Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Reel_0025A
E ' i r COUNTY OF KING T'^ STATE OF WASHINGTON MICROFILM CERTIFICATE The papers and documents appearing on this roll of film were photographed by your affiant and that said papers and documents are true and correct copies of the originals thereof as the same appeared on record in the custody of the Jefferson County Clerk. The microfilming of the papers and documents as aforesaid was done in the pursuance of, and in conform- ance with provisions of the statutes in these cases made and provided for as they appear in Title 40, of the Revised Code of Washington. I, the undersigned, do hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, that the above statement is true and correct. i i , gna a Date Northwest Center Industries Micrographics Department W 111L y /?. t ,y ' y ?? .? 'ART t 4y' ? 71 r. ? t _ r? ,'??? k??i!?{ ,::.?;'a?'Euairy>?.- to &?r6t k???A?,,r?"?;y'`'°`?''? ?Za?.?°sa. _ ..,•- g i ,. ? e ;?.. • ?: • -?•°?^ Wi4T'ER E® PROTECT16N PROJECTS people in watersheds, whether on farms or in town, may have problems in dealing with water and its management, which they cannot handle with their own esources. Recognizing this, Congress passed a special act in 1954 to help local organizations with such problems. It I. the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (Public Law 566, 83rd Congress), This is how it works:` THE APPLICATION y •. ? - ,`4?:. T?? ?Sr? °i ?,.i-L / // I fits,,. ? 'k ?g The Need. First of all it must he recognized State Approval or Disapp applicroval. It the state Adi, that there is awater management problem which agency disapproves the ation, the local 1 SUx Vyv.rc n can 'be solved only by all the people working organization will be notified. If it approves, the together. And the local people must be willing state agency notifies the State Conservationist of T • and able to spend time and money toward solving the SCS and makes recommendations. - ' the problem. j - a ! / P1 Q`pv _ .t " Preparing Application. A local organization, On to Washington. The State Conservationist?y9" !¢ which may be a soil conservation district, sends the application with the recommendation to prepares an spplicntion. This application will Washington for review by the SCS Administrator. ?, -aa$tt`ppyy include (a) the size and location of the waterahed, (b) a description of the problem, (c) the extent (p'?;+ of damages, (d) details about the work needed, +rY r and (e) information about the organization and ,S source of funds. Standard forms are available, rf /?Il1 1,k , of i. 3 k?"`? 7 Notice to Local OrgnnlzaNon. The State Conner- vationist informs the local organization when t y p I iI t Where to Send Application. The application is the watershed in authorized for planning help. see 7y ?, sent to the agency deaig„Atcd by the Governor d t w q t, ,F with a copy to the sMte office of the U.S. Soil g Conservation Servi c e, See footnote for the name of the agency In your alate. FOOTNOTE {#4: ? .,7,, ? •- - ...?. ? Marl. •r:?' " f W"r (S'?, t Field Examination Terh Iclans from the SCS F . idy 7(e•!f ?fP and other agem lea examine the watershed. v! f?, t tau ? ? "? r I ,ax Uffsk ?p,?}, S li ` 4 1 A Mr°'? S? i? 1 ? o ° f a r" ? u a ?? In e ro \ ? 4 ° q ', x ? a ° b ? ? v w ° H o y r: 1t l \ ^° ° .. a: tL: v r« 3 ? N _J N '4 ?? S .•:1 I / / y p U y ? \ g 4 Y u q N J °04°° ngk.C°3 oo Z V,/ v.eY _q.?N - ?1.? aro ELY U? oall s H w r a; a to H S $ u fk a _ o'E v a r .. 0 0 3«",° y o s "? a r1 i' R q W >O ? "'O h Y y ? z^ 7 yt O ?u.= uk RPM F« ° m E U. U p'q n w n t1. ° FSYC qg a Q b L H U 0.b *Y ?j H3 F? o°HO? 3•?? 4 '; ? g ropro aYwEw y ? c? _N >F'. s Y w ro n 4 c G i ° `or3s:V 4ca« vOg°?° $? a•?e .G G u $ C ° 4 -b g'q . Y wloo ? Y P U T o .,a ?? /? H r V" N lb 4°? U \?,? uwp^y ,O , 11 .,Yi '0 b V 1, L " H Y p F 'Q -S o. , 1,. :,"uw ?, ? w rob ur?Ewb w c3'j l?r,??, ? YQ.eF.S 3p,yb.c"u i'z Oln °? U m:: 3 F+4B Ian•SO . r, .may > °?"u 2 ?. NH,_ 1 ??I9mw n, ? w w / g u ?l C w q G H O. _ Y Y A C° 4t' 1 Q .. y B u E?5 g am Y 1 V .I IL$'E OCW•5a 0 0 9 b < y ?r g k L s SO _ o,•? y? Fg i ro?4roog9 " F g ° y y Y .?u Go yyu? E w?.ypMaN mum ?,s4°g Y'SGA EB Na. K :! '? tv H O N q 0.' ?1C?r??A ' }t ?1 ' ?'? 1 t, ?; ll •. ? tR Mf 11,,' .??`,'I . . 7 it +„ - ' N }.ry! ?'thi?' ".1 ??; x -T4 {} C n S V ?nT;u l? . ., .?x4 Y (; 7 s r September 3, 19511 ' st , Yarcus Laroan, Chairman Drainage Histrict #l . Chlmacum, Washington a , D H M1 '_ ear r. Larsen: p G Y yp ? "Ai The culvert ordered £or t hie replacement arrived in h ? d t e yard about ten dRga ago and is scheduled to be installed as soon as w th u h i e are ro g w th the oiling, probablg next week. %Y D Yours very tral y, p ' t KEIM F. JONES County Engineer XFJ/ed s pis FF Soptcmber 2, 1954 Keith Jones County Engineer Court House Port Toernsornr, S4r zhinrton - Dear r Jones, B " P { is nab d,u uiou Lt ,:y a ,.n on b sev ra 1e of late that the culvert just I1 of Chin.r.cum h of b,.-.en lowered ,cveral months ar,o. This ou insured us would be done 3 r.. c lied ul7ify much o'' our recent ditbh -rrork if it `'isn't c o..e before this fail. c 1 cn sure, voI are aware o nr oo ble con.cruxn;.. f 9 ' t r culvert , rc lo- c.'re'1 I eo ld n_• c e hear .n,; r :rt :is u1v ; h t r . ,, . s e .. i: from -ou as :,eon as ...n s - w o_ 1.. ?• Tory tr?u.]/v Fours, 14%rcus Larsen, F Chairman Dieina,,e District r'il. S r h )R) I r• ,? .+ n? , _ ?,r??rk??r??tdri • -?? :, . ?". ^` Jr.4??'h"r^' 'tw????? 7%71" d ' yy Y ? F V '1 u 7 n' v NIL,J AL April 22, 1954 Paul C. Dickey, Area Conservationist # 332 Federal Office Building J Seattle 4, Washington , . : ? Dear Sirs a . I am sorry that the program we had proposed to help to drain the RRR ?. r east and west Chimacum valleys has caused such a atom of local bicker- ing. It was a program that would have put those creeks in such a condition that the six hundred 'dollars ($600.00) per year that the = - drainage district is able to raise from taxation, would have adequately taken cam of future maintenance. Unless the dietrict`ia able to raise money from other sources, it will be several years before esy work can be done in the upper reaches of either of these creeks. The only source of additional funds, I knew of, were ttwee made available by this program. r There seems to be considerable misunderstanding in the part this ' office performs in drainage affairs. Our only interest is to help them when we can. 3o far most of the help we have given has been in corolating the finances with the engineering requirements. The Soil Conservation k end tell the district what is needed f th fi ld d ll E i , e wor o a o e neers ng ieve if I^bel rovide funds for necessary work n wa b t i t . . y p canno n a y u th d l one on e ower you will check back four or five yearn when work was reaches of the creek, you will find this to be no. This office worked out the financing for this earlier project and your engineers did the - field work. z . ak'' All work for the latest project was on recommendation of your engineer, with the exception of the out that in so much in question. there are many arguments for and against this cut. Moot of the Tme rx, t µ , ones against it are rumors or lack of clear thinking on the parts of some ' k ar of the people. If the out had washed or Bluffed, which invostigation th t 'f o remove, e shown that it was not likely, it could have boon an cheap v it . e 4 e wash from the lower reaches of the creek, if necessary, an to remo from the cut. Yearly tax money would have taken care this wash an it f ad t van age o oocured and in the meantime the fanner- would have had the having their places in much better condition. one big advantage of the out that cannot be ovorlookad is that its construction was financing all the work in the west valley of the creek. If flat alopes would have been f designed, there would not have been any money left to do the rent of the crook as had been proposed by using the steeper slopes. r G t . t.W ^?+. Y ,- '??"•." 1.1? T?-x=id"%'°PWN??tiN ,1-... t-. ,.?,h.' . 5-,-''Yt u '?? e 1 ? 11 . ow, own g, lis - p WS 1 A Y' 4yC'? ?? ` far ,? '.; F..,a .._"xf,?.??.-«,..s?- a. .?erss 1::::._'t. _.?'??`iu._?:,',__nun?a?C'iX?''•II.3s ? `~n`?? E UNITED STATES 1 a DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SOIL. CONSERVATION SERVICE f W.. ne 332 Federal Office Building Seattle 4, Washington # m w` ;. April 12, 1954 P a Mr. Jones a : gi• -'^'%? County Engineer Port Townsend, Washington ' Dear. Sirs t . I hope you will excuse my abbreviated address, as I do not know your initials. I am writing about the cut-off ditch which we have had under discussion. Since your phone call I have been informed that when William Bugge was county engineer over there he iniestigated this same site for a cut-off ditch. }le found it would require 1? to 1 slope and six feet of rip-rap on each side to make .4: it safe. He estimated the cost at $10,000. Since there is i e that we it s l t bl $ ?e seem p a n o m e now, no such sum availa ?" should not approve this ditch. . y w. Very truly yours, r ?y Paul C. Dickey Area Conservationist ! m PCD:em `v 4 , ?? u r 4 , A 't?pt Sx ! Yy gt ? 01 gp " ' i 'i . 'C77 :' 7 W fi _W i 7 J l A . . cru . M r y ,. l : , . iY.?1 t YiJ - la { i } + 1+ a^ EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF WAY 1 THIS INDENTURE, j N 2 WITNESSETH: ! 4 3 That we, the undersigned, Josephine Yarr, Isabel Yarr, Marion a 4 Yarr and Grace Neudor£er, for and in the consideration of the benefits 5 expected to be derived from the execution of this instrument, do here - 6 by GIVE and GRANT to Chimacum Drainage District No, 1, a municipal 7 corporation., a perpetual easement for the disposition of spoil banks I All, 8 caused by the digging of a creek channel on their right of way as r 6 I hereinafter described: 10 A strip of land 40 fast in width, the centerline of which 11 begins at a pond on the existing drainage ditch centerline 167.0 feet south and 120.5 feet east of the northwest corner 12 of SW a NW 4 Sec. 35, T 29N, R 1W, WM., thence in a southwest- L' erly direction as located and staked over and across the SW n 13 NW I Sec. 35 and the SE j NE n Sec. 34, all in T 29N, R 1W, WM., to a point in the existing drainage ditch centerline at Z4 the northerly end of the long tangent which bears S 37° 40+ W across said Section 34, such point being 121.h feet north ?. 15 and 887.6 feet west of the a corner common to Sections 34 and 35 T 29N, R 1W, WI4. L: Al 18 Said spoil banks to extend not more than 60 feet from the ?u F 17 centerline on each side of the right of way and to be sloped not steeper than a 2 to 1 slope. The banks are to be w Q 18 left in a smooths and neat condition. Any merchantable timber within the area is to be loft standing; all brush may r' m be buried in the spoil bank. a f?¢ 19 20 WITNESS our hands this _ day of April, 1954. 5 rt a tr 21 6 v ?k. 22 23 4p s 24 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) 25 COUNTY OF JEFFERSON Y -, 26 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT ON this day of April, 1954, personally appeared before me Josephine Yarr, Isabel Yarr, Marion 3 27 Yarr and Grace Noudorfer, to me known to be the individuals described 77 in and who executed the foregoing written instrument and acknowledged ' 28 to me that they signed the same as their free and voluntary act and W 29 deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. r yam' RR GIVEN under my hand and official seal the day and year 30 in this cprtificato first herein written. y A i .. p e 3 .sfi21I44 ' ' I d,' r. ?'•z - t,`4,tk. ??i,. _.a3w ,. ;?d./is?oMS ?. it?^i:wr:l.i_a-._,'.,. - 11 ? ? __ _ VOL .?. r PAGE f r. 4 o Rr_nr r•,srnTE S:1LCS TAX 1,FQUIRED 1 I EASRaXT AND RIGHT OF WAY C,UUN Ty TREASURER . 71 By L 2 THIS INDENTURE, s xs WITNESSETHs ry? 3 4 That we, the undersigned, Josephine Yarr, Isabel Yarr, clarion fi g x Yarr anti Grace Neudorfer, for and in the consideration of the benefits S t 5 y) expected to be derived from the execution of this instrument, do here- 6 r = by GIVE and GRANT to Chimacum Drainage District No. 1, a municipal 7 corporation, a perpetual easement over and across the lands and premi- ' q+ 8 sea hereinafter described: ?t 9 A strip of land 40 feet in width, the centerline of which ' 10 begins at a pond on the existing drainage ditch centerline 167.0 feet south and 120.5 feet east of the northwest u I1 corner of SW 1/4 NN 1/4 Sec 35 T 29N RIW Wit, thence in a southwest- erly direction as located and staked over and across the 12 SW 1/4 NW 1/4 Section 35 and the SE 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 34 13 , all in T 29N RIW VIM to a point in the existing drainage ditch - centerline at the northerly end of the long tangent which bears S 370 40' W across aid S ti 4 I s ec on 3 , such point being 121.4 feet. .! 14 north and 887.6 feet west of the 1/4 corner common to Sections 15 i 34 and 35 T 29N RIW WM. s 16 i TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto said district, and its successors for- ever, together with the right of ingress and e r ]7 I g ess over and upon said lands to maintain a ditch to be constructed thereupon. 18 WITNESS our hands this day of December, 1953, 19 20 4•!F / _ _Q c? (may„ 21 0 7 - ??-- 22 23 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) i ) ss 24 COUNTY OF JEFFERSON ) 25 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT ON this day of December, 1953, personally appeared before me Josephine Yarr, Isabel Yarr, Marion Yarr 26 II and Grace Neudorfer, to me known to be the individuals described in and who executed the foregoing written instrument and acknowledged to me 27 that they signed the same no their free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. 28 ?I Ij GIVEN under my hand and official seal the day and year ? 29 I' in this cartifioato first h eroin written. ` a Ilu` 30 31 Noiary-21r plc in azdfo he State of Wnshingt ryyw?iAing at Port Townsend " ?.r n r 'f r 3 Y? -,? r ? l ' 4? µY ? :. ? ? C ??5 -.? ? `P L, r ' ! , ? , : b t[` ?Y . I J ..-i4'i l+S tl .lt u!WynW tn. + ...ct ll`?? i? h.. .l?i_. rt M•M?•,{,..?I FO ? O r r.{, 0A, a f , :r dM i ?? .. ? __ ? ? R .F .. . . ;? ??` i OD4 ? 3 ,? ? ?? ? ? ? ? yy???? ? ? ? ? _ . d {k ? t ? ?? ? ., ? ? ? d r°. ' ? '? ' ? ? ?? asva ? ? ?, ion ? ?' ? ?1 ?? ' r<<' ?_. i ? ., W it ? ?r r ? ? ? ?, S 'u + ` '? ''??@?&a'?te*''_'' i w"r" ?^_ ."4"?Y° Wes!" ?`"? •:'?""? '?L?1'ti- ""GFtiAi ? ? ? W ; l ` ? .a } ? 1 t i{5 i tip ?, , i1 ` . . ? . . 1 ? ? t ?. ._ v ? tip. ? t ?? , ? a ?l ???(t ? iJ ??' LLr L? r ? ^FS ? . ? .-_ ? ? 1? '$ i r?3ri" Jones, County Engineer Mr. -_-- "•, ana Was attended by Mr. Keith George Hwntingford, Drainage District Commissioner, r and representatives of the Departrent of Fisheries and the Department of Game. At this meeting it was agreed that the projects on the east fork of Chimacum u Creek could not be commenced before April 15, 1954, and completed not later p than September 15, 1954. The portion of the project on Chimacum Creek proper n qr. lying in the south half of Section 34, Township 29 North, Range 1 West (Yarr" and Larson properties) would also not be commenced before April 15, 1954, and completed not later than September 15, 1954. " ?. ' That portion of the proposed project situated in the northeast quarter of d c• 1 Section 34, Township 29 North, Range 1 Westti exist ,will involve the bypassing of two i9 ` ut a•-' iov culverts and would, theroforo, be to the advantage e of migratory fish 15 life movement. As disc u ssed dur jority of the work for this portion ofeth©eproject will not influence the ma present migratory runs in the stream, since the new channel Will be constructed' before W flow has access to it. The Department of Fisheries and the Depart- ment of Game will have no objections to this project providing the following w restrictions are followed: - ltti p,: 1. The entire new channel is to be constructed leaving the dike at the J n A. upstream and downstream areas during the construction period. alit ', a M r .. S _ 3. ,,?,A r Mr. Keith F. Jones - 2 - November 30, 1953 2. Once the new channel is formed, the dikes at the upstream and down- stream areas are to be removed and the creek allowed to flow into the new channel. 3. During the proposed project in Sections 23 and 26, Township 29 North, Range 1 West, it will be necessary to form a settling basin in the area downstream from the proposed project. This may be accomplished by utilizing the dam on the William Bishop property. As you know, the Drainage District has an agreement with the Department of Fisheries and the Department of Game to remove the stop logs from all dams dur- ing the fall and winter months. In this case, special consideration has been given to approving the damming of the creek during this period. It is felt that damming the creek for a short time, during the continuance of the project, will give the maximum possible fisheries protection under the circumstances. immediately following the completion of this portion of the project, the stop logs are to be removed from the dam. The project in this area is not to be commenced prior to January 11 1954, and completed not later than September 15, 1954. The Department of Fisheries and the Department of Game hereby approve the above outlined projects as provided for herein and as stipulated in your sub- mitted plans and specifications. This approval is granted in the interest of fisheries protection only, and these departments cannot be held liable for any property damage that might oc- cur as a result of this project. The Department of Fisheries and the Department of Game reserve the right to make further restrictions if it is deemed necessary for the protection of fish life. Very truly yours, Robert J. Schoettler, Director DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES John A. Biggs, Director DEPARTMENT OF GAME r?- ? 7f ?r ra z. Fin ?k ? 2k 3 Ji' f k i?a October 29, 1953 G _ X95 - State of Wasbington ". ° ? Dasprtnent of Fisheries 4 . " 0t& th Tower S 1308 h, as dJ4,toa 5 A 4 y' cup D .9 ?.., ear Sin The County, in Cooperation with the ChImaaim Drainage 0 District, propose to do oooe channel change and Channel oleaaiag cn the west fork of the Chimamm Creek is Sect L v tea ' : m 23s 3L, 35, and 36, Tmmehip 29 North, Range 1 West, W.M. . iloo Case channel cleadng in the east fork of Chimacam C 4 ._ ? rook Sectiom 24 and 244 Twnsbip 29 Rosths Range 3 . wants We would like to start thla sob 1n the middle of R owrsber and it should take afoot elxtq (60) days to S r c: . ?? W - aargplr'.e. Will tbio be setWhetory with you? x Xoum ary tnay, b? ? m KHM F. JCMR.9 EFJ/ad CcWty Engineer s ? ?( car Dept. of Oasa ff ?b, u? a }f aR1 t µµ M L ? 71 r F .1]:13S4u'13'.'J."M...Hw.?..._81`av'"uv'. „s... 5!iHV" 1.. .. _. 'p n_ "rwnww.+w.+.•?.w?N+_ ?y, ??...TdL'%F?MCSYk . gggg???? P y .« .. g""iX?t. 1 Q.xl? ?,• x June 14, 1963 's ' - County Engineer . Jefferson County Port Townsend, Washington Dear Sir: ....,k - After Mr. Aldridge's talk of May 24 at the meeting of the Washington Association of County Engineers in Wenatchee, several of you asked for tabulations of peak flow data collected on small ,.a streams in your area. We do not have enough copies of the state- wide compilation to give each of you a copy but l am enclosing data ' through 1961 for the streams in and adjacent to your county. 4 I t' The nenwn of r.hese streams are from the best sources avail- able. If any of trn,:m Are in error we would appreciate it if you would give us the correct name. The stations having the word trib- utary in the name are on unnamed tributaries of the larger named streams. For example, "North Nemah River tributary near South Bend", is on k. small unnamed stream which is tributary to North Nemah River. t FE you know the names of these streams, please send us this infor- motion. x' We have also tade measurements of peak and low flows at numerous miscellaneous sites, and are preparing estate-wide compil- ? g' ation of these measurements. This report should be published early next eer b t d l f l ° c .' y u ata or oca areas can be furnished sooner upon request. Si l Y ? ncere y yours, ti pp S t Enl`. ?? tb BNA:dif x _ M fA k ? J6k rc, ? '??.'t ulM5 pwq P. M. Veatch District Engineer r 731 ,icv,L?7 r` 1 7 ?{ 1? fiF • 5 ??yy 1 Ry? ? y x -71 em J'. C+ °`b; '?v 2~+~? PEAK (LOWS FROM SMALL ' ELL-' _ DRAINAGE AREAS EN JEFFERSON COUN7Y A Compilation of Annual Maximums Through the 1961 Water Year ° N ? 4 ... i Z £'' Extracted from a report by B. N. Aldridge entitled, "Peak Flows from Small Drainage Areas in Washington" a * which was prepared by Water Resources Division, U. S. ? j . Y Geological Survey, Tacoma, Washington in cooperation with the Washington State Department of Highways. A r . % June 1963 ?' i euvSt 6e?w 5 + r a ; 6 @dfV 'i ' u J '(;' +v e r+ ' ? ? ? • i ?ry [yyy ' ? Y . '?,.,? .t?? 'ywE,.,a Y'd _ _ n4L ,?ip1.tGIdYG]r::.T:LI ? dnr....•...i?.aik 1S:71Li.'Y ?.1rv__ L'r?..WSuYf?:SffQ?'u: --_ ? F{ PEAK FLOWS PROM SMALL DRAINAGE AREAS IN WASHINGTON 4 r p A Compilation of Annual Maximums Through the 1961 Water Year F k By D. N. Aldridge r IXTROLUCT'P,ON F KI ;. This report was prepared under the terms of a cooperative - ' ?? agreement between the Washington State Department of Highways and - the U. S. Geological Survey which provides, in part, for collection " _ and tabulation of peak flow data from small drainage areas and for extension of records for sites previously operated as gaging stations. _ ' It has been prepared under the general direction of F. M. Veatch, y.• -t Aistrict Engineer. ... Annual peak discharges from small areas have been obtained a from crest-stage gages installed at selected culverts or dams. Most of a es are locat the d t l b l ll f- - g g e a cu verts, ecause cu verts genera y are un form transitions between reaches of channel, and reliable methods are - s <• ; available for computing the discharge through them. r HIS70RY OF PROGRAM The project started in 1948 with the establishment of a small number of crest-stage gage stations. Additional stations were added in western Washington during 1949, 1950, and 1951. In 1953, the program wa ded t a d i l W h i p s exp n o nc u e eastern as ington where numerous stat ons were {RA established during 1953 and 1954. Since that time, additional gages ++ ' have been installed in those areas where better coverage was desired. " The gages are inspected at frequent intervals and the peak stages occur- ring between visits are recorded. As of June 30, 1962 the Survey was operating 79 of these crest-stage gage stations on small streams in t eastern Washington and 68 on streams in western Washington. The annual peak gage heights and discharges collected at these A p, sites are listed in the body of this report. The gage heights shown are the elevation of the water surface upstream from culvert or dam, with r . respect to an arbitrary datum. Peak discharges were computed by the , standard U. S. Geological Survey methods in use at the time the compu- tations were made. As better methods become available, past computations are reviewed and revised wherever necessary. Figures in previous reports and publications, which differ from those in this report, have been superseded and should not be used. Peaks for 1955 and later were computed ? oc by the methods presented in U. S. Geological. Survey Circular 376. The r computations have been officially reviewed and their use is unrestricted. t The basic data and computations supporting the figures in this report are a in the files of the U. S. Geological Snrvey, Surface Water Branch, Tacoma, a dry;' "T Washington. Stages for some lesser peaks are also on file but, generally, y 4 discharges have been computed only for the annual peaks. 6 ?E l`. •k ---?`?id.. ?'?"?7 !'? n?•a •.a.,w?i"',?' ._+.E - I s b=diax -- Prior to 1953 perk discharges at cresc-stage gage sites were published i n water supply papers as miscellaneous measurements. In 1953 they were se d f parate rom the general run of miscellaneous measure _ ments and were 1{,sted in a table of miscellaneous detesminatione of peak dischar e Wh g . en the 1958 .water suAA1Y papers were published these sites were reco i d ? " gn ze as partisfl-record stations and were assigned gaging station numbers. Perks for the entire e i d f ° p r o o record were compiled together in a table of annual maximum discharges at crest- t c.l s age partial-record stations. These records can be found in Water Su l P pp y apers 1566-1568. Annual maximum for 1959 & 1960 water e y ars were published in Water Supply Papers 1636-1638 and 1716-1718. All ann l ua maximums during period of record are tabulated in this report. ' ARRANGLIAENT OF DATA In this report stations were arranged in the downstream order used in Geolo ic l S P? ' g a urvey Water Supply Papers. Identification numbers for all gaging stations operated b the S ` y urvey have been assigned according to this downstream order. The numbering of the stations in Washington starts with Pacific Coasc streams north of the Columbia River ro re , p g sses northward along the coast, around Puget Sound to the Canadian border thence t , o streams in the Columbia River basin. Stations within a basin are numbered in downstream direction starting with the uppermost gage in the basin. Tributary st ti 7 a ons are numbered according to the order in which they enter the main strea Th m. e first two digits of each number indicate the part (or region) in which th c _ e station is located. Washington comprises a portion of Parts 12, 13, and 14 as indicated ;, - M on the map showing crest-stage stations (Figure 1). .' ' ? ?r The numbers for crest-stage stations ass in sequence with b i num ers for other gaging stations operated by the Survey. The foll i ow ng table indicates the areas in which gages are located. . 12-0000 to 12-2500 western Washington basins r' ry tributary to salt water. 12-3900 to 12-5200 Columbia River basin above Snake River. 13-3300 to 13-3600 Snake dives basin. t 14-0000 to 14-2600 Columbia River basin below S k P NN na e River. The part number has been omitted from the station number shown on k C the map (Figure 1). ,r ?fi k 1 wf? C I ?' 1 i P ? ; . r ? t 2 ' `4 f 51 ,1 ?i Py 9 _ USE OE' BAT The purpose of this program is to obtain sufficient data k1 to develop flood-frequency curves for small drainage areas. Flood- f frequency curves can be drawn using less than 10 years of record I but the accuracy of the frequency curves determined from such short `yr record is poor. this appears to be especially true on small streams such as are gaged in this program. { In order to evaluate the data collected to date flood- frequency curves have been drawn for all stations for which dis- charges have been determined for five or more annual peaks. Peak discharges were assigned order numbers in order of decreasing magni- rude. The recurrence interval was computed from the foratula T nn±l , where T is the recurrence interval in years, n is the number of m -- - -"? ' years of record and m is the order number. Recurrence interval was plotted against the magnitude of recorded peaks. Generally, curves could be drawn fairly well through the ' points but the plotting of points for several stations showed con- - ( siderable scatter. It appears that 10 years of record should be a very minimum for determining flood frequencies on these small streams. Most of the gages should be operated considerably longer than this in order to define suitable frequency curves. Some streams in eastern Washington have had flow only one or two years in the eight years since the gages were established. These stations will need to be operated for quite a few more years before flood-frequency curves can be drawn. _ It will .also be necessary to operate the gages long enough to cover S an average hydrologic period which will include a number of high and '' •?> low annual peaks. Records for long-term stations show that several high magnitude floods have occurred during the period that the creat- A stage geges have been in operation. Therefore, the frequency curves computed from this short period may not be representative. _?y??y.+° ,Y G. L. Bodhaine and D. K. Thomas incorporated the data from y B a crest-stage stations in western Washington into a statewide flood- frequency study with very satisfactory results. They used annual Kri peak discharges determined at these sites in :onjunction with those g from continuous record stations to develop a formula for determining l ' " A r an average s ope of flood-frequency curves in various regions. The ?4J3 •; h. end result was a method that gives a flood frequency curve based on average characteristics of a region. Such a curve is believed y to be more representative of long-term conditions than the curve 8' obtained from a single geging-station record. The results of this 'i • v1 3 study are published in it Geological Survey open-file report entitled, ?''tln' ?e "plooda in Washington, Magnitude and Frequency." 1960. A supplemental , 9 report is now being prepared for- small drainage areas in eastern v y y 7 Washington. t "A` tt ? f k' 71 puinauit River Basin 12-0394 Hirley Creek near Amanda P,rk, W^.h. Location.--Lat 4^o2'155", Ion,,^, 123°5:'45", In :3!,," 1 sec. 13, T. 23 N., R. _ 10 W. nt North SDoru ro•rd, 1.6 miles east of U. j. Hirhw^y 101, •?nd 1? mile: north of Amanda Perk. rr.airm 'e are,..--G.77 sq mi Area of la;:rs ,tud p,inds, 0 aq m3, ' Henn altitude of basin>-1,080 ft Basin charicteristics.--Basin is steep and covered ..ith virvin timber. Gore he, aht. -sna hei&.f s are from crest-st,ge a •, cs or outside high-water marks. Disch•,rr- --Peck dischar{pts are from computations of r1isch•raa through 5-foot corrur•ited pipe culvert with upstrcnm invert at 2.54 feet. .Above 13.6 feet ro•id overflow is added to discharge through culvert. Annul F _peaks only. Remarks,.--Peaks occurred on or about the dates shown. 9 Historical data.--Peak of Dec. 9, 1956 is the highest since culverts were - installed abeut 1951. Saw-ril higher peaks occurrer prior to the in- - - stallaticn of culverts. Richest flood known since 1915 occurrer in 1935, mother high flood occurred in 1917. S [, - i Annual pr,,kn Water Date Ght. Disch^rge ear ft of-, 1955 Nov. 1P., 1')54 IC .04 24 1956 Nov. 1955 9.22 237 1?57 Dec. 9, 1956 1'.86 409 1)58 Dec. 25, 1957 5.99 87.0 1959 Apr. 29, 1959 9.47 24U 1960 Dec. 14, 1959 7.78 164 1961 Feb. 21, 1961 ,12.00 332 (Hax. stave 13.65 Jan. 15 - - a debris in culvert) yv?g7 f::%;Jm" 1Vu%?.?M. '1'7?n ?*ya?{$7?T.'Ta??,{?,?, e,F751mf 'S- ?'}a+a;".grm]?yyy J•.;"•.. 4'Jti•i tli°?'F%>AA??P. lJ,i. a \?k7:.J?4 nA.. fi MVS ?.6kE51;`}41v?? . LID f 1 J r,,.. ..... _. ... mi ,...-.._..,-.-.,?-, a, • , m om i'luillayute River Basin 12-0427 May Creek near Forks, Rash, - r _d - Location,--Lat 47052'55", long 28 q ro , 1 n 7 P R. 13 N„ at D. S. Highvay1;1, C 5 m11en sou th of Forks. . Drainare area,--2.03 sq mi. (revised). Area of lakes and d pon e,U sq m1. f • Kean altitude of basin,--650 ft. - Benin clJ--aracteris 'ca.--Basin is steep with a cover of virgin timber. E Gage Leif:ht•--Gage heights are from crest-stage gages or water marks outside high-, ` '. chance.--Peak discharges are frcnn cnnputatlons of discharge through two concrete box culverts L f b ([? . e t ank culvert is 6' x 41 with upstream inverr at 14.98 feet; right bank culvert is 4'x 4- F with invert of 15.23 feet, Annual peaks only, E _ Remarke^--Peaks occurred on or about the dates shown, rE t _ Annual peaks Gbter Ght. Discharge Date , year Dec. 2&, 1949 23.75 475 6 1951 Feb. 10, 1951 22.87 L39 1952 Am. 30, 1952 19.62 278 1953 Jan. 2, 1953 22.60 427 1954 Feb, 17-21,1954 22.62 428 1955 Nov. 18, 1954 27.96 624 1956 Nov. 3, 1955 26.02 554 1957 Dec. 9, 1956 27.32 617 1958 Dec. 25, 1957 21.15 303 1959 Apr. 29, 1959 25.05 522 1960 Dec. 14, 1959 26.77 582 1961 Feb, 21, 1961 30.21 694 W4 ?dw' u?P .nIM"„r, ;,x :.