Laserfiche WebLink
<br />an "existing conditions" floodplain study. The Board has already designated the FHAD, with its . <br />future conditions floodplains, Now the Board is considering the designation of the FIS', with their <br />existing conditions floodplains. <br /> <br />Current Rel!Ulatorv Practice bv the City of Westminster <br />Westminster acknowledges both the "future conditions" floodplain study (FHAD) and the "existing <br />conditions" floodplain studies (FIS '). The city also acknowledges a third piece of information, the <br />watershed master plan. They use the FHAD, and the accompanying master plan, for floodplain <br />managementlland use planning purposes. They use the FIS for flood insurance purposes <br />(depicting where the purchase of flood insurance is mandatory), They have spent a lot of time <br />educating their elected officials, planning commission members and other staff about the two <br />floodplain delineations, They accept both the complications inherent with having two delineations <br />and the benefits of doing so. <br /> <br />In a meeting with CWCB staff, the city's floodplain administrator, Dave Loseman, stated that the city <br />wants the FIS to show the current floodplain, not the future conditions floodplain, Showing the future <br />conditions floodplain in the FIS would mean people who are in a floodplain that does not yet exist <br />would have to purchase mandatory flood insurance. On the other hand, the city does not want to <br />ignore the future conditions floodplain, They are being careful about knowing where the floodplain <br />will be in the future as they approve new development. In addition, they are working to follow the <br />specific requirements of the watershed master plans. ' The master plans prescribe specific flood <br />reduction improvements (i,e detention ponds, channelization, open space) to protect properties <br />downstream from the impacts of urbanization upstream, The city needs to have all three pieces of . <br />information in place in order to make its current regulatory system meet its objectives. <br /> <br />A Complicatinl!: Factor <br />The above process can work relatively smoothly if the entire watershed, most of the watershed, or the <br />most critical part of the watershed in terms of flood hydrology, is in one jurisdiction, If the watershed <br />extends into other jurisdictions, then a regional master plan that is legally adopted by all parties might <br />be needed to assure that assumptions made today about conditions tomorrow are valid, Some <br />watersheds in Westminster originate outside of Westminster. Broomfield is upstream of Westminster, <br />as an example. Obviously Westminster cannot compel Broomfield to implement specific flood <br />control features, If the master plan for a stream calls for a detention facility in Broomfield and that <br />facility is not built when Westminster would like it built, then the downstreiun development in <br />Westminster faces hydrologic and hydraulic conditions that are different than what was anticipated, <br /> <br />Reasons for Desimatinl!: the "Existinl!: Conditions" Floodplain Delineation <br />Below are some reasons for designating and approving an "existing conditions" floodplain delineation <br /> <br />. The "existing conditions" floodplain delineation depicts the floodplain as it is <br />today more closely than any other delineation, <br />. The "existing conditions" delineation is the official floodplain mapping in <br />FEMA's eyes and, therefore, in the eyes oflenders. <br /> <br />. <br />