FLOOD03849 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

--. J..d~ ,",3-{f(JiJ (e OPPORTUNITIES AND OBSTACLES FOLLOWING THE BIG THlIQ>SON FLOOD 1976 by Nona Thayer, Larimer County Coan1ssioner Ten inches of rain within four hours coming down on already aaturated soils caused the flash flood that hit the Big Thompson Canyon the night of July 31, 1976 with shocking little warning. One hundred thirty nine people lost their lives that horrible night when an 18 foot wall of water tossed suto sized boulders and autos themselves like ping-pong balls. Eventual estimates included $27 million in damages to public property and $16 lIIillion loss in private pro- perty - 57% of these individuals were over 50 years of age. The event hit with little warning. An obvious obstacle for recovery was that little systematic planning had been done to prepare for a catastrophic event. '. In addition, current management structure of the County did not have the depth of persOnnel to handle the problems facing them. I wonder if a local govern- ment can ever have the person power to undertake public works projects in the aftermath of a disaster that is four or five times greater than their annual expected projects? The County needed to immediately put destroyed County roads back into service. They needed to make decisions about the trade-offs between having roads rebuilt in the shortest possible time as opposed to seizing the opportunity to carefully engineer to mitigate future flood damage.. For the most part, expediency won out. Immediately there were gargantuan problems of search for victims; identification of the dead; concern about water contamination; assessment of property damage; identifying damaged homes to be destroyed because of publiC health considerations; and immediate housing for the homeless and short-term aid. What I want to emphasize today, is the post flood recovery program that also was predicated upon the idea of redevelopment of the canyon so that it would be a safer place. This was the flood plain public acquisition program of buying up flood plain lands where the house was more than fifty percent de- stroyed. A measure of relief to the 115 victims whose homes were more than fifty percent destroyed was also possible by combining land acquisition at pre-flood values with a relocation allowance from BUD Grant. The opportunity was a safer redevelopment pattern and relief. The obstacles were delays, uncertainties, and pressures growing out of frustration of some of those who had lost their homes and possessions but who were obsessed with the desire to rebuild irrespective of the flooding. The County Commissioners immediately after the flood placed a six month mora- torium on rebuilding homes that were more than 50% destroyed. A flood plain study was begun. It was completed in January, 1977 and a hearing was held to determine if the maps of the Big Thompson River would be brought under the County's flood plain regulations which had been in place since 1974. Even though there was local opposition from canyon property owners to applying the flood plain regulations to the Big Thompson, the Commissioners did put this area under the Flood Plain Regulations. (e The acquisition program was launched in February, 1977 when the Commissioners committed $253,000.00 of County dollars to initiate a local, state and federal program for acquiring floodway lands in the canyon for public open space. At that time it appeared that $2.53 million would be needed to ensure enough dollars to negotiate with the owners of 364 floodway parcels which were either undeveloped or the improvements had been more than 50% destroyed.