^ M d' de ,WM?1.',tYwvt+. L?r' Quillayute River Basin - 12-0429 Grader Creek near Forks, Wash. Location,--Lat 47055'40", long 124024'25". in SA sec. 17, T. 28 N., R. - -?- 13 W., at U. S. Highway 101, 2.0 miles southwest of Forks. i' I Drainage area.--1.67 sq mi. Area of lakes and ponds, 0 eq mi. - j i Mean altitude of basin.--530 ft. 1 y . Basin characteristics.--Basin is fairly steep, brushy logged-offland with quite a few large trees. Gage height.--Gape heights are from crest-stage gages or outside high-water marks. - - .? Discharge.--Peak discharges are from computations of discharge through a: - 'f 10' x 10' concrete box culvert with upstream invert at 16.13 feet. Annual - peaks only. .Remarks.--Peaks occurred on or about the dates shown. _ Annual peaks Water Ght. Discharge i year Date ft (cfs) j 1950 Nov. 26, 1949 20.94 235 _ 1951 Feb. L0, 1951 20.49 265 1952 Nov. 30, 1951 19.94 210 1953 Jan. 31, 1953 21.04 335 1954 - Feb. 19, 1954 20.58 288 1955 Nov. 18, 1954 21.98 407 1956 Nov. 3, 1955 22.48 503 1957 Dec. 9, 1956 22.98 520 1958 Dec. 25, 1957 20.50 199 w 1959 Apr. 29, 1959 21.42 334 Max. stage 21.58 Dec. 1, 1958 n 1960 Dec. 14, 1959 21.70 415 d 1961 Pub. 21, 1961 22.05 455 _J' i r? ti _i Dean Creek Basin - - 12-0494 Dean Creek at Blyn, Wash. Location.--Lat 48001'30", long 123000'35", in NW} sec. 12, T. 29 N. R. , 3 W., at old highway, 50 feet east of U. S. Highway 101 and at the . west edge of Blyn. . Drainage area.--2.96 sq mi. (revised) Area of lakes and ponds, 0 aq mi, Mean altitude of basin.--1,490 ft. Basin characteristics.--Basin is quite steep, wooded and brushy. _ - 2ae heights.--Gage heights are from treat-stage gages or outside high-water marks. .Discharge,--Peak discharges are from computations of discharge througha ?- 5-foot concrete pipe culvert with upstream invert at 5.90 ft. Annual . peaks only. ' ,.. ...,.Y ' "- Remarks,--Peaks occurred on or about the dates shown. Annual peaks Water Ght. Discharge .. year Date it 1949 Feb. 22, 1949 8.68 47.3 1950 Feb, 25, 1950 8.18 33.2 1951 Dec. 24, 1950 8.26 35.1 1952 Dec. 5, 1951 8.16 32.3 1953 Jan. 8, 1953 7.70 21.4 1954 Feb. 13, 1954 8.60 45.0 1955 Feb. 8, 1955 8.31 34.0 1956 Mar. 3, 1956 8.67 49,I 1957 Feb. 24, 1957 10.32 108 1958 Dec. 25, 1957 7.35 16.2 1959 Nov. 24, 1958 7.34 16 1960 Jan. 29, 1960 8.53 44 1961 Mar. 15 or May 4, 1961 7.55 20 I? Quilcene River Basin - 12-0527 Penny Creek nearQuilcene, Hash. Location.--Lat 47°48'40", long 122054'50", in SE$ sec. 22, T. 27 N., R. 2 W., at county road 1,000 ft west of U. S. Highway 101 and 2 miles southwest of Quilceue. - Drainage area.--6.78 aq mi. Area of lakes and ponds is 0.07 sq mi. Mean altitude of basin.-••1,450 ft. Rabin characteristics.--Nest side of basin is quite steep; east side is moderately flat and swampy. About 80 percent of bath is - covered with virgin timber and brush, and about 20 percent has - - been logged off. Cape height-Gage heights are from crest-stage gages or outside high- -dater Prior to January 1959, gage was located 140 ft 1 upstream above concrete dam at datum 20ft higher. Discharge.--Peal: discharges 1949-58 are from computations of discharge over a dem with crest at 8.02 feet. Peak discharges for 1959 and after are from computations of discharge through a 7 foot corrugated pipe culvert with upstream invert at 14.44 ft. Annual peaks only. Remarks.--Peaks occurred on or about the dates shown. ! Historical Datft --The peak of January 1959 is probably the highest since ! ! at least 1937. - Annual peaks Water Date Cht. Discharge - year ft efs 1949 Feb. 22, 1949 10.29 332 1950 Feb. 25, 1950 9.97 232 1951 Dec, 16, 1950 10.65 352 d 1952 Nov. 27, 1951 11.18 376 1953 Jan. 9, 1953 10.38 223 1954 Feb. 1.3, 1954 11. 64 456 1955 Nov. 13, 1954 10.68 191 1956 Jan. 6, 1956 11.36 348 1957 Feb. 24, 1957 10.87 281 19 7 10.04 135 1958 Dec. 21 1959 Jan. 8, 19 9 26.41 557 1960 Jan. 29, 1960 21.17 277 1961, Feb. 11, 1961 18.95 150 .? ° "P®lxuq CveM.:%"r-r? pk rape [aa gw77 rMOP r"t5? , t J I? warm= Dosewallips River Basin 12-0530. Dosewallips River near Brinnon, [lash. Location.--SWk sec. 24, T. 26 N., R. 3 ll., half a mile west of Corri^a d ranger station, 5$ miles northwest of B rinnon, and 7? miles above mouth. r Drainage area.-93.5 aq mi. ' G- age.--Operated as continuous record station, 1931-50, 1951. Gage heights shown below are from high-water ma k i r s n well. Crest-stage gage installed on outside of well in 1953. Discharge.--Obtained from rating table dated July 19, 1946 which is extended above 4 500 cfB on b i 3 , as s of slope-area measurement at 9.92 ft. Two medium water measurements made in 1957 plot plus 5 percent and minus 10 e p rcent from rating curve. Annual Peaks 7 Water Ght. Discharge Dat' year ft efa 1951 Feb. 9, 1951 6.36 3,990 1952 Apr. 30, 1952 5.15 2,230 K 1953 Jan. 9, 1953 5.86 3,200 1954 Nov. 13, 1953 5.08 3,230 195 5 Nov. 19, 1954 7.10 5,330 1956 Nov. 3, 1955 8.26 8,050 : 1957 Dec. 9, 1956 7.15 5,430 1958 Feb. 24, 1958 7.02 5,180 1959 Jan. 8, 1959 6.54 4,300 1960 Jan. 29, 1960 7.68 6,600 1961 J3n. 15, 1961 8.05 7,520 '" -..rm, ?? 't7%]AA t .?fa,. ',;•' F'}'('?7 ,.d+?;F. -xW 3p i t ? 'h ,..,v? kc ,. .. n74i'M • ?. biz .. - ?11 '?:L..?u u..:.raY?.? d+..u.u ew ?S.Lw w __lsuach.. itY W. ?'?Ft? 1.? .,_.tu•.uf u+__fL....iYSdIS'?i3?-ri' Adh j Dosewallips River Basin 1 12-0534 Dosewallips River Tributary near Brinnon, Wash. Location.--Lat 47043'00", long 122°56'20", in NWt sec. 28, T. 26 N., R. j 2 W., at the Dosewal lips River road, 2.9 miles from U. S. Highway 101, and 314 miles northwest of Brinnon. (revised) Draiaare area:--0.62 sq mi./ Area of lakes and ponds, 0 sq mi. Heat; altitude of basin.--1,770 ft. Brain characteristics. --Basin is steep, brushy land with a fairly heavy - ' cover of second-growth timber. € Gage height.--Cage heights are from crest-stage gages or outside high- . water marks. Prior to November 1954 Sagas were 8 ft upstream ? at -arse datum. - ?! - Discharge.--Peak discharges are from computations of discharge through - - a 4-foot concrete pipe culvert with upstream invert at 4.15 feet. - Prior to November 1954 invert was at 5.68 feet. Annual peaks only.' a Remarks.--Peaks occurred on or about the dates shoran. The upper . ' 8 ft of culvert were recaoved in 1954. Annual veaks Water Date Ght. Discharge H a ..._aL ft (cfs) 1951 Feb. 10, 1951 8.76 52.0 1952 Jan. 30, 1952 7.94 30.0 1953 Jan. 9, 1953 7.74 25.5 1954 Feb. 13. 1954 8.82 53__2 1955 Nov. 19, 1954 7.16 53.0 1956 Jan. 5, 1956 6.98 47.0 1957 Feb. 24, 1957 7.33 57.3 1958 Feb. 24, 1958 6.64 36.0 1959 J3n. 8, 1959 7.71 66 1960 Jan. 29, 1960 6.47 32 1961 Jan. 15, 1961 6.23 20 .?P?di f ,T ?? !?. ?!' '?i?+?'.?.? `,?4 Nw i;7?, I.LL^ lpkdR3?paMa' ,yry.Y4fiVSIDflddna9M I..? . "•'?r'+n"Y.r?wT1'?',?*,ptl W' .4Y<:4ukH? } I v. it ....,......,n.,,.aw....... ...»....,.?.,...-......r.rT.,*? .. t f if ?..'ma e j EASEMENT j Ilk THIS INDENTURE, made this day of December 1954, between Carl John Nelson and Gertrude.Evelina Nelson, hush'-and and wife, first party and Jefferson County, a t municipal corporation of the State of Washington, second party. WITNESSETH, that first party, in consideration of ONE AND NO/100 DOLLAR ($1,00), receipt of which is acknowledged, and the bonefits which will accrue to the land of first party be the exercise of the rights herein granted, do hereby remise, release and forever quite)^im unto second party, its successors and assigns, an easement and right of way for the purposes hereinafter stated, over and through, under, along and across all or any part of that certain parcel of land in Jefferson County, State of j Washington, described as followa: A strip of land twenty feet wide, being ton feet on each side of the following described conterline: beginning at a point on the centerline of the Quilcene 8 Cemetery Road two thousand sixty-nine (2009) feet wasterly from its intersection with state highway No. 9 at approximate highway station 408+701 thence S 24°35' E at an angle of 114 301 with the centerline of the Quilcene Cemetery Road a distgnce j of tw h d d o un re twenty-five (225) feet; all in the SEJ of section 14, Township 27 north, range 2 went, W.N. in Jefferson County, Washington, d p i Said easement and right of way are for the folk ? owing purposes: The right to F - F r . enter upon the above-described land to construct, reconstruct, maintain and repair a drainage ditch including all appurtenances thereto, together withany enlargement { or raconhtruction thereof, and to trim, cut, fall and remove all such treas,brush and other natural growth and obstructions as are necessary to provide ade uate q clearance and to eliminate interference with, or hazards to, the structures, im- provements or utilities placed on, over or under paid land; and included as an appurtenance to said easement is a right of access thereto over any other lands owned by first party. It is understood, and agreed that first party grants to second party the right p [ to discharge drainage !water carried by above-=entioned drainage ditch upon the lands of first party at the southerly and of and beyond the limits of above-desoribed 4 ' right of way, and first party agrees to hold second party blameless of any and e all results thereof. It is further undaratood and agreed that first party will hold second party i kk S n no way responsible for the flow of transverse drainage water from the Quileene Cemetery Road onto and upon the land of first party by reaaoh of the elimination of the present lateral roadway ditch on the southerly side of said road. F The consideration above-mentioned in accepted zm full compensation for all r damages incidental to the exercise of the rights above granted. To have and to hold, all and singular the said easement and right of way, to- f gather with appurtenances, unto second party, its successors and assigns. `ar IN WITNESS WHEREOF, first party hereunto set hand the day and year above written. -- irs art StATE OF ) ?a ) as. ) First y i County of ,R. 1) .7 _&..nF`+?bq?9CFl?iwt7P"a??'iy?.?'S"a MIae Je4My,'+,.w E ?I wow i PLAN of ,JEFFERSON COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL_ PROJECT- NO. I OF 1954 LITTLE QUILCENE RIVER & BIG QUILCENE. RIVER KEIT:-1 F, JONES, CO. E;Nrf4. OCT. 8, 1954 .?7 I 3, , is F 5 ; Hiyh _WcrY¢r - L e v¢/ - ip k r orI l Woter Leval I ?:? Rack R%,orop F TYPICAL SECT'ION' - Q s /ong on L i c`d/¢ Qui /c¢ne Ri v¢r /75'/ong o v 8/9 CJw/terra kR/'ve., , y ', ? l`1'pra?ea h?a va tnlPnt ? 1 f TYPICAL LAYOUT . F ' E Oyu ?, e , r 8. F. No. 8192-5-53-2M. 34702. AGREEMENT t . "C• -• ., No ............................. (County) ' THIS AGREEMENT Made and entered into between ..._..._JG.E_F.K.:t.e N•,,,••.• a municipal corporation, mail address _........ ...... _...........° ............ ? r . .....__.._......_...._..•°-_ ............... _..... _...., first party, and the State of Washington, Department of Conservation and Development second party dated , , .............................. and void after ................................ _................ ...... _.... _.......... _............... ................. .......... ..................... (Filled In b s d t - $: y econ y par y) provides for flood control maintenance under the provision of Ch. 86.26 R.C.W., on... . l ? r -: t • -, .. .. ...._.... _._..... _... (Stream or body oi water involved more specifically located in../Lf-.a-A!E )?.4..:uc .l_!Lf_T__?.7_.t.!., ? <^YL N....dn, tEygNYI?c 24 ??7 1 dzr - (Secaons and fractions, township and rnnge• right or left bank, tits ,t r?r ) ?. and involves _..._. .:. k.......R.a. :a n?x 2 / w c f zL ' •"""""` ......_ .y............ r c... re t..f... o:_..A.a./.... ....... 2.a 1 ..._Y?.i .yam?.e_...._._..._._.._ (H k h ON ti an prolecLons,channel trectlflcatlons dikes etc.) Map and plans (on sheets 81/ rr x 13") prepared by..... .?? 1 ?!1 F 4 /2Cc5 -', .. . .... .. .... _..•.. ............. _...................... ..... _..... are attached. .-(Engineer) ^ w- tua Quantities and costs estimated by...!l.c,f.!! oar c s .................... _. are as follows: 4 (Engineer) ?i. d a •, ' Y PRINCIPAL WORK ITEMS unit Quantity Unit Cost Cast / YGtG Or ¢ h A r5 /a.oo .oo ?La[tdet u $ $ 3 -Tr-a c( ' a• ou r ?gNgr, a:?? D/ov a fe rs /lass 9 z 3 76 6, 1A -r; /0.15 0. 00 TOTAL $ ?? 3, ',?.• 7 The State will participate to the extent .................... . . . . . f/ PJ .: l . . . . . . • . (To be filled J. by Supervisor of Flood Control) ??••?•?'?• The project is affected with a State and public interest because .._....... _....... .... _............. (To be alma In by asst party) . ._ ......... ......... ._..__..__.............. _........_._._..__.__...._.._.___._._._..__._._..__.__....___...._.__._....._..__._...._.... :onstruction will be performed by first party under the supervision of the local Flood Control Engineer , ubject to the approval of the State Supervisor of Flood Control, and completed within the term hereof. IECOMMF-NDED FOR APPROVAL: .._........................... _._._._..........__.......-....._.......__.: ............ First Party, sy....__..._._..._..._.......... ......... _......... _................................. _......... Lornl Flood Control Enyinecr,............... ........ ..__...._..__....__._...._..._._.__ ._ ___..___._.............. .... ..._._.._._.._..___._.__.___.._...._.._ ._ .... __..... PPROVED: STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT. Second Party, Supervisor of Flood Control. By........ _....... _.... _............ __.............. ____.,......._.._........ _....... _.._._... Director. 7g: When properly completed, on Its part, signed by first party and by the• local Flood Control Engineer and submitted to the Supervisor o! Flood Control, thR will be considered on application for state participation When also signed b d hi d o . y secon t s party, oeumont becomes an Avftman_ I', N' N"A M J? n k? a ,Yl I?; ,rdl l ) r'c of Cr r CHAPTER 240, SESSION LAWS 1951 (Ch, 86.26 RCW) - k STATE AND LOCAL FLOOD CONTROL SECrrmt 1. Chapter 86.20 R.C.W., being chapter 150, Laws of 1933, and chapter 88.28 R.C.W., being sections 1 to 7, both inclusive, of chapter 204, Laws of 1941, are hereby repealed: Sa Sea 2. It Is the purpose of the state In the exercise of Its sovereign and police powers and in the interest of public welfare,. to establish a state and local participating flood control maintenance policy. Sec. 3. There are created under the director of conservation and development, the division of flood control - and the office of supervisor of flood control. The supervisor of flood control shall have charge for the state, of all laws relating to flood control. -+0 SEC. 4. State participation in flood control maintenance shall be with corporate municipalities subject to flood conditions, namely, with counties, counties acting jointly, cities, towns, flood control districts, diking or diking s Improvement districts, drainage and drainage improvement districts, diking and drainage improvement districts, - irrigation districts, and soil conservation districts. SEC. 5. The regular or special engineer for any such municipality shall be ex-officio the local flood control s engineer for any flood control work prosecuted by his municipality with aid from state flood control funds. The „?tu r•; county engineer shall be the ex-officio local flood control engineer for any soil conservation district In his county and for any other municipality therein by special agreement between the proper municipal authorities and the county commissioners. § SEC. 6. Each local flood control engineer shall approve all plans for flood control maintenance projects within 't his jurisdiction; he shall supervise their construction and have control of and make the authorized expenditures therefor. The approval of such plans, construction and expenditures by the supervisor of flood control shall be a condition precedent to state participation In the cost of any project. .l 1 - SEC. 7. State participation shall be in such flood control maintenance projects as are affected with a general .t. _ public and state interest, as differentiated from a private interest, and as are likely to bring about public benefits commensurate with the amount of state funds allocated thereto. Such participation shall be made from state appropriations for flood control maintenance purposes. "Sea 8. Appropriation for flood cm.lrol maintenance shall be so employed that as far as possible, funds will + be on hand to meet unusual, unforeseeable and emergent flood conditions. Allocations by the supervisor, for emer- gency purposes, shall in each instance be In amounts which together with funds provided by local authority, under ,.?*,. . reasonable exercise of Its emergency powers, shall be adequate for the preservation of life and property, and with ' due regard to similar needs elsewhere In the state. ' SEC. 9. Any municipal corporation subject to flood conditions, may establish in ifs. treasury a flood control - - ?4 Mt maintenance fund. Such fund may be maintained by transfer thereto of moneys derived from regular or special lawful levies for flood control purposes, moneys which may be lawfully transferred. to it from any other music- lost fund; and gifts and contributions received for flood control purposes. All costs and expenses for flood con- 1 v trot maintenance purposes shall be paid out of said flood control maintenance fund, which fund shall not be used for any other purpose. .? SEC. 30. Any municipal corporation intending to seek state participating funds shall, within thirty . days after j by final adoption of its annual budget for flood control purposes, report the amount thereof, to the supervisor of flood - r' f? - control. On the basis of all such budget reports received, he may thereupon prepare his tentative and prelimi- nary plan for the orderly and most beneficial allocation of state flood control funds for the ensuing calendar year. t Any otherwise eligible municipal corporation falling and neglecting to report the amount of its budget may, at R the discretion of the supervisor, become Ineligible for state participation during the ensuing year. Soil conserva- tion districts shall be exempted from the provisions of this section. Sea It. The state.ahall participate with eligible local authorities In maintaining and restoring the normal and reasonably stable river and stream channel alignment and the normal and reasonably stable river and stream channel capacity for carrying off flood waters with n minimum of damage from bank erosion or overflow of ad- jacent'lands and property; and in restoring, maintaining and repairing natural conditions, works and structures yyu, r, 1. for the maintenance of such conditions. The state shall likewise participate In the restoration and maintenance of . , natural conditions, works or structures for the protection of lands and other property from Inundation or other .)g damage by the acs or other bodies of water. State flood control maintenance funds shall not be available for }1 55 maintenance of works or structures maintained solely for the detention or storage of flood waters. u Sec. 12. State participation in the cost of any flood control maintenance project shall be provided for by a ;s a written memorandum agreement between the director of conservation and development and the corporate au- i?"ttv,M` 9N . E thoritles of the local sponsoring party, which agreement, among other things, shall state the estimated cost and Y r of the percentage then-of to be borne by the state. In no Instance, except on emergency projects, shall the state's 'i share exceed one-half the cost of the project. State participation In any soil conservation district shall not, In the aggregate exceed ten thousand dollars in any flacal year, and shall be only in projects approved and recom- R??,•" mended by the district's board of supervisors. Ste. 13. No warrant shall be drawn by the state auditor to the credit of the flood control maintenance account ! InMy; of any participating local agency except on vouchers for reimbursement of expenditures therefor made and prop- arty supported and approved by the local flood control engineer and by the supervisor of flood control. - v JSY '? t tl . r ? n... .. en.a .?..• .42D. .ru.............. ry 4 - i 1y?? J¦f _. / 777{r.+K L ASR z rM1 - r w ?" ? .?N:'?S?Tniw4'?»'.5se•Si?r ?dti?§"•d+i>d?arr•ar __ _ s 19 1. _.._ . , I 1 1 ?a - - c J I - LA , ! ?- ?--,-i'G, - oa , I ? 4 41 1 17 I,? a 0 , ? 1 -8 /9L ? I /vlgrlh??u,? o?,.. ""'p oo s-o a© ._ _ /? I , a ' ? I ?Hr htlGf SZ, I I i 1 i I ? ?, I I I i r I ' I v f C ,7 gs" 4 k s FLOOD CONTROL BUDGET ' 1948 Estimated Receipts Estimated Cash on (land January 1, 1948 ed from taxation - .8 Hill i 1,614.42 78 4+3?• v Estimated amount rece Total 0 5.975.20 E £ t j R Estimated Exbendituree i ;l Overhead & operations 100.00 5,875.20 " ?- Emergency; Flood Control E Total b 975.20 r, E 10, ^r .77 :C# rK T7 RESOLUTION NO. C_19 County Flood Control Project No: 1 BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY ConmISSIOTTF.RS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTON. In the matter of nueAts, Clearwater) Resolution to construct channel change & Hoh River Flood Control ) and bank protection on said rivers. ) IT IS HrRFBY RF^OLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS that it is their - intention to appropriate funds to the amount of a one (1) mill tax levy on County Valuation. The funds to be transferred from the County Road Monies in the amount of 65,218.67 to the County Flood Control funds for the above ' resolved purpose. BE IT. FURTHER RESOLVED that for the foregoing proper County Flood Control purpose there is hereby appropriated sugis in the following detail: County Flood State Flood Items of work: Control Fund Control Fund Total Day Labor $ 5,218.67 $ 8,781.33 $ 14,000.00 ` Total- C:-5,218.67 ,73 $ 14,000.00 The Flood Control purpose herein described is HEREBY DECLARED TO BE a public _ emergenby and the County Road engineer is HEREBY ORDERED AND,AUTJORIZED tG report and proceed thereon as by law provided. E BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this purpose be performed by Day Labor ?• n• in accordance with the specifications as adopted by this Board. • A80PTED'thie 21st ' day of July, L947. i j Chairman t SEAL ' der "} ry} Attest: + Member County Constituting the Board of k Auditor and Ex-officio Clerk County Commissioners o of the Board. Jefferson County, Washington f ?'! ^^ A Audit or. { .b 16?r •? G, SIC 1? ?? i 7t r r ?? ? ? + '?'-a • :}'K ? ?? 5 1? ???':,urAd JL'?7? "N? .?.? .f•c1 G!.'i d?'FW :iy?.1.?W - 'fY".... 41 R E S O L U T I O N No. C-20. WHEREAS the Board of County COLm:issioners deems it necessary to construct the following projects: (1.) Channel change and bank protection of the Clear- water and Quests Rivers in Section Township Range W.M., hereinafter re 'erred to as ' oarwater River Project No. 1. a (2 ) Ch . nnel Change and bank protection along the Clearwater Rivor in Section Township )? Range W.U., hereinafterrred to as e Clearwa er River Project No 2, w . (3.) Four hundred feet (4001) of bank protection and removal of debris and jams from the Soh Ri e Tire v r in Section Township Range W.M., here- inaPter r- erred to asILO=i r o eo N T . ? o. 1, NOW TyE'P.w„'F'^ iF BE IT RESOLVED That said work be done "Q V by day labor and payment for said work be made from the Flood Control account of the Jefferson County River Improvement F ' und, ?z as budgeted for maintenance of the Queebe , ClearwOter and Bch Rivers and tributaries, anticipating reimbursement to aai d , River Improvement Fluid of 50% or more of the cost of said work "`Fists` _ F • tram -State'Flood Control Funds in accordance with Chapter .. ' 9€ _? 204, Laws of 1941 as amended, said project to be designated as State Flood Control Project No. 1. E ti s mated Cost $14,000.00 mmxase?eu:wxu 'n Adopted this---7 Lday f o ?1947 " . AORD F COUNTY COMMISS , q IONERS ATTEST: Lvnll Arev mt, Chairman, ??•CC?( •< u C? Tom Mil x _ . roy County udi or and Ex- 6 t' i officio Clerk of the __QaoraA Huntl nPford .n4a Board. ?»runr Mme; Y I _r R E 8 OLUT Ia.H No. C-20. WHEREAS the Board of County Commissioners deems it nsoeaaery to construct the following projects: (1.) Channel change and bank protection of the Clear- water and Quests Rivers in Section ;P-c? township 9 411Range . rJ W.M., hereinafter. reTerred to " ea sarwater River Project No. 1. (2.) Channel Change and bank protection along the Clearwater River in Section ^ Township 2 w H 7197 Raagor 41 WM., hereinafter- reerred to as o ?? Clearwa roarer River Project No. 2. (3.) Four hundred feet (4000) of bank protection and removal of debris and s from ?s j?r? the Hod River in Section ?" Township a Range ' a,i W.M., here. a inafte'r re 'erred to &a ?o iver Fr-of3sct No. 1. NCiV THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED That said work be done r by day labor and payment for said work be made from the Flood `x Control account of the Jefferson County River Improvement fund, ' as budgeted for maintenance of the Quests, Clearwater and Ho1a 9 - l Rivers and tributaries, anticipating reimbursement to said FEW - % k" River Improvement Fund of 50% or more of the coat of said work ? r. t F 'y from State Flood Control Funds in accordance with Chapter , a ' 204, Laws of 1941 as amended, said project to be designated i as State Flood Control Project No. 1. 1'+S-• py ? . F t r Estimated Cost 014,000.00 +ut ,-,'a Adopted this _?day of ,1947. BOARD F' COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ry' } ATTEST: LyallAroy a{ sus Chaiaman. Helen J. Eads Tom Milroy I "? Count - - o ?M2 u?,wy , 4 0 n y u i or a Board. io Clerk of the B George Iiuntingford N R E 1 2 L U T I O N WHEREAS the Board`of County Commissioners deems it necessary to construct the following projects: r (1) Channel change and ?enk protection of the Clear- IV water and Quests Rivers in Section-......•Townsehip_ ? Rnage_ W.M., hereinafter referred to as Clear- Water River Project No. #1. f (2) Channel Change and bank protection along the Clear- { 99 water River in Section Township Range_.W.M., hereinafter refferred to as the Clearwater River f, Project No.#2. (3) Four hundred feet (4001) of bank protection on the o) Hoh River In Section Towns M. hereinafter referred to as Bob River Project No.l. l NOW THEREFORE BE IT HESOLBED That said work be done , ff C } by day labor and payment for said work be made from the Flodd Control account of the Jefferson County River Improvement Fund , as budgeted for maintenance of the Quests, Clearwater & Hoh f Rivera and tributaries, anticipating reimbursement bo said Rive4-provement Fund of 59 % or mo th , re e cotst of said work from State Flood control runds in accordance with Chapter 204y Laws of 1941 as amended said , project to be designated asH?Ut' ?C? Flood Control. Project No. 1. 1 , Estimated Cost$ Ad opted this day of , 1947. . BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS k Jefferson County, Washington A . C it+, ,...3 " Q OO ?41 .. Affidavit of Publication . { 7 STATE OF WASHINGTON) 'VaTY OF JEFFERSONea. -?litY O. SCOTT, being sworn, says that he 1s y_... the publisher of the Port Townsend Leader, a weekly newspaper which has been established, published In the English language and circulated 7 continuously as a weekly newspaper In the town - of Port Townsend, In said county and State, and - - of general circulation In said county for more than six (6) months prior to the date of the first publication attached, i sald Port Townsend Lender was on the 27th day of Juno, 1941, approved as a legal newspaper 7 - by the Superior Court of said Jefferson County, and that the annexed Is a true copy of the ................ '- No.ito e of hearing, Flood control ........................................................................................... ............................................................................._... kF[ as It appeared in the regular and entire Issue of - said pager itself and not In a supplement thereof 11 .. for a period or......One.......... consecutive ronijilt; be- . ginning on the.....10VAley ot......dVly ,1' . 194....7., and ending on the......7.Oth ............... day of ` '. . ; ......... r141.X..._ .............1 194... ?... and that said now.. paper was regularly distributed to Its subscribers during all of thls period. That the full amount of $ -...? ..................... Ilan been paid In full, at the rate of $2.00 n hundred words for the first Inner. time and $1.60 n hundred words for each subso- auwtt insertion. - s '° ............_ Subscribed and Anrn to before me thla ................ .' JU 21 94?r day of ............... 104 Noma P bit. In and for the State of . nn'irl oil residing at Port Townsend. ,Y FORM TeRM"-.1 I IF i t - - " - News clnllY to visit with her .i'ler nd family,Mrs. Florence allies y nd three boys. muni y l - ] a ` ?, a i arrlvpd tram Forks le M ' +? q v Gerald to'Z¢ eenin6 d ay ks " plynaure, evidently became reek. Satur S homy after n wee es vacation nts the 13. L Norlh• les of the road and t th her pare leas with the ru x reened disastrously along the - ca shoulder for several hundred feet upMr, and Mre E. H. Dahl of Paco- (before dashing headlong over the ma visited M. day night with Mr. ll Dahl $ and Mre. Leo Christian.. Mr. embankment. The car landed a wyrked wheels up and, was badly smashed. and DSrChrletIan formerly d ., Li ht ' ] " driver was severely cut an city g together in the Tacoma.. The bruised and wax given first aid by department. :" a l-! . th, - :'Erwin Kelly. One other occupant Mr. nn3 Mre. Charles Nye of l and h M t , r, but l? vin spent the build ya wit i was injured in _ the foot Nys Is a Mrs . , Mrs. Fred Springor. sister of Mr. Springer. i Chnrlos Doriatby returned home ;Monday eventa, after mo absence iof two weeks. He. returned to So- " . ottle Sunday after spending a vnca• ;thm with hie aunt and tmels in - (Brewster. Hie mother met him in , SeRtt O Monday morning. and Mrs Goorget Enginnd c Mr . companied C. V Dorothy to Bram• erton Monday evening Mr. and Mre .toe Kenny spoof a 'few dnye hero 1, t waek._Prlor to "thou regular two•wooka' v¢cnth"m ' • Ff. htourick, a buildingcontractor ' !tc ; ioI Scanty, "is build ing a mu nter on We W. 'on his property - L ; FYu.L home {Point.. - " Don't throw that cigarette Out,tho wind.wl Uae the ash troy. You too " .. can prevent forest tire.. KyoP Washington gymml 7 % I L L ? 1 bg j 132 -n orations ylan Mo, 1 a • o 3 ~ J b Namnzmtm ?L'q Lain^d Period oovorcd 91231499 to ( - Job Location M"Mj? ,.lcrk Un4 t_.J6"2e?k!-_ `;tato yae?lpBba ¢ .is n:•ioc: to ?nco I'o Pakn aronnL• :pnroont ;sti- TWE OF P.O1?K Units:Quantities :Z1:nnti+.ios:Timo licnxd:Ccmolato::.:ated Tim(, - - 1A 114P Jirsgline Excavation :Cu,Ydsr12,000 12,000 100yL -? ', Traotor-Gr ;der Spoil bank snreadinr: __Q 0 Ci_: _0.2-- Fencing ?_ icods 0.0 0 n00.0 ? Dlna$llt? tavdme 1®s_ ISO 1SO , . ¢ Q n ? i-. ??-A 6e 111tn6 M h_: HO 00 L)asoription of opcrni:inn : du:•inv, :: i ::: SaOavat10II OOaaoaoad at e log yD 0? Use" to O.y}.00 S. stations 0 were eaaa'aieToeor3iujp io p-Ion. a ratl A 01 pry eao _ weret 1 bottom width vas oonstruoted Instant of the ltt ao 4tans riv l w l? 0 * Y3 u y a ?;; P i o or raa 3 ) ro 0o tiiio were asa In p nos e _tASOS ?3a a0o satterts plaaaad for the coua$r rose. Lake level control o4raatasro i, ? r? L'i ^ . 