Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, ' <br />, <br />! <br /> <br />Agenda Item 18a <br />September 2, 1993 <br /> <br />r: <br />l <br /> <br />Action: lllfough a Multi-Objective River Management Planning process, tbe interests <br />of all stream users can be better achieved. Most mandated programs bave <br />standards wbich can be evaluated or amended in the planning process. Many <br />times the Oood conveyance of a stream is not properly evaluated or <br />considered in a re-development proposal wbose objectives are not Oood <br />protection. Likewise flood protection projects do not always properly <br />consider other uses of the river. A multi objective approach should be <br />required for all river projects. <br /> <br />Possible LeVslative Issues <br /> <br />The above seven issues lead naturally to consideration of the possible need for <br />legislative action by the State of Colorado. <br /> <br />There are many questions, misunderstandings, and pre-conceived opinions on the <br />authorities and responsibilities which government officials and land owners bave during a <br />flood event. <br /> <br />Below is a list of issues that could be considered by the State: <br /> <br />L Direction to public officials to implement "Best Management Practices" <br />during a declared flood emergency by public officials <br /> <br />2. Designation of Natural Channel locations and alignments <br /> <br />3. Autborization of the State Engineer to divert flood waters and change <br />reservoir storage <br /> <br />4. Autborization for state agencies to re-assign allocated funds <br /> <br />5. Clarification that expenditures by public entities are exempt from the <br />provisions of Amendment No. 1 during a natural disaster emergency <br />operation <br /> <br />6, Mandating Oood insurance coverage as a requirement when state resources <br />are used in a development activity <br /> <br />7 Others <br /> <br />LFL/bj b)II96I&o <br /> <br />5 <br />