My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP11158
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
11000-11999
>
WSP11158
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 3:16:23 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 4:46:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8210.470
Description
Pacific Southwest Interagency Committee
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
6/1/1972
Author
Unknown
Title
Analytical Summary Report on Water and Land Resources - June 1972 - State and Federal Comments
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />OfJl172 <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />programs that were put forward in the Regional studies, These needs <br />are in and around urban areas. The report recommends study to determine the <br />kinds of outdoor recreation development that can best satisfy unmet <br />demands in urban areas. Recreation opportunities and open space <br />contribute to the quality of life within the metropolitan areas, The <br />need is apparent for participation by the APOs in the task of focusing <br />the recreation planning down onto the urban areas. <br /> <br />DisaRRreRation Made Difficult by Mix of Projections and ,imeframes Used <br /> <br />As observed in the Analytical Summary, the OBERS-68 projections have been <br />handled "quite differently" in the four regions that make up the Pacific <br />Southwest. The differences and the construction of individual baselines <br />for use in the four regions will make difficult the disaggregation of <br />the projections in the Type I Framework studies by the APOs and others <br />seeking to use them in local situations. Planning agencies below the <br />state level have been inclined to use their own projections of population <br />increases and economic growth. Almost always their projections of <br />growth and development are dissimilar, one in comparison with another <br />made by a nearby community. The fact that the timeframes used in the <br />Type I Framework studies do not match those most frequently used by the <br />APOs will further complicate the problems of use at the local level of <br />the projections and programs included in the studies. The discrepancies <br />of projections and confusion of timeframes may largely frustrate efforts <br />of the local agency planners to use the forecasts of needs and outline <br />of future programs in the Type I Framework studies. Further efforts <br />should be made to coordinate population and growth projections and to <br />standardize timeframes for use by planning agencies at all levels. <br />HUD will cooperate with PSIAe and others in efforts to improve the <br />intergovernmental coordination of baselines and timeframes in the next <br />round of water and related land use studies in the Pacific Southwest. <br /> <br />ReRional Summaries are Helpful <br /> <br />The inclusion with the Analytical Summary of summaries of the Regional <br />Framework Plans for the four regions of the Pacific Southwest help to <br />make this very good report handier for use by the APOs and local and <br />other planning agencies. <br /> <br />I hope the foregoing is not too voluminous to be useful to you. Please <br />let us know if we can be helpful in any way as you review this commentary. <br /> <br />rz'". ~ <br /> <br />- 2:i.1a <br /> <br />It"c.,''';'_" Mimlnls,trator <br /> <br />EXHIBIT D <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.