6416446as a mlow U.N. 101 were buss" pr or to draclRe s:aan? on. lo*dVo u's t . ,:?' ? ?. y . omrv nreraala 0 7 Plane for o.nrntdons dari::y next p9riod: Jansary 1949 Jnne 1949 SPUN oprsadlas - tiastint 000t0s from station IOE 450 0 to l;s 4.005 a and lapel,ms. 0 ' J C) Preparhd h••; O.M. Putman ^1 1 M, Aasslaa A --, il- : 1___??J'bti? y 'r 0er -:y' c'.r`.e': go:.carvitao.:i. c V ' ;-? 9 sp c. JAMISIT 10, 1949__. gi as +?6.+yru' ? ?. ?q1 N MEMO Newell 8. Robb, Work Unit Conservationist,- June 24, 1947 SCSo Qu12cens, Washington Hari T. Fulkersons District Engineer, SCB, Redro Woolley, Washington Preli?liiary and 8soonusissance Report - Lake Leland Project We Nave raaelso8 the,: following'approvalsdated Juno 4, of the preliisinsry roport mt tbs Lake Leland ProJeat. -,"The combined el pr taiaary and rsaonnaieasnoe -sport for the Lake ,, Leland Projeot Mobs= reviewed. The report is approved as pra- pared.' . ` a °Dotailed plauniag is authorised subject to the fallowing conditionsi {k J Approval for the esaavation and ounLrol-of water level of Lake Leland $hall po obtaiuod from tho State Fish d C C i 1 , an ame omm ssion prior to ft -a ar:6oneidamblo'tochnioian time. *Atote-o?.way r"uirsments should be determined at an early date y n and rocoraary agresummts obtained. F "The $auis for oparatlon and maintenance and assessment shall be dmtei mined'and a reed to b b f h . y mem g ers o t e group. e oceabiasd report hen been well praparede Through analysis of x oonditions and problems enables the Service to give sound rmoom- . esattdfatieais." 1 r ? 1Booltul aStfi?pt to tarnish the regional office the information ftluired to ob- TSr?t9la approval from. he State Fish and Cams Commission, and 1 believe that yon !"M y, 1.F eltAad with:;.ssourinb tlrs right-of-way easements and determinlt- the basis for, ®R np 9Uon and"m ' l t no ? ,. r a araa a n an you see fit. J r G T r . ?rT?^n 'r^'- ..r wp MmeV $ YY .7 ?;..P. 0. seorsw, state Conservationist. SCS, June 41947 ' PaslLwan, Washington ? W1111ea R. Vas Dermal, Regional Chief of operations r Preliminary and Resonmai®amee Report - Lab Leland Provost ftw eambimsd Preliaimry and rseomnaiseanos report for the Lake Leland ?. y Pro}ost hu hsoa rooia®ed. She report is approved as prepared. - Detalled glaoaing is authorimsd snbjeot to the following sonditionso " Approval for the ezoavation and oomtrol of water level of Lab Leland shall be. d fray the State Fish and Gus Cmmiasion prior to expemditnea et"eo8miderable to0hnielas time. 1 W4hke-efroe7 requirements should be determined at as early dab sad rses82427 agavamats Maimed. p ' r" basis for operation and maintieaaase and messesmont shall be detaralasd amd agreed to b7 rtbers of the group. gYu enabistsd report has boom well prepared. Thorough analysis of oomditiam `per amA'ptoblems enables the sarvis0 to give sawed rsoommsndatdoem. / eft, foul. Cc- Pulcat Fred Larsen 1. 0. fehler v - ° v???? 3. 8. Dwaer ` . s ? r ?'+^r t ?*r,' P R?cr t?rt_.o REC:EIVED.... ?? JUI? lz 1941 ?? ?i SEUHU r _ .1 , n ,_) SfHI ffli,Jl.iO Oil 1, 11" V, ?3 µslw , x/;. ?a,.,kk e'v ti r I w o ?n.S '? J I c III 4 '? M A? ?? ?,l J Y 5 i J I ~ ? III I ??? a p ' X09 ` 1 , ' ?1 ? ? ?, J I _ 1 I 11? 1 y r} ?? ? ? 1 ? ? ` i lr4 ? s w CL + lif i? NII Iii ??y C k 111 I , i I 4?1 i 10 4 W I I? ? I ?; :, I 1. I ? as ?? all I •??? _ '? s, I I ? I , 4'. I ? / 1 I ( I? i H I.b ' '? i' ` I 1 1 a. S•'? 1 I ?` ,.I 7y T 't '•'?-•- 1 ..I•. ? r ...r.1• r 4 "i ?, ? f I L Ilti '?? f j l f .I' I. ? a,??,w:?l??'"* x, h??., I. 1 .??44 1 i^'I } t I 1 ??w?..,? s +iw' III ? : v 1 ? r ? Q ? t r ar ?. m F = I1 y x , ltd; a a •ti ?u 4 j j CL , to 4 ? ? 1 r.> •, ;fir 1F,{ 711 } b 71" t „- K LAKE LELAND DRA NAOE ASSOCIATION Location Approximately 3 to 6 miles Iforth of Quilcono, eashington on U. S. Highway #101 in Sections 2lt, 25, 26, and 36, Tovmehip 28 N., Range 2 W Y M . . An the Eastern Jefferson County Soil Conservation District, Jefferson County, Washington. Project Description - This project covers the reconstruction of the Lake's inlet and outlet channels. Rank brush and other vegetative rowth i th i ti - - ' g n e ex s ng channel and side, slopes; changes made in alignment and channel bottom; and the filling' i f th h n o e c annel with silt, logs, and detritus from land slides has changed the hydraulic qualities of the drainage chan l t ne o such an extent that it no longer is adequate to carry off the normal winter run-off from Lake Leland ' - and its watershed. r During the winter months the level of the Lake and the water surface, in its outlet channel is raised to such an t ex ent that serious drainage problems have risen on the agricultural land surrounding the Lake and its outlet channel. Plan of Rehabilitation 1 The work contemplated in this project will consist of obtaining rights- " t of-way from land owners; cloaring of right-of-way; excavation of the inlet and outlet channel bottoms and bank slopes to a d i es gned fradient and oross section; and a road culvert designed for a five-year run-off frequency installed near the Lake will control the lake level throughout the year. He is for Design a3rd " The Lake outlet structure 1s designed to operate under a maximum head of one (1) foot and to discharge 86 2 c f . . .s. into the outlet channel. The Lake level under extreme conditions will vary in elevation by two (2) feet. Thq maximum run-off at the lower roaches of the project is calculated at 206 o,f.s. & Construction Program Y 1 Construction program is oontemplated to start during the fall of 191;8 and be carried to completion prior to January 1949. G LVI-It -a-oEM-Z F Eaeements for a 40-foot right-of-way have boon obtained by the local E:oup from the land owners involved. Those i ht ,eA ) . ? r g -of-way grants will be ' rt 1 x ?ra,. 5? 6+a " . i , ?fuf `Lr?? ,I s-? , r ; fir I-6 Materials and Eq F!.t- CS f . ? ?? . All materials used in construction shall be new and of good quality. Machinery shall be in good operating condition d b s an e adaptable to the per- formanoe of the construction work , t 2-0 CONSTRUCTIO14 SPECIFICATIONS - s 2-1 Clearing end Grubbing - Clearing and grubbing shall bo done durinf- construction unless pre- viouely cleared by land Owner. From STA. S 8*144 to STA. S 32+00 going South ' from the County road bridge at the South end of' the Lake the right-of-way shall be l d f l y c eare o a l brush, trees, logs and stum ps - a width of 30 feet to provide a clear area for the spoils resulting from the excavation. From 3TA.'S 32+00 to S 128.00 the South li it f S r # m o the project, the right-of-way will be cleared in such a t 1 manner o allow for the proper operation of excavating a h t m c inery. Spoils resulting from the excavation will be piled ten (10) feet £roa the ditch banks with no regard to brush t l ' , rees, ogs, or stumps that may be buried under the spoils. This area.has very limited potential agricultural value.` From STA. N 0}00 to STA. N 4500 the right-of-wny where necessary will be'oleared sufficiently to allow for the proper o eration f p o machinery. THe land owner, if he desires, will be responsible to provide a cleared area for PPP disposal of spoils. Clearing will be done by dozer, dragline, and common labor. 2-2 Fence and Hridge Removal This item negligible. Fenocc and bridges are few and in very poor repair. They will be removed and destroyed by construction o t :-; rew a the time of construction unless removed by owner previously. 2-3 Excavation a'3 p All excavation shall be done by power drarlino shovel to lino, grade, and press section as specified in the plan. The excavation will start at STA 8 1 ' l o . 28}00 and carried North to STA N 45+00- In sections where the ch ' .. anne bottom is rook and shale, blasting powder shall be used to l t ?o On, ' M } oosen he bottom to fioilitate dragline excavation. Hlastinr of sections shall be done upstream r of.;the operating dragline--a minimum distanco of 700 feet. This is required to minimize siltation of the excavated sections. ' The draClino operator shall be allowed to carry wit the excavation from whichever side of the channel is most convenient except that secti i t lG on n he U.S. Highway #101 right-of-way where he will carry out the excavation from the iffiest bank of the oxisting channel. e? ? ? A ti r G+ r -?i ?..•?aw'"LfP.?r " ?"?i•?;?, aloe .: ?u f ? .`? -? , ,? i 1 ?i ' ,t. r • ? t 'M Or" 1 1 .? o? iL O i ? 0 ? N m A 0 W Q O m ?y 0 m .d ri c W .. N W .r gl ? b ? ?p OU ? d A!"? EH[? P W pg ttl 4 qF.' 'S O F? U40i W E q h m n s x i? ? W 43 1? ° rl r? ? • S7 0 o ,ova F ?v... ?°a ^oa E ?-+ H o H U Q }{ O U ?+ 0 v h N .a y ?. U n O N N V 0 N O U 0 a N 0 s N c 8888 R sig 88 8 8$ co 0 SOON Cl1n v? N ci qci ~o Eti 800 0If 0.1 00000000 G ? `r N (Ntipo oopp Q ((?? N S _?Q,l QQ 8 QQ pp8 " a t- o?'O? en Ki O ? ty P uj a tq a. ;,W Ay bJa ?. N N to r iC -P Y Y O F u N rl L. o? .O i-i N " j +t y h N N p d .i r01 m [O W mma a OU v j w m a ? iOi g d3 d o A ? N N M K Y +b ?. µ}r i r Y hYJI'?,J I fr ??S'4/I N i 11 C; o Q 0 m ayf O z ' 0 x m m c7 W W q E ., G7 P D-u y - ? n0 .q b P tiq I 3 O H W 4- o0 0 f) N W ? E IN ti q 4' A y 0 ?4y E N t o U 0 a7 41 E m _ m y O i ? !Wv ? ? - P-4 I vJ: 0 0 . ^a 5 ? N OO 8 Il'? O t(? F [ OU p 0J Q ?. ? ?j 7 ? . Lr, O 1 F F 0 O N O " q 0 O M O 41 x y ? ?? 8 8 8 . N ? p p Fi N N ? It A N ° N g gi Ici o 0 O ? p p p ? O ? M MAO ltl ? - p p p O, 8 Si NN Q F H U -4 OAO-7 rl O Lr% N °J . 4 g",1% 8 cY a " 0 '? cg a1 ?1 C' • 0 q O d yW M { ? ~ 14 1y ?4 fa qtl y j 4. 45' . , p ti y. ?C D O rrr-m11i ? }O, pppJ?? m ?• O { ?. G1?pmn Ri v v ?l y w n0 f J % A S ? ? ways; ??qy` "1 a '. ? I ® E G. Boulton R "" John 780 Boulton Road 76 MAY 1984 r NO Quilcene, WA 983 May 23, 1984 FERSON CQUN-ry ICE ,- ' m JEF ERS OFF ENGINE a? Mr. Tim Rymer _ Wash. State Dept. of Game - .'R£. 3 -Box 3856 ^ Forks, WA 98331 Re: Leland Valley Drainage Dear Sir ?p I have been meeting with a number of landowners in Leland Valley to determine what could be done to help solve our drainage problems. To fill you in on what has been done to date, let me give you some history of the area. In 1947 a number of landowners got together and with the help of the Soil Conservation Service .. ° and the Agriculture Stabilization and Conservation Service, t (which operated under a different name at that time), cleaned out the exit to Lake Leland, (Leland Creek), starting near Tom Weirs' property up to the lake on the south end, and then ? starting at the north end of the lake dug a channel up to.the $ south end of our place. Now, thirty years later, this needs to be done again.- After the 1947 drainage project, the "Faith Farm", Munn farm, Stoner farm, Vincent farm, and Boulton Farms, experienced adequate drainage for cultivating and harvesting crops. The past ten years it has deteriorated to the present condition. Some of the fields are totally useless and highway 101 has been underwater numerous times, on one occasion causing a serious wreck to a large truck and trailer. The county road at the lake exit has also been underwater. This present situation has been caused by canary grass, weed growth, willows, and other debris plus damming by beavers. T q Also, no provision was made for maintainence of the original ' ditch. i s Leland Valley Drainage page 2 The cost of this project at this point in time would be s_ extremely difficult for the local farmers to bare. However, the State Highway Dept. cannot allow continous flooding of 1 highway 101, and since they are willing and able to work with - a drainage district and provide substantial funding, it seems _-_n to us that working with the highway dept. is the sensible way to solve the problem. In any event, the highway dept. plans to raise the road bed ?- in 1985. The extent of this depends somewhat on the drainage available. I can also vouch for the fact that if the old 3 drainage project was redone, very little would have to be done `.?. to the roadbed. We also have another problem with the drainage of Andrews Creek, involving highway 101 and the northeast boundary of my farm, which needs to be addressed but is a separate issue from the Leland drainage. ;:. I would like very much to have an on-site meeting with you; Dee Freeman, the Wash. State Highway Engineer; and Brian Shelton, the Jefferson County Engineer; to go over the various options involving these two drainages. I have already done this with y Grant Fiscus of the Dept. of Fisheries and received verbal R approval, subject to certain conditions, to solve these two problems. a r I am looking forward to meeting with you on these matters soon. _ If we are to receive funds from the State Highway Dept. for it the Leland project, a lot of work must be done quickly in order to beat their project deadlines on raising the roadbed of 101, which may or maynot cure their problem but will definitely do nothing for local farmers involved. Sincerely a ? 1199 ??{ tl John G. Boulton h ?F The drainage district would have to finance a perpetual maintenance program. Since the Department has a heavy committment in the ditch cleaning we will not be able to participate in 50% of the ditch maintenance. We would consider participating in our fair share as a land owner. We assume a proportionate assessment would be based on our total acreage versus the total acreage in the drainage district. The agreement needs to be consunated by the end of November so we can determine feasibility of raising the roadbed, We plan on advertising our paving contract in the Spring of 1985 and the roadway work needs to be incorporated into the project if it is done. I would ask that you keep contact with Mr. Freeman on your progress. Sincerely, JDZ:m,jb RED cc: Bob Dugan . ZIRKLE 11R EC V I V E L) Dee Freeman 'strict Administrator Ed Trulson, PA APR G 1984 John Bolton JEFFERSON COUNTY ENGINEERS OFFICE ?,k Y Y o F i4riA Jh'f?A,n.?up'fJ4S „ h(ViLl 1 yy.,4W4 4 w F [ ?iC }9 rj i - JM+:?'.07 "nCli 1 PTT?`FIF 10141 } Z + h zi`?rr t ¢ V S, Y ?' ?y r 5 1 { p t J? 1 • ` ? F tiJ ?' 7 f 1 ' ?x y ti i 4 47 r R Dear Mr. Shelton: You asked Mr. Rich Darnell if the Department of Transportation would assist in financing the proposed drainage project. It is my understanding the project would consist of excavation of a drainage ditch somewhat paralleling the highway for approximately one mile and crossing under the highway before it enters Lake Lealand. Also this project involves excavation of approximately lss miles from the outlet. A preliminary estimate indicates the cost may approach $90,000. Our assumption is the lake would be lowered two to three feet. The Department is willing to participate 50% of the cost if several committments can be made. The remaining costs would come from the other members of the drainage district. The drainage district would have to finance a perpetual maintenance program. Since the Department has a heavy committment in the ditch cleaning we will not be able to participate in 50% of the ditch maintenance. We would consider participating in our fair share as a land owner. We assume a proportionate assessment would be based on our total acreage versus the total .. acreage. In the drainage district The agreement needs to be consumated by the end of November so we can determine feasibility of raising the roadbed. We plan on advertising our paving contract in the Spring of 1985 and the roadway work needs to be incorporated into the project if it is done. I would ask that you keep contact with Mr. Freeman on your progress. Sincerely, JDZ:mjb RED cc: Bob Dugan ZIRKLE R E C E V E U Dee Freeman 'strict Administrator Ed Trulson, PA APR G i?bd John Bolton JEFFERSON COUNTY ENGINEERS OFFICE a .d _ ?.' .a rn,we x4?^a aloe P!K ;A,9 aM1 W r 8 'n°ar wmee ., a., -^".4-4, - N r r e a "hl {ryyy? t i r 7' ti A !? 4?' t? .'k C;i71 a ra 1 S '? 4??'y ?1y;?? Q? 1F ?+i ? ? y ! N ??666. t x ? , : I,a r2,' e? ? n iry.j ? ?, -f t l? 1144 ?I IN t `' ?L ? itsTr+gtr STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of District Administrator . 5720 CapiroBlvd., KT-11, Tum,nater, Washington e PO. Box 932:, Olympia Washington 98504 April 4, 1984 Mr. Brian Shelton Jefferson County Public Works 1820 Jefferson Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 SR 101 Proposed Drainage District Vicinity of Lake Lealand _ 411 n, f -d k DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION !ten '?a}e. k DATE: October 24, 1983 INTRADEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICATION i is FROM: Dee Freemarf%John McNutt v '' an•,,,r• 632-1275 sueJeci: L 7702 SR 101 Leland Valley Road to Quilcene 3 Dredging at Bolton Farms2 TD: Bob Dugan As requested, we have examined the area near Bolton Farms in consideration of dredging the existing drainage ditch as opposed to raising the grade. Mr. Bolton had offered to provide labor ' for such a project if the Department agreed to pay for the ' equipment rental. For estimating purposes we assumed 1 week of cat work, 2 weeks of gradall work and 1 week of dragline work, at a cost to the Department of approximately $14,000. After' examination of the area, however, we have found that this work t is not feasable at this time. ?xauu The land surrounding the draina a 'ditch is swampy, a type 3-20 y wetland. It is also very flat. The difference in flow-line , grades between the culvert at Bolton Farms and the culvert at Lake Leland is only 1.8' over a distance of 4,500'. The culvert at Lake Leland has over 2 feet of standing water. Additionally, we discovered that the flow-line of the culvert near Bolton Farms is 0.84' below the normal level of Lake Leland. The down- stream areas from Lake Leland are clogged with reed canary grass' and the level of Lake Leland will continue to rise, possibly to the point of threatening the highway at Lake Leland. The overall solution to the drainage problem requires that Lake:, •? Leland be lowered by 2-3' which requires approximately lk miles of Leland Creek to be dredged. This work would involve 30-40 Working Days and 16,000 C.Y. of material, at a cost of approximately $80,000., s This project as a whole is beyond the scope of our involvement. Joint involvement with the Department of Fisheries, DOT, Jefferson County, the Conservation District, the Soil Conservation Service and the local land owners is necessary. For long-term benefits A any new channel would require continuous maintenance: This could be assured only if a local drainage district was formed. as i The immediate solution to our flooding problem at Bolton Farms is ' Lo raise the highway grade in that area. We could become involved R again if and when a Local drainage project is developed to lower Lake Leland.. We should offer our support to the development of 5. such a project. r?.. DWF:lcs a? JHM RECEIVED (ySp. cc: File ryry 9' JAN 3 1 190*ir JEFFERSON COUNTY "w ?tM?ka+r17 ENGINEERS OFFICE { p n; xnx s z 1 r uv fn n iE da ld;i ?s4v$l fi a ? n e: ?p wx ?m? c t + 1" 71 ' - - , ? ?Li.' 4 ? ?? k ,?'.? ?-.s? .i:'WYf'?+?.. i'.. v+r"'W ?'+?+?•+?? ,????7?'?dMG'0", ?,„, f . ,?y O.?y? 111555:1AA? "' ? ? fns. yaT? ; q .{?' 3 . u Z ..e?.'I2r (5 4 y L70T r x ' ? u, 5-?- d, _ Scs F `?? '_ ?G ?o?-l CosistrVark.e„ ?t517•rc? ?,' at? ? U.S. D-1.1.1 OF AGRIUULNRE DATE I REFERENCE SLIP _S ? e ................... -------------------- ------- ------ ---- ---------- ----- --- ------------ ----• "I E] ACTON NOTE AND RETURN LJ APPROVAL PER PHONE CALL `- I AS REQUESTED RECOMMENDATION [f .; FOR COMMENT REPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF j E] FOR INFORMATION RETURNED _ IN171A15 SEE ME F. E NOTE AND FILE E] YOUR SIGNATURE J in T% r ^ : T 1 C......... . Gt??'y;?r?l1? IIY?Lh - I li 15 W t & ? /3y;? i. ?VF'avL?Fvvc=i'+Y'b'?a?'?'??C+°v"i?"usG+?"'re?Y': -l€•-' .3Y3Yr..-'wrv+v9v'?i b p $ v Iyy}? ' Y f ? Y • . II /? // LL N \ Ma-rio?, E",&7 8. G . t urn f111u- J n ? A r 4 SlC 1 i 1F{ ?. {.S- i'A. .1 S ii s ' !; ?Jn 1.S 1 r ? (t l J ?y?Ci ' ' of ^? ' parr ? ? ' ? . _ 1 i LELAND LANE DRAINAGE PROJECT RECONNAISSANCE INVESTIGATION } I Location. Sections 24, 25, 26, & 36 - T38N, R2W, W.d., three miles north from the town of Quilcene, Washington. II Previous Investigations and Reportas . K 1. Preliminary and Reconnaissance report dated March 17, 1946 by Roy M. s Raasins. 2. Operations report including specifications, agreement, drawings and cost ' distribution sheets dated Sept. 16, 1948 by Raasina. r• 3. Construction progress report dated January 10, 1949 by Raasina and Putman. III Local Interests ndowners adjacent to the stream are seriously effected by high water and have L a made the necessary request for assistance. This has been requested orally and also by letter dated February 15, 1956 from the farmer group represented b; William Vincent and Meade Dunlap. IV Problems Inadequate drainage outlet for the Leland watershed is the source of thi s f problem. The situations that cause this poor outlet are today the same an is pointed out in the report dated March 17, 1946. There is no indication of past maintenance and the channel condition is nearly identical to that described in 1946. 77 V Hydraulic Considarationss t 1. Runoff total from watersheds i ` a. 5120 acres l 'b. 216 ofs a, I'M" (Drainage Modulus) 1 inch per day ? i (1) Runoff total for watershed area above Leland Lakes - a. 1410 acres ? - 7'- b. 59 of$ +dC " F o. "M" - 1 inch per day ' (2) Runoff total for watershed area from the inlet of tributary stream from the East located on M. Dunlap property to the Northern boundarys a. 2050 acres S " alt. ' b. 86 ofs o. 91" - 1 inch per day I a V (coat) '. x ? (3) Leland Lake u a. Area - 77 acres Is. Storage per foot of surface q$,'„r Depts 77 A-F or 335,000 cu. ft, a (4) Runoff total for remaining watershed are: , { r a. 1660 acres b. 71 ofs c, 290 - 1 inch per day - 6 'r . (5) Utimated discharge capacity of box culvert under state highway . 101 located near strait property. (a) widths 791010 w: (b) Height: 69 (c) Lengths 1009 (d) Flowing full probable discharge could be 400 cfa VI Construction considerations that may merit additional studies. at 1. Channel clearing and excavation. 2. Control structure at lake to regulate water level for flood storage possibilities. s i=y9 . 3. Channel straightening. 4. Channel relocation. itv ?a 2 +?+ n 5e? `? Sys PRELIMINARY AND RECONNAISSANCE REPORT v " 1. Naas and Location: The Lake Leland Drainage Project located in Sections U,25,26 and 36, T. 28 North, Range 2, W.A.M., in the Eastern Jefferson County ' SCD, Jefferson County, Washington. ` 2. Problems = x This project covers the reconstruction of the Lake Leland inlet and outlet s'Tx* channels. Rank brush and other vegetation growth in the existing channel's j and bank slopes, changes in alignment and bottom grade, and the filling in of the channel with silt, logs and detritua from land slides has changed , the hydraulic qualities of the drainage channel to such an extent that it ??a +z no longer is adequate to carry off the normal winter run-off from lake Leland and its watershed.". .rca During the winter months the level of the Lake and its drainage ahaanal A has been raised to such an extent that serious drainage problems have riroea r on the agricultural lands surrounding the Lake and its outlot channel. The work contemplated in this project will consist of obtaining right-of F way easements from land owners, clearing of right-of-way, excavation of? ' channel bottom and bank slopes to a designed bottom grade and arose-asotion t 3g; ' with minor changes in.?&Iig:aent, and the construction of vier at outlet of «l lake to control the water level throughout the year. 3. Local Interests ? Local interest is high. Request for assistance has been made and group mestiaga scheduled. /,. Area of Land Involveds k r a. Total area in farm benefited.. ............. 680 ?orea 7Is. Total areas directly benefited ............. 276 Acres:. 1 c. Number of operating unite directly benefited 13 . 5. 'hype of Organizations A. Voluntary group will construct and operate facility. Individuals in P Group will be assessed according to benefits derived. rj d" t •r 6. Teahaioal Considerations a. Soils in the areas that will be benefited are prodominately of class No. II and III capability. t., b. Precipitation occurs mainly during winter months. Average rainfall is during year is 30so e i tt a. Para enterprise is predominately dairying. Hay and pasture crops. 4 d. Water requirements - does not apply. Y. s 3 { a .r: i n ? x+ ,'ya?? + tl 1 y rir 1 , i? {?, If4pp' % nyew I + .v4 s E h ? - i;r _ r,? r % t e. Stream flow data 1. Watershed area in approximately 5120 acres and mostly logged off hilly land covered with brush type vegetation. 2. Qlaziam run-off based on 10 rainfall in 24 hours is 216 n on. ft. per second. t. Water rights - does not apply B. Water supply - Is. Water Storage - • • • i 1. General Conditioner 1 M 1. This existing channel is clogged with aqueous weeds, overhanging s and detritus. ilt l d b 4 ,t og , y s brush, bottom and width restrictions cause d to duc h l , e re anne Velocity of flow retarded and carrying capacity of c one d b c d b y een re u e an extent that production on farce adjoining has third. f 2. There are no features that will require detailed study except ? ? for the installation of wier at Lake outlet to control water level in the lake. ' ?. s J. 31ght¦-of-way "a 9fi sr( 1. Conditions are favorable for obtaining rights-of-way easements ti; 4 for the proposed work. Rights-of-way will have to be obtained from private ownerships 2 = r k . and the State Highway Commission. k. Drainage Proposal: 1. Irrigation water supply will not be affected. y. 2. Cutlet conditions are favorable. Channel will empty into the i Little pniloens River. 3. Source of water causing trouble is precipitation and ground water. 4. Existing works not effective. Agricultural lands are flooded. h Cleared land is being taken over with brush and sedges. , 5. Proposed work will consist of excavating the old channel with some 1 minor changes in alignment to ouch a designed bottom grade and areas- ive adequate the outlets and other drainage practice section to d , g on adjoining lands. 6. Wildlife in this area will not be unfavorably effected by the facility 1. Flood Protection - does not apply. ..dr 7. Relationship of facility to other agenciest ame commission te Fish and St _ g a a. Permission will be required from above agencies for excavation and for y? a control of water level in Lake Leland. i b. State Highway Commission Rights-of-way or cooperation in construction and maintenance of that portion of facility adjacent to State Highway. v? p,?z f?.'` 4 rya .. _ hnlyaa`bEB?+?IFk"9?, m um' ,) }gar 8. Benefits to be derived from Operation of facility. •? . (a) Increased agricultural production 5 ? Production will be increased on approximately 276 acres by 30% which will equal 82.8 additional acres .,! . (b) Decreased costa of operating and maintenance costs do not apply as no work h s b a een done in operating or maintenance of existing works. (e) E i conom c Feasibility Estimated cost per acre will be $17.00 per acre 9. Preliminary Cost Estimate (On Form attached) * 10. Technical Services required i (On Form attached) 11. Time &equiraments x Sa) To complete surveys and develop plan of operations - 4 weeks (3) To c l t f b ?°N omp e e jo a ter starting construction - 8 weeks (o) Time and length of construction season Y,..' r begin - July 1957 End - October 1957 (?) Date Facility will be required - October, 1%7 12. Estimate of other requirements 9 Labor - is available I l a bEquipment -dozer, dragline are available ? ? c ¦aterials - are available 13. Availability of technical services in Area (a)• Technicians time to plan the fob is not scheduled in operations y }ia+ ` program. (D) Technicians time will be scheduled as personnel needed for job , are available in Area. .. , pp F r t ,c t s SPECI3CaTI0NS {. 4 1. General Conditions ' 1-1 These specifications are prepared for the purpose of establishing i minimum requirements that suet be met and agreed to before final plans and ' construction specifications are made. Their intent is to clarify the nature and extent, of the work necessary for the lands adjacent to and draining into R Lake Leland and its outlet. " r 1-2 Description of Work to be Planned. Y 51, _ . g '. ' ". The work is to be in the nature of a channel improvement on the cutlet channel of Lake Leland and to lower and control the level of the lake. a. Acquiring and recording permanent easements on channel right-of-way 'k b. Fiaoc removal' o. Clearing and removal of brush a" . d. Excavation to grade and cross-section from bridge #'17 to Lake Leland n -`. a distance of 10,000 feet, and excavation from North and of Lake to s Vincent farm approximately 1,500 feet. e. Construction of weir at Lake outlet for control of lake level. A 1-3 Engineers Status f Upon approval and acceptance of final plans by group and the Soil H Conservation Service and District, the engineer of the Soil Conservation District shall have the general supervision and direction of the work to ` insure the work being done according to specifications and plans." 2. Work and method of Doing. 1-1 Easements Easements shall be drawn up by the group and recorded in the County records. This will consist of easements granted from adjacent land owners also right-of-fray and clearance for work to be obtained from State Bureau of Fisheries, + q, +i the State Righway Dept., and for any other State or Federal Commissions interested w and/or concerned with work. n 1-2 Fence Removal -. Fence to be removed as necessary by owners. u 2-3 Brushing and Grubbing right-of-way. yi This work to be done by common labor and bulldozer. 1 right-of-way 40 feet to be cleared of all snags and brush on the side that will be used by draglins and spoils bank. Brush and snags to be removed for a width of 10 feet an opposite bank. ar` 2-4 Excavation G A . 6? rr ' A ?' t 'YtM M Ay a , n Y 4 h` i ? 'ant P Mir- 2-5 Spoils Spoils mast be piled not closer than 8 feet to bank top. Spoils to be spread at option of land owners adjacent. ? a; ha ?} °xw"'?,7?„`'+?'?r'a'4S?Alli`tU?1.?'w?C.mr.t«:R'.u+?,. .....n •-• ex?wa ua+vwM•?+r?vr wuaaai r.?x vas +nspvamirk ?G??????,gptF> q{;1 y, f??? ? d r?? rr i r ?' tirc L rA ?? f r ? ?? R Y y. T Y - ? f S t E ? } a jj eJ° r yip ' L , y=Y?:2L.?113« ._.?i.:?r:+?a?r': ??41' ? (' BO?f= ... AA ? .,?.?" i• ? ..=5 Xn . MK .O m ?o m a N m m a a ? x. m O U m Y H S ^ie haG?' M fr ? d ?'6.... ? fr m .rp?ip O A W ? W ,? ,? P Y m r gg tiY m m O H ? ? y ? [[ 11 p nn d 3 :< F 5 4> O r} ? ? N N 0 kl W M q O lfN M U ' m Ur ? ' ? ? ?p "Oa O ^Oa .. H C N N ? J F U r~ h ? Q N ? y 0 0 • j H D h p o ?p 4z E U r-1 A r 44. O m N U O N a O O M V ? E 0 C 10 ?0 0 P U N N ri ri In ? M H y ? m a ¦ ¦ ¦ J C1 W bq O H 4*7 o G O rd s ?a ? N s t q 0 tl p q o r ? { F4 . .? B RG W h t ? ? p ? or, r e m r A t7 c7 t7 C7 ?' ? G W 4- ? i C4 14 N w H 4 1 5 V _ a j H ? . C. I . , T yT e ..a i FF? A AEI I i?i 4S rl r( r a l ` ?at? f r ' N ? ? . ? I1 T 7 ? 4 I I ,:<J[ w? 'Sid' R S` 41 ` A . 1 } x PQ A' ?] t ,p A 64 `i 40 a? A S ti f'! d.L r1 0 rr..?4- U 80p O OO S N hw Of p C E A U 1? M NhrU-1 M 1U rU-1 ca Cp C11 tY N d r? C e { ? CU PC IDI b" rAl al m ? 0-4 At U h9 (n IO ri N M k ?y: f ?'NY A V T F 'NN 4 r?4y?`y+lu i r ` r ?t a 14 r r yr' Afr: 5 [ 1 § ?y . 1 ' a PIS ? 1 ? 1 4 x k S ?` : %Ai6 F . 9 0 0) ?r' ,A r.ic " 1 1 1 ?.'y 1 1 . i I_ ` l 7 1 '.? _l t 1 H p d O J (p O 7 N S UI 1J (? N u? ° ° ° °' - CO a T r J a a J J !' r n V c a a c e a N t r 0 .3 Lr V, J ' ` S J SI O ? N N ?n 7 N T ? O ' ?' ? }mod. ? ? W . g q 5 • ? ?tY w r-? m? d ° II a to ? i., ? I I I I - - - - - - - - - - - -- r m r - - ? N ? rJ ? W rl M ? o' r ?^ O ;. ,J y. dl i `? r 00 ? M r P ? G? I P Lt` '?Il ? ? (1? ! ? y J ° ( G rl ? ? H ? r, 1 n h _ Y L 5 Y + +? I T 4) I ' 1 a you, ? F A ? _ l ??' l r ) i I I ?j a ? I I I + I I ? ! l ? i I j I I . W4 ZIC '-N `? ?±i: rzaaa"?ss'? ? ., i Hs ?;??r y??; 4''.