BOARD01914

• Board Meeting Date: 12/4/1974
• Description: Agenda or Table of Contents, Minutes, Resolution
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

Mr. Chairman. I turn it back to you.

Mr. Stapleton: Thank you. Larry. Inasmuch as the two people that state
they have to depart at 2:00 p.m.. I presume they are departing together.
1 will call on Ruth Wright first. please.

Mrs. Wright: My name is Ruth Wright. I live in Boulder. ColoradO. and
lam representing the Boulder County Council on Environmental Quality
which is made up of about twelve environmental groups from Boulder
County. '

Unfortunately. the copy of the draft that I got most recently which we
received December 3, is still dated September 11. so I think they sent
us the wrong draft copy. But I will try to respond to what Mr. Sparks
just said. not knowing exactly if my comments are totally appropriate.
I spoke to you about two months ago and at that time made several com-
ments which at this point I am not sure whether they have been incor-
porated or not. But one of the items. and I will take a quick look to
see if it is still in there. Yes. on page 5. it is considered section
3.1, subsection (5). which is one of the criteria. It says. "Any
obstruction which would adversely affect the efficiency of or unduly
restrict the flow capacity of a designated floodplain so as to cause
foreseeable damage to others." At the time I pointed out that it would
be very difficult to prove to that anyone development. especially.in
a very large floodplain. would cause foreseeable damage to others. The
problem of building in a floodplain is not anyone particular building,
unless it is really enormous, but the cumulative effect of a lot of
buildings. So I was hoping that in this wording we could somehow put
that cumulative effect in there, something such as "considering that
other buildings similarly'woula"be built which would then cumulatively
restrict the flow capacity." I still feel very, very strongly about
this. The problem with floodplains in the United States is not anyone
building. It is building in the floodplains continuously and the
cumulative effect of this. building, not anyone particular building;

I also suggested that the lower floor be defined. There are so many
different governmental jurisdictions involved in floodplains from federal
on down to the local. that it would be helpful to start coordinating
some of these. In the National Pluod Insurance Act. in the regulations.
they actually have a page which shows about twelve different kinds of
structures. And in each one they show the lower floor. I was hoping
that in our regulation we could perhaps have as an addendum. saying
that the lower floor is the same as the national's use for their flood
insurance act.

We are very pleased that the publications of the permit applications I
will be published in a newspaper. I think there perhaps is a little
omission here which was inadvertent. I think in that same notice on the
permit it should state when the hearing date has been set. You discussed
not less than thirty, nor more than sixty days after the date for the
hearing. but the public won't know ~>1hen that hearing is taking place
unless it is in that same notice. So I would think that would be not
only helpful but very necessary. Otherwise, in each case you see a
notice of a permit you have to call the particular agency to find out

I

-49-