Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />physical reasons for selecting the one foot or selecting the criteria <br />that st~ff had selected. My feeling is that;~taff do~s have suitable <br />data availabl, to justify the One fdot bf depth and the three foot per <br />second criteria that was selected. <br /> <br />In closing, I would like to point out that I believe having a separate <br />designation for nonresidential areas is impractical because of changing <br />zoning at the local levels. In fact. at every city council meeting <br />and at least once a month in most counties rezoning is going on as a <br />regular day to day matter. Often. the rezonings are from industrial to <br />residential or vice versa. <br /> <br />Because I didn't have an opportunity to review the December 4 draft. I <br />would very much like the opportunity to submit an additional written <br />statement tomorrow. Mr. Chairman. <br /> <br />Mr. Stapleton: That would certainly be appropriate. <br /> <br />Mr. Wright: Thank you. very much. <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: Considering the drafting being done by the Governor's <br />office and the change of the statutory citations. we will not have a <br />clean draft of this regulation until the February meeting. If anybody <br />wants to submit any further comments within the next thirty days. the <br />staff would like to receive them. <br /> <br />Mr. Stapleton: All right, the next speaker is Ted Diffenderfer from <br />the city of Boulder. <br /> <br />Mr. Diffenderfer: I am Ted Diffenderfer. director of the storm drainage <br />and flood control utilities for the city of Boulder. My concerns are <br />very much similar to Ken's in that I feel that in trying to administer <br />a regulation that has two zones and where we can have within a community <br />changing zoning classifications it will create problems for us. Perhaps <br />my solution may be a little bit different from Ken's but I do see the <br />problems that he points out. <br /> <br />Because we are dealing with both open areas as Mrs. Wright referred to <br />and Ken. and with areas that are already urbanized. I think that we <br />need to come up with something that we in local government can admin- <br />ister in a practical manner and try to.treat people equally whether <br />they be the property owner or the other side of the coin. It would <br />appear to me that if we adopted a criteria similar to the Urban Drainage <br />District, the six-inch rise, those lines can be drawn on existing maps <br />and show us where buildings presently exist that should ultimately be <br />removed and prevent the construction of buildings within open space <br />areas now. I would urge the board to strongly consider revising that <br />section speaking to low hazard areas. whether it is the six-inch rise <br />or some numerical magic number. I don't know which may be the best. <br />They are arbitrary. anyone of them that you use. So I would ask the <br />board to consider the low hazard area again. Thank you. <br /> <br />Mr. S~arks: The comments by Mr. Wright and Mr. Diffenderfer are almost <br />ident1ca1 and raise an issue which has worried us a great deal. MY <br /> <br />-54- <br />