• rvr't??? ??? __ ._ r ? ?a. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AY f L ." y between the g Washington State Conservation Commission yLn and { Washington State Department of Transportation W11 This Memorandum of Understanding between the Washington State r Conservation Commission (WSCC) and the Washington State Department of d x Transportation (WSDOT) is executed because of a mutual concern to enhance cooperation in preserving agricultural and forest lands; to prevent and treat erosion problems adjacent to or associated with farmlands and state highways; and to maintain drainage ways and to reclaim abandoned roadways for agricultural purposes. Provisions f The WSCC acting independently or through their Conservation Districts, agrees to: s n d f 1 * (1) Consult with WSDOT District Maintenance Engineers regarding highway rights-of-way which exhibit serious erosion problems. r? ?p (2) Work with WSDOT Headquarters in developing techniques for - management of farmlands and roadsides for erosion control in coordination with WSDOT maintenance practices. L ". y k (3) Work with WSDOT District Location Engineers to assure that roadway'. s projects minimize agricultural land conversion. TAX (k) Work with WSDOT District Location Engineer to reclaim abandoned roadways for agricultural uses wherever feasible and practical. (5) Consult and work with WSDOT District Maintenance Engineers to 9r maintain adequate highway drainage so it does not adversely affect 4 agricultural lands. r (6) Consult and work with WSDOT District Maintenance Engineers to "V „ maintain adequate agricultural land drainage, of precipitated or irrigation water, so that it does not adversely affect highway drainage F facilities. 1 (7) Work with County Weed Control Boards or other County officials to la maintain or develop a noxious weed control program. (S) Furnish the WSDOT Project Development Engineer annually seven (7) ( S' copies of the WSCC Directory that contains maps showing boundaries of f } s Conservation Districts and current list of each district's board of ,i supervisors with addresses. s e ', t - 4 r r .. r 7 a The WSDOT agrees to: ,. (1) Furnish the WSCC a WSDOT directory and updates as required, r n containing the names and phone numbers of Headquarters and District rs 4 Staff and a map showing cacti district's boundaries.'' GC'7141 : V k ? ?/rr ,?.. i.. ?]4 ',•X-Rif ? ..,? t '..? ?? 4 'k w rt .. y ;xa a... r 1 h ? _ 1 Q) } ''t y, ? .+? ?I idiSiw -a r yi t t [ 4 f ":l A? J ? flJ?.r r A > ?r ±'t ` R .. F . C9 , ? ? ?r _ '?, .eh"r..?+"k•!? 1 '+' '? _. _- _ ___.._ _ ._ ? SPA- k`3' ?, v ?! a ri ult l i ti li dd i i d h ( ) R i ° ? g ura ew ex s ng po ress c ev c es an at a 2 spec fications t Q land preservation and reclamation and rights-of-way management, and , propose change's as may be necessary. The WSDOT Project Development Office will work with the WSCC to rectify any concerns s and develop guidance for the WSDOT Districts. A copy of such guidance will be provided to the WSCC. (3) Through the WSDOT Districts, contact local Conservation Districts during the design stage of projects to coordinate concerns and u, recommendations. ; ia{ m, a (4) Work with Conservation Districts through County Weed Control Boards a h;. or appropriate county officials to control noxious weeds. 4. (5) WSDOT Headquarters will request Department of Ecology to send draft Ji? environmental impact statements and assessments to Conservation Districts near the project area for review and comment. (6) WSDOT will review Conservation District's comments to environmental documents and make appropriate revisions considering acceptable ' ' economic tradeoffs in roadway alignment. Resolution of WSCC comments will normally be determined by the Project Development & -' Engineer. If a satisfactory solution cannot be mutually ogreGd upon, th C ti t Di i e onserva on s r ct may appeal to the Assistant Secretary, for Highways and, if necessary, to the Secretary of Transportation. Duration rl 3 i7l t ' It is mutually agreed that this Memorandum of Understanding becomes ?. effective at the time of the last signature and will continue in effect until: ' . , (1) Both parties agree to its termination; or .e (2) 45 days after either party notifies the other in writing of its intent to j? y; terminate the M.O.U. ry k This Memorandum of Understanding may be modified at any time and in any ra manner that is mutually acceptable to both parties. 1 6 / ,46 Was}jinn??+.on S a e Conservationshmgton State Department of Comrflssion' Transportation l ° Assistant Secretary for Highways t l Date Date r ? y 32/PD9 i '"'? a t c ti i . • GC714 x •??' ,A '_ ' C ( ti t a? ?r {A - ? N ? @pq?^ 4 \ +.S m 1 :'1,•S: .n _ 1-11'.w IV r 1 h w'R'7 1 w 1 1 k 5 NYIA' IB7MI 333 w , - ?r - - ? ?f Ip (jS?/ ?q, L 5 1 ?N1F 1 F t1?1? ? hF•- 1 ? , a? 71 t, Y F [[ 3 F Tim sms"i d i JY•t`o•3t' m LOCI, mmst7RfA xo?, U'fn m roT A4 ^ ?~ Aid TW MMM OF Jt{APf=fff, STATE orl aA.RIM:tYDIM $ oil end Uster am tqa of the hasio reaourooa upon sAliah the C Csrmw+tr dependa for Ito w ojfi .re and a dsta"oe, and Uroa oonservaticn of these redo is of eoeh"Me iegwxrtrnoe to t1m Oantinued prvepnrity or the COUMV sag the common good, the EAST.'Wd JZFL3;fL4MT SMT, GT.L''?Tat'IdTI(rl PT,571 TM, herein ter Zh d the DDIMOT has been dul oar d d " , y W ze as a gave ntu7 auwiviaiaa of the State of Waahington Par the ptapoao of ama w Pnl?lio Powers i ) In OQWWCtion with soil end aster oonaarar?tian, ' ABe tba suparvisicas Of t2m DT.STICT haws ar =W 1Ava UWW l t15q.t!' edttSaiatration corLRln Y s g Or aUmr assets contributed 15 ml aral, state, end local ?fi?iL? ? J .L a B ? ?v a?ae??.r?. a , ???p? ? ? ry? ? .? ? ` `?y?? ? (y RMmm M C?Nt??.l Va' I8 ?.t?'i.J ?/??, y?p„? W1- "feY to ma vle the - 4 I. also n subdivision of the ngtnn .. C (,"O'IaMSVOYtt Of the State of '6tachl ,.. r2 " and has or MEW Imes under its administration Oertaln powers Jj I?rdy, 19atr1a, serviam, facilitisa or Other a9asto I'-d b t . +ww 7 °? M y •? a7m6tt. Of its 11eelAII"6ee or by ooatribution from variom govermantal or priroste amrft& 3 y ^w+` ?. , WUInjr , the DMTAICT is preparf na n 7 o:?6'rp+»PA propoa Saae""tlcm O ti n a $ , loo ves and is actively engaged in praeeoutlnq such aDm'atione m within these objeativoe to the ltftit f it ? •" o s roaauroea, ?: , WHOW, the ObJGPU yes of the OM M aml the DmurT are in mmp ° A P2 m r*Ppsate similsr and to tho ooxun goad, WW aloee cnpperataon bsL+aean Umm ? boai? in exrtain m?daavors in Uuir resMaUvs ' ,. Uaa gW desirable from the standpoint of greater r + aoeoaplleRwwont end effieienc/ am anonmW, flow i1 M FT= M T, xmcrfvm, that the Can-:Y ou a?-;"r?ar ma the SlIS9Im J ry% ' Y,,l r L5m SOIL C Tf MATIM., rn-mrCT desire a wall.-defined and saftring basla for suds ocoperation and thorefam mutually a»tea• into this L4:i 1ttA'fD[Sd Of+ UfTA'd+71Xi. [ 4 A A" ?S T? t L ??k y LfAr . ? ? bM Sv ' i i' v 1? .:?f a J C ??Q ?!? h PLR? III. TIM COM"Y OF JlQ 1=014 JUM TIM 1SA.42JrUI J17,'1703011 SOIL (CO ITIFdIF7) AITU Y AGHRB LI s . t , A COUSIWATI01r DISTRICT T -That thia ORAMM OF U1 TA IDIITG shall be effective upon the data of the last affixed signature. d 9. That the t.G?2tO KMM shall remain in effect, unless otherwise teminatedp e t . ar. o y 3p and shall be automatically removed from year ?at?l June ? r The t7Ell?tAMM may be terminated by written notice given by . OLM either party to the other party at least thirty (30) days prior to the erfaott- tiOn =t t . xua e ive date Of , AVpmvods Ta MITIYY OF JVV_A t40i9 n 4 ? (signed) Lyall Aroy s,y Chairmnn? 13 of CM01seiomors t (SeW) 11/5/48 Pate l hereby oertify that according to the minutes of the meeting of the paoaisgionaro of Jafrerson County held_Ugkoia=k= 5 14L8 at Port Townsend n r Waahimgtoat; the.s=cuttoa of the tZworendum of Understanding by the Chaixmnn sae " ; thorised by a resolution duly adopted. au Helen J. Rpdp vet ^ (signed) ` Secretary 7e e Pate Hovembsr 5. 1948 v Lppy»ev-di SASTl4tU JRFPSit40N SOIL CtNS?tVATInR t)ISe^fiSOT + Bartel Kruse (signed) Chairmant !bard or q rw ,x 11/5/48 A` $ r Date p .y a + I hercby oartify that according to Ube minutes of tin mnetinR of the Supervisors : 1 TM 15. 1941 of the Eastern Jeffernon Soil Conservation r1striot held •T?*++a or nb 9Lloene %Taehington, the execution of the Manorandtmo itudorstandliV by the Chairman wan authorised by it resolutions duly adopted. p (signed) J. 0. Tiffarg f + secretary d ' r, ti n e 'yj 4q V ate ?` _ .. If -?^fr tG C f h M ?: 11l\\ N t- , - j U?0 •% 547„C1;'? 4 111 ' u i x d' 4 R t ` :?L a J r ? Z fr DEPARTMENT OF THE ARM ??ooa/Nrr SEATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINE,.,. a a', + ?aA` ??'• / 1519 ALASKAN WAY SOUTH 55 EATTLE, WASHINGTON 08134 DEC }9T? ,`.1`,I NPSEN-PL-BP p, AM- SUBJECT: Unfavorable section 205 Detailed Project Report on Big Quilcene River;(lQuileene, Washington R F. F: I V E". C1 ?? IEFF°hSGiJ CGdr'; t'i ?. Division Engineer, North Pacific V -A W... .y 1. Authority. This report is submitted under authority of Section 205 lia a of the 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended. Authority for preparation of a detailed project report is contained in NPDPL-FP letter to OCE dated 22 March 1971, subject: "Section 205 Reconnaissance Report, IIiS Quilcene ?' a River at Quilcene, Washington."9 ' St 2, i.ocation. Big Quilcene River joins Quilcene Bay, an arm of Dabob Bay "?. ? on Hood Canal, about 30 miles northwest of Seattle and 23 miles south of 0. Port Townsend, Washington, as shown on plate 1. The flood problem is along the downstream reach of the river in the unincorporated town of Quilcene, Jefferson County, Washington. 3. Flood PTO111em• Every two or three years floodwaters overtop the banks of the lower 3 miles of the Big Quilcene River. The floodwaters inundate a 170-acre residential area lying on both banks of the lower mile. The g: flood problem is aggravated by deposition of debris in the channel and by a bridge that has inadequate capacity. r 4, purnoae and scope of investiKat:ion. The study was authorized to determine the desirability of federal participation in a project to reduce flooding in Quilcene. Studies were limited primarily to brief fieldisal, survey and'aerial photography of the flood plain, flood damage app 1 reconnaissance study of 13 alternatives, brief hydrologic and hydraulic aw studies, coordination with local, state and interested Federal agencies and } report preparation. Full use was trade of information furnished by the state Departments of Fisheries and Caine. Detailed studies were not 4 9 completed because of the apparent luck of economic justification and objections from the fisheries agencies. d A 1: 5. Related Rtudics, pie flood problem at the mouth of the ISig Quilcene Rivcr Na briefly discussed in the Y'Gct Sound and Adjacent 11-26 to Waters 11-30. Comprehensive Water Resources Scud App ti a ' '' r a ?? }y+flj z r ??F F ur + :k ,'I r ?sJ? + TV, f , r P d r 1 { n 4 6. Description. a. Drainage basin. The Big Quilcene River drains about 69 square c miles of rough mountainous land on the east side of the Olympic Peninsula. From its source at an elevation of 7,700 feet MSL,. it flows eastward about ' m 18 miles to Quilcene Bay. The upper part of the watershed contains wooded terrain with exceedingly steep slopes. Development is limited to the more gentle slopes along the lower three miles of the stream. ' b. Stream. Big Quilcene River emerges from a steep-sided canyon about two miles upstream from Quilcene. About 44 medium priced homes are located on the alluvial fan of the river at the town. The stream has occupied several different channels in the flood plain. The present channel S. 101 highway bridge crosses has been stabilized by county forces The U ?i . . the channel about 2.5 miles above the mouth. Two county highway bridges . . cross at Quilcene. The upper (older) bridge restricts strenmflow during cj high stages and is being considered by local interests for abandonment. The other, a new concrete bridge with much greater streamflow capacity, is JR? i located about 1,000 feet down^.tream from the upper bridge. Debris jams upstream from the town are said to interfere with migrating fish and cause { some localized flooding. i c. Fishery. The Big Quilcene River is an important spawning and , rearing stream for chinook and coho salmon and steelhead, cutthroat and resident trout. It is also the major chum salmon producing stream in flood i ' ,•? Canal. Chum salmon occur in the river only during the winter spawning and incubation period. The fry migrate to saltwater immediately after y r? " hatching. Other species are found in the river throughout the year. 7. Existing flood control works, a. Local interests have constructed flood control works along both banks of the stream at Quilcene. The principle works are levees on each stream bank between the two bridges. The right bank levee is from 4-1/2 to 8 feet in height above the adjacent protected land, has steep sides, a narrow top width, some rock riprap of varying thickness and questionable value, and a top profile which varies greatly, compared to the stream surface profile. The left bank levee is of better quality. Its height is 3 to 4-1/2 feet above the adjacent protected land, has steep side slopes, a top width of about 10 feet, is armored with rock riprap of apparently uniform thickness, and a uniform top profile. Downstream of the lower bridge, low intermittent levees 2 to 3 feet high on either bank provide some flood protection. Minor works upstream from the old bridge include a small concrete wall which protects a residence building and a low, narrow earth levee which, together, keep low floods from overflowing the right bank, Floods on the order of 2 y 7F = e I ? a ?' ?,r NPSEN-PL-BP SUBJECT: Unfavorable Section 205 Detailed Project Report on Big Quilcene River, Quilcene, Washington a 5 or 6 year recurrence interval overtop the left bank upstn:-em from the old bridge, cross the roadway leading to the bridge and flood residential h e property downstream of the bridge. Somewhat higher floods overtop t minor works on the right bank and flood residential and farm land along the right bank. of b. The right bank levee between the two bridges contains flood flows, ha nel if id th e ## ? . e c n e primarily because major portions of the flows are outs k b , t ? an the flows were retained in the channel, it is doubtful that the right ear flood a 5- tha t f E '. . y n low grea er levee between the bridges would contain a The left bank levee could possibly contain a 50-year flow, if all the water were retained in the channel, although a detailed investigation might reveal t: that the steep slope of the riprapped bank reduces this estimated capability. ? - S. Economic environment. ' , a. Population. The population of Jefferson County is 10,661 (1970 . census); the unincorporated town of Quilcene, about 600; and the flood r plain about 150. f _ b. Resources. The principal resources consist of forests, fish, agricultural land and the rural. and scenic environment of the Olympic s A Peninsula, including the Olympic National Park. Ilia U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service owns and operates Quilcene National Fish hatchery located on the , Big Quilcene River at the mouth of Penny Creek, just upstream of the U.S. 101 highway. The Washington State Department of Fisheries operates a shellfish laboratory on Dabob Bay about 5 miles south of Quilcene. The principal fish industry at Quilcene is the production and processing of oysters and oyster seed. Agriculture is the primary means of support for ercent t 40 b . p ou about 20 percent of the population, and lumbering supports a Tourism and recreational activities are a growing source of revenue. c. Transportation. Quilcene is adequately served by primary and a secondary highways. Small boats frequent a marina located on Quilcene Bay nscheduled k ' e u s mouth. Seaplanes ma about 1.2 miles south of the river trips to tha bay. e 9. Climatology. Quilcene and vicinity has a mild maritime climate, typical of the Puget Sound region. Annual precipitation ranges from 51 inches at .;' Quilcene to over 75 inches in the higher elevations of the Big Quilcene River drainage basin. Over 80 percent of the annual precipitation fal.s during the period October through April. The mean annual temperature for ° p F to an Quilcene is 50° F. ,. ranging from an average smmnert6ne high of 78 ? i average wintertime low of 30° F. Extreme temperatures are rare and of short duration. Provailing winds are northerly during the summer months and M southerly during the remainder of the year. Tlna strongest are generally from the south and southeast. 3 rw v c f} Y ?f?kr a Y?,..,, F 4 ,"Fw?? x.y4 1" ? Kw Y? k? ?><C i.?.; 1 ? ?4 w? fah r w Ord r??,Yht Ma F '? t t {?C ti._ , t 11 i ( ? ,? y y n ,? ' ? r t rI % ?R t t NPSEN-PL-BP a I vP' SUBJECT: Unfavorable Section 205 Detailed Project Report on Big Quilcene .d River, Quilcene, Washington 10. Hydrology. High flows on Big Quilcene River have not been gaged. A gage near the river's mouth was in operation a few months in 1926 and " ` 1951. Flows exceeding 3,000 c.f.s, cause major damage. The frequency V", curve, figure 1, for Dig Quilcene River was based on data developed for the Dosewallips River near Brinnon, Washington. A maximum flow of 26 c.f.s. is.diverted about 9 miles upstream from the river's mouth to Port Townsend - for municipal and industrial water supply. 11. Floods. Most of the floods occur during rainstorms in the winter months. According to local residents, major floods occurred in January 1960, December y ' 1966 and January 1968. Floods of a lesser magnitude occur every two to three years. A discharge of 1,930 c.f.s. with a recurrence interval of 1.7 years is considered to be zero damage flow. 12. Extent and character of flooded area. There are public electricity and water supplies, but septic tanks are used for sewage disposal. The a np streets are paved and well maintained. Excellent schools are about a half- ?i mile from the flood plain. on the left bank, the 100-year flood plain a includes a residential area approximately 3/4 mile long and 1/6 mile wide and canprises about 76 acres. The area is characterized by old river channels, sloughs and swampy areas. The nature of the terrain and the flood problem , restrict the extent and type of'development. Fifteen dwellings and one small ,. evergreen packaging plant are in the left bank flood plain. The dwellings ? are in the $8,000 to $12,000 class. On the right bank, the 100-year flood plain includes a residential area about 3/4 mile long, 1/5 mile wide and comprises about 95 acres. Twenty-nine residences are in the right bank flood plain, most of which are in the $12,000 to $16,000 class. 13. Flood damages. a. General. Flows exceeding 3,000 c.f.s. cause major damage. Flood damages were estimated for discharges of 2,760 c.f.s. (1 Decemocr 1966 peak, a 3.3-year flood); 3,400 c.f.s. (5.9-year flood); and 6,000 c.f.s, (50-year flood). Lands, residential improvements, crops, livestock, poultry, improvements, equipment, transportation facilities, utilities, levees and Y channels, and miscellaneous improvements are subject to flood damage. t Following is a summary of estimated flood damages for the selected discharges: Estimated Flood Damages 3h (1972 prices and conditions) Discharge in e.f.s. / Damage Area 2.760 3.400 6,000 i Left bank $2,100 $19,530 $43,500 ai?x 9? Right bank 3,600 40,370 96,500 N 71 r Total $5,700 $59,900 $140,000 j' ..?., 4 ? h?y??y`"1 ?etYKw'?.4 ha.y " 7777 13 nr , NpPSEN-PL-BP i s SUBJECT: Unfavorable Section 205 Detailed Project Report on Big Quilcene River, Quilcene, Washington b. Flood damage categories. Damages from a 50-year flood are V summarized by category as follows: , Damages Y Item Amount Percent Crops $ 1,170 0.8 Land p 2,940 2.1 Buildings and other improvements 110,500 78.8 Care of evacuees 2,970 2.1 m Livestock 1,040 0.7 u Farm machinery 380 0.3 Autos and trucks 1,650 1.2 Fences 820 0 6 . Flood control works 2 880 2 1 , . Roads and streets 10,080 7.2 ,r Utilities 4,320 3.1 Flood fi h i s g t ng 1.450 1.0 Total $140,200 100.0 i c. Growth. The area under consideration is primarily residential . The average annual rates of growth and discounted average annual growth fa t b ' c or were ased on historical population trends in the unincorporated area of Jefferson County and future annual growth in per capita personal income as projected by the Office of Business Economics.. When combined, h t t ese two annual rates indicate growth in total personal income of 2.7 percent which is the basic indicator used to develop the average annual discounted growth factor. The 50-year average annual growth factor for the Quilcene area, discounted at 5-1/2 percent is 1.60. d. Average annual damages. Using the frequency curve and the above flood damage estimate, discharge-damage and damage-frequency curves were developed. As determined from these curves, the average annual flood damages are $11,760 without growth and $18,820 with growth and land enhancement. 14. Fisheries damages. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife personnel believe that some migrating salmon are lost by being stranded during receding floodwaters. State Departments of Fisheries and Caine personnel state Lint high velocities cause erosion and deposition of gravel resulting in the loss of spawning areas in the lower reaches of the river. Fisheries' interests have been unable to evaluate the losses which have occurred. 15. Desired improvements. Local interests advocated the raising, strengthening and extending of exisEing levees. 5 '? S' ? -' _ r? 77 ? f• ? F ? P SEN-PL-BP N " SUBJECT: Unfavorable Section 205 Detailed Project Report on Big Quilcene River, Quilcene, Washington 16. Proiect formulation. Thirteen alternatives described in the public M. x brochure, Appendix A, were considered as summarized below: s? a. Alternative Y. (Do Nothing). No action would be taken to reduce the flood damage. Existing trends in land use would probably continue, resultin g :- in future increases in flood damages. s z b. Alternative 2 (Flood Plain Managment). This alternative would 3 include such measures as zoning of flood plain land, flood insurance, evacu- ation of the flood plain, flood warning, floodproofing of existing structures, and preservation of undeveloped land along the stream for such uses as parks, o- golf courses and agriculture. c. Alternative 3 (Levees for residential area). Levees would tie into high ground upstream from the residential area and extend downstream past the last inhabited buildings. d. Alternative 4 (Levees to high tide line). The levees described in Alternative 3 would extend downstream to connect with exist'ng (temporary) g levees constructed by Coast Oyster Company. ,. i " The left e, Alternative 5 (Levees downstream from U.S. Highway 101). bank levee would be about 2,2 miles long and begin at the U.S. Highway 101 bridge. The right bank levee would be about 0,6 mile long and begin upstream t from the residential area Both levees would and at the same downstream locations as the Alternative 3 levees. ';- f. Alternative 6 (South bypass channel). A bypass channel would start just upstream from the residential area and extend southenst, about 3,100 feet along the toe of a bluff to Quilcene Bay. A rock diversion structure at the head of the bypass would be designed to start operating when main streamflows reach 3,500 c.f.s. Two roads, one paved, would be crossed. g. Alternative 7 (North bypass channel). A bypass channel would start just upstream from the residential area and extend northeast and east about 5,100 feet through the residential area to Quilcene Bay. A rock diversion structure at the head of the bypass would be designed to start operating when main streamflows reach 3,500 c.f.s. One paved road would be crossed. h. Alternative 8 (Channel improvement). Log jams and sediment deposits would be removed from the river channel between the river mouth and (lighway 101 bridge. 6 C " AA . ....es t 11PSEN-PL-BP SUBJECT: Unfavorable Section 205 Detailed Project Report on Big Quilcene '• .I. River, Quilcene, Washington i. Alternative 9 (Storage dam). A storage dam would be constructed on the Big Quilcene River 4 to 5 miles upstream from Quilcene. The dam P would be more than 200 feet high and would impound about 4,500 acre-feet w: A M of water. J. Alternative 10 (Relocation, Flood Plain Management and Zoning). Structures susceptible to flood damage would be moved out of the flood plain. olf courses arks ited to ld be li x , , g p m Future development in the flood plain wou , agricultural areas, etc., which would not be seriously damaged by frequent i o p ng flooding. This could be done by purchasing land holdings and allow k residents to find new homes or by developing a new residential area on flood-free land. Alternative 11 (Setback levees). The Alternative 3 levees would be k . set back from the river to minimize harmful effects on fish and wildlife. Existing levees would be removed. Thirteen houses, one trailer, and a brush- packing plant would be displaced. % Alternative 12 (Setback levee on left bank and close levee on right 1 . bank). This alternative would provide for a levee close to the river on the right bank and a setback levee on the left bank. Existing left bank levee l - ant packing p would be removed. Three homes, one mobile home and a brush would be displaced. ' 11 and 12 - 3 5 , , Alternative 13 (Right bank levee - Alternatives m . extended to high tide line). The right bank levee for each of the indicated alternatives would join the existing Coast Oyster Company temporary levees. Cost Analysis. Estimates of first cost, interest and amortization, 17 v . annual maintenance and operation and total annual costs (1972 price levels A 5-1/2 and conditions) are summarized in Table 1 for each alternative. percent interest rate and a 50-year life were used for the computations. 18. Benefit/case analysis. Estimates of annual benefits, annual costs and t ratios are summarized in Table 2. Flood control benefits benefit/cas , include growth and land enhancement. Fisheries benefits were estimated with the assistance of the State Departments of Fisheries and Game. None of the structural alternatives are economically justified. 19. Coordination. Studies were coordinated with the Port of Port Townsend k , (study sponsor) and other local interests. Coordination with Federal and ?,.••b,,; , state agencies is staamarized as follows: a. Nntionnl Marine "inherics Service, Portland, Oraron. 3arvico representatives particip.tcd in nmetings, field trips and workshops as M 7 1:, r7l? ?µ Fyn n sB kff k r?? ia,,, 1Y 4 SfWSS1! x*w x w W ¦ y wwr, . Ohl !` ? . - , 1 { ? ? ! f i ? ? ? fJ? ? Mfr ? 1 F .Y } ?} t? n I ? , 4S7uv t'R i?` Lms 'ftahc h ? ?? .:=?a..?'a.+?m.?R1n?.'?*:' S.?!'?GP'l?f kv'xA?Yf1? ? R `"F#?' ? r f Y NPSEN^PL-RP ? SUBJECT: unfae_-dble Section 205 Detailed Project h..,.wrt on Big Quilcene s nt,: River, Quilcene, Washington . , ? _ reflected in the inclosed public brochure. 'By letter dated 15 May 1972, exhibit 1, the Service advised that the levee plan, Alternative 3, would .., result in severe losses to anadromous fish and adversely affect fish ?s production at the Big Quilcene Hatchery. The letter also states that a flood bypass channel would benefit anadromous fish production, particularly chum salmon which spawn almost entirely in the lower river, but could cause t some damage to oyster production. ' b. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, Portla.id, Oregon. Bureau representatives participated in meetings, field trips and workshops as , reflected in the inclosed public brochure. c. Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, Seattle, Washington. The Bureau provided comments for the public brochure. - d. Washington Department of Fisheries. Department representatives r,. ' participated in meetings, field trips and workshops as reflected in the inclosed public brochure. By letter dated 18 May 1972, exhibit 2, the Department advised that confinement of high streamflows (by levees) would cause severe damage to the excellent spawning gravel within the project area. ' The Big Quilcene is the major Chum salmon would be most severely affected.; chum salmon stream tributary to Hood Canal, producing in 1968 a catch value to fishermen estimated at $101,850. The South Bypass channel could be very beneficial to chum salmon by reducing streambed scouring. Because of r declines in chum salmon production at other western Washington streams in recent years, the Big Quilcene is becoming more valuable and the protection of its chum salmon runs is imperative. Consequently, the Department urged t that a study of the bypass channel be undertaken. 101 e. Washington Department of Came. Department representatives participated in meetings, field trips and workshops as reflected in the inclosed public brochure. _ f. Washington Department of Ecology. Department representatives participated in meetings and workshops, as summarized in tho-inclosed public brochure. g. Washington Department of Natural Resources. The Department provided comments for the public brochure. 20. Discussion. a. Ovorbank flooding occurs every two or three years along the Big Quilccoo River in and near Quilcene, Washington, damaging crops, land, buildings and their contents, fences, flood control works, roads, streets and utilities. Average annual flood damages are estimated at $18,820, 10 'YLiL " r ?.tJ.rv y ti r .RK$'R Y`F 4 , A ?r i rye, • r 1 1?Y ? v r ? ? w { l i?f % i ? i bn F °d } - x 7 P i L i w 33 e NPSEN-PL-BP 1t SUBJECT. Unfav-,able Section 205 Detailed Project Rl-. rt on Big Quilcene River. Quilcene, Washington including growth and land enhancement. Extreme high water would inundate ~? P 76 acres on the left bank and 95 acres on the right bank, most of which yiry is residential and undeveloped property. 'Local interests have constructed ?." levees along the stream, which, generally, are low and provide minimal q protection, partly because of inadequate construction and partly because {., overland flow upstream from the levees floods the residential areas behind F7 s the levees. ff P " b. In January 1967, at the request of Representative Lloyd bleeds, a 89 limited investigation was made of the flood problem on the lower Big Quilcene River. At that time, economic justification for flood protection was doubtful, K and the study was discontinued. After the flood of 1968, the Port of Port 4 Townsend requested additional investigation of the flood problem. A recon- o- naissance report was approved and authority received to continue with detailed investigations under Section 205. In order that the study would be respon- sive to the desires and needs of local interests, a workshop was held in z r j Quilcene on 23 September 1971. Three alternatives were presented in a first ?. draft public brochure for use at the workshop. Comments and suggested alternatives were included in a second draft brochure, mailed on 26 November {k ?,3 ' 1^•72 to interested agencies and persons. The inclosed third draft brochure was i=sued to cover comments and suggestions received from those who reviewed sP b the second draft, as well as changes in alternative descriptions and data developed from reconnaissance studies. r c. To find a solution to the flood problem, 10 structural, and 3 non- uyh M ` structural alternatives were considered. None of the structural alternatives were found to be economically justified or to have overriding environmental or social benefits which would warrant Federal participation in their con- a struction. However, flood plain management by local interests would help reduce future flood damages through floodproofing existing structures, flood fighting and preventing development of new uncompatible flood plain uses. ^m d. The most feasible structural flood control measure, levees adjacent to either bank of the stream along the residential area of Quilcene, would cause severe fishery damages which have been partially evaluated. A flood ?k bypass channel would resolve the flood problem and provide significant fishery benefits. However, the annual costs would be excessive compared to the benefits received. Also, because a considerable amount of i residential property, including several relocations, s would be required for rights-of-way, there would be resulting undesirable bypass channel. a e. There is no economically feasible structural alternative which would, reduce flood damages.in the Big Quilcene River flood plain. Nor is relocation roy of flood plain structures feasible. Consequently, the only feasible alter- +1 N4 ^r.d:?