Laserfiche WebLink
<br />!<;,. I <br /> <br />c::J <br /> <br />c=Jc=Jc=JCJCJCJCJc=JCJCJ <br /> <br />CJ <br /> <br />'"""'"'... <br />L.::LJ <br /> <br />!..' I <br /> <br />Iliiiil <br /> <br />- - <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />Table 2 <br />TABULATION OF COMMUNITY RESPONSES, NEEDS AND RECOMMENDED SOLUTIONS <br />FOR COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD'S <br />STEW ARDSHlP OF COLORADO STREAM CORRIDORS <br /> <br />COMMUNITY RESPONSES <br />(134 current total received) <br /> <br />COMMUNfrYfflTAKEHOLDERNEEDS <br /> <br />RECOMMENDED STEWARDSHIP PROGRAMS <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Planning Assistance Response Planning Assistance Need Planning Assistance Recommendation <br />- 62% of respondents expressed need for -Community growth patterns are adversely affecting natuml -Facilitate local/regional multi-objective basin p1anninl <br />a multi-objective stream/rive stream corridor functions. for Colorado's major river basins in cooperation with <br />rehabilitation project. - Specific, single purpose solutions are genemlly inadequate; local stakeholders. <br />- 42% of respondents expressed need fo need to apply multi-objective stewardship perspective to waif -Establish a program to support local/regional river <br />watershed based Drainage Master Plan. shed and stream corridors. rehabilitation project planning for selected stream <br />- 88% of respondents cited one or more -Multi-objective planning solutions are needed for most reaches. <br />problems relating to stream corridor or Colorado watersheds. -Facilitate local planning for community based multi- <br />local flooding. -Communities and landowners need assistance in fonnulating objective flood hazard mitigation projects. <br />and planning their river or stream rehabilitation projects. <br />-Floodplain management must be expanded to include: <br />'" . stream rehabilitation/stabilization <br />. habitat and riparian zone preservation/enhancement <br />. flood hazard mitigation <br /> <br />Funding Implementation Response <br />- Local funds are unavailable or <br />insufficient to support stream corridor <br />projects <br />- 36% of respondents felt lack of <br />funding was the primary obstacle to <br />planning and implementing <br />improvements. <br />- 70% of respondents said they do not <br />have a funding mechanism or had an <br />ineffective funding mechanism. <br /> <br />Funding Implementation Need <br />-Funding programs at the local and state level. <br />-Expanded opportunities for cost sharing in state and federal <br />programs. <br />-Effective program for administration of grants for planning <br />and loans for project implementation and construction. <br />- Need for flood related emergency response and post-flood <br />land acquisition. <br /> <br />Funding Implementation Recommendation <br />-Create a state wide revolving fund loan program to <br />enable communities to address flood mitigation, <br />watershed, and stream corridor management issues. <br />- Expand the statutory language to allow CWCB to <br />sponsor projects with fedeml agencies in addition to <br />existing authority with the Corps of Engineers. <br />-Establish a fund for post-flood property acquisition. <br />- Support projects/planning that include diverse <br />stakeholders in multipurpose projects to maximize <br />opportunities and benefits to stream corridor and <br />watershed projects. <br />