Sunset Valley council denies variance for 9 Rees Drive over flood and runoff concerns

Council members voted unanimously to deny a variance request for 9 Rees Drive on July 15, after a lengthy public hearing in which residents described repeated flooding and urged the city to reject any development that would increase impervious cover in the critical water-quality zone.

Staff told the council that about 94% of the 2.5-acre lot lies within Sunset Valley's critical water-quality zone and that the applicant's plan proposed roughly 17,214 square feet of impervious surface. City staff and the city engineer recommended any approval be conditional and capped impervious cover at 14%, contingent on a large vegetative filter strip and recorded restrictive covenants to maintain mitigation.

"This project will only increase the problems that already exist," Sandy Cox, who lives adjacent to the site, told the council during public comment, citing personal flood experience and saying mitigation would not prevent high-intensity runoff onto neighboring yards.

Architect Hunter Tipps, representing the applicant, said his client's goal is to build a home and that engineering analyses by Ranger Engineering and Alpha Testing showed the proposed, reduced footprint and vegetation would not raise downstream elevations. He said the finished-floor elevation would be at least 12 inches above the 500-year flood elevation and that their no-rise study found no adverse downstream effect.

Council members repeatedly questioned the size of the proposed hardscape and the sufficiency of the mitigation. Councilmember Medicus moved to deny the variance on the grounds that the five required findings under section 150.323 of the Land Development Code were not satisfied; Councilmember Johnson seconded. The motion carried and the variance was not approved.

Councilors and many residents cited the 2013 flood and more recent regional events as evidence that extreme storms are increasingly unpredictable and that additional impervious cover in key creek corridors creates unacceptable public-safety and property risks. Several residents urged the city to use its existing acquisition fund to buy high-risk lots rather than permitting further development in the floodplain.

City staff noted that denial of the variance does not preclude a future application with different plans or additional independent engineering, but that under current submittals the council could not find the statutory criteria were met. The council adjourned the public-hearing portion and moved on to remaining agenda items.