`. native for reducing future flood damage along the stream would be regulation 11 5 ; f -Yb61 ?Sy11WyTPl^"" - ..? _ LIKE i i '• ry ' k ???( V ,, ti, _ 1 77 W r NPSEN-PL-BP a SUBJECT: Unfavorable Section 205 Detailed Project Report on Big Quilcene _ _ - River, Quilcene, Washington of flood plain lands. Such regulation could, prevent a further build up of a ., non-compatible structures within the flood plain; guide the gradual replace- ment of existing non-compatible structures, as they become obsolescent or r damaged beyond repair by fire, flood or other causes, with compatible structures or uses; and prevent further encroachment on the floodway channel. i I With the adoption and enforcement of suitable regulations, including zoning flood lain ert would lai e s of existin ro 100- fl d f h ! p g p p y oo n, own r year p o t e become eligible to purchase Federally subsidized flood insurance which would R indemnify them for damages to structures and contents due to flooding. Also, R floodproofing of existing structures, flood fighting and preparatory measures such as "Operation Foresight" would assist in preventing flood damage. r f. Flood plain regulations should be.implemented by local. interests to ' reduce future damages and alert present and future property owners to the u location and hazards inherent in the use of flood plain land. In this con- nection, available data has been assembled in a special flood hazard infor- r mation appendix which may be used by local interests in identifying flood hazard areas, and in studying and planning land use to minimize future flood ,r damages. "C x g. A final public workshop was held on 15 November 1972 at Quilcene to ^ advise local interests of the results of the investigations and the Corps .. proposal for recommending Alternative 2, Flood Plain Management, as a local responsibility. The inclosed public brochure had been mailed on 19 October 1972 to all known interested parties to provide ample opportunity for study ° of the proposal prior to the workshop. Attendance was about 45, including representatives of the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife; U.S. Forest Service; Washington Departments of Ecology, Fisheries and Natural Resources; Port of Port Townsend and Jefferson County. The following topics were discussed: Reasons for rejecting Federal assistance on structural flood ` 4 control measures; the need for flood plain management, including zoning, in order to reduce future flood damages and qualify existing flood plain residents for Federally subsidized flood insurance; and assistance which could be expected from the Corps in providing flood plain information. Copies of the following publications were furnished to persons who desired them: "The National Flood Insurance Program" prepared by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (IIUD-283-1-2 dated May 1972, including errata sheet GPO 933-503); ?{ "Introduction to Flood Proofing" dated April 1967, prepared by the Center financed a as a art of a stud it f C: i i a k { fZ y}a go, p y c vers y o i for Urban Studies, Un jointly by the Corps and Tennessee Valley Authority and distributed by the a Corps publication Flood Damages" idelines for Reducin a d "G C a1 ???( , g orps; u n dated May 1967. Questions were solicited from the floor and answers were y ` ? provided either by representatives of the Corps or other agencies. $ t ?a? f lc 12, )t W ?4 ?J .1n r ?'' ?;"e:?•1•J?' ` qtr H"$' 7 1nTsz?;zx7.+ WipMA•i ?J . > tr y ? : r.q i? +rirllr ? r;i k i ..w3 ,? -, 07? t?y.,?• 7 ? , ? t 0 y J?i ` 1I ? 1 y 4 1 ? I Y i p. N NPSEN-PL-BP SUBJECT: Unfavorable Section 205 Detailed Project Report on Big Quilcene River, Quilcene, Washington - -a 21. Conclusions. Based on the foregoing analysis, structural measures to alleviate the flood problem are unjustified economically, and the only feasible flood damage reduction alternative appears to be flood plain regulation combined with flood fighting and whatever preflood preparations are found to be appropriate as flood seasons approach. q, 22. Recommendations. In view of the foregoing considerations, the recommended solution to the Big Quilcene River flood problem is flood plain regulation by E,x.. local interests. 13 !' a r ? iP t f o } T t. r ?? . 1 ? t? t t h j?}?J} . ?' j t t 1 C y #d P. J ? tf,?ift? S ' ?.?'F rl ,f g k c' U.S. DEPARTMENT OMMERCE & AOL National oceanic a ospheric Administration y National Marino Fisheries nice - ?, LdJJrt9 t - v { Columbia Fisheries Program Office - „5 Gil N.E. Oregon Street P.O. Box 4332, Portland, Oregon 97208 q g„ ?Pmw FIAT 4 ._,?S _ a ° May 15, 1972, 4 ? District Engineer, Seattle District Corps of Stsgineers 1519 Alaskan Flay South Seattle, F7ashington 98134 N - Dear Sir: 9 At your May 5 meeting in Olympia with F>deral and State biologists I ver, on the flood control study of the Big.Qalcene ffi.a c°PY Of Draft No. 3 (dated March 1972) concerning alternatives was dis- t. tributed to the group. ` We were informed that this document was to be revised before the f public meeting. Because of this, a detailed review of each al- ternative will not be made. J, It was emphasized by your representative that Alternative No. 3 ; is the most economically feasible plan, and for this reason, would w{t{S be presented to the public. This alternative appears to be the same as Alternative NO. 3pwuhriposition has nab changed. Thiseplan, y which a " December 22, 1971- calls for levee constructiio resultin aringrhabitatnand wouldo to and n,rewoul anadromous fish spawning deterioration of fish runs. We also believe that it would adversely 4 i affect fish production of the Big QAlcene Hatchery as well as angling. T 6' Your representative ass channclefornflood flowil Wetb 1leveethis 6 ?y " which calls for a byp proposal, in addition to providing flood control protection, w ould 4 River. also benefit anadromous fish production in the Big QAlcene g r ,;r It would be of particular benefit to chum salmon which spawn almost 3 flOw entirely in the lower river, the area most affected by floc ch vsss• The Big (Icon, with a spawning population of about 7oOOO sA i a of Paget Soue?atate. i is one of the better chum salmon streams in this section r.? r s These fish are valuable to the commercial fishery of Pug t.. J i Appreciable numbers of eoho and chinook salmon also utilize the river `y y and all thesc•fish contribute to the sport and commercial fisheries. a 5 t F r ty J p i I t• { 1 Y _ 131 !:il i v r _ rrtv:.. { s r 1 1 I 1 '???Y ? r {'?t rI ,r al Y? 11 'titi i s .p IS ? r;-. f r? im ? A} Ste , y?P tl 1 > z »a i 2. Costs for the channel associated with fisheries could be borne by the Federal government because these fish rovid p e a sport and com- mercial fishery along the entire Ehelfic Coast. u? S+ In the event Alternative no. 6 is followed, we further recommend s a detailed study of the bypass concept be made part of the project cost d dom.:. " , an if found favorable, similar installations be considered for other chum-producing streams along our co t as . We recognize that a bypass channel could cause considerable damage ' to oyster production near the mouth of the Big Qti.lcene River . However, we feel that this may be minimized by extending dikes into the estuary. A detailed study of such a plan would be nee- canary. Preliminary fishery benefits and losses associated with Alternatives No. 3 and 6 are presently being prepared by Washin ton St t g a e Apart- ment of Fisheries and Game and will be available to you soon. It is our view that Alternative No. 3 is unacceptable and that " twi Alternative No. 6 is the most desirable from a comprehensive stand- point. " Sincerely, Fred Cleaver Program Director cc: Washington Department of Fisheries Washington Apartment of Came RBS, BSFW, Portland, Oregon Regional Office, NMCSI Seattle Y l t?tip 1 4 i ? s , 4 t USA, ? }" /j f 1 l ,{D 5 ?S 1 t.l r °aY '.'J i EVANS ROOM IIS, GENERAL Alil. NlIGTRATION OUILUING • PHONE •!33.0000 THOR C. TOLLCFS'• ?yy3,,, NOR OLYII i•IA. WASHINGION 00004 DIRECTOR 1.• P.( Hay 18, 1972 12?; p@,: District Engineer U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1519 Alaskan Vay South Seattle, Washington 98134 Attention Hr. Faul Ostroth Dear Sir: The meeting on May 5, 1072 with your representatives and state and federal fisheries biologists indicas,ill that Alternative 3 of the Big Quilcone River Flood prevention Study is tl- only economically feasible solution for the con- trolling of flood waters. Therefore, this is the only alternative receiving immediate consideration for future study. This Department is on record as opposing Alternative 3, and wn wish to take this opportunity to comment fur- that on this proposal. Confinement of the Dig Ihlllcene River to a narrow channel during periods of high stream flow will re:IUlt in severe damage to the excellent quality of salmon spawning gravel witltiq the area of the project. Erosion and scouring from increased current velocltles would destroy ergs and developing fry in the gravel and permanently lower the quality of this stream section for salmon re- production. Tile major impact of thin project would he upon chum salmon, with less effect on other,specion of salmon. The Dig Quilcene River In one of the major chum salmon streams in flood Canal, and its contribution to fisheries of the State of Washington is sizable. Two distinct stocks are prodiwed in thin watershed. An early run enters and spawns during 'Into September ;%nd early October, and a smaller late run enters in late November and Deccribo v. During 1968, one instantaneous count was made of 31234 fish, and tite total ;hum salmon escapemant to the Hilt Quilcene River was estimated to be 7,000 f1111nrsicra. Approximately SO%' of this population spawned within the area of 01r Alternative 3 proposal or adjacent areas that would be affected. Therofor,i, this project would have a bearing on potential survival of prorany of 3,500 :.pnwning chum salmon during an escapement year similar to 1968. The catch-to-escapement ratio for flood Canal chum salmon, calculated from a tagging study in 1963, in It I. The value of this portion of the gig Quil- cano River run, at thin pro.lt..t.ton level and using 1969 average pricos, is $10,850 annually to the fishvlmen. 11hulosala procesacd value and retail value are $15,785 and $22,050, resp.•aLlvely. T"c I Z its t; al , ErL;I? } Z . •?*a ,e iVt17T. Y'. Rwa ?9ng:CAAtra arrr: ry_R ?..1 ?, . ?,*n c^...TW9Y^' + wz.xrs•`- , rr`^`. •v'* IM,•wr>w w +, y 44 ?? ?' f e ? J 7 ?s ?.. IT,+F>s+atwy', lr - ; F L "WO District Lngince t itay'18, 1972 ?t y Page 2 nti : Rl a Chum returns during the past three years have been considerably below this level, reflecting the poor production throughout Puget Sound. During d! LIq i such years, the potential impact would be even more serious, since fewer 3 fish migrate upstream past the project area and a much larger proportion ' of the total escapement would spawn within the confined stream section. 4 The 1968 level of chum escapement and production is still considerably f below the ultimate potential for this stream section. Riffle and gravel t 4 • areas are available that could accommodate a maximum of 9,000 spawners under a ; ideal conditions.. Means to achieve this potential would include flow con- trol, particularly during periods of flooding, as well as physical improve- h. e ment of the stream channel and gravel quality for purposes of spawning and embryonic development. M 1 Alternative 6, the flood-water bypass channel, could be very beneficial and would contribute to achieving this potential. Such a means of control- ling damaging floods would lessen scouring action of the stream bed, or per- haps even eliminate it, and assure greater survival of eggs and fry. Improve- mante to spanning gravel could be made with the confidence that work. would rct be destroyed by subsequent flooding. A numerical projection of the benefit / to chum runs is difficult to make. Natural fluctuations in abundance occur over large geographical areas caused by such factors as variable marine sur- vival rate. Control_of flooding over the spnuninq area would, however, in- . w +aore that fresh-water survival would be significantly hir)ier and that numbers a of downstream migrant fry would be more numerous. In Big Qualicum River, n British Columbia, total flow control has resulted in dranatic increases in ++k ' chum salmon production. A major feature of this project is a flood-water sy bypass channel to control flows from a tributary stream. The level of chum salmon production in Washington waters has declined ' severely over the past two decades, and a portion of this decline can be related to deterioration of spawning areas. The Big nui.lcene stocks can, i. therefore, be considered even more valuable than in years past. For this yh k}. S, reason, their protection becomes imperative, and any project that would in- ii ' crease production may be assigned a sizable economic benefit. Wo, therefore, urge that a more detailed study of the Alternative 6 bypass channel be under- 1, r taken. Ile appreciate this opportunity to comment on the Big Quilcone River Flood a r& r Prevention Study. , •?g?. ,°,, ;? ; Sincerely, Thor C. Tollefson Director cc: BSFW - Portland 11MFS - Portland Department of Came ? . S rt k ? i ", 1?a k?! W p ? T F fr i ? 1 1yVa ? 1•?1 v t. a .r ,h . +A _ YC'? i-A'YFSi11t .{ ^tYT4YsC;V'y-?y '- ? ?'?r4St$ 'VC+' yry iil.vn"?-v,u6l I? ; •::. _• x;11 ? -== - ?a ? - ? ?? --• _= 1 { ` - -- ? - - - -1 4 ., 34 1 7-. ? 77 7 . >? t I I ' ? i ( _ _? J - 77 - . 1 1 i • I . • I :. , I 177, r :.: 5 9 .. i.Y i. 1 - ;..x ! , j T '77 77 ? cr r .,rvc g I HI "h 1 • ?? o?t L, I j SEATTLE ° ?-- ow a... r. .1 N tx> . •?y W' Ta r.n rwl ? rr. w. . ? A f' ? G Wa1allll.nw?wn wn.wp ? i 2 ti ui V aarr•. 1n... . O I 45/o. QUILcENE RIVER QU?LGE&C V1145H • ?= Tarbw oN a5CGTlOI? 205 FLOOD CONr,' OI- STUD}' ?- `b? T? BAS/l? MAP ? Tbcet' / oT 5 .5cgle:Aa54 ,OW17 Arovff ?isrric7; a5?,kle,wo.5h. MAP- _ Nov. 7Z c.' wrroe.?o•??wrr..r....•'www...?ar++rv+?+'.Rew?s.?n......?n..w.w.afs...?..w.•..r........... ?...w,? ..,w? ??? i }{{1 r r r;? '-4 ? ?S?r'•',5?.0.?C. ?iS?'Flk Tt$?eNdrit"w ? hu'il?. ? I 4 y ], n. { Ir r F Y T`4. V . 1, L R ?SAN JUAN b`r ISLANDS. :tar tieSf?t "b f % sra?lr??Ce \' •TQN'NSftil .a 1 `!! I f ?a j e °e ,t • - '? ?•? L? Lam. ?.'. 1 i ' !.'s r 1' r ?' ? .?•; \ ? dEi/ERSON COI.YTY A k QUILCEN 1 • ?. •? f 1 yt .tRERSON cctNT-Y , =y ^' ?y • !, f, o,: 1-,_,r , ` MASON COUNTY si ) )t '1 '4 ` 1111 '? ?._•_. - BREME a •?? .y '? 1 r 1 1 I 1: I ? CCWNTY. moovpoFff c ! •'t en- 8.1 1 TELL ^;? ? a' I ! l .. .._•. ..__. roc ScaJe /"-9960'..._ .:j' ; ._ ?,\ _.._.._.__..•._._. w?W ?; 1 • ?',v? _!v '. I ' ??. ,.;` ? tit ? ,G '?"l?w \ ?,', k_ .?-.. ?.•+ ++.tsr•!'mr+.rn?*!°.•w-..•1?•....,..-.-r.. ••+r.. M?^•v ar' ??{ %?` lt.f ' c ?. / h t H f l : mw*7 ' 3';X 1:,61a`}t 6.'i•° r?..?• "'f'd.$' 7 71a4,p..*?i .i.A U{ r ti r ?* 1 1". 0 1 ?1 A ?;.i`. ?4`` ?+ \, r;' ?.II 11111 5 *• s. .,, . .I?a?+.,,.•??' .?>, l ??'iJ ? a -?1.. iv'•v:`c'ar•? I\ t? 1 I•.-. rt iI1 ?Y S /,+1 n,.l 1 1 ! 1'+? `.? •a•h-Vii;-?^ t F/S/i // y .... _??.. _ _ ... i? .. c4rrr _ S• r r r. , frig" wal "U" i -, FIT y R il tP• p c..ry 1 ?t f fl ^???• n.•w,r .•••w•w .. •' ,• ? .. .-.. ?t ._... _. ... .`_...)•_ y a• Na F ?\ F + . fit 1? J ?If-l-•?j -YV.?•?2i1t1?1? ?•r?{11..fit?F?1 - ? 77 7 mo 71 1 _ ( 1„ ? , '' F i k` . 1 h.`. - 7 f9.W p S d f+: 1 >.i : ? '? ?,?^? +? ?. r- 3a' :;. ' ? n ? r_ Moils x:.ti?`•??`'? ">??r??fa?'v^ ? ? _ ;? \ ` J I •I f) l l? t \ 1•? ?.: ?„ y '((1,? '.'?. ' 1 S i` i ' ? 7 ) I I• AM ref ????„r?, ?'?,•,- >\?,?';?-r ?:.'- _ ! 1 ? ' , / f• \'IV.'Ca?w b. 4/{{rJr ••?,?ry ? ?'?' Ssca ?",/ ?^-?'o•? ?' 11/ ? `? ?) `? } •?. ?'•\` ?/ ? .' /? ?,? Yl (??I r ? )i;G1!!d rYrok?,? J 1 i..., ' ;` . - J ?r t•'1 ^rc 1 ,J tt? 16 71n u1 ???? 1 ?! / /??(I';"V. ;?1?1? ` ?•?': +'•i?%+,...1 ??'' . 1 J Cl ' , ?? ?? ?J , V, 11t1 ;','?r Y.?r•,°'i%?..: .i J^-`??-_ ?j ???,?? Jre.Ya 1?L.??y J'\ \ '"? ?'}. (P\, VNI ? - r"_ '•`fyrt?eltri ?'. ?.'.x ,; .Lir?\t'/? ':li`\?./,Jf?" J L ,,, A\Ar? i l1-u+'?.t(14t"':n ' /` :-. ?' ; ? J _• . `.%' °? 1. - '-' ??-''' '? ^d?k. ika\/ (\ I ?• '(! C.?: \.l; f. •7' leril'n i t'.?r-?' '?,1`t1 alt ?? `???' ? ? \• l??>; f?--?,r, . , , ' ? J f-?1?,.• ? , conitencn/ i -?° ?'}J?? J'?J,r?r••/',, ??'..'!r1'u:'"? r// l?, \\ 1 ?it `,,?'.\\f .II ?1 ??,'•' ? rY'"" ?ennl ¢u 0. wGap 'r .?• ? j,I, v.,Y.•..:. rl rl?rtyf If:?y?/?"i-?.r-'?.,?.. 1'. ?,. ^'?v _ Y.. ?i ^w /Jlty f'vN}1 y.' \-?1 i _'f. - /•w •/,//: t .'?.'r ',,.?•-r+,+.. ?n 1 tF. ?rl r , S ? i ? [L'di ` ???,"?-` :; ? r?.?h' ?sS:?+w r ,: '??C7 •t7"Y>Rc.,:i. .- ..? ?? I ?? ? ,1 1 I L y-? Rl. L • f , ` ¢?y?La K ¢ UNFAVORABLE SECTION 205 r DETAILED PROJECT REPORT F r BIG QUILCENE RIVER, QUILCENE, WASHINGTON 3 APPENDIX A I{s PUBLIC BROCHURE .4 October 1972 Prepared By U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT a SEATTLE, WASHINGTON s, ` L L lbk F" 1 o i r'k' ( ;y c t ?? 4 q ZNC? v y ? Eal UBLIC BR®CHT E ALTERNATIVES AND THEIR PROS AND CONS FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION STUDY L L BIG QUILCENE RIVER, QUILCENE, WASHINGTON .er! AUTHORITY FOR STUDY: At the request of the Port of Port Townsend, the 1Seattle District initiated this study under authority of Section 205 of the 1948 - Flood Control Act, as amended. 2$( LLJ PURPOSE OF BROCHURE: This brochure portrays concisely all alternative solu- date to the flood problem at Quilcene, and the merits and d t t e o L..B tions presen disadvantages of each. M ? ?.- . a"•' METHOD (FISHBOWL PLANNING): This brochure is distributed to interested s parties on request. T eir comments are solicited and incorporated in successive 4 drafts of the brochure.* The alternatives described were suggested by local interests through public meetings, workshops, correspondence, and personal contacts. Interested persons are invited to propose additional alternatives, defending them with advantages (PROS) and describing disadvantages (CONS) of other competing alternatives. The brochure is revised continually until all meetings and studies have been com- pleted. Changes are made as new comments are received from individuals, agencies, and associations, and as studies reveal new facts about alternatives. Individuals, groups, and local, State, and Federal agencies are urged to participate now, when their efforts will be most effective in guiding the planning. The brochure is not intended as a device for obtaining votes for or against alternatives. Selection of alternatives for final study will be based on consideration of all social, economic, and environmental advantages and disadvantages of each 'alternative. We would appreciate your examination of alternatives described and invite comments (PRO and CON) or modifications; suggested additional alternatives; and your appraisal of the impacts - environmental, social, or otherwise - of any one or all of the alter- natives. ?a PAUL OSTROTH Study Manager (Tel. 442-5003) SEATTLE DISTRICT, U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 1519 ALASKAN WAY SOUTH, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98134 *Changes in this draft are indicated Draft 131 October 1972 by on asterisk. r- ?? Y J. ?4 Y R ? f[, 9 ?? iit ! ? ? ' l??j ?•• Fumf? CY??},y.:.. u, t 1 ? 1 ? y ?„•i row?? r py' i;', t???}}t.,y?r '!? -•? + I •? W r l ?s sa?+a ? ? T ' ? Mkt 1 ? rr 1 .?` l l^ f4? Y I ? !I ? k Y s Fq INDEX Page Rationale for Tentative Selection of Flood Damage Control Plan Flood History Study History Recent Study Action Future Study Action ?? The Future - Flood Plain Management and. Insurance ?? ALTERNATIVES 1 - Do Nothing 2 - Flood Plain Monagemerit 3 - Levees for Residential Area 4 - Levees to High-Tide Line 5 - Levees Downstream from U.S. Highway 101 6 - South Bypass Channel 7 - North Bypass Channel 8 Channel Improvement 9 - Storage Dam 10 - Relocation of Residents, Flood Plain Management, and Zoning 11 - Setback Levees 12 - Setback Levee on Left Bank and Close Levee on Right Bank 13 - Right Bank Levee (Alternatives 3, 5, 11, and 12) Extended to High-Tide Line Alternative Comparison Agencies and Individuals Contributing to Brochure 1 1 2 3 3 3 6 8 12 16 20 24 26 28 30 34 36 38 40 42 43 t ?. r, t L^? ?m 'ter m y ? a ' `aati em `:i r { .:.S2' A& *RATIONALE FOR TENTATIVE SELECTION OF FLOOD DAMAGE CONTROL PLAN k 4 a To obtain Federal participation in any alternative, the monetary benefits to -' g fit! Y be derived must exceed the costs, unless there ore intangible environmental and other benefits of such commanding importance as to override the lack of economic feasibility. On the basis of completed studies, Alternative 42 - ?' a FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT - would be the only economically feasible r, means of reducing flood damage in the flood plain. Therefore, flood plain r management will be alternative recommended in our report. As discussed ' ., below, none of the structural alternatives was found to be economically feasible. Also, most of these alternatives would have significant adverse environmental impacts. t Reasons for Rejecting Other Alternatives. a. Alternative 11 - DO NOTHING. Continued extensive and growing -flood damages are the cost of doing nothing. These damages' represent an a economic loss to the community and to the United States, and should be curtailed. b. The following alternatives were found to be economically infeasible (costs exceed benefits) and to have severe adverse effects on fishery resources: Alternative 13 - LEVEES FOR RESIDENTIAL AREA. Alternative 14 - LEVEES TO HIGH-TIDE LINE h ^' ` • Alternative 15 - LEVEES DOWNSTREAM FROM U.S.' HIGHWAY 101 Alternative 18 - CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT c. Alternative 16 - SOUTH BYPASS CHANNEL - is eliminated because the cost would exceed the benefits, and becouse'of damage to oyster beds ?? .., at the channel mouth which would result. d. Alternative 17 - NORTH BYPASS CHANNEL - is eliminated because the cost would exceed the benefits. 0. Alternative 19 - STORAGE DAM - is eliminated because the cost is n very high compared to the benefits. 1 f. Alternative 110 - RELOCATION, FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT, AND ZONING - and Alternative 111 - SETBACK LEVEES '- are eliminated because the costs are*veey high compared to the benefits. Moreover, there S s would be a severe social impact resulting from the necessityof ;relocating fl '' residents, m.I r r,t S? I ). •? ?i'^ "! . ? ??? - Al it r , ? . aGr Y it r t '. r , •''' LEVEE ON RIGHT BANK - is eliminated because the cost would exceed the benefits. Several property owners adjacent to the river have, moreover, ex- pressed an objection to relocating. 4 h. Alternative 013 - RIGHT BANK LEVEE (Alternatives #3, 15, 011, 4 and #12) EXTENDED TO HIGH-TIDE LINE - could be used only in con- ld b ll d i e econom ca y wou junction with one of the other levee alternatives, an infeasible. FLOOD HISTORY: fn?f The Big Quilcene River drains about 69 square miles of rough mountainous ({r land on the east side of the Olympic Peninsula. From its source in the ' 7,700-foot-high Olympic Mountains, the river flows eastward about 18 { + miles to Quilcene Bay. The town of Quilcene, located near the river's e -' mouth, has been subjected to frequent flooding. The floods have become increasingly severe during the last few years, possibly due to deterioration } of the channel capacity as a result of deposition of materials washed down- J stream from the mountains. Reports by local interests indicate that major .- floods hove occurred in Quilcene in January 1960, December 1966, and January 1968, while floods of lesser magnitude occur every two or three years. The major portion of the flood plain, which is located near the y river's mouth, occupies about 170 acres. Levees along the river protect flood e More than t the l i ' arg r s. ns against small flows, but do not protect aga 40 houses are exposed to potential flooding. STUDY HISTORY In January 1967, at the request of Representative Lloyd Meeds, a limited' ' investigation was made of the flood problem on Ike lower reach of the 4 z Big Quilcene River. At that time, economic justification for a flood p protection project was doubtful, and the study was discontinued. After the flood of 1968, the Port of Port Townsend, at the request of several property F owners in the flood plain, sponsored a study of the Big Quilcene River flood problem and requested additional investigations. A reconnaissance report, based on the findings of the investigation, was prepared, and approval 7ll was received from the Chief of Engineers to continue with detailed investi- gations, under authority contained in Section 205;of the 1948 Flood Control r 't Act. wr • r? ? IF t Y r x.)51 L ?JM i9????NSN?. rty?l ?i 7) 1 ? ? w?.nw,+mr+? am J??e, j'?4fA^pA?j"?F 'leFyy Q????p?r? ':I }.? 1 ^r r i S ' r P i c? r A 4: m1 w'? ,Y ? •S ,.4 In order that the study might be responsive to the desires and needs of the affected or interested parties, a workshop was held in Quilcene on 23 September 1971. Three alternatives were presented in a first draft brochure for use in discussion during the workshop. Comments and suggested alterna- tives received at the.workshop were included in a second draft brochure, mailed on 26 November 1971 to people who had expressed an interest in the study. - *R CENT STUDY ACTION This third draft brochure contains comments and suggestions received from those -persons who reviewed the second draft of the brochure, as well as'some changes in descriptions of alternatives. *FLITURE STUDY ACTION A workshop, at a date to be announced, will beheld in Quilcene with the sponsor (the Port of Part Townsend) and interested local property owners, at which time the results of this study will be discussed in greater detail. At this meeting a representative of the District Engineer will review the back- ground and reasoning for the Seattle District's tentative recommendations. The final draft of this brochure will accompany the Seattle District Engineer's report. His recommendations will be reviewed by the Corps' Division Engin- eer in Portland, Oregon, and the Chief of. Engineers in Washington, D. C. After completion of this review, flood hazard information will be made available to local agencies for use in adopting flood plain zoning measures in Quilcene. "?? THE FUTURE - FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT AND INSURANCE ?? a As previously stated, flood plain management wouid be the only feasible al- ternative for reducing future flood damage along the Big Quilcene River. This would include non-Federal regulation of flood plain lands. Regulation could prevent further buildup of noncompatible structures in the flood plain; guide the gradual replacement of existing noncompatible structures as they be- come obsolescent or damaged beyond repair by fire, flood, or other causes, with compatible structures or uses; and prevent further encroachment on the floodway channel. Floodproofing existing structures would reduce future damage, although, for •a majority of existing structures, floodproofing costs i' would exceed flood damages which might be expected to occur. Flood- fighting and adequate system for alerting of Impending floods would also assist r:. In preventing flood damage. *Changed, this draft w1 3 h ". - L F,?;t lGit r v. P e ` are' ? f r 3 ?k 7 A 1 Nith the'adoption and enforcement of suitable regulations, including zoning of the 100-year flood plain, owners c`f existing flood plain property would d become eligible to purchase Federally subsidized flood insurance which would indemnify them for damages to structures and contents thereof due to flooding. Flood insurance is made available under the Housing and Urban Development q Act of 1968. The program is carried out by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Flood hazard information developed during Big Quilcene River studies, and rt,f to be provided to local agencies, will be suitable for local adoption of zoning measures in Quilcene. However, if such measures are also desired to prevent residential or other development of the flood plain upstream of Quilcene, additional data not now available would be needed.' These data E.i could be provided by a flood plain .information prepared by the Corps of • t„ Engineers. Such reports are prepared at the.. request of the State at no local cost, to assist port districts, cities, and counties in developing zoning measures. if a flood plain information report is desired, request should be mode #o the Director, Department of Ecology, P. O. Box 829, Olympia,; s'r 4 r ? t With the adoption and enforcement of suitable regulations, including zoning Jg of the 100-year flood plain, owners of existing flood plain property would b l b , n ecome e igi le to purchase Federally subsidized flood insurance which would indemnify them for damages to structures and contents thereof due to flooding. Flood insurance is made available under the Housing and -? t • r? ry' Urban Development Act of 1968. The program is tarried out by the De- partment of Housing and Urban Development. h t ? a- t Flood hazard information developed during Big Quilcene River studies will be suitable for local adoption of zoning measures in Quilcene. The data presented have been derived from a limited history and observations of past flood events. Observation of future flood heights and flood quan- tities should be'continued, and the reliability of the computed values checked by these observations. The assistance of Jefferson County and the citizens of Quilcene is required in this future observation program. Local residents should be encouraged to make accurate observations of flood heights on their properties, and these data should be collected and reported by the local governmental units to Mr. William J. Spurlock, y Flood Plain Management Services (phone 442-5010 in Seattle). 4 Revised 13 Nov 72 ; gWIP "" 3; , R g Q' r M1 ImW n.- cazikeitsvs?z?. 1r ALTERNATIVE 1 DO NOTHING DESCRIPTION: No action wo either structural or nonstructural (flood plain management) means. Existing trends in land use ex- pected to continue. Costs. Federal - Flood fighting and repair of damages. Cost varies with magnitude of flood. Local - Flood fighting, care of refugees, repair of damages to roads and u"lities. uld be taken for flood damage reduction through II \I ASSUMED QUILCENE 100 YEAR FLOOD LIMIT' EXIST.. LEVEE_ EX -•.? ? IST, PAR- t L:L TEMPORARY EFFECTS: ASSUMED 100 YEAR LEVEES FLOOD LIMIT -' `Fish and wildlife. Losses in habitat resu ting from additional development. Continued damage to spawning gravels caused by high velocity flows. Water quality. No change. Recreation. No change. Water and land use. Present trends would continue, with possible voluntary restrictions. People. Flood damages and threats would continue. *Flood damage prevention. Frequent flooding of the lower flood plain, with associated average annual damages of about $11,800, would continue. Damages would grow as development took place and property values and agricultural production increased. `Changed, this draft. 