My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD02598
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
BOARD02598
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:17:23 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:17:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
9/18/1974
Description
Agenda or Table of Contents, Minutes
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
77
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 />Mr. Fetcher: I am still not very happy with paragraph 4 under this low <br />hazard zone. And I th1t1k for the beMfit of the ctlitlDiisl:l.On and the <br />audience I would really like to understand now that I am utterly confused <br />as to what a low hazard zone is. I mean, I really do not read this <br />correctly. And maybe I am the only one here who does not, but I think <br />there are others that are confused. I <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: It is an area in which the depth of the water will not <br />either exceed a depth of one foot, or will not attain a velocity greater <br />than three feet per second. <br /> <br />Mr. Fetcher: So that if the water is less than a foot and the velocity <br />is three feet per second or greater it is still in the high hazard area. <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: It is still in the high hazard area. <br /> <br />Mr. Fetcher: Okay. <br /> <br />Mr. S\?arks: The reason is that six inches of water can be very destruc- <br />tive l.f it is going at the rate of say, ten- twelve miles an hour. The <br />velocity of the water has a great deal to do with the damage. <br /> <br />Mr. Fetcher: Of course, the way I read it is that if it is greater <br />than a foot and it has no velocity it is in the flood zone. That is the <br />way I read it. <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: That is true, it is. <br /> <br />Mr. Fetcher: Okay, then we are in the same place. <br /> <br />Mr. Kroeger: Any other questions from the board? <br /> <br />Mr. Pickrel: Mr. Chairman, I have one question of Larry. <br />flood insurance program, federal flood insurance program, <br />ditches considered in defining flood zone areas? <br /> <br />Under this <br />are irrigation <br /> <br />Mr. Starks: Right now we are trying to stay out of that field. We have <br />enoug problems without considering irrigation ditches. They obviously <br />do create-flood hazards. The best example is what happened here <br />recently south of Denver along the Highline Canal. That canal over- <br />flowed last year and did considerable damage. It is not a natural water- <br />course, but it did cause flooding. The statute uses the term "streams" <br />and we defined that as a natural stream. There are flood hazards other <br />than natural streams. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Mr. Kroeger: John, another question? <br /> <br />Mr. Fetcher: I would like to go back to my other questions on page 6. <br />Under subparagraph l(b), apparently you felt that small buildings <br />should be accepted. <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: Yes. Again, this is purely arbitrary. There may be a few <br /> <br />-8- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.