The Corps and the City have not made a schedule for that yet, and apparently funding is running low like usual. It appears that the City planned on using storm water program funds for their end of the wall, but those will probably be long gone in the few years it will take to complete another study and then bicker about the results for months/years on end.
You have to start wondering if they know the other bank option will come with a ridiculous cost that rivals the cost of including RR in the levee design so that it can be argued that the cost is the similar instead of the $30 million difference with the rejected options.
Has this decision been covered in the media at all? I see the city hall reporter for the Star that reported on flood issues in the past now works for the Denver Post.