Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I SECTIONFOUR Performance Goals <br />I Table 43 - Proposed Map Modernization Projects for Years 2004-2006 <br />I DFIRMs that are J effurson 527,056 12.4% <br /> already complete Broomfield 38,272 13.2% <br />I or are m progress Eagle 41,659 14.2% <br />Pre- (i.e. digital flood Grand 12,442 14.5% Not <br /> 2004 hazard data is Routt 19,690 15.0% App Iicab Ie <br />I already available) Douglas 175,766 19.1% <br /> Denver 554,636 32.1% <br />I Boulder 219,296 37.2% <br /> Countywide Adams 363,857 45.8% 20 Yes <br /> 2004 Mapping Arapahoe 487,967 57.2% 20 Yes <br />I (hopefully :fimding Larimer 251,464 63.1% 20 Yes <br /> will be provided for Mesa 116,255 65.8% 20 Yes <br /> Countywide EI Paso 516,929 77.9% 50 Yes <br />,I Mapping Pueblo 141,472 81.2% 50 Yes <br />2005 Teller 20,555 81. 7% 50 Yes <br /> Site Specific Douglas n.a. 81. 7% 50 Yes <br />I Eagle n.a. 81. 7% 50 Yes <br /> Countywide Weld 180,936 86.0% 65 Yes <br /> Mapping Garfield 43,791 87.0% 65 Yes <br />I Park 14,523 87.3% 65 Yes <br /> La Plata 43,941 88.4% 65 Yes <br /> San Miguel 6,594 88.5% 65 Yes <br />I Montezmna 23,830 89.1% 65 Yes <br />2006 Fremont 46,145 90.1% 65 Yes <br /> Gtmnison 13,956 90.5% 65 Yes <br />I Mineral 831 90.5% 65 Yes <br /> Site Specific (if not Adams n.a. 90.5% 65 Yes <br /> :fimded in 2004) Ara ahoe n.a. 90.5% 65 Yes <br />I Larimer n.a. 90.5% 65 Yes <br /> Mesa n.a. 90.5% 65 Yes <br />I * Assumes funding will be provided for Site Specific (H&H) Mapping as well. <br />Table 4.3 assumes that funding for Site Specific (H&H) analyses will be provided by FEMA to <br />I the CTP from this point forward (FY 2004 and beyond) when Countywide Mapping studies are <br />initiated. The CWCB believes that performing site specific (H&H) mapping in some areas <br />should take precedence over low priority countywide conversion mapping. Therefore this <br />I Plan integrates some of the areas that are considered to have high priority flood hazard data <br />needs into the proposed schedule for Countywide Mapping. Priorities in the table above were <br />established by the CWCB BCP prioritization methodology without considering whether a county <br />I already has a DFIRM or not. A county that already has a DFIRM that is missing critical H&H <br />engineering information may score higher than a county without a DFIRM. In such a case <br />I Colorado Business Case Plan - March 2004 4-5 <br /> <br />