6 ?i?drR 1,111, J ALTERNATIVE 1 DO NOTHING PROS CONS Natural Envircnment ...i I. )a, W?ould?not dcma e?fis her_y_ This alternative wou d not t be detrimental Io present fishery re- sources. (Depts. of Game and Fisheries) •b. Stranding not excessive. Stranding of fish outside the river following ooding could very well occur, however, to no grector degree than in any other highly productive river of this type. (D6p4 of Game and Fisheries) 21 No probleaa with structural measures. No struc- Nro meawres to oflccI fish and wild life. (U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Depts.of Gone and Fisheries) 63. Good fish stream. The Big Ouilcene River has exce ent runs of chum, chinock, and coho solmon, m well as steelhead trout, that contribute heavily to commercial and sport fisheries. The Big Ouil- cene is a production and nursery area for these fish populations. (Depts. of Game and Fisheries! 4. 2. Larga ffsh?e lossese cw. Large numbers of fish are {' ( :fronded outside tW river following floods. (H. M. k ' Richbourg, T. Bogaclres, Alex Bergeson) A- 3. Few f'sh to ratect. E+cept for solmon and steel- eod using it in the fall and winter, the Big Ciuilcene is not a good fish stream. (H.M.Riehbourg) 4. Habitat de radotloa. Eneroochment on slreom (pos- si a under 1 is a ternative) would cause other biological problems and habitat degradation. (Dept. of Fisheries) Public Welfare 5. 6. 7. R. Economy 9. •10. Law cost to Public. Public wouldn't be billed to support Town of Oullcene's poor lond-use practices. (Nancy Thomas 1 5. Flooding causes a health problem. (Unknown) 16. Changes not controlled. Debris will continue to 1 d up an cause channel changes on tidelands. (C. Smith) 7. Hazard to develo .d arem. The river could start o c bonne thong. neor , place and swing under the hotel. (A. Bolander. 8. Flood hazards remain. Damages and threats of dam- ages remai- n. (Unknown) 9. Dome es nor sta ed. Loom to Coast O)sler Co. MO. awe averaged 55,000 per year since 1967) would not be controlled. (C. Smith) 10. I L Problems caused. A piecemeal plan normally causes more pro em t an a well developed comprehentive plan, (Dept. of Fished.) i xr :,. "p 5 •12. Ir_prh rove logring _fraericet. Might eneouroge Ouil- 12. . r t r - cene to demoo3 better logging practices upstream, h j`i!fl + t if this is contributing to sillotion and consequent t T .c' ?' Y •,:' flooding. (Nancy Thomas + t it ? ?) ?: ?9 ag ?(6 (f z ? :7. ?.+....? U II r4 t? 5s. rr a ? f Y i ?, Y I ? t Y W k'y hk .3 r( ?, IW ! ? ' i o?4q ?t Y(i '? 0 ? t _? I ti xRl ;. ,G? r5s ?I F s.s e p" t(? t 'r,ir s 1 ^•?'; .?..?-... 1.3x? ?&. ..??"?.."E?'?'" `?*`"i"" ; `,.y?q?.,a"r w't. ?tix"tES'rk. ;?IaCA.tict?'P.Jl aa,•w.tK?' w:t.?s+Yi"?, E9?"FrlPisu.U?2" tkN'?; `u'.'aFs J ? n l ALTERNATIVE 2 r FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT DESCRIPTION: This alternative would II \?I include such measures as zoning of ASSUMED flood plain land, flood insurance, 100 YEAR z _ evacuation of the flood plain, QUILCENE FLOOD LIMIT' 'F flood warning, floodproofing of existing structures, and 1????? r ' preservation of land along N uJ Nivr r ?? fiy streams for parks and agri- ' mr .... grm cultural open space. EXIST. LEVL'E•?I? ??.???..,: • EXIST PARTIAL No dams levees, channel LEVEE a a tiw „ improvements, or other structural measures rRl?rrr?;,rll would be considered. ??t7p', ?J?I• ., '? TEMPORARY $ lotion cost LEVEES Ir'glemen ASSUMED IUO YEAR ' (not. imoted FLOOD LIMIT T Federal - Provide 'ood information. y 'Local government - # Zoning, land purchase, and park development. 'Individuals - Floadproofing, maintenance, and insurance premiums. Flood . ` losses to property not protected by floodproofing. (National average premium cost is $2.50 per $1,000.) EFFECTS: 'Fish and wildlife. Continued damage to spawning gravels caused by high velocity F ows. Ha itot preserved. 'Wafer quality. No change. 'Recreation. Would improve future recreation opportunities in flood plain. Land. Agricultural lands and open space would be preserved. flood damage prevention. The Quilcene River would remain uncontrolled. Some f ood damage wou d e eliminated through floodproofing by individuals. Limiting flood plain development would curb flood damage growth. 'People. Flood damages would continue. New residents would be pre- vente ram constructing buildings in high-risk flood areas and would be pro- vided floodproofing guidelines for permitted construction to avoid significant 'ood damage. 'Changed, this draft. B N'''? r r w R?' _ r Y `,h kq. ti " IFIIW?7 AV, { i r h µ, ^ ? p .'? ?yC r +t ? ' .i(?.?Z C n?bYf r. k l3 2,r ? l a,a1 ?' ` ,• tp s ? ,, r x r ? P ?! Z r 4 1 S ,'•,s ° F kr e r t :1 .? .. t p ?M U 7 • ALTERNATIVE 2 ` FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT s9' d i y,, PROS CONS yr a. Natural Environment r 1. Pr seen habitat. Helps protect habitat by stipulat- I. t w ' ? < ' mare c. om r usn. (Depts. of Fisheries and Game) # s• _ 'rt. •? •2 The Big Quilcene River has excel- `w 2. Good fish river Few fish to rop test. Except for salmon and steelheod 'r . . ent runs of c um, chirwok, and cohoo salmon, as using it in 17:a (all and winter, the Big Quilcene is hbour ) Ri (H M h 3r. + well as st--Bead and cutilnoat trout, that contribute g c stream. . . not is good fis heavily to commercial and sport fisheries. The Big ' Quilcene is a production and nursery area for these fish populations. (Depts. of Game and Fisheries, % National Marine Fisheries Service) 3. No damn is to fisheries. This alternative would not 3. .R be detrimento to present fishery resources. (Deph. - of Game and Fisheries) •4 losses not excessive. Stranding of fish out- !"• 4. andin St Fish losses now. Large numbers of fish are stranded _ . g r Me the river following f ooding could occur; however, outside e e onnel following floods. (H.M. Rich- ) A B h to no greater degree than in any other highly produc- ergeson . es, bourg, T. Bogoc live river of this type. (Deph. of Fisheries and Game) riIt 5. No roblem from structural measure.. Fish and wildlife 5. s b "t wou d not be of ecled by structure measures. (U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Depts. of Fisheries and Game) • 6 Enhanced fish and wildlife. Fish and wildlife could be 6. r? 4 .; . en ante y certain management techniques. (U.S. t' - Fish and Wildlife Service, Depts. of Fisheries and Gortw) 7. No environmental im act. Avoids environmental impact. 7. Depts . o Nal sra Resources, Fisheries, and Game) Public welfare mF)- B. Must disclose flood hazard. Must include prevision 8. 1 0l rea ton isc ose f rood hazard. (Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) 9. Needs not met. Does not meet needs of local its!- 9 den-,,.n noun source) 10. Adverse Im act on local resident, Restrictions would 10. be p aced on msiMOnanae and Improvement of hams. t (Unknown source) i Land Use - t 11. Controls development. Provides a guide for lulus 11. of Outdoor (Bu lnin d h f , v „1 v . . oo p e evelopm<nt n t f r y 7, r Recreation) ` ?P Jr fi ?r ,. r ._ 12. Rreres1 m rovement Enhances potential for .y? •12. of Outdoor B Would not improve No recreational im ra ement recrealiona potential on private land. (A. Ouam) 9 i 4? u. riv< rani rKre<t ion development. ( Recreation) -Added, this draft. 9 Icy ?..??. ?- 77 K' sA„ - ?A •sip. G6ilet?a x . 999 ; f 't & 4 J 4 F X 4 S ? n ALTERNATIVE 2 (Cant.) :fl . FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT s PROS CONS , $ 13. Cti-bilit of development mproved. Increases 13. b b l bl - pru o i ity of deve opment compati e with lands, natural features. (Depts. of Fisheries and Game) - 14. Building in the flood loin controlled. Will de- •14. Inode u ote control. Would not effectively control ? ter further bui din in the flood ain. U.S. 9 ( _ i dibu I 'n on riwte land. 8 P (A. Ouam) - , Fish and Wildlife Service) Economy 't. i 15. Eliminate or control damages. Tendency will be for 15. c.isting uses to be changed to eliminate damage. Damages remain. Some flood damages would still occur. (Bu of Outdoor Recreation) - 3 M (Dept. of Natural Resources) . : tl l - s ". 16. ProDCrt lolou?reven?re?d. Stipulate uses compotible 16a. with known (ooTd areas and thus protect a valuable Losses to Coast Oyster Co., which hove averaged $5,000 per year since 1967, would not be controlled. " 4 natural resource from encroachment by man. (Depts.' •b. ter Preserve. Tidelands were on oyster preserve. O _ of Fisheries and Game.) T ey o under Busch Act. (C. Smith) • 17. Losses controlled. Future increases in losses would •17. Losses Increase. Future lasses would continue with $ be control ed. Dept. of Natural Resources) Increase in property values. (A. Ouam) , 7 In. •10. Losses will be grouter to oyster Industry. (C. Smlds) s s Cash avoided. High levee toll would be ovoldad. 19. Dept, o Natural Resources) Would cause a few people higher costs for flood Insurance. (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) ?l 'r y sdded, this draft. 10 A -__ __?7 7 " -'a F " 1. k° a ak s *ALTERNATIVE 3 *LEVEES FOR RESIDENTIAL AREA * DESCRIPTION: Levees would e provided, starting at high ° O land upstream from residen- tial area in flood plain on each side of the river, `extending to the banks, i. thence downstream along each bank post the last in- US NwY habited building. • ioi? I Works would in- EXIST. LEVEE eludestrength- CONSIDERED " Sps an ing and raisin(, / A'? _ existing levees, •• / s providing rip- i ?t?? rap where ?PO pNF ? r necessary J'? Stream banks °r.QUILCEN E would not be - noved. ASSUMED 100 YEA1 FLOOD LIMITS Construcnon cost. Federal -Levee construction - $195,000± Local - Rights-of-way, relocations, and flowage easements - $16,000± Annual operation and maintenance. Federal - None. Local - $2,100± EFFECTS: 'Fish and wildlife. Increase in periodic damage to fish spawning gravel, with iesultont oss o is production - primarily chum salmon. Annual detriment, at least $5,000. Water quality. Possible turbidity during construction. Recreation. Paths could be placed on levees for access to the river. Land use. Approximately 110 acres of protected land could be developed for more intensive use. Levee would occupy 9.5 acres of land. Pca le. Flood damages would be reduced for 150 residents of flood plain. F ood contral . Flooding frequency would be reduced to an average of once in 2 years. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS Average annual benefit - $16,000, less $5,000 (fish detriments), or $11,000 Average annual cost - $14,600 *Changed, this draft 12 ASSUMED 100 YEAR FLOOD LIMIT tr' N. LEVEES IRS, T a fa'. A ALTERNATIVE 3 -LEVEES FOR RESIDENTIAL AREA PROS CONS Natural Environment 1. Prevent loss of fish. Large number, of fish are stranded)-1. Stranding not excessive. Stronding of fish outside the river outside IF. river banks following flooding (H M f ll i . . . Richbourg, T. Bagaches, A. Bergeson) o ow ng r oodirs coo d very well occur; however, to no greater degree than in any other highly productive river • of this type. (Deph. of Fisheries and Game) 2. 2. Damages habitat. Levee construction would destroy fish and wt if e habitat and encourage development. (U. S. Fish 6 life, Deph. of Fisheries and Game) -3. Poor spawning ores no. Winter floods regularly w HE -3a. Damage spawning grounds. Induced high velocities would chum and ange sedi ments in section of river scour sediment depasih, adversely affecting salmon produc- through residential area and wash out or cover up lion, and be detrimental to onadromous fish runs. (Nat. salmon eggs. Floods of Jan. 1972 churned and Marine Fisheries Service) moved bottom sediments badly to a depth of 2 Is. Damage spawning beds. Could create excessive constriction or more feet. Salmon eggs spawned in this o rivet, causing - owing increased veh,:itim, with resultant gravel section of river are probably in Quilcene Bay scour, and permanent reduced salmon production. Big or covered up. (T. Bogaches) Quilcene is a major chum salmon producer and most of fishery damage would be to this stream. (Dept. of Game) 4. Few fish in river. Except for salmon and some steel- 4. Good fish stream. Stream support Chinook, .0h., and ead using It in t a fall and winter, the Big Cull- cum sTa mon, as wall as steelheod, cutthroat, and resi- cane it not a good fish stream. (H.M. Rlchbourg) dent trout, and supports many of these on a year-round basis. (Not. Marine Fisheries, Dept. of Game) 5. 5. Added siltation. Removing excessive sediment would create additions siltation in the downstream reaches and would be destructive to the river bottom that is used by spawning solmon and steelheod. (Depts. of Game and Fisheries) 6. 6. Undesirable aesthwticoll and biolog1ea11 . Channelizalion o river s undeslra is t aesl rs"ca y and biologically. (Deph. Not. Resources, Fisheries, and Game) 7. a -7. Demo es stream ulh Construction will eliminate all groom cover and t ere6y lower water quality and reduce rearing capacity, (Depts. is Fisheries and Game) 8e -8. Adverse effect on salmon and steelheod. Would creole greater than norms ve ocillet, advane y a fec Ling salmon returning n Quilcene Hatchery, and spawning during periods of high "for. Spawning success would be reduced. Sediments removed would be prime spawning gravel, presently being heavily utilized by Chinook and chum salmon. A tingle In- slontaneous count showed 3,2.94 adult chum salmon spawning In this area In 1968. All species of fish using this area would be harmed, and o large portion of rum permanenlly lost. (Deph. of Fisheries and Game) -Added, this draft. 13 1+, S r ? A t. s '? rq4 '"?E M .ru t t 4 ti u ? L xt? ; 1 }" ? 1'I ti Y g t Yxo m t` r r t+ l - ry I 1 1 ' r n r f ? 1_ j •7 ALTERNATIVE 3 (Cant) LEVEES FOR RESIDENTIAL AREA r CONS -' L •9. Damage oysten. Narrow channel would cause in- ?8 r az1 9 creased movemeN of udiment to high tide line Smith) d (C b i t e s. . and added damage to oyster r . Public Welfare 0 10. Less recrealional_ opportunity. Levees would cause (Bu ty i - ~ _ . . n loss o potentia recreation access po of Outdoor Recreation, Nancy Thomas) -A _ il. Eliminate health roblem. Flooding creates o I1. ' health pro em. Un nov m) Land Use i 12. Im roved use of flood lo in. Protected land could ..•? 12. Chan 'Chao a i e Levees could encourage changed of Out- (Bu ace s f , t '.i oe deve oped for more int . . p open ensive use. (A. Qua-) and use nvo ving use o •. ? door Recreation) e 13. Land loss small. Area of l and used by levees is 13. Loss of land. Levees cause loss of land. (Bu. of ut oar Recreation) sma •Un mown) •14. Wrong use now. Flood plains should be preserved ie ; f1 U for agree and open-space uses. (Nancy Thomas) x 16. Flood lain mono ement needed. This alternative must Inc ude f ood p in managemant and toning. (Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) t x Economy 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 16. Not economical. 200-year protection is not warranted for existing pattern. (Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) 17. Would not control all damoges. Damages to Coat OYsf er Co. (which have averaged )5,000 per year since 1967) would not be controlled. (C. Smith) I8. Additional protection requited. Would encourage further deva opmenl in the flood plain area, making further flood protection in the future necessary, while destroying fish and wildlife habitat. (U.S. Fish d Wildlife Service) •I9. Fisher loss.,. Depletion of alit-d fishmiet would r.- tu t in monetary losses to area and 'fate. Pnsonl value of sicelhead'ought in Quilcene is more than $39,000 per year. (Dept. of C=ome) .20 - Increased fish lonfin as I. Would result in the nxesAfy or p anrtng cuts root and steelhrnd 10 make up for losses to native runs. (Dept. of Game) 14 fu v } 't r R a1{ r f '? u t a? t1' IIf?l? r s tl rr ??}t a ? Yi r ? ! 1 it 'Added, this draft. V? ?i Ire' a a PS R tt, H ?aavinj • v 22 P AdUL ALTERNATIVE 4 elk *LEVEES TO HIGH-TIDE LINE n + + .DESCRIPTION: The levees described in Alternative 3 would be extended down- $ 3T 1 stream tote igh-tide line to ? y : connect with levees constructed :. by Coast Oyster Co. Excessive 'ASSUMED sedirenr de.-sits would be re- I 100 YEAR moved from channel. Riprap FLOOD LIMITS would be provided entire length " 1 of of levees, including those con- ° strutted by Coast Oyster Co. us N y LEVEES f Reinforcing or raising fO? ?,.•?' "'" CONSIDERED Coast Oyster Co. EXIST. LEVEEI r ,, ?F• • LEVEES levees may be advisable. Annual removal of sediment 1 Sf .. g' near tide line ,??,?.?,.•? 9 would be necessary. QUILCENE ?• s ASSUMED 100 YEAR Construction cost. FLOOD LIMITS F, Federal - Levee construction $400,000±. Local government - rights-of-way, r. relocations, flowage easements 30,000± s $4 Total 30,06R- Annual operation and maintenance. Federal - None Local government - $4,000* EFFECTS: 'Fish and wildlife. Increase in periodic damage to fish spawning gravel, with j resultant loss of fish production - primarily chum salmon. Annual detriment, at least $5,000. Would help protect oyster beds south of river's mouth. Water quality. Possible increased turbidity during construction. Recreation. Paths could be placed on levees for access to the river. Land use. 170.E acres of land protected from 200-year floods. Damages to 50? acres of tidelands substantially reduced by directing river flows and sediment de- }i posits away f rom oyster beds.r People.. Flood damages reduced for 150 residents of the flood plain. + Flood control. Frequency of overbonk flooding would be reduced to an overage o rr r{h, J of once in 200 years. fe ECONOMIC ANALYSIS: j ?F???1 j? Average annual benefit - $17,000±, less $5,000 detriment to fish, plus $1,000 benefit to oyster industry, or $13,000. t t b' Y' , ?4?=f ?' Y 4E Average annual cost - $29,400. Y j =?( F 1 4. ? f Changed, this draft. a ut t 16 ,, 1} s J r4 f L ? y 1 i11 Cl?' v 1 t Y ?, 4 .?Mr + th 1I ' ?? .? ? yf???'• n 4 ?Yt, tYl `' ?1 'r? 7r 7 ?f r ?e I r J; N 7t,,,. ? r fi .TT' , b'?E?a '.??? ;:: -j ,*. - '?- ? - =ssxxar?+_.if?4-.i`rau??t?s?nsisrwssass?t?'•mr?:._? q ? ({ - - • ALTERNATIVE 4 LEVEES TO HIGH-TIDE LINE CONS PROS Natural Environment ' Damage habitat. Levee construction could destroy fish 1 . 1. and wi d ife ha itat. (U.S. Fists d Wildlife Service, Dept. of Gam-) 2. Devclo merit encouraged. Flood protection would encourage S•Fish b Wildlife (U tion d . . estruc 2. drive opment with habitat of Game) t De ice S ' . p , erv Not eom otible wish fish usage. Will cause degrade- 3 f 2T . 3. lion of is a itol during construction and for an unknown time to come. (Depts. of Fisheries and Come) + age sP.wring beds. Levees on the banks of the Da ' 4 ?' m . river could creole excessive constriction of the river, w 4 . • f • with resultant increased water velocity. This would -- cousa ancir. a: c,. navel movement and be detrimenlal Dept. of Go-) obito t i i i . ' i c i to the spawning bc•d, ofd aquat 01 5. Incrcmm siltation. Ronoving "excrosivu s,d'mcnl" from ould cruote additional siltot ion to the l ti w 5. the river channe downstream reaches and would be destrucsi yr to the river bottom that is used by spawning salmon and sterlhcod. I ; (Dept. of Game) ' oNarrowing rrJA R ulorly ,e.w'-b. Adverse effect on salmon and - resat velocities ds re fl n e p oo on n 1 e oo way wit create greaser 1 •6. poor s rig area now. Winter to the Ouilrene section of fluor nin t i t n g ur s n c Doge sa imen that adversely affect 'ninon re e urn an h the residential area and wash out or cover and solmon spawning during periods of high throu h g Hatc ery up salmon eggs. Floods of Jan. 1972 churned and valet Success of spawning would be reduced. The moved bottom sediments badly to a depth of 2 or sediments proposed for removal consist of extensive more feet. Salmon eggs spawned In this s--if-" reaches of prime spawning gravel, presently heavily le inston- or covered ' A sin B l g mon. ay of river are probably In Ouilcene utilized by chinook and chum sa - up. (T. Bogachusy laneous count showed 3,234 adult chum salmon spawn f fish ?y, ., ing I. this immediate area in 1968. All species o oii ts t (De l l r f l i p . - os y unes permanent the portion o e larg Fisheries.and Gone) •7. Rrduced water unlit aria fish•rearing copacit . Con- m cover and l'errby ' 7. ttruction will eliminate a strea lower water quality and reduce rearing capacity. (Depts. of Fisheries and Game) B. ew fish in river, Except for salmon and some steel- rod using it in the fall and winter, the Big Quil- Fcene is not a good fish stream. (H. M. Richbourg) 9, prevent loss of fish. Large number of fish eta strands outside I is river nks following flooding. (H.M. Riehbourg, T. Bogochu+, A. Bergeson) -Added, this draft. -8. Good fish dream. This st,cam supports chinook, coho, and and c um to man, as well o+ steelheod, cutthroat, resident trout. The Big Ouilcene supplies spawning and rearing habitat and supports many of these ,Peet.' of fish o or e of round basis. Marine Fisheries Set' Game) , Dept. vice 9. Fish raise, not excessive. Slronding of fish outside the river o swing coding -Quid very well occur, but to no greater degree than in any other highly productive river of this type. (Depts. of Flthatiet and Go-) 17 ALTERNATIVE 4 (Cant) ? ,. 9 v LEVEES TO HIGH-TIDE LINE .? PROS CONS z en {. ' to.. Protect sea life. Tendency of river to meander -10. Ma damage -Mten. Constriction of upstream area resu t in increased deposition of ill h and change course at its mouth and damage y evees may tidelands and thus become detrimenml to oyster oyster, and other sea life would be reduced. (C. an roduction. Gradual deterioration of lower river Smith) p Is. Protects oysters. Connecting upstream levees with spawning areas may also occur. (Nat. Marine Fish- ; 'akeTT tidTanrT, would protect oyster-producing cries Service) W. -p areas, provided the latter dikes are adequately rr construcied. (Not. Marine Fisheries Service) •. ally. . Channel- It. Undesirable oesthetieoll and biolic 7? . ,- II .--y and Ization of river n undesiro a .e; biologically. (Dept. of Natural Resources Public Walter. a I2. Access ' proved. Access to river would be Im- 12. Fewer access Inn. Levees would cause loss of paten- tion o:cess points. (Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) N • r proved. (UsLnown) tia recrea IJ. Eliminnte health ble. Flooding creates is 13. ' Tols6 problem..: U no e14. Use of river damaged. Riprop and channelization make 14 a for recreation and too ugly a river virtua Ty - to appeal to most vacationers. INoncy Thomas) - - - Lund Use ( 15. Im roved use of floodorlain. Protected land could 15. Changed land use. Levees could encourage changed ed !or ma intensive use. (A. Quam) and use, involving use of open space. (8u. of e a do s? p v c Outdoor Recreation) ' 16. Protection provided. Would protect 170 acres of up- and and W ncies of oyster beds which are period- ically damaged. (C. Smith) 17. - 18, 19. Provides lunbl- protection. Would protect oyster Fed, with a potent is overoge production valued at $75,ODO per year hero,- horvetting. (C.Smilh) e16, Protection offset. This alternative would reduce the value o Mc river or fishery uses. (Dept. of Ecology) 17. This alternative must include flood plain management and zoning. (Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) 18. Levees would cause loss of land. (Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) 19. Additional protection rc uq (red. Would encourage further deve(opmend plain omea, making it necessary In the future to provide further flood protection, while destroying fish and wildlife habitat. (U.S. Fish & Wildlife) Economy 20. Not economical. 200-year protection Is not warranted 20. or eentinp [and-ute pattern. (Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) e21. Costs "ecssive. Cost is ..,,%live and probably would 21 be ig er i ong-term cost of lost open space could be given adequate dolly value. (Nancy Thomas) IB 3 t y.h 1 r r r4 vW t t t r. y -r ? 1.r el?lrb?- 2y? t ' ???' fP r4? & Y ilk 5 ? L r v t ,, n re PAL " •Addrd, 3hD drofr. 19 .r, 47JY,i `Slt S"w+'7"?f?k t f QVr" Ci n?, TT r O I ? " WAY N'9aN > f?? 'f a f??l?}1 f i - .y;,tq„ ! ? ? x T k hl y J.gb?11 ' ? 1 ? ? ? ? ? tt + ' ' 1 Lo ? ? r r 1rl ?n'?' r r i_ u! ra j? r Y I H 77 a ? `'LEVEES DOWNSTREAM FROM U.S. HIGHWAY 101 ? DESCRIPTION: Levees would be constructed ulong riverbanks where substantial land area could be protected from flooding, begin- ning at the bridge for U.S. Highway 101 and extending downstream - OUILCENE - }? through the residential area. LEVEES . The levee on the left CONSIDERED k' (north) bank would r be about 2.2 miles long, the levee ? on the right J r (South) "`° bank about 3,000 .t feet ?'. long. Riprop would be provided where needed. Levees through the residential area would be essentially the same as those described in Alternative No. 3.f Construction cost $380,000 Federa - Levee construction Non-Federal - Rights-of-way, relocations, flowage 34,000 easements Total $414,000 Annual operation and maintenance costs None Federal $ one Local Government 4,000 EFFECTS: `Fish and wildlife. Increase in periodic damage to fish spawning gravel, with resultant loss p-of fish roduction - primarily chum salmon. Annual detriment, at least $5,000. Water qualify. Possible turbidity during construction. Recreation. Paths could be placed on levee for access to river. Land. 210t acres would be protected from floods with frequency up to 200 years. people. Flood damages would be reduced for 210± residents. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS Average annual benefit - 516,500, minus $5,000 detriment to fish, or $11,500. Average annual cost - $28,500. J• `' *Changed, this draft 20 1. Prevent loss of fish. Large numbers of fish are I. Fish losses not excessive. Stranding of fish outside stranded outside the river banks following flood- ~.r river following flooding could very well occur, ing. (H.M. Richbourg, T. Boaachus, A. Bergeson) however, to no greater degree than in any other highly productive river of this type. (Dept% of and Game) Fisheries 2. Few fish in river. Except for salmon and some steel- e2. Good fish stream. The Big Quilcene River has ez- - ead uTi sing it in the fall and winter, the Big Quit- ce rnl runs o cum, chinook, and coho salmon, acne is not a good fish stream, (H. M. Richbourg) and stcelhead Iroul, that contri buts heavily to cam- . mercial and sport fisheries. The Big Ouiloene River - is a production and nursery area for these fish popu- lations. (Depts of Fisheries and Game) 3. 4. •5. Poor spawning area now. Winter floods regularly churn and c Doge sediments in section of river through the residential area and wash out or cover up salmon eggs. Floods of Jan. 1972 churned and moved bottom sediments badly to a depth of 2 or more feet. Salmon eggs spawned in this section of river ore probobly in Quilcene Bay or covered up. (T. Bogachus) 6. 7. 8. 3. Lower water quality and rearing capacity. Construc- tion will eliminate a st;,am(I- cover and thereby lower water quality and reduce scoring capacity. (Deph,'of Fisheries and Game) 4. Daestr?o hhabitatet. Levee construction would encourage deve oI pment of the flood plain and result in degrada- or destruction of fish and wildlife habitat. (U.S. Fish 6 Wildlife Service, Depts. of Fisheries and Game) e50. Adverse effect on salmon and sleeihead. Narrowing 0 the oodwoy will create g. ,e, t} an normal veloci- ties that adversely affect salmon returning to the Quilcene Hatchery and salmon spowning during periods of high water. Success of spawning would be reduced. The sediments proposed for removal consist of extensive reaches of prime spownino gravel, presently heavily utilized by chinook and chum salmon. A sinple inston- toneous count showed 3,234 .dull chum solmon spown- ino in this immediale m a in 1968. All species of fish utilizing this area would be harmfully affected and a large portion of the runs permanently lost. (Dept. Fisheries 6 Game b. Levees on the banks of the river could create azces- sive construction of the river, causing increased flow, which in turn would cause accelerated gravel move- ment and be detrimental to the spawning beds and aquatic habitat. (Dept, of Game, C. Smith) 6. Addition.[ siltation eneournged. Removing "excessive sediment" tom he riven c annel would creole addi- tlonal Allation to ilia downstream reaches and would be des trucli ve to the river bottom that is used for spawning salmon and steelhead. (Dept. or Game) e7. Damage oysters. Narrow channel would encourage movement of sediment to high tide lands and thus cause formation of new channels and added damage to oyster beds. (C. Smith) 8, Undesirable aesthmicoll orl?ieal? Channelizo- oon o? river is und li esiralsle oeuhetic.Py and biologically. (Dept, of Natural Resources) 21 kF, ALTERNATIVE 5 (Cont) *LEVEES DOWNSTREAM FROM H(GHWAY 101 ..,JS CONS Public Welfare 9. Better access. Access to river would be Improved. 9. Acccc s?ioiints lost. Levees would cause loss of Po- Comment at workshop) l.ioy recreation access point,. (Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) 10. Eliminates o haolth oblem. Flooding creates a eI,oblem. (Unknown) 11. Damorics reduced. Flood damage would be reduced Tor 221 p p (A. Qua.) Land Use 12. Im roved use of flood lain. Protected land could deve aped for more intensive use. (A. Quam) 13. 14. Economy 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. W, this draft. 10. 12. Chan ed land use. Levees could encourage changed and use inva ving use of open space. (Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) 13. Less land available. Levees would cause loss of and. Bu. at Outdoor Recreation) 14. Flood lain management urgent. This alternative must inc ude (ood p?i management and zoning. (Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) 15. Not economical. X00-ycor protection is not war- rantedfor existing land-use pollern. (Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) 16. Does not control all damages. Damages to Como Oyster , wh re ave averaged 55,000 per year since 1967, would not be controlled. (C. Smith) 17. Additional rakedion uirreed. Would encourage further devciopment in 1 eh hood .in area, cooking it necessary In the future to provide more flood protection while de- stroying fish and wildlife habitat. (U.S. Fish 3 Wildlife) e18. Fishor lassos. Depletion of steelhead fisheries would raw t in monetary losses to area and State. Present value of soeelheud caught In Qullcene is more than $39,000 per year. (Dept. of Game) e19. Incremed fish tan E,coil. Would result In the ne- cessity or panting WE, Wont and s1,elh.ad to make up for Imsm to native runs. (Dept, of Go-) 22 3 Kd, Yg ` wi ZSffi• .?-?.. ... -... .-- ..-. N x 1' DDESCRIPTION: A bypass channel to carry flood waters in excess of capacity of a exng channel would start at a lip print on the river a short distance I ASSUMED k upstream of the Quilcene \S 1 t residential section, and ex- FLOOD 100 YEAR a tend southeast along the toe I z LIMIT of the hill to Quilcene Boy. Riprop protection N for the channel and us a» ????^ X levees would be pro- --y ? EXIST PARTIAL vided. An ungated EXIST. LEVEE ..?':•...N a ' LEVE 1 diversion structure at ?1P ?}„?• uao N the upper end of the bypass would allow ?Ql>?NU?• . ? y use of the channel, ov?'