My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD01350
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
FLOOD01350
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/23/2009 12:58:19 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 9:57:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Statewide
Community
State of Colorado
Stream Name
All
Title
Colorado Communities FIS Restudy Priority List FY 92-93
Date
7/24/1992
Prepared For
State of Colorado
Prepared By
CWCB
Floodplain - Doc Type
Educational/Technical/Reference Information
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
59
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 />Ms, Virginia Motoyama <br />July 24, 1992 <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />governments, and by the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. I feel that as long as <br />funds are unavailable, FEMA is throwing away an opportunity for a meaningful partnership <br />to improve maps. I cannot yet speak for the unmet XDS needs of other states, but I trust <br />that FEMA will seriously reconsider its position.. <br /> <br />With regard to LOMRs I feel that we need some thoughtful discussion of the criteria <br />for converting letters to physical map revisions. Although FEMA staff, particularly in <br />Washington D,C., does not work regularly with property owners or their representatives, we <br />and local officials do, Letters alone, without n(:w maps, simply make our work harder than <br />it needs to be, In addition it appears that even for FEMA systematic tracking of the <br />LOMRs is difficult, I think that we can do much better. <br /> <br />With regard to Studies in Progress there is one major point to be made. The fact <br />that a study is currently in progress does not mean that all of that community's restudy <br />needs have been met. In the future we will include data regarding unmet needs for such <br />communities, For this year we felt that it was important to concentrate on communities <br />where there no such ongoing efforts, That will probably not be the case next year, <br /> <br />I appreciate the opportunity to submit this information to you, I look forward to <br />discussing it with you in the future, I look forward even more to helping to develop a <br />thorough and efficient system for prioritizing study needs that can be used in other parts of <br />the country. <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br />~L...---~"""_____ <br /> <br />Brian R. Hyde <br />Sr. Water Resource Specialist <br />Flood Control and Floodplain <br />Management Section <br /> <br />BRH/bj <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.