FLOOD07020 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'99S - Colorado Rood Hazard Mitigation Plan (409) e were estimated by the Colorado Water Conservation mentation of mitigation measures will only occur fol- Board and the U.S. Geological Suvey (USGS). The lowing the public's acceptance of both the problem CWCB obtained detailed surveyed cross-sections on and the solution, This requires a determination that the North Fork of the South Platte River, Sand Draw, there is unacceptable risk. and Buffalo Creek. The estimated flow rates on July 12 To sum up, the hazard mitigation planning process range from 4 to 25 times the published FEMA 100- year flow vaiues. Obviously, the Buffalo Creek flash begins with the five preliminary steps relating to haz- flood produced enormous flow magnitudes and was ard assessment. First, the hazards affecting the juris- extremely dangerous. diction must be identified. Second, the community's vulnerability to those hazards must be determined. 2..4 Risk Information Third, a determination of whether that vulnerability constitutes an unacceptable risk must be made. To reduce the community's vulnerability to hazards, Fourth, ~ an unacceptable risk exists, it must be some knowledge of the risk/lhreat must exist. Thus, communicated to those who are in the position to hazards assessment has two important components effect rts change. Fifth, the people receiving this risk 1. Hazard Identification - What are the hazards information must agree that the nsk is unacceptable, that there are viable solutions to the problem, and that that pose a threat to the community or a particular segment of the population? What is their expected magnrtude? How fre- Hazard Community quently could they be expected to occur? Where are they likely to occur? Vulnerability Values 2. Vulnerability Analysis - What is the risk ^ from the threat? What are the likely im- pacts? What are the economic, social, and polrtical ramifications of these impacts? community In most communities, substantial work has al- Huard Values ready been completed on a hazard assessment, Vulnerability and maps portraying these risks are readily avail- able. This is an integral step in the emergency /\ planning process. Hazard assessment is the foun- dation upon which the local Emergency Opera- tions Plan (EOP) is buirt. It is also the foundation for hazard mitigation planning, as well. A hazard assessment provides the information By "doubling up" community goals with those that identifies the need to mitigate, as well as the of hazard mitigation, the scale can be tipped III ability to accurately focus mrtigation efforts on a accomplishing both objectives particular problem area. However, simply identify- ing vulnerability from an identified risk does not guarantee that any action will be undertaken to mrtigate that situation. Thus, a Critical component Community 1 necessary to mrtigate the impacts of hazards is a Goals determination of acceptable risk. When vulnera- Hazard bility to a hazard risk is determined to be at an Community acceptable level, mitigation actiVities are not pur- Vulnerability sued. However, when communities determine that Values the vulnerability to a given risk is too great to ^ chance (a determination of unacceptable risk), mitigation is pursued. (See Figure 2 - 10). This concept of acceptable risk is central to the (community goals -long term objectives I communrty's determination as to whether mrtiga- tion is undertaken or not. This determination is e.g. capital improvements, open space typically answered based on community values acquisitions) being combined with technical information. Hazard ~ j assessments allow communities to focus on haz- Figure 2-10 ard mitigation planning needs. However, impl... e e FII.:FHMP-chilp,er-2.pub Chapter 2 - 12 112",,10:4, AM