You are on page 1of 1

OBP004706

From: (b) (6) on behalf of (b) (6)


To: FLOSSMAN, LOREN W; (b) (6) ; (b) (6) ; (b) (6)
Subject: FW: Aerial Maps versus Land Surveys Acquisition Comparison
Date: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 8:59:58 PM
Attachments: (b) (6)
Importance: High

Loren

Apparently our default criteria of acquiring 60 ft of property when fence is installed at toe of levee may
result in some properties needing to be acquired whereas if the acquisition were slightly less, no
acquisition would be need. (b) appears to have a good recommended path forward. Thoughts?
(6)
(b)
(6)

From: (b) (6)


Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 7:21 PM
To: (b) (6) (b) (6)
Cc: (b) (6) ; (b) (6) ; (b) (6) (b) (6)
Subject: Aerial Maps versus Land Surveys Acquisition Comparison
Importance: High

(b)
(6)
The enclosed image shows a comparison of the real estate swath as determined by use of
aerials/project maps versus the results from out metes and bounds surveys in RGV. For this project
reach we had assumed use of P-2 fence sixty feet from levee toe (L-1). However, the survey results
indicate that if we acquire 60 feet from toe we will impact residential lots which may require relocation
assistance. I would propose that we reduce the real estate swath to what is available from the toe of
levee to the back of the residential lots to avoid potential relocation assistance. This would require that
we mod the ongoing survey contract to have the surveyors determine the real estate swath available
without impacting the residential lots. RE tells me this is doable but will delay their schedule as they
will need to wait on this survey measurement to define our taking. I’ve asked RE to quantify the
number of miles where this is an issue so we can make a more informed decision. Let me know what
your thoughts are/preference so we can coordinate with RE and the survey crew. Thanks.

(b)
(6)