.•: SOUTH BYPASS only when flows ap- proach the capacity ASSUMED 100 YEAR CHANNEL p of the river channel. FLOOD. LIMIT QUILCENE *Construction cost. Federal (channel, levees, and diversion 1, structure) - $700,000 Non-Federal (rights-of-way and two bridges)- 383,000 Total $T1Un,Uff e Annual operation and maintenance Federal None Non-Federal $ 4,000- EFFECTS: fish and wildlife. Possible loss of small amount of habitat. *Some oyster beds at channel mouth would be damaged. Salmon spawning areas in existing channel would be benefited. -Water qualify. Not evaluated. *Recreation. Not evaluated. Land use. Loss of land (*14 acres) required for bypass. Protected land could be deve op for more intensive use. Flood control. Frequency of overbonk flooding would be reduced to once in 200 years. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS: *Average annual benefits - $30,000 ($16,000 flood control and $14,000 fishery enhancement), minus detriment to oyster beds. Average annual costs - $68,000 *Changed, this draft. 24 '"d+r 4 4 ? µ Q ? y M 1 hl ? r .. ilk y 7 I ? ; ?. fit l" i" . ! 7ll:k-? d # ALTERNATIVE 6? -S OUTH DYPASS CHANNEL Natural Environment PROS C NS x. - A_ks 1. droved deve_loaenl?altern. Encourages JovaIop-+'? •1. Land development must meet county bu ll ding code requira- menl compatible wit ahTnd i natural attributes. menu. (A.Quam) (Bu. Outdoor Recreation) -2. Benefits anodromous Fish production. Improves pro- 2. Loa of habitat. Potential lot of some habitat. (Bu. uction o cum so man, w is spawn entirely in t o or alt creation) lower river, by reducing flood velocities and gravel movement. (Not. M.6-Fisheries Service) •3. Couldsol ve oblems. Combined with flood plain man- 3. Some damages increased. Would damage oyster beds. (Nat agemenf, could reduce flood damage without causing Marine Fisheries Service, C. Smith) Intensive development. (Nancy Thomas) "Al. Beneficial I. salmon. Incrooses salmon production •4a. Not good for fish. Could cause serious problems for onod- t roug improved, stable channel downstream from romous f(s 8u. Sport Fisheries and Wildlife) bypass diversion. Normal harmful effects from b. Salmon and steethead might spawn in bypass during high - erosion would be eliminated. (Dopt. of Fisheries) flows and ]afar spawn would be lost, because channel vauld be dry. (Dept. of Game) 5. Public Wolfe 6. Reduces damages. Reduce flood damages for people. Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) 7. Enhances recreation. Land management plan could enhance recreation and open space potentials. (Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) Land Use B. 9. Boller use of rolectod and. Allows nsore Intensive use o1-de.. P7 m Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) •5. Would dama o tan. Would cause last to oyster pro- duction westgeof river mouth. (Jot. Marine Fisherin Service, C. Smith) •6. Domoges continue. Log jams below bypass could cause damage. A. Ouam) •7. No recreation olential. Bypass channel would go through private pro perty. Therefore, recreation potential does not exist. (A. Quam) 0. Land r u(red for channel: Some productive land lost for e ann.. Bu.. odor Recreation, Willard Brown) -9. Intensive use undesirable. Intensive flood plain development undesirable. A temative of value only If used in conlune- llon with flood plain management. (Nancy Thomas) Economy 10. Domdges reduced. Reduces current damages and pre- •10. Tetra manure. Mouth of bypass would plug almost vents increases. Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) Immediate y dT us to somh.." sforne on high tides. (D. McCo. -11. Increased ,'Mn sn roduIts [oonn. Conslderable economic i1. eneTit ram Intl-reinem mlrron proiuelion. (Dept, of Fisheries) 'Added, this draft) 23 e a. ?wy i s r y, (r a -f i?l.>fr 1 r li ?' r too f rr ? ? 1V 4 it t 7 f r? 7 i ? J 11 )^ and extend northeast and east to QuIlcene Bay Construction cost: a Federal - $837,500 •ior- _ Non-Federal - 195,400./ EXIST, LEVEE: Total SI7623,4bS Annual operation and main- r ,.nonce: Federal - None ?. Non-Federol $3,500 NORTH BYPASS CHANNEL: PARTIAL rED FFFecLS: ASSUMED 100 YEA QUILCENE ,-? Fish and :•dldnre. Las, of ,` FLOOD. LINIT tome a itat. Sa man spawning mess in existing channel would be benefited. Water quality. Not evaluated. Recreation. Na, ev.luoled. Land use. Loss of land (2e acres) used by bypass; protected land could be developed for more intendm use. Flood control. Frequency of overbonk flooding wauid be reduced to once In 200 years. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS: Average annual benefit - 530,000 ($16,000 flood control and $14,000 fishery enhancement) Average annual cost - 564,000 •v Rights-of-vcy and one bridge -Changed, this draft. 26 t? 1 ., rx Y Y4 t P . ry te'. J yy t A k r d'A ., e e ..x...?`.:f4LTw?ea'n ?'?k:.,.-..,_..i .-.'?oAA•_"?a?.:;?4rxr^hC?i,LYx.. _:;..... ...;:_..(?...... ???''- .adY.-'.`;-.iC73:-: ?'.. -F:t ? A ALTERNATIVE 7 NORTH BYPASS CHANNEL PROS CONS Natural Environment 1. Im roved development pattern. Encourages develop-• •I. Development pattern controlled now. Land development ment compatiu?e wit r end's natural onritutm• (Bu. must meet county regu mions. A. uam) of Outdoor Recreation) -2. Benefits onodromous fish' roductian. Imperoves pro- duction o c mm sa mars, w spawn ntirely in lower river, by reducing velocities and gravel movement. (Nat. Marine Fisheries Service) -30. Beneficial to salmon. Increases salmon produc- tion, uttttooa esser degree than Alt. /6. (Dept. of Fisheries) -b. Beneficial to fish and shellfish. Calls far bypass channel north of Big Oui cone. Therefore, most desirable for fish end shellfish.. (Nat. Marino Fisheries Service) 2. Loss of habitat. Potential loss of some habitat. (Bu. of ut oor ecreatian) -3a. Damages fish. The water diversion could cause seriom proli- migmting anodromous fish. (Bu. of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife) Is. Possible trapping of fish. Young soimon and trout might be trapped and die in bypass. (Dept. of Game) I' r Public Welfare 4. Reduces domeges. Damages From flooding radueed 4. Marc dangerous. The bypass channel Increases danger of orT pe0st (Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) cotastrop e, 4nown) 5. 6. 7. Land Use 5. 1 don't wont a river channel on both sides of me. (A. Burgeson) -6. Incomplete olution. Does not control all damage. (C. Smith) 7. Land loss. Channel would occupy some productive land. Bu. o Outdoor Recreation. 0. Better land use. Allows more Intensive use of pro- " e0. Intensive use undesirable. Intensive development of flood tecte on u. of Outdoor Recreation) pan Is an un es is a and-use practice. (Nancy Thomas) e9. Good solution. I feel this olternalive would solve 9. the problem and cause the least damage to productive land. (Willard Brown) Economy 10. LLove-cast rlohnt-of-way. Most of channel could be 10. constructed on ow-vaTue land. (H.M. Riehbourg) ell. Irsereased salmon ie--. Considerable econ- ell. Less beneficial. Offers lea benefit For cat than All. 16. omie Sene oTom ne reared chum salmon production. Taney oros) (Dept. of Fisheries) -Added or changed, this draft. 27 CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT DESCRIPTION: Log jams and sediment deposits would be re- I I \? moved from the river channel. Sedirent deposits at and near QUILCENE the mouth would be removed and the channel restored. H, r l l y j of EXIST. L EVEE 1. S?, CHANNELr(y''' Frl'' r r F i rp^?''' Sn^' ? Jc r ASSUMED 100 'CAR FLOOD LIMIT' Construction cost. ASSUMED 100 YEAR FLOOD LIMIT r r' r I __.EXIST, PARTIAL TEMPORARY LEVEES Federal - $197,000 'Non-Federol - Spoil and debris disposal areas (cost not estimated) Annual operation and maintenance. Federal - None 'Non-Federal - $21,000 EFFECTS : Fish and wildlife. Improved access from boy to river, offset by loss of some spawning grounds. Water quality. Some turbidity during construction. Recreation. Improved recreation access. Land. reopre. Damages would be reduced. F ood control. Frequency of overbank flooding would be reduced. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS: Average annual benefit - $6,000k *Average annual cost - $32,600 'Changed, this draft. 28 x Fs ALTERNATIVE B CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT PROS CONS Natural Environment 1. "1. Damaging to fish and shellfish. The "sediment de posits" include much spawning gravel that would be classified as exceptional on any scale. Removal of debris, which our field personnel report as minimal in this vream section, would create instability of the channel and increase scouring and loss of sal- mon eggs during high flows. Repeated maintenance dredging would taus.. annual periods of sihmian and reduce water quality and overall productivity, (Depts. of Fisheries and Game) a well as further detertora- Lion of fish and shellfish production areas. (Nat. Marine Fisheries Service) 2. - "2. Loss of habitat. Would result in loss of important oquahc oZimt, and change in fresh water/sot, water boundary would result. (Bu. of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, Dept. of Game) 3. 13. Loss of s whin urea. Some fish-spawning are. would e a". Bu. Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Service, Dept. at Game) Public Welfare 4. Improved streomflow. Flow could be improved 4. if the peop-Ie were allowed to remove debris from she streom. (C. Smith) 5. "5. Poor Ian. This alternative would be the same as Al rnativt 11, "Do Nothing." (A. Qua.) 6. 6. Incom lefe p protection, Thls plan would not produce needed protection for residents of Quilcene. (Willard Brown) Land Use 7, Rtduce Properly damaie. The log lams, which 7. cause the river to movt and erode its banks, should be removed. Removal of log !arts would have prevented the loss of 5 acres of (and al my place during the lost 2 floods. (A. Bolonder) Economy 8. 'S. Cost eeeeeds benefit,. Maintenance cost (a, outweighs mated ere if to residents. (Noncy Thorns) 9. 9. 29 x i r. ueyi "W ( , ?° Y r` t ll t`a+ ?r T',? d? "'? 1 v$ik""lR? YrAw}:" y ., nsF¢p - Yt I S . ) la Al ?' d r Q } i '?" , a ? , e..??+p'??Y•; lei C r?{ s' ) i 4 k?t1(? i t ti1 Je( ,;? ? ?'((yt1:'syt}?? v s s i ' r d i F?? i 1 T { t 7 ? f fi T h 1 J { r ?, 1 4?yih f _ ? Y S f ? Pit ? 7 4 kd ALTERNATIVE 9 - LMPM!'w:, M T f-MEM STORAGE DAM DESCRIPTION : A dam would I 1 be constructed on the Big Quilcene River about 4 to 5 miles southwest of T Quilcene. The dam W wntr.`? would be more than 200 W J? y Feet high and would. O/c impound about 4,500 acre-feet Dv/LCFA of water. Water t supply, power, recre- ation, and fish and wildlife could be in- POSSIBLE Srniiur.? eluded as purposes. pA(AJIT[S - C-instruction cost: r}' Federal $12,000,000 - $20,000,000 I Non-Federal One-half the cost of recreation facilities, plus the allocated Z cost of water supply. Annual operation and maintenance. Federal $240,000 Local Government - Operation of recreation facilities. Costs allocated to water supply. EFFECTS: ''Fish and wildlife-Not fully evaluated. Chum salmon spawning areas benefited. Water quality. Less turbidity during flood periods. Recreation. 'Lake usable for recreation. Water and land use. Reservoir would cover about 35 acres. People. Would reduce flood damages for residents of flood plain. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS: Average annual benefits - Flood control $20,000 t Water supply Not evaluated Recreation Not evaluated. Power 'Fish and wildlife 514,000 for chum salmon. (Detrimental to wildlife; other fish not Average annual cost - •1,185,000 evaluated. 'Changed, this draft. 30 ?s`' ALTERNATIVE 9 STORAGE DAM PROS CONS Natural Environment 1. Improved spawning grounds. Would provide more stable 1. spawning areas downstream. (A.Quom, T. Bogochus) 2. Im ov1 d fishing. Would provide a lake for raising „q •2. Poor facility. A flood storage dam may not provide mne and lorger fish. (A.Quom, T. Bogochus) - the type o! lake envisioned in PRO 2, 6, and 14, • since flood control would regviie reservoir fluctuo- t ion to contain high flows. We have some concern about creating a year-round lake, because of possible environmental changes downstream. (Depts. of Fisheries and Go-) 63. Could benefit fishery. Fisheries benefits would be 3. ?" - provided 17-95 slo i i-li.rs of downstream spawn- . irg areas and improved survival of eggs and fry. - A minor portion of the stream's coho production ? could be influenced in areas above the dam; how- • ever, existing hatchery operations normally regulate " abundance of this species. (Dept, of Fisheries) " v •4. Nal damaafn to Fish. This storage damwould r4. Deslro 1111 . lYldlife hobilat and fish spawning h a cause no Berri menro change for fish and wildlife. , wo areas e e d slrayed. (Bu, of Sport Fisheries ono - ') 1 (A. Quo.) Wildlife) ?.. ws?^? •5. Fish runs blocked now. A waterfall near the dam- r •5. Blocks fish runs. The 200-foot dam would block anod- site stops upstream migration of fish. (A. Quam, to us is utf izing the river above the dnneile. - T. Bogochus) (Nat. Marine Fisheries Service) Public Welfare 6. Increased recreation. The lake above the dam could ..*6. Recreation value low. We have plenty of lakes and a used(or uoaring, swimming, and other reereo- reservoin now; rive recmotion Is becoming a tionol purposes. (A. Ovens, T. Bogochus) scarcer commodity. (Nancy Thomas) 7. Decreosrd damages. Flood damages would be stopped •7. Damages nor sto d tomplelel Y. Would not control or 3'L it ies.denn of flood plain. (A.Quam, T. o omago?s. C. Smil Bogochus) J ;%> •B. Fills need for woler. Dam would furnish water for 0. eesrern Jef erson County, which is critically short of domestic water. (A. uam; Jefferson Co. Engr.- Becker; Port Townsend Leader) •9. No disruptions. Would cause no disruption to people, 9. properly, or stmombed in problem area. (A. Quam) 610. Eliminates flooding. A flood control dam would slim- 10. .are fu odi.g. (A. Quota) t? tc' Land Use r 11. improved lan sna. The flood plain lands below the ?•I1. Intensive use undmiroble. Flood plain lands are a ' dam cou d developed for more Inlenllve use. ce valuable open-space rmoum. and should not be ?' .+•? ,^?, 4.. ?Y. (A. Clue., T. Bogochus) object ro Inremive sne. (Nancy The-) 31 (K Y 1, ` ?F .? ¢c..c,+r?'rra YP?4Sk ?a'*? ss. - v?C??„+ 5 ! al ALTERNATIVE 9 (Cons) n +) STORAGE DAM s a+I1 .-LAOS CONS -- Econom •12. Requires no land purchase. All lands required are 12. national forest, where purchase is not required. (A. Guam) _ 13. _ •14. Return on costs. Only alternative which would ring a return on the cost. O d M costs could be returned by sale of water to Bremerton, Quil- ''?" { Gene, Irondole, Hadlock, Chimicum, and Port Townsend, with the lake to be used as a reservoir during low-water months, supplemented by pumped water from Dosewollips and/or the Duckobush River. Excess power generated at the dam would be sold to pager Sound Power 3 Light Co. (A. Quom) 32 13. Costs excessive. The cost of a dam for flood contror-would probably be excessive. (Willard Brown) 14. F z< 55'. ';^± u ? ?.r dr kl' 1 l f 1 v wm "" ?}f!°s wl r ? r fir- r f rw w ue4p,(fis §?? .?' r .??? .@ '.?? FW6 `& W-: r r `alY 7 , i r a h ,.rn. rt r ' r r ? T h?s+ Ab ?( r ' t _ tl,A 5 dl fl 1 1 S t ` r'. 4 ? ll F I ? l ? f vt:i ? k ? Nk8 . rt. y. namr nvcaw' „v? Y ALTERNATIVE 10 ' RELOCATION OF RESIDENTS, FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT AND ZONING ^ ;C )ESCRIPTION: All residences and other ll ?' famogea le structures would be moved a new areas on high ground. Flood loin development would be restricted _QUILCEIVE a such uses as parks, which are com- atible with frequent flooding. This II ' 7 could be done either by purchasing us W. ?a - ?nd holdings and allowing residents find new homes, or by develop- EXIST, LEVL"E ?? t nn•C ig a residential area on higher L / X31 ' U'?-?;'• round end movie the houses nd residents in the flood ???j_"! lain to the new area. -`?- Y Imolementation cost. ASSUMEU,100 YEAR.vr Federal - $527,000 FLOOD_ LIMIT: Non-Federal - $100,000 (lands) Annual operation and maintenance costs. Federal - None Local Government - Enforcing zoning regulations. .: :FECTS: v ASSUMED ,100 YEAR FLOOD LIMIT'S C?„.•, N• x 1 EXIST, PARTIAL J La'E TEMPORARY, LEVEES s " 'Fish and wildlife. Upland habitat damaged. Flood plain and fish habitat iproved. Recreation. Opportunity to develop evacuated areas for recreational use. *Land. Future use of flood plain would be reserved for flood-compatible es, such as forms, parks, golf courses, and parking lots. Water quality. Not evaluated. *People. Re ocated people would be free of flood hazard, but would have adjust to new surroundings. "Flood control. River would remain uncontrolled. Main source of flood moge - residential development - would be eliminated. Farm and other land wld remain subject to damage, ')NOMIC ANALYSIS: Average annual benefit $12,800 'Average annual cost - $37,100 hanged this draft. 34 it ???Nt1^ 1 L s ? ? ??` q$ ? 1n4` J?*•r" nc'Sry SI,rnYI?? ? "• y t A '.. . ? p ' g L? _%[7A lCrt?l ? 4aN.? ? J f v Y t (y 4 ?1 l?? e ? 1 r T ? f l r ?, 5 *' - 5 i v4F , tf i '.. 41 a N te. :C4 y qp e lic ALTERNATIVE 10 RELOCATION OF RESIDENTS, FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT AND ZONING PROS CONS c - ?. r Natural Environment w w, ? 1. Sound develo ment possible. Comprehensive 1. _ a _ p on o environments y sound development - _ can be initiated. (Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) Public Welfare - 2, Open spaces and reue- 2. Improved recreation. ? , otion opportunities are enhoncad with nwinten- once of undeveloped flood plain. (Bu. of q ^ Outdoor Recreation) 5' 3. Benefits to residents. Ris=ible long-term improve- 3, Damages to residents. Short-term dislocation of ment for people. Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) some peop e. Z. of Outdoor Recreation 4. My home is here. I will 4. Disrupti s = Willa d Brown e5. Allows fresh start. Would allow town w make a 5. r fret, start wish future development free from flood . worry. (Nancy Thomas) - v }. Land Use 't r 6. Geor land use to natural attributes. Encourages 6. 7r, and use compatible wit the ands natural al- ti f O d R ) I - ecrea oor on ut tributes. (Bu. o ? onom E y c 7. Reduces damages. It would reduce current damages •7. Damu as would still exist. It would not control ' and prevent increases. (Bu. of Outdoor Recreation) o damages, C. SmilTj '8. Boost to local economy. Recreational use of flood 8. t pain could ring o boost to local economy If town tp i makes effort to attract visors. (Noney Thomas) y a I/ PROS and CONS shown for Alternative 2, 'Flood Plain Management,' would alto apaly here. 35 SETBACK LEVEES 'DESCRIPTION: Levees would be set back from river to mini- \\? 100 ASSUMED mize effects on environment. FLOOD LIMIT Existing levees would be s Ryy• removed, and buildings moved from rights-of-way ar N"Y LPL ll? N q - and river banks. Home owners would be relo- EXIST. LEVEE 1 SETBACK ?, ... Gated. LEVE? ell G d Construction cost. ASSUMED 100 YEAR ?+UI E FLOOD LIfr11T Federal (Levee construction) $168,000 Non-Federal (Land, 14 houses, 'xidge and rood 230,000 alterations) Annual operation an°ramaintenance. r 7' b1 Federal Non-Federal $ one m 200 EFFECTS: •Fish and wildlife. Environment improved. Water quality. Possible turbidity during removal of existing levees. Recreation. Paths could be placed on levees for access to the river. Land. Would require 14+ acres of land. Existing levees would be removed. Pep le. Would displace 13 houses and 1 trailer with 38 residents, and 1 business - Flood damages would be reduced for more than 112 people' Flood control. Frequency of flooding would be reduced to once in 200 years- Levee would protect about 105 acres . ECONOMIC ANALYSIS: Average annual enefif - $15,000 Average annual cost - 25,500 *Changed, this draft. 36 pp t W. A l tiY ?1 J' ??4 li + 1 Zi' kWYh 9 t ALTERNATIVE 11 SETBACK LEVEES Natural Environment PROS CONS •I. Excessive scouring prevented. Lower velocities to prevent excessive scouring, (Dept. of Ecology) and less scouring of streambed than alternatives 3, 4, and 5. (C. Smith) 2. Preserves ecology of stream. (Dept. of Ecology) e3. Habitat improved. Improves fish and wildlife habi- toi. (Nancy Thomas) '4. Not detrimental to fish on_d o sY tens. Setback levees wound not a detriments ro onad_us fish spawn- Ing areas; oyster production areas would be pro- tected by existing diked tidelands. (National Marine Fisheries Service) 11. Ma_damage s?treombed. There is the possibility of s l igh t increases in scouring over existing con- ditions, under extreme flooding conditions. (Dept. of Fisheries) 2. 3. 4. Public Welfare 5. Increased recreational opportunities. (Dept. of 5. Ecology) •6. Compromise ..sure. Offers compromise between 46. Measure insufficient. Would not control all town s desire mod protection and public's in- damages. C. Smith) termt in having Federal money spent for widest public benefit. (Nancy Thomas) Lard Use 7. Not too restrictive. Many existing uses may be be continued. (Dept. of Ecology) •8. Reslrictions desirable. Land-use restrictions de- sirable to prevent intensive development of flood plain. (Nancy Thomas) mts inimized. River coupe it •9. Lond requireen reTtive y straig t, minimizing land requiremenn for setback levee. (Nancy Thomas) Economy 10. Lower costs. Lower dikes, so less installation and maintenance costs. (Dept. of Ecology) •11. Park possible. Some potential for tourist anroc- Ile. in riveaide pork, if present levee does not bar octets to river. (Nancy Thomas) Other e12. Plan ce Coble. This alternmive would be ac- cp.ae, provided no encroachment is made into the normal floodwoy, and the river channel Is allowed to follow its present meandering path. (Dept, .1 Fisheries) 37 7. 8. Requires restrictions. Creates lond-use rrstric Cons, with local zoning required. (Dept. of Ecology) 9. More right-of-way required. (Dept, of Ecology) 10. Higher cosh for right-of-way. ()ept, of Ecology) 11. 12, t Ala: _ .?_ Ep x u J '"5, 4^"'l' (F ' t if - r?ro- n 4 rc f^ 91"s * ?l 1y?r`$ ['W J 1 1 11??^I 4 + 1 ?IEIA.?' J??a A t ± ? . r, s ha+ ? + f ri `'s P • gT t ?? i ?. x? 1 1 , A?ivb?`4? s r ? j4 k r : h AI TFDKIATIM: 7'J ?u Th Wa SETBACK LEVEE ON LEFT BANK AND CLOSE LEVEE ON RIGHT BANK *DESCRIPTION: This alternative would provide for a levee close to the river on the right (south) bank, and a levee set back on the left bank. Existing levee on the left bank would urwr be removed. Buildings ° would be vacated from EXIST. LE right-of-way and left L bank. ASSUMED , 100 YEAR FLOOD LIMIT E ) SETBACK ASSUMED 100 YEAR Construction cost. FLOOD LIMIT Federal Non-Federal (Relocations, road and bridge alterations, and rights- of-way) Total Annual operation and maintenance. Federal Non-Federal CLOSE LEVEE OUILCENE $190,000 75,000 $265,000 None $ 2,000 EFFECTS: *Fish and wildlife. Left bank environment improved. Induced high flood velocities in channel would damage soaturwning beds. Wafer quality. Possible bidity during construction. Recreation. Paths could be placed on levees for access to the river. *Lond. Would require 12 acres of land; left-bank levee would be removed. People. Would displace 3 houses, 1 packing plant, I trailer house, and 9 people. Flood damages would be reduced for more than 140 residents in the flood plain. Flood control. Frequency of overbank flooding would be reduced to once in 200 years. Levee would protect 107+ acres. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS Average annual benefit $15,500, minus $5,000 (fish detriments), or $10,500. Average annual cost 17,700 *Changed, this draft. 38 elm rMIT17' 3. a. a?• S. ALTERNATIVE 12 SETBACK LEVEE ON LEFT (NORTH) BANK AND CLOSE LEVEE ON RIGHT (SOUTH) BANK PROS CONS Natural Environment 1. Preserves stream. This plan preserves the ecolssgy 1. of the stream. (Dept. of Ecology) 2. Less streambed scouring. Lower velocities to. 2. prevent excess scouring. (Dept, of Ecology) 6. More recreation. Increase in recreational opportunities. (Dept. of Ecology) e7. Fewer displacements needed. Displaces fewer pcp(e I an A rem-ive is. (Nancy Thomas) 8. 7. e8. Inadequate. Would not control all damages. (C. ?t s Land Lhe 9 Some uses remain. Many existing uses may be 9. rictions on use. Requires local zoning and Som . continued. (Dept. of Ecology) anrntric lions. (Dept. of Ecology) 'Deli table d- to prevent intensive development of flood plain. (Nancy Thomas) e10 Less oddilional land requirements. River course 10. Additional land required. More right-of-way would . is ive?y 'freight, minimi zing and require- a required on mart tide of risror than for Alterna- menh for setback levee. (Nancy Thomas) . 3. (Dept. or Ecology. Economy 11 Some costs less. Lower dikes, to leis Installation 11. Hi her cost. Overall cost would be greater than . and nenrenonce costs. (Dept, or Ecology) or A ternolive J. (Dept. or Ecology) Other 12. 12. 1 prefer Alternative 3. (W. Brown) 39 r *3, Lack of moneuv ing room. Gives river channel Tess moneuveri room than Alternate it. (Nancy Thomas) •4. Spawning bed deterioration Mn e. This alterna- tive wou d is ea ,g- ev; a thaAllernati ve 11, because some deterioration of spawning beds might occur near the right bank levee. (Not. Marine Fisheries Service) 'S. Floodwo restrictions. Causes soma restrictions of f oodway. Dept. of Fisheries) Public Welfare 6. RT 4a wt's I .ter. - 'ALTERNATIVE 13 RIGHT-BANK LEVEE (ALTERNATIVES 3, 5, 11, AND 12) EXTENDED TO HIGH-TIDE LINE DESCRIPTION: This al temat Iva provides for extending(--' I tFe rig t south) bank levee described in Alternatives s 3, 5, 11, and 12 downstream to the high-tide line, L! , where It would join an existing levee. Riprop would ASSUMED ' be provided where needed. QUILC ENE ? ) 100 YEAR FLOOD Llbil T' a, RI?.;. ??( TE M. P 0 R aRY -LEVEES EXIST. LEVEE'-71 v I '•30 ASSUMED 100 YEAR 'HIGH TIDE ' ?'!? FLOOD WAIT' LINE Alternative 3 Alternative 5 Alternative 11 Alternative 12 , Construction cast plus extension plus extension plus extension plus extension i Federal $295,000± 5480,000± $270,0001 $290,000± Local 23,000± 41,000± 237,000: 72,000± I Total 18, 660-1 fSErMN 5 7,000± j3a2 ooo: . Annuol operation and mointenor,ce Loco S 3,100± $ 5,000± S 3,000± $ 310001 EFFECTS: Fish and wildlife. Would help provide protection for oyster beds south of river's mouth. Other problems and benefits -d be t e some as for the alternative selected to be used in conjunction wit h the levee extension. " Water quality. Possible increase in turbidity dur ing construction. ' Recrealfon. Paths could be placed on levees for access to river at other place than at bridges. Land. Would provide protection on south side of river between rafdential oreo and high-tide line. Damoget to HdaTonds south or levee would be substantially red uced by directing Ilowt away from oyster beds. People. Little effect due to extension. Flood control. Frequency of overbonk flooding would be reduced to lest than once in 200 ysan. ECONOMIC ANALYSISt Average annual benefitss Flood control $16,000± $17,000± $16,0001 $16,000± I Oyster benefits 500± 5001 5001 500t Fish detriments - -5,000± -5,000± -2,500s Net benefits -3T1;3W STx7mN- 41 Wk Average annual cost 21,9001 35,60Ds 33,600± 24,4001 'Added, this draft 40 s ? 4F .; 3 F. Fto IL 1 1 ALTERNATIVE 13 RIGHT BANK LEVEE(ALTERNATIVES 's, 5, 11, AND 12) EXTENDED TO HIGH-TIDE LINE PROS CONS s.n.; Natural Environment 1. Protect life on tidelands. Would 1. provide protection for oyster beds and other sea life on tidelands south of river's mouth. (C. Smith) " 2. 2. t ? f 0. ? }J } N' Econom 2. Valuable protection. Would help 3. t, protect oyster beds with a potential overage production valued at _ $75,000 per year, before harvesting. (C. Smith) siSY Smarr 41 d ?t •? f1 f { , i ¢ ? ,k it F v ? t rt, ? F 4 1 ?,, I ?' d+6'E a --, s`• Z > o w f W o u O Q O Z oul7 aP1-46:H n •'e viv! ?? oiler ?a ila,s I I ??" !``V?'j 0 0@ 0 . 0 JUN 448!S uo oano, 0W.s n •?luN ,1Qaj U O aana, 1ooyi j ?,_? 0 \Y 0 0 0 0 aana, ryoogias 0 0 @ 0 0 @ 0 Fuawa6o -!-Id P lob '4uaP.Ua j o uot?o»? ° ® 0 0 0 0 0 waQ a6aoF5 c D 0 @ 0 0 i 0 0 luawanadwl lauuoy) w @ (D 0 0 ( I 0 louwy) vmd.(8 yF,aN ?? 0 0 (?) 0 I 0 lauuoy] -"a 44-S " O 0 0 0 0 S 10 0 wa) woaLl FUMOp wono, out, °PN-461H of mono ° 4 t 0 0 0 0 0 0-1 0 1°Uu°Peaa Lod aouo, 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 ?uawa6ouoyy -told Po°li ® 0 0 Z Z ® 01 0 6ulywN op ^ 0 0 ? Z Z Z 0 0 ` a : L a 1- ? o ? 4 _ - °x O L v u .1 oc ? a o W ? gg ?1,., Ny y? J 1 AF Iy A A. i--`tNUS ': fC AGENCIES AND GROUPS URGED TO PARTICIPAI, ORGANIZATION AND LOCATION Contact Helped prepare draft doted Nov. 71 Oct. 72 L LOOCA - AL Jelrenon County Commissioners, Part Townsend Port of Port Townsend, Port Townsend George Randolph, Mgr. X X Jeffenon County Planning Comm., - Port Townsend Joseph Dunlap, Jr. X Jefferson County Engineer, Port Townsend Edwin Becker X STATE Dept. of Ecology, Olympia Howard R. Steeley, 753,587.9 X X Dept. of Game, Olympia Robert Wasson, 352-2487, Art Crews X X Dept. of Highways, Olympia Bill Karr Commissioner of Public Land, Olympia Dept. of Natural Resources, Olympia Donald R. Hopkins X Dept. of Social and Health Services Olympia Dept. oI Fisheries Ray Johnson X X Wash. State Ecological Comm. FEDERAL Bu: X-Outdoor Recreation, Seattle Maurice Lundy, Dir., PNW Region 442-4706 X Notional Park Service, Portland, Ore. Notional Marine Fisheries Service, Portland, Oregon John 1. Hodges, George O. Black X Bu. of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Richard L. Morgan, 503-234-3361, GaryKline X X Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, Seattle ' Federal Water Quality Admin., Portland Environmental Protection Agency Francis Nelson INDIVIDUALS CONTRIBUTING TO-BROCHURE. H. F. Beck, Quilcene 765.3728 X Alex V. Bergeson, Port Townsend X Tony Bogaches, Quilcene 765-3557 X X Mr. and Mrs. Andrew Bolander, Quilcene 765-3557 X Willard Brown, Quilcene 765-3445 X Mrs. Dale McCoy, Quilcene 765-3555 X Arvid H. Oucm, Quilcene 765-3393 X X H. M. Richbourg, Quilcene 765-3441 X X Patricia Stumbough, Quilcene 765-3308 X Noncy Thomas, Tacoma X 43 '¢i5. _ P , 6 ? f UNFAVORABLE SECTION 205 DETAILED PROJECT REPORT z ?` .'; ( 4 1 1111 t BIG QUILCENE RIVER, QUILCENE, WASHINGTON F APPENDIX B r ? z FLOOD HAZARD DATA October 1972 Prepared by U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT SEATTLE, WASHINGTON Z%kf IU y i ?'. 11?k?11?r1,Y ?q ?i vast x'fJ ?1 v1,.1 Nn fb it?y T - a , d - ' b (t 'F J U ?'• , dJ f h HUI f a r e J-A n ss? iQ, I ?50 c h rb 00" 0021tzh ` f aos'S?% 28{? !cam! ? ' z !` ` ?L %Z ? g ? •i ? 00°90 42s 1?Z ?? ? °ooo?i ?S y ? n oc2 oz ; „t/k.J e ? _ O C ? 1 ? ?g52,c i ??' 1z S z ? o?oL n o o 5 ? 1 I 5. ?' ?' g C;,o prZ 0' 00 CO QP U z o3 S 1 1 O, I. ?SC£r`? 0 9 L ? oo- I/ ? oZ,o12r9fi ' C?Of ? ? I I - ?oO Q 7 c4L?5«: ? I ? no ?L r?. ? P ? / ^ c Oplfil. - P OQSj''/' OQ-Css:t 9E W boos 11 o,o'<z sis !ch p W,. °q PO P f ? A t -- Qq-.. _ ... _ 52 e no??o2 qos dd?s ., ,)?; p0000r Z K/Or?i X py? I ?:r SQ1YE? AIL( _ooo moSL 1 -6a ooo?? I Sf+9'4e ?oOZ! Lh `II To ca}, : I pOSpS?bl 54//1 W QQS?g '?° 00.5 Pp G Q OO.??S I i"'? NL21 bl -2-9S OO X2/2 bQSL, O/O 013Z -S:;2 I I. 0o o Q? ?5$ 2 00 Z //i foo orc1 ? oo?o.S's l s r '' ay, j 00txpl ?zl 0 60 250J216£00 ooorz/ GL?5 sl n O?xJ? OS%I °0 I t I O -C; L 00 ?pQS 10/ ?5lZ /c6 Ohl o°po0 x Aa °ZJ oSZ f'-5 I O5 I ?, ?. p00 +S P' SL I 02 ' ? 7 ??L s t ! 1 A r < < . oml _i _ Sos? 2 - _ooz.l, ?1 -- I Ir I v0f?4?7 O , ? ? ;, ? a r " Sfi oo o£ 1h1 geoocla c o(? Q C e On1+. 11 ooS rl ?a4 00 IL 000 01 Ira Fr'2OSL 51:.. oZL' Sh 60 00 _OOQI $'14kc o p??rrc 0 p0 !/' 4 f ! Oo,,?,? ! ao? 00.5 (7 SZ t2 / + I +s• no 0o pO?c<5 /4 h oo ss?'>? oo Si?'