My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00961
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD00961
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:56:18 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:47:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
9/22/2003
Description
Flood Section - Probable Maximum Precipitation Site-Specific Study for the Cherry Creek Reservoir-Study Findings and Recommendations
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
75
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 />SECTIONS IX <br /> <br />Final Two Organizational Alternatives <br /> <br />With the elimination of alternatives C3, C4, and CS, an expanded evaluation of alternatives Cl <br />and C2 is presented to determine which is the best alternative to meet the needs of the project. <br />Both alternatives include Alternative A, Status Quo, for activities that are within the boundaries <br />of each jurisdiction and not multi-jurisdictional in nature. As outlined above, the primary <br />activities of the multi-jurisdictional organization are: <br /> <br />. PlanninglRegulatory, <br /> <br />. Construction of Large Multi-jurisdictional Projects, <br /> <br />. Operations and Maintenance of Large Multi-jurisdictional Projects, and <br /> <br />. Administration. <br /> <br />Following is a discussion of examples of how specific activities would be performed by the new <br />organization under Alternatives Cl and C2. Either C1 or C2 could perform the activities. <br /> <br />6.1 MAJOR ACTIVITIES <br /> <br />Floodplain Mapping and Management <br /> <br />The primary concept for each of the two alternatives is the completion of multi-jurisdictional <br />activities for and in each of the jurisdictions. For example, the floodplain mapping and <br />management activity would be completed on washes that extend through a number of <br />;'C~ jurisdictions and on major washes that <br />./ 11,2;;;/""" may only be located in one <br />----- - '~l'VO(j!4N"~ d t Th t' t Id b <br />. .-/. .' '-y. '. juris ic ion. e ac lvi y wou e <br />,. .' ....:.. . funded by the selected organization <br />for the benefit of all jurisdictions and <br />for all residents of the valley that <br />benefit from the mapping and <br />regulation of floodplains. It would be <br />an efficient way to complete mapping <br />and management, and all participating <br />jurisdictions would receive the same <br />mapping studies and be advised in a <br />consistent manner on the management <br />aspects, including where and how <br />development should be controlled in <br />the floodplain areas. <br /> <br /> <br />"'~" <br /> <br />Flood Insurance Rate Maps <br /> <br />Drainage Basin Planning Studies <br /> <br />The completion of drainage basin planning studies would work in a similar manner. The studies <br />would be focused on multi-jurisdictional drainage and flood control issues including major <br />drainages that pass through a number of jurisdictions and drainages that are large enough to <br />warrant regional attention. The selected organization would fund, manage and complete the <br /> <br />UBS <br /> <br />1'.\I?ROJEC1S\222~22_GAAND_VP,llEY\SUB_OC\6,\U;)ROJ_DEl\,^F\NAl REPOR1\FINAl REPT REV 4.DOC\9-JUl-D3\\ 6-1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.