My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD05467
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
5001-6000
>
FLOOD05467
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 6:49:19 PM
Creation date
10/5/2006 1:35:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Adams
Community
Thornton, Adams County
Basin
South Platte
Title
Flood Hazard Area Delineation
Date
10/1/1979
Prepared For
Thornton, Adams County
Prepared By
UDFCD
Contract/PO #
&&
Floodplain - Doc Type
Floodplain Report/Masterplan
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
76
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 />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Flood Proofing- <br /> <br />Flood proofing is additions or improvements to an existing structure which would <br />prevent or decrease flood damage. Such improvements can be grouped in four categories: <br /> <br />-Temporary and permanent closures for openings in existing structures <br /> <br />-Raising existing structures <br /> <br />-Constructing small walls or levees around structures <br /> <br />-Rearranging or protecting damageable property within a structure. <br /> <br />Flood proofing is accomplished on a structure by structure basis since the type and <br />'extent of flood proofing required depends upon the specific circumstances. A detailed <br />discussion of the several types of flood proofing, the advantages and disadvantages, and <br />some approximate cost data is contained in Reference J. The costs of flood proofing <br />structures in the DF A 0054 floodplain would be the responsibility of individual property <br />owners. This alternative was examined principally in Reach 2, where a single residence is <br />subjected to innundation by the 50 and 100 year floods. <br /> <br />Flood Insurance <br /> <br />Flood insurance is unique among the non-structural measures available to com- <br />munities because it does not reduce flood damages or provide a measure of safety to <br />residents. It is, instead, a measure an individual property owner can take to indemnify <br />himself from losses suffered during a flood. <br /> <br />Flood insurance is available to all persons in all of the communities involved in this <br />study since all are participating communities in accordance with the rules and regulations <br />of the Federal Insurance Administration. Insurance is available for both structure and <br />contents; however, residential property not covered by insurance includes: <br /> <br />Fences, retaining walls, seawalls, outdoor swimming pools, bulkheads, wharves, <br />piers, bridges, docks; other open structures located on or partially over water; or <br />personal property in the open. <br /> <br />Land values; lawns, trees, shrubs or plants, growing crops, or livestock; underground <br />structures or underground equipment, and those portions, of walks, driveways and <br />other paved surfaces outside the foundation walls of the structure. <br /> <br />Accounts, bills, currency, deeds, evidences of debt, money, securities, bullion, <br />manuscripts or other valuable papers or records, numismatic or philatelic property. <br /> <br />Animals, birds, fish, aircraft, motor vehicles (other than motorized equipment <br />pertaining to the service of the premises and not licensed for highway use), trailers <br />on wheels, watercraft including their furnishings and equipment. <br /> <br />Flood Insurance is part of every alternative solution in that the opportunity to <br />purchase such insurance is always available. While the capital outlay by local <br />governments would be minimal, the disadvantages of relying solely on flood insurance are <br />that none of the potential flood hazards would be mitigated. This is true to some degree <br />for nearly all the non-structural alternatives considered in this analysis as well, and should <br />be kept in mind when considering non-structural flood control measures for <br />implementation on DFA 0054. <br /> <br />V-4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.