The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPackets - Council Packets (35) AR1.4'1601 9:1E; TOV March 7, 2016 Town of Oro Valley 11000 N. La Canada Drive Oro Valley,Arizona 85737 Attn: Ms.Julie Bower,Town Clerk Re: 1/12/2016WLB Flow Mitigation Graphic Dear Ms. Bower: At a meeting of residents regarding the property in question, Councilmember Zinkin was present. At his suggestion I am respectfully requesting that this letter be placed in the "Fasseas Packet", for the March 16, 2016 council agenda. Thank ou for your courtesy, RAY B UER 9900 North La Cholla Boulevard Oro Valley,Arizona 85742-9645 email: Mike Zinkin JPL�„EY ARS Councilmember o oy Mayor and Town Council 0 9 Phone:(520)229-4993 �!a f Mobile:(520)471-0321 Fax:(520)297-0428 E-mail: mzinkin@orovalleyaz.gov koTown of Oro Valley LADED 11000 N.La Canada Drive Oro Valley,Arizona 85737 www.orovalleyaz.gov Town of Oro Valley 11000 N. La Canada Drive Oro Valley,AZ 85737 Re: 1/12/2016 11"x17",WLB Flow Mitigation Graphic February 29, 2016 Honorable Mayor and Town Councilmembers: At a meeting of residents regarding the property in question,Councilmember Zinkin was present.At his suggestion,the Town Clerk was requested to include this letter in the Fasseas packet,for the March 16, 2016 council agenda. Mr.Zinkin also viewed a video illustrating the ferocity of an LDO Wash flow that almost totally filled the only exit culvert. After discussing the sketch I had been advised to contact the Town Engineer,as a courtesy and also as a record of fact at this juncture. I did so in a similar letter on February 4, 2016,on March 3,2016, Engineer M.Todnem, P.E., responded. When a legal action may be imminent,a letter of intent or claim precedes. I have no present plans for any such option, at this time. Nor should this communication be construed as part of such a document. However, negligence is a valid basis for such an action. I believe it shall be evident that,that element is present as indicated, herein. The present Town Engineer, had none of the faults concerned initiated on his watch. However, as Town Engineer he,as well as the Mayor and Town Council, have been entrusted with a solemn duty and I believe you will find that one must choose to defend the neglect pointed out or be part of the solution and revisions. I believe you will opt for solutions. Regardless of water mitigation efforts,this and future development, along with the new La Cholla road drainage,will all have some impact upon the only exit,The LDO Wash.The WLB graphic perfectly illustrates the problem. Rains that may be normally absorbed will now be deflected by development flat surfaces into the narrow, barely visible,gabion lined LDO Channel, lower left, resulting in increasing volumes and velocities. LDO Wash flows are imagined to be associated only with local rains. Large flows occur for hours at night,with no local rains.The sources are the mountain flows which may occur at any time.With the drought, multiple flows are reduced. At the initial meeting of the 2009"LDO Wash Improvement Project",on April 8, 2009,an Oro Valley/Consultant handout stated it would, "Provide the additional capacity required to convey the 100-year flow event, "with sufficient freeboard". However,the required FEMA printed notice of 7/29/2009 in the Explorer News,approved only a design that would, "convey CLOSE to the 100 year storm event". Most residents were unaware and uninformed of the change. That meeting was hosted by an OV Stormwater Engineer and Town consultant.After viewing the plans, my wife and I proposed to donate additional lands, at no cost to the Town,to widen the proposed 25'wash.It had been 32'wide.We believed then,as now,that the consultant plan was,and is,flawed.Width and bank heights were,and are insufficient to handle even present,as well as future increasing flows. Our offer was bluntly refused without any consideration. Our existing 60"high walls of 6"reinforced gunite, with a 1'x 4'reinforced toe, were allegedly deemed too low by the Town consultant.Our existing 60"walls were destroyed and replaced with gabions presently as low as,49 inches to 55 inches above the existing flow levels. Minimum plan specifications are 61 inches. An OV Stormwater Engineer wrote in regard to a flow on 7/12/2012,that the"structure had functioned superbly". Apparently unknown to him,243 feet of the gabions,on our property, had been washed out 3'wide and 4'deep. Haphazard repairs were made, and not to original specification,as required. It leans embarrassingly,yet today. Our lands adjacent to all the gabion walls here are higher, except for the washed out section, because all the walls are of insufficient height for protection from ever increasing flows. This also has caused us tremendous erosion I In an email of 3/17/2011,to the project manager, I protested the low heights of all the walls across our property considering it mandatory for an addition of at least an 18 inch row of gabions to increase the bank protection and to be at grade with adjacent land. I was advised that one could not just add a row of 18"baskets on the top, as it would not be stable. If it were added, it must be underneath the gabion stack, and it was now impossible to do so on our property. Roads and development drainage, no matter how mitigated, will have an effect upon the LDO Wash.The weakest link is here, where flows enter and are sharply restricted by the narrow,steep channel.They produce frighteningly violent wave actions and unbelievably swift velocities.The video viewed by Councilmember Zinkin should be required viewing. Here,at that entering point will be found the lowest,poorest bank protections. Here,243 feet of gabions were washed out as well as being overtopped in other locations. Here,bank heights may be seen as low as 49 inches. Minimum specs are 61 inches. Here an increased 18" bank height was refused because it was not possible to add the gabions on top. And here,for over 47 years, my wife and I have resided on this 4.89 acres and monitored this channel. However,20 feet downstream of our 57 inch wall,the walls have risen 91 to 102 inches—with 18 inch gabions on top. Although we were advised this height and procedure was not possible, it apparently was possible. But,just not for us. The bank improvements were appreciated, but,finding that a double standard had been perpetrated against us that renders our property more vulnerable,than an adjacent property by this negligence, is a travesty that must be addressed.To permit new development and new roads to add to the LDO Wash flows without first addressing and correcting this negligence that has imperiled our safety by this double standard, is unthinkable. The addition of the originally requested 3'x 1.5'(18")row of filled,secured and backfilled gabion baskets must be Installed on top of the entire section of LDO Wash bank protections that pass through the 9900 N.La Cholla property. The need was clearly demonstrated by the 243 foot wall washout here, and overtopping of gabions here, previously. It would also be quite helpful if the most simple requirement of the recorded easement,granted to the Town,was also implemented.And that is: "Scheduled elimination of weeds".The small channel aside our north drive is most indicative of this impediment to flows into the wash, it is overflowing with weeds and has never been addressed as required. As suggested,there are choices for us all. I pray the correct one will be made for our Town,as it is our Town as well. Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, RAY BAUER,Trustee,The Bauer Family Revocable Trust 9900 N. La Cholla Blvd., Oro Valley,AZ 85742-9645 email: