Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />approximately forty-four percent (44.4%) of Colorado Counties had retumed their questionnaires, and <br />approximately (39.9%) of cities and towns had responded. Overall, 135 of the 331 questionnaires (40.8%) <br />have been received. Twenty..four of the 110 organizations (21.8%) also completed questionnaires. <br /> <br /> <br />Questionnaire Review <br />Each questionnaire was reviewed by MWE staff. Completed questionnaires ranged from very brief <br />responses with minimal or incomplete data to extensive documents with detailed responses that included <br />maps, reports, or other supplemental information. Additional follow-up calls were made to fill in blanks on <br />returned questionnaires or to clarify responses. Once all information was verified, the questionnaires were <br />entered into a database model. <br />Database Analysis <br />The Database Model enabled the project team to quantify statewide needs regarding miles of <br />unmapped floodplains, mapping that needs updating, miles of eroded or unstable streams requiring <br />rehabilitation, watershed or drainage master planning needs, flood mitigation project needs and funding needs. <br />Figure 1 illustrates that over 70 percent of respondents indicated the lack of a funding mechanism for planning <br />and implementing flood protection or stream rehabilitation improvements. When asked what type of funding <br />mechanism would be preferred, a significant percentage of respondents favored a revolving loan fund <br />(Figure 2). <br />The survey reSpOnSE!S reflect a keen interest by local community officials and water organizations to <br />better understand the naturall resource functions of stream corridors, so that flood protection can be gained <br />without compromising other IJeneficial values such as aquatic and riparian habitat, wetlands, water quality, <br />open space, recreation and water supply. <br /> <br />IDENTIFIED NEEDS <br /> <br /> <br />Based on a review of the questionnaire responses from the communities, counties and water-related <br /> <br />organizations, need were identified and grouped under two major categories; stream rehabilitation and flood <br /> <br />protection. <br />