My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD00589
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
FLOOD00589
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/23/2009 1:21:41 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 9:22:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Denver
Community
Denver
Stream Name
South Platte
Title
Costs to Denver of 1965 Flood Recurrence
Date
9/14/1977
Prepared For
CWCB
Prepared By
G. Ahmad
Floodplain - Doc Type
Flood Documentation Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
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 />f <br /> <br />.,. <br />'~ <br /> <br />"ail <br />" <br /> <br />Mr. G. Ahmad <br />September 13, 1977 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />Part 5 contains the conclusions and recommendations of the <br />studY. The first conclusion is that local communities are adopting <br />unprecise zoning regulations. No substantiation of this conclusion <br />is given anywhere in the report. The second conclusion is that no <br />comprehensive examination has been completed to determine the combined <br />impact of flooding on all streams in the Denver metro area. Many of <br />these drainageways have been master planned and the impact of a flood <br />on the individual drainageways is available. Still others are being <br />master planned at the present time. When the master plans are com- <br />pleted, a composite picture of potential flood damage for the entire <br />metro area will be available. The third conclusion is that there is <br />no program in existence to help relocate public facilities or private <br />buildings likely to be damaged or destroyed by floods. Again, this <br />situation is being addressed in the master plans. <br /> <br />The second recommendation is to estimate more precisely the com- <br />bined effect of all streams on public facilities. This again is being <br />done as a part of the District's master planning program. The third <br />recommendation is to develop plans to relocate facilities preferably <br />before flooding or at least after flooding occurs, Relocation is but <br />one OPtion in a complete flood loss management program. All options <br />should be considered, and are, as a part of the District's master <br />planning program. Recommendation No.4 calls for a channel improvement <br />program. Again, channel improvement is but one element of a complete <br />flood loss management program. Recorrrnendations five and six are to make <br />the public more aware of flood hazards and the National Flood Insurance <br />Program. The District has a very active program underway to annually <br />notify all occupants of flood hazard areas of the hazard and of the <br />availability of flood insurance. <br /> <br />In summary, the report is confusing, contains many inaccuracies, <br />contains conclusions not supported by the information in the report, and <br />contains recommendations for courses of action, most of which are well <br />underway in the Denver metro area. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />_C'a'~Cvl~ <br /> <br />~;n D,G,oo' <br />{~}~hief, Flood Plain <br />Management Program <br /> <br />WGD/ba c <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.