My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD00937
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
FLOOD00937
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/23/2009 10:51:25 AM
Creation date
10/4/2006 9:36:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Statewide
Community
State of Colorado
Title
Evaluation of the Economics, Social and Enviromental Effects of Floodplain Regualtions
Date
3/1/1981
Prepared For
State of Colorado
Prepared By
FEMA
Floodplain - Doc Type
Historic FEMA Regulatory Floodplain Information
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
209
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 />(Scenario I), (2) regulating the 100-year floodplain in a manner <br />similar to the current minimum requirements of the National Flood <br />Insurance Program (Scenario II), and (3) forbidding new develop- <br />ment and substantial improvements in the 100-year floodplain and <br />"correcting" past land use decisions which interfere with the na- <br />tural functions of the floodplain by removing unwarranted struc- <br />tures (Scenario III). <br /> <br />A further difference between Scenarios II and III is that <br />Scenario II allows vertical adjustments of development (by eleva- <br />tion or flood proofing to the regulatory level) or a horizontal <br />shift of development out o~ the 100-year floodplain. Scenario III <br />on the other hand, permits only horizontal adjustment, prevent- <br />ing further development within the 100-year floodplain. This ex- <br />tends to both new construction and any proposed substantial im- <br />provements. Therefore, Scenario III may not be deemed to be <br />a reasonably viable option, just as Scenario I (no regulations) is <br />normally not. However, from a research perspective it is desir- <br />able to cover the extreme range of theoretical regulatory options. <br /> <br />To avoid obscuring the effects of a particular scenario, <br />variations in regulations among local governments were not con- <br />sidered. This eliminates the ability of communities to compete <br />with respect to the stringency of regulations. Each scenario <br />, <br />was assumed to be applied uniformly throughout the nation. All <br />regulations were assumed to be properly administered and enforced. <br />The differences between the evaluated effects for the three regu- <br />latory scenarios for the case study communities are presented in <br />Table 2. To facilitate comparisons, both amounts and percentages <br />of change from 1975 to 1980 and 1990 are presented. <br /> <br />Economic Effects <br /> <br />When no regulations are applied (Scenario I), average annual <br />flood losses increase sharply. It is projected that flood losses <br /> <br />-11- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.