?Z r l rl `, 5,'Y,24 W?'14tL-j 06W ,O'iC •firlC 3NONd • rl9c-, NOLONIHGb'M (7N36NM01 Lttoj • 3sncmitjnoo I i a d { miaom Onend 3O 1N3N.LHVd3O .11NnOO NOSLI33331' !J { , ?ax? ? tl "v POP I - - ?r?-- a? is I d s SL S /I?Sz I ?o? i r/s °°ooo?wz cos ` . oo -- ?o r Lao SC7/ Sao ? ._ ; w 4 ooo'S I , ? { - he ._(4 2 ry?k r l i o I O/R noQ Lr a° oS /sh S? s/.19 b s° : S 1 ;. z ' I I ? ooa .? ? _02 h l7Z ?QS2 rS, 5?_5 60 00 56 1 I 00 O0,S ELL w00//SS O£Sr?Z I GyS215? III cl L(rS9/ s?l'29 no i oa- _I ?° i ?° oS. o z /z z to/ r^?-S1? hS ?n05 --- OIl I QOSI?j ?IS o°S4 OJ rim ooao5 /ZZ a (L -V I !o 5z (o OOO:r 11 00 0°2 'z IC 7 4 ao0?? ??? ,SLf? `ZL ?os??9 pOp52:!!/ 00 I I a,5 4?S O Z -L? 1 ? oa ? / S? /L</ QSI. v oo r i ? O OBI ?' ': mCbq`' Qa; rO / pOO /s/ljz oa-C7o (h ( , ("li-E a p L i <254 %2: I I 'SL ?'? -??F'rEJE?E ?,^771 I ? _ ooo%/ oQ- cZl I OLE rod/ ` boos ??i !O o S??( I Qui9 2b f• f^.?`. ,.. -_? 0 9- i . J O' o z z2z... oo ?? riS -I no I I r..? _ S ° Sh no Q r k C) as ?l bb S-0 I .a °ooo s a5L'?z ?o?G?Or09 I , W -o°P5L r°??JOr2l _. ._ ?ri°OOlj1?L I ? ,000r$j ?Oc2'!v :/ :-i0 QQ2ljh. O a5L`) ?n0gnIn SOL21, " SLS /4/ o00hr oos?'2(,1 r' ?. r.3Ldl14r rJ/1?.;:.//Yi7y?a:/ I crli? {}'L _w? F.. __.? - IL you I xl { _,d Y" >Fa, 111 T f E ?y ?I r SOSE -5[3C 3NOHr1 • 09CE16 Nf]I ONIH sVM 'O tJ35Nh101 LtJOd • :;SnOH-Lmno.1 S>INOM 31-18f11 30 _LN3Nl.HVd30 AINnOZI NOSa3333f t. A 1 . A - da _ y BLEALTH VITAL ENV JMENTAL HEALTH P COMMUNICABLE U DISEASE CONTROL NURSING STATISTICS HEALTH EDUCATION ` l *n . x JEFFERSON COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT w, 802SHERIDAN PORT TOWNSEND, WASH. 98368 (206) 385-0722 r• December 22, 1987 •„ Bob Nesbitt, P.E. Department of Public Works Jefferson County Courthouse Port Townsend, WA 98368 , +a6'?; Dear Bob: t ? Thank you for filling me in last week regarding the flood i F,. situation in the Quilcene area. It is very disturbing to me to consider the potential for water borne illness given this , situation. I am in the process of drafting a news release to urge all public and private water purveyors to here their water $ tested to protect them and to get a better idea of how wide , spread the contamination might be. We have, however, already e.•t received a smattering of unsatisfactory reports from Quilcene. Contamination of drinking water supplies is the most critical issue we deal with at the health department,. Some of the germs we must deal with when contamination occurs are coliform (sewage) bacteria, typhoid, viruses, the pseudomonades, staphylococcus, strep, protozoans and many others. I consider it imperative that everything be done that can be in order to protect these water V supplies from contamination, +? 1 I am looking forward to discussing this situation with you further. +" „ s Sincerely, 1 r, Y # Rick Miklich f ',? ? v Director of Environmental Health RM/cp ,?,.. -?hvru?s;..-,.,? ..., a .. ,. . , , t r : e . T ]ii t+ 2 pl v P?NS4 ? 6 f ? .Wn ?Y ?? 1 ? yl 11 ? ,o 1 ?,, ?Afl 1 ? d R °ii 1 ti t - 1 f j? My _ ? tit y ? - - ; ?A Fi,"? pp?? JACK WESTERMAN III JEFFERSON COUNTY ASSESSOR COURTHOUSE - PORT TOWNSEND. WASHINGTON 9&168 - TELEPHONE (206)085.7262 d January 20, 1983 JEFFERSON COUNTY LANDS OWNER ACRES % OF COUNTY " ?: 'Mz 1.• Federal Lands w c - (a) National Forest 155,466 13% '.: ? f (b) National Park 528,218 44% (c) Miscellaneous 72,818 6% , 2. State Owned 193,039 167 3, Privately Owned $? (a) Timber Land* 185A 16/ (b) Open Space Agriculture 4,027 Less than 1/ %i (c) Open Space, Open Space 333 Less than 1% 1! (d) Fair Market Value 53,121 411/. . TOTAL ACREAGE IN JEFFERSON COUNTY 1,192,560 7pryG f15? :54- Mai ' n *Inc ludes Classified, Designated, Reforestation d Open Space Timber Land f? ? ti t Jl VOL Q i v, n OM 01"011 t rr: i, * ' ,d''- - r , s i.?,1raG14t o- dr f (VS:. t a • ^L? S 1" ?` ' '??' A L a d e r ^? I < f a Lr , x &981 ) t V 1 r 1 ? ti!y II ' I ? K ILL IiSG , h fig t? r c SEy r i T7 ) , r r • ?.'.?ratce _Y"+cen ;,"' ? sm?„-• ,# ,5 ,. a. ..crs,.„..?;a 4 1 _ Flood Control Zone Districts 86.15.040 (5) "Storm water control improvement" means any (2) Countywide flood control zone districts shall be t' works, projects, or other facilities necessary to control established pursuant to the requirements of RCW 86- and treat storm water within the county or any zone or .15.020, 86.15.030 and 86.15.040 as now law of hereaf- zones. ter amended. Subzones established from countywide ' (6) "Supervisors" means the board of supervisors, or flood control zone districts shall be established by reso- governing body, of a zone. lotion of the board and the provisions of RCW 86.15- (7) "Zones" means flood control zone districts which .020, 86.15.030 and shall not apply to the establishment are quasi municipal corporations of the state of of such subzone as authorized by this section. Washington created by this chapter. [1983 c 315 § 11; (3) Such subzones shall be operated and administered 1961 c 153 § 1.1 in the same manner as any other flood control zone dis- '? t? trict in accordance with the provisions of chapter 86.15 Serembility-1983 c 315: See note following RCW 90.03.500. RCW. (4) Such Subzones shall have authority to exercise any 86.15.020 Zones-Creation. The board may initi- and all powers conferred by the provisions of RCW 86- - ate, by affirmative vote of a majority of the board, the .15.080 as now law or hereafter amended. creation of a zone or additional zones within the county, (5) The board shall exercise the same power, author- - and without reference to an existing zone or zones, for ity, and responsibility over such Subzones as it exercises the purpose of undertaking, operating, or maintaining over flood control zone districts in accordance with the flood control projects or storm water control projects or provisions of chapter 86.15 RCW as now law or hereaf- y`io groups of projects that are of special benefit to specified ter amended, and without limiting the generality of this - areas of the county. Formation of a zone may also be subsection, the board may exercise over such Subzones, initiated by a petition signed by twenty-five percent of the powers granted to it by RCW 86.15.160, 86.15.170, - the electors within a proposed zone based on the vote 86.15.176 and 86.15.178 as now law or hereafter cast in the last county general election. If the formation amended. [1969 ex.s. c 195 § 1.1 of the zone is initiated by petition, the board shall in- t: '^ f - corporate the terms of the petition in a resolution within 86.15.030 Districts incorporating watersheds author- forty days after receiving the petition from the county !zed Formation, hearing and notice. Upon receipt of 45 .ct auditor. Thereafter, the procedures for establishing a a petition asking that a zone be created, or upon motion I4 zone shall be the same whether initiated by motion of of the board, the board shall adopt a resolution which `°. the board or by a petition of electors. shall describe the boundaries of such proposed zone; de. e- Petitions shall be in a form prescribed and approved scribe in general terms the flood control needs or re- by the county auditor and shall include the necessary le- quirements within the zone; set a date for public hearing gal descriptions and other information necessary for es- upon the creation of such zone, which shall be not more i tablishment of a zone by resolution. When the sponsors than thirty days after the adoption of such resolution. of a petition have acquired the necessary signatures, they Notice of such hearing and publication shall be had in a & ' shall present the petition to the county auditor who shall the manner provided in RCW 36.32.120(7)., ttt syl thereafter certify the sufficiency of the petition within At the hearing scheduled upon the resolution, the Y forty-five days. If the petition is found to meet the re- board shall permit all interested parties to be heard. I quirements specified in this chapter, the auditor shall Thereafter, the board may reject the resolution or it may transmit the petition to the board for their action; if the modify the boundaries of such zone and make such other r petition fails to meet the requirements of this chapter, it corrections or additions to the resolutions as they deem 't shall be returned to the sponsors. [ 1983 c 315 § 12; 1961 necessary to the accomplishment of the purpose of this ?rC c 153 § 2.] chapter: Provided, That if the boundaries of such zone s I+{ y Se.enMUty-1983 c 315: S« note following RCw 90.03.500. are enlarged, the board shall hold an additional hearing following publication and notice of such new boundaries: 5 Provided further, That the boundaries of any zone shall 36.15.025 Districts Incorporating watersheds author- generally follow the boundaries of the watershed area ?l ized?ubzones authorized-Creation, proce- affected: Provided further, That the immediately pre- n dure-Administration-Powers. (1) The board is ceding proviso shall in no way limit or be construed to r authorized to establish a countywide flood control zone prohibit the formation of a countywide flood control =r ; M $ district incorporating the boundaries of any and all wa. zone district authorized to be created by RCW f tersheds located within the county which are not specifi- 86.15.025. tally organized into flood control zone districts Within ten days after final hearing on a resolution, x' established pursuant to chapter 86.15 RCW. Upon es. the board shall issue its order. (1969 ex.s, c 195 § 2; tablishment of a countywide flood control zone district 1961 c 153 § 3.) as authorized by this section, the board is authorized I` and may divide any or all of the zone so created into 86.15.040 Limitation on the formation of zones. Any k separately designated Subzones and such subzones shall zone to be created pursuant to this chapter which in- then be operated and be legally established in the same eludes lands located within the limits of any city or town 114 K manner as any flood control zone district established or flood control district shall, prior to its creation, be boo, pursuant to chapter 86.15 RCW, approved by the legislative body of such city, town ors, ' + ' I t 0911 FA 1 1Tltk 86 RCW-p 351 l..I' 1' a"Try t.i rre}', rv 'P? . -Tie ?? r . r.7 7 7 ' s 11 ?.:y 'I ? r 4 k 36.32.090 Title 36 RCW: Counties 1867 p 53 § 7; 1863 p 541 § 7; 1854 p 420 § 7; RRS § 4049. Cf. 1893 c 75 § 2; RRS § 4050.] 36.32.100 Chairman of board Election, powers. The board of county commissioners at their first session after the general election shall elect one of its number to preside at its meetings. He shall sign all documents re- quiring the signature of the board, and his signature as chairman of the board shall be as legal and binding as if all members had affixed their names. In case the chair- man is absent at any meeting of the board, all docu- ments requiring the signature of the board shall be signed by both members present. [1963 c 4 § 36.32.100. Prior: Code 1881 § 2676; 1869 p 305 § 14; 1867 p 55 § 14; 1863 p 542 § 14; 1854 p 421 § 14; RRS § 4051.] 36.32.110 Clerk of board. The county auditor shall be the clerk of the board of county commissioners unless the board of county commissioners designates one of its employees to serve as clerk who shall attend its meetings and keep a record of its proceedings. [1981 c 240 § l; 1963 c 4 § 36.32.110. Prior: Code 1881 § 2668; 1869 p 304 § 6; 1867 p 53 § 6; 1863 p 541 § 6; 1854 p 420 § 6; RRS § 4052.] 36.32.120 Powers of legislative authority. The legis- lative authorities of the several counties shall: (1) Provide for the erection and repairing of court houses, jails, and other necessary public buildings for the use of the county; (2) Lay out, discontinue, or alter county roads and highways within their respective counties, and do all other necessary acts relating thereto according to law, except within cities and towns which have jurisdiction over the roads within their limits; (3) License and fix the rates of ferriage; grant grocery and other licenses authorized by law to be by them granted; (4) Fix the amount of county taxes to be assessed ac- cording to the provisions of law, and cause the same to be collected as prescribed by law: Provided, That the legislative authority of a county may permit all moneys, assessments, and taxes belonging to or collected for the use of any county, including any amounts representing estimates for future assessments and taxes, to be depos- ited by any taxpayer prior to the due date thereof with the treasurer or other legal depository for the benefit of the funds to which they belong to be credited against any future tax or assessment that may be levied or be- come due from the taxpayer: Provided further, That the taxpayer, with the concurrence of the county legislative authority, may designate the particular fund against which such prepayment of future tax or assessment shall be credited; (5) Allow all accounts legally chargeable against the county not otherwise provided for, and audit the ac- counts of all officers having the care, management, col- lection, or disbursement of any money belonging to the county or appropriated to its benefit; (6) Have the care of the county property and the management of the county funds and business and in the n* t 11948rpt6y?', If'.i'"?' Y name of the county prosecute and defend all actions fo and against the county, and such other powers as are o may be conferred by law; (7) Make and enforce, by appropriate resolutions o ordinances, all such police and sanitary regulations are not in conflict with state law, and within the unin corporatcd area of the county may adopt by referenu Washington state statutes and recognized codes and/o compilations printed in book form relating to the con struction of buildings, the installation of plumbing, thi installation of electric wiring, health, or other subjects and may adopt such codes and/or compilations or por tions thereof, together with amendments thereto, or ad ditions thereto: Provided, That except for Washingto state statutes, there shall be filed in the county auditor' office one copy of such codes and compilations ten day prior to their adoption by reference, and additional copies may also be filed in library or city offices within th county as deemed necessary by the county legislativ authority: Provided further, That no such regulation code, compilation, and/or statute shall be effective un less before its adoption, a public hearing has been het thereon by the county legislative authority of which a least ten days' notice has been given. Any violation o such regulations, ordinances, codes, compilations, and/o statutes or resolutions shall constitute a misdemeanor Provided further, That violation of a regulation, ordi nance, code, compilation, and/or statute relating to traf fc including parking, standing, stopping, and pedestriai offenses is a traffic infraction, except that violation of regulation, ordinance, code, compilation, and/or status equivalent to those provisions of Title 46 RCW set In rtl in RCW 46.63.020 remains a misdemeanor. The notic must set out a copy of the proposed regulations; or if code is adopted by reference the notice shall set fort) the full official title and a statement describing the gen oral purpose of such code. The notice shall also include the day, hour, and place of hearing and must be given b; publication in the newspaper in which legal notices a the county are printed; (8) Have power to compound and release in whole o in part any debt due to the county when in their opinioi the interest of their county will not be prejudice, thereby, except in cases where they or any of them ar personally interested; (9) Have power to administer oaths or affirmation necessary in the discharge of their duties and commit fo contempt any witness refusing to testify before ther with the same power as justices of the peace. [1982 226 § 3; 1979 ex.s. c 136 § 35; 1975 ist ex.s, c 216 11 1967 ex.s. a 59 § 1; 1963 c 4 § 36.32.120. Prior: 1961 27 § 2; prior; (i) 1947 c 61 § 1; 1943 c 99 § I; Cod 1881 § 2673; 1869 p 305 § 11; 1867 p 54 § 11: 1863 542 § 11; 1854 p 421 § 11; Rem. Supp, 1947 § 4056. (i Code 1881 $ 2681; 1869 p 307 § 20; 1867 is 56 1 2 1863 p 543 § 20; 1854 p 422 § 20; RRS 1 4061. (li Code 1881 § 2687; 1869 p 308 1 26; 1867 p 57 § 2 1863 p 545 $ 28; 1854 is 423 122; RRS 14071.1 Effectirr duo-1462 c 236: S. note following RCW 17.21.180. ERecdtc duo- S.-billry-1979 nt c IX S. rata fo lowing RCW 46.63.010. r, r as r n s f 't I t, _?? 9t r t• r1 `? zo, n c FEOE RAL EME RG ENCV MANAGEMENT AGENf? DAMAGE SURVEY REPORT - DATA SHEAff _ PART I • PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. APPLICANT NAME (State, local Yo?arnmenl, prlva to nonpro/It or special d1YtrleN - COUNTY k.T u /?T /?/ 7. DAMAGED FACILITY (Noma andlocation) LARATION NO INSPECTION OATS A-•Ofl MM QDO p/VY C?3 6. PHYSICAL DIMENSIONS OF DAMAGE TO THE FACILITY 7 NO. 6, PROJECT NO./CAT. X 1-- 472 LETE 0. WORK ACCOM BY FA AGE CAUSE (Optional) E: 17. DAMAGE DESCRIPTION AND SCOPE OF ELIGIBLE WORK OR SUPPLEMENTAL COMMENTS L,§-r4-1 3000tS TyE wJouT//aF Ts?ZE Q?'/?eeL/e °/?Ce, /JdPGlcyuT T?2oPoSC?S Tp 0eA17-e.5&G7- SL'?aL?eyL cjf .2 LW3O/lE?P -7b -5517-4- /Yo Th/----¢T &X/STS 7 PU,@G/G oe .tee/K9TE C,,FofE 13. RECOM ENDATION pY FED RAL INSPECTOR (NO., Age-, Code) INSP. NO. AGENCY CODE ELIGIBLE ATT CH MENTS , I' .( Y QF' Y N .? CI 14. RE M O T No,. Agency Code) INSP.NO. AGENCY ODE ELIGIBLE ATTACHMENTS C ECa. V N r 1 . ZOFLOCAL REP ES TATIVE (Name, Alency) J,, rg• e? ELIGIBLE ATTACHMENTS PAR II • ESTIMATED COST OF PROPOSED WORK ITEM CODE OUAN• TITY MATERIAL AND1OR DESCRIPTION UNIT UNIT PRICE COST in) 61 (c) (d) 16. 17. aJ O c?Gp ^J •- 18. G o Gt/ c ,Al 2 4/ 23 // /Sro .- 19. 70. GE _ 1 1 CC A 0 9,r- 71. J_EdCGy. 77, 73. 74. EXISTING INSURANCE 7 8• TYPE: F H AMOUNT: $ TOTAL $ .? .•? PART 111 • FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT/HAZARD MITIGATION REVIEW 76. IN OR AFFECTS F OD• PLAIN OR WET LANG: LV N 77. FLOOOPLAIN LOCATION: 1 2 3 4 8 70. %DAMAGE 1 1 3 1 79. DISASTER HISTORY Y N U 30. LAND USEt 31. FPM RECOMMEN• : U1234-01224 OATION:11 3 8 0 7 PART IV • FOR F EMA USE ONLY 37, AMOUNT 33. ELIGIBLE 34, FINAL DSR 35, SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS 36. FLOOOPLAIN RE IEW NO 37. WORKSITE NO $ V N S V U F 38. INSURANCE COMMITMENT REQUIRED 361 DURATIONIYI-) e. TYFE: b. AMOUNT: S 40. COMMENTS/CHANGES 41, FEDERAL REVIEW (S4 nafuro/ DATE 47/./{1F E?M?A R VIEW ISllnaluro/ OATIi ? y Al, i 7 pp X l ?Si 1 , >11 T 1 r. 1 " I del FEMA Form 9001 APR BB 1. ? / / ' , REPLACES FEM A F 9067, JAN 01 WHICH IS OBSOLETE r?±?5 1 7 r? k i /. Y+7n1? ,a 1 ? ?a.. ??? -. ? p7? . ."^- --.'s ?n'• , MI3?.7: FP?n, '?"+?i'.? 1 r.,;..? T--+- ? vi / ??1 r I^ 'It ---- - -- i ;i V r a " - jg? a "TA IS. -',-\LELAND ? •" ,e _ d •r }S DD I i0a t r,? Y COUNTY $k^' ??00 i _" OUILCE iEl?i -"s ".. •• eft 747 101 a k,? :4 ... I S• I + ?' C IN A ?'' 1. Y Arlo V h v rlt Y-?„+?? ds ?.. ?/... _ en nwo r?? 4':76:;C o.???/?, Y ? 7?ti'f J3 k?? i M" i hYk1FIY 1. •,?0 M, % I . • LI\ , ? Y? " I _ .,d,? '?_ ? ?? ,ra°.°i• D,S,? .? O7?Z5-'.2. + i 1.?'?P '' ? xI L' .118 ??6 FF?,P?S'ON t?OUNty ri t I.;, y '' ° ? lel 1 ? ?n+.•k it I,. 1 , SOJA4, I I?? ?•. ") I } .L St t fy .NN k ? S 41 ? I YL F If? 4" r .C tj , r ?Ty ?1?i ?1 M .- ?q/?ltty?.E .S?.evFy ,P?:?,eT s-TEM won r?.v dilTiaJ ?5?1e'rj ?°?°4Ga4AJ7'.° vEFrERSOn1 Coc1NTy 07h17572, w /OLJ? ?oN ay .70? t.?I.JT too -7o"4 Al aoo e.r Go.ug. -?- Go uJ:a? x u kN.i-.lp 7 ? xt ?? i:g ?r e w°R ?xr r ? Photo No.: 1 Item No.. 0 7117S Description: r[ { b?^ ? ?? "} ii ,?? 4? ?/iEr? vac tPE' 4,r1k,?p a d 411 All # «F: 1?L._. t ?A}'. 11,4 `1 :? BS?•.!•?j "? '? .d Fl(? i '$r Photo No.: Iteto No. v `' J "?+! 1, .` Description: } 'g r ! F fl .py?h lR..?. 5 .. ? , A ' f ?? ? a kFk??u P ?, t ; t I ?`,+? s:wiv . _AT[A44ENL__ TO nsa r o7fl??r MT, r. ?.5. x, 1.. .,?, ?x?>:?l.°.2,?.- ':, x.? ,.•:;, :i'?Iret ,??'"T'.6.?'" r? ju amula, a??? i 4 ;? / `L1E?Z^&?;;E}.,.? 1' ,*irrdsM_T V :r6 y !` k o° l ?,1 i it x7 S? Photo No.. °2- x• a }? Item No.: 074475-2 ip, Description:. zs Y'F. .LoC> ?T4wf FAT LEFT ,g/ x b ' _£ Ffl 1?M -var AOI?t .47- -1.0074e. 4, ! aI ? i?1"F .t Photo No.. Iteto No.. Description: r h N "INT New 1t `A? I,?i 1 ?i •' ? ? 0 ?- -&TM44lHEttL---? 7?D.«t 0T r ti . u % f 49, ad 1 IVAN _ %? r, - I• 1 Y? .:. 'k JYy ? ? 4 4+ f ... .. 7 i' .__ -,.__ ...,....._.. __ ay? ?hC1 ? 4 ''? ` N -. ? ? rr.• It;' ?:'+ : . ? r f} . E .. ' A 4 § r y{ti,y r 1 1 {I? '?Y.} J Y ?? 1 ?? l. 1' .` '.?' .. ;r,,?a+...-- .,.r•.+•n'"""t"1..r, `[r; A7 ,,I '??'" NM. pt 11 T ,J?t???l i W ?F 1 ,r j 0 { S?r { . J q I .; J? f!rwA .fit. l A,. AA WH .l I ?N 1 ? 1 STATE OF WASHINGTON FLO 03.E rm COUNTY OF JEFFERSON In the matter of: X RESOLUTION NO. 102-85 n Resolution Establishing a X Budget and Fund for the X Quilcene Flood Control Sub- X ? Zone District X ? '. WHEREAS the Board of Jefferson County Commissioners estab- ?I. lished the Quilcene Flood Control Sub-Zone District by Resolution Number 95-84, and; WHEREAS a budget needs to be established for, said Sub-Zone District in order for said Sub-Zone District to plan, administer, operate, and maintain flood control works; IT IS THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Board of Jefferson County Commissioners hereby establishes a budget for the iterns and amounts shown on attachment A, and T I? IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the Jefferson County Treasurer ' ji is hereby authorized to establish a fund to receive monies pur- suant to RCW 86.15.130, and IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the Jefferson County Treasurer is hereby authorized to dissolve fund number 124-000-010, Flood I! Control, account number 12800, and place one-half of any remain- ing monies in said Flood Control Sub- Zone District fund. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS (() DAY OF,_')"'-,:'_ ? 1985. •+ BOARD OF JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS A: John L. Pitts, Chairman SEAL: 9, e B. C. Brown, Member, i • Larry Dennison, Member M; ATTEST: Jerdine C. Bragg, Clerk of the Board ATTACHMENT "A" QUILCENE FLOOD CONTROL SUB-ZONE DISTRICT REVENUES ?u. 308.00.00 BEGINNING FUND BALANCE $ 200.00 j 343.13.00 FLOOD CONTROL FEES 4,360.00 TOTAL $4,560.00 7 EXPENDITURES 532.00.41 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $4,560.00 TOTAL $4,560.00 _P ,? AARn`x?F 'N ryF K ? W, .,?' C RTi"I s r r r ;y yam., Z M1 ?r ry4F? i?. ?? STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF JEFFERSON , In the matter of: % Resolution Establishing a X RESOLUTION NO. ?. Budget and Fund for the % Quilcene Flood Control Sub- X y r Zone District % WHEREAS the Board of Jefferson County Commissioners estab- lished the Quilcene Flood Control Sub-Zone District by Resolution Number 95-84, and; l WHEREAS a budget needs to be established for said Sub-Zone District in order for said Sub-Zone District to plan, administer, operate, and maintain flood control works; t IT IS THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Board of Jefferson County Commissioners hereby establishes a budget for the items and amounts shown on attachment A, and ?q IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the Jefferson County Treasurer is hereby authorized to establish a fund to receive monies pur- suant to RCW 86.15.130, and IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the Jefferson County Treasurer is hereby authorized to dissolve fund number 124-000-010, Flood Control, account number 12800, and place one-half of any remain- ing monies in said Flood Control Sub- Zone District fund. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF , 1985. BOARD OF JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SEAL: John L. Pitts, Chairman B. G. Brown, Member Larry W. Dennison, Member ATTEST: Jerdine C. Bragg, Clerk of the Board ?. •..,, ,?, - - ? 4-. '? _ r2 raj •S ,,. ci n, , , RESOLUTION NO. _ - ESTABLISHMENT OF' THE QUILCENE FLOOD CONTROL SUB-ZONE DISTRICT S tJ ? " r WHEREAS, on the 1;4h day of sSrPrrtwek? /985 -'ma=r-r 1-5,847 in regular meeting the H d , oar of County Commi.ssio r' ?rp?n their ow motio unani- mouQ,lyo?3e,iFFr?.ution Numbery,niti!a ting eu,srow,9r. i of the ui cenoe F d C x oo ontrol Sub-Zone District in accordance with F.C.W. 86.15.010, et seq „ ,and; WI-IFRFAC +her n Pd For States and Stat angton Floo' On lro r or United S ;, ized any agency with nd; powers to handle the same, , and; i WHEREAS, n tace of a lir_ i a an of the intent OF the L'om- ?°" ` cP1. IT, issaon r e s Di ' }rr the OiiiIcene Flood Control Sub-Zone strict was given, made and published s rovi,ded by law, said hea ri?r)9 was held on the day of f °?r, 19 t t t 4 ? a ffie hour ?.?? of t F' .? in the l a ei d i k `r ByrEE?? ? . n Jefferson County, Washington, the date ,and place fixed -c by such Resolution and Publi N c otice for said hearing, arid; - WHEREAS, all persons attending said public hearina were iven th g e opportunity to be heard and on the E o ? f sai? find District and the Commissioners f find that said District >ig'i,%Fd "fi ep e, and that it is it tha bes r the general public 1 th ° 0??.,eres"oe ` NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED ?Je%?.;.r2? _nn? ;?ty Board of Commissioners does hereby m .the E.13 rene `B`lood Control. Sub-Zone District Use of 01"P. i , n... - s r 1 i n g "Rd *i Pans•r-n*rthori t ies amY-drrtie ?c i k - bh e -and any._°and ?5TI-""aiYcSfi'Yl1GC+l'ft:s; 'chrrrc' ?.. Iowa _ pertaarcin t _ ?+ "-1511 x 1h!'rMtq_ or 9 q`:suth•: --and-iilt 1Gdang.:proviaaons-:.as'Fie?ean vided; p'rd- BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, the/lBoundaries of said Ouilcene dirt.- rict be described as follows; THE_BIG QUTL__f,F:NF FjSVEF IJAi'•RSFED Thai- portion of Sf ti.iwY•-1'Y', Township 27 North, Range I West, -W-.MT, ,and that, portion of Sections 3, 41 10, 15, 22, 23, 24, 26, 34, and 35, and all of Sections ), 16, 21, 27, 28,-and-33 of Township 27 .' North, Range 2 Wes3,,_W.t1;; and that portion of .°ieC- ..'... v? s ' ^ions 8, 9, 14, and 16 of Township 26 North, Flange West, W.M., and -thrt, portion of the Olympic Nat- i on-al Forest, Quilcene District, and that portion of th jR. e Olympic National Park, and -that portion of Ouilcene Ray more particula l d i ,SFr t r y escribed as fol- laws: a Beginning in Ouilca_ne }ray at the high tide line at Fishermans Poi t; t n hence northerly along the easterly li.mits of said Quilcene Ray -at the high r tide line to the easterly projection of the divide between the Big Ouilcene River and the Little Quil- cene Fiver watershed; thence westerly along said easterly projection to the westerly limits ct the " high tide line of said bay; thence continuing along .+ said divide through Section 19, T. 27 N., R. 1 W. , -and Sections 24, 23, and a portion of 22, T. 27 N. 7 , R. 2 W., to a ridge laying in the NE 1/4 of said Section thence northerly along said ridge through said Section 22 and Sections 15, 1.0, and a x" portion of Section 3, T. 27 N., F. 2 W., to the summit of an unnamed knoll laying in the NW 1/4 of said Section 3; thence westerly and southwesterly along the rid e th t f 9 g a orms the divide between Penny Creek, its unnamed tributaries, and the Littl e Qu ileene River, Dry Creek, its unnamed tributaries through said Section 3, and Section 4 T t , .27 N., R. 2 W., to the southerly summit of Green Mountain laying within t:he boundries of the Ol i ymp c National Forest; thence northwesterly along the ridge to the northerly summit of said Green Mountain; thence westerly along the ridge to the southerly sumni t of . Mount Townsend; thence southerly and southwesterly along the ridge to the il y summ . of Buckhorn Mountain, thence southwesterly along the id 4 y.,. r ge t.a Marmot Pass; thence southerly along the ridge into Olympic r . National Park to Warrior Peak; thence continuing southerly along the rid ge to Mount Constance; thence continuing southerly along the ri dgt+ to th . e boundary of the Olympic National Park and the Olyrr,- i p c National Forest; thence easterly along the ridge to Mount Crag; then ce easterly and sou'theast.- erly along the ridge through Sections 8 a d n 9, T. 26 N., R. 2 W., to Buck Mountain; thence easterly, southeasterly th , nor easterly and northerly along the ridge that forms the divide bet ween Elba Creek and Marple/Spencer Creek drainages through Sections 9, 16, and 10, T. 26 N., R. 2 W., to Walker Pass; thence northwesterly d an northeasterly along the ridge through Section 34 T 27 N , . ., R. 2 W . , to the westerly summit of Mount Walker; thence northerly t , nor heasterly, easterly -and southeasterly along -the ridge that f S orms the southerly divide of the Big Puilcene River watershed through Section 3S 1 s , 26, 23, and 24, T. 27 N., R, 2 W., to the high tide 0 i J TM r {1 r Y, a 1 I ` + ,ra rtn,"Q1 p 3 n ? `?'? . ? '( 1 4 ` ? ? f \ pet 1;l? yy i , J ? ,, nn i M al?rVL!'F ?4?1?y ? f (1 . Y? JI ELI ??4? F ) i ,` y G p x L7T'"fir ? ¢5 _ t ••? line of the westerly limits oF' C7uxlcr=ne Bay, thence i southerly along the westerly high tide line of Quilcene Bay to F•renchmans Point, thence easterly to the high tide line at Fishermans Point and the k , point of Begining. Containing 52.200 acres, more or less. A BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the area described herein incorporate Mfi w any and all watersheds located in said described boundaries; ADOPTED this ___ day of _--•--__-....._r 1984. Larry-W. Dennison, Member Attest' 5erj_:L7n_P __E. C. Bragg Clerk of the Board S pr _ 4 q ? f 1 Y d 71"', 'N f?L?"t?C'1y, r n t v r r li 7i '1 a 1' ? t`t 4 3A ? ? Ji 4 Flo 03. 50 ROADS IN FLOOD ZONE QUILCENE NAME NUMBER MI. LINGER LONGER RD. GLEN LOGGIE RD 301309 0.80 . DUTCH LN. 300509 302209 0.26 p - PENNEY CREEK RD. 303908 0 09 4 56 $ FISH HATCHERY RD. HATCHERY-PENNEY CR RD 302009 , 0.27 . . HIDDENDALE DR. 302309 300309 0,27 RIVERDALE DR. 300109 0.34 0 20 RIVERDALE CT. BIG QUIL. RIVER RD 300209 . G.03 ' . MAPLE GROVE RD. 305709 300909 1.91 WASHINGTON ST. 321309 0.04 0 20 RODGERS ST. HAMILTON AVE 301 09 . 0.38 & . BOWEN ST. 7 30009 318809 0.05 HERBERT ST. W. ROSE ST 17209 3 0.24 0.21 . E. ROSE ST. 315809 301809 0.32 -• OLD CHURCH RD. 311009 0.19 } MASONIC TEMPLE RD. 301409 0.07 QUILCENE AVE. 301609 0.05 FREMONT AVE. 301709 0.12 0 42 * :r MUNCIE AVE. LEADVILLE AVE 301209 . 0.34 * . ROBERTS ST. 300809 309509 0.19 * OLD RAIL ROAD GRADE 301509 0.07 * 0 08 * MCARDLE AVE. 301909 . 0.11 * STRUCTURES OLD LINGER LONGER BRIDGE 22E LINGER LONGER BRIDGE 23E TOTAL ROAD MILES INSIDE QUILCENE FLOOD ZONE 11.81 MI. * SUBJECT TO FLOODING 2 .4 ?oj aarv ?. , ,his.: ? n ... M i r?} ra. ? , i OF W iSHIN6TON COUNfY OF JEFFERSON h In Lhe matter o+' ;t Revi.Sion of the. Boundary Y Resolution No...._Z.3-.85.--_. ._ . . '? - . .-........ . . Of the nu- Irene 1=laOd X • Control Sub-Zone histrir.{, Y WHEREFiS, on the: 16th day of September, 198::;, in reOUl.ar meeting, the Board of rMUnty COHIM SLoners upon their own motion umar imoa:;ly plc>secr Recolution Number 65-85 in::t.iating the revision of the Boundary oi' the Qr111Ce1e F"luod Control S!b Z?_na District Lip accordance with R.G.W. 56.15,019, - et aer, , and; c WHEREAT, notice or a public hearing of the intent of the. C.ommissioners to Tevi_;e the bounclarv of the FluiIcr-ne I load Control Sail -song ha;l.rir.t wos oi ven. . mode ana bJ.t?hed as orrivicled by law, said he-ir.ing i i.: hold oil the nth d ' -'Y Cf k . October. 198`'„ at the hour of 2:00 F r ;.n the Comm '::i.oner- Chambers of 1,te County (cur house lorat:?cl in Jefferson County W:ashingLon, the date and plac e ii:;ed by such Resolution and Public Notice for .,aid hearint,.i, "And; WHEREAS, all persons attending said pubs is hearing were cJiven the opportunity to be heard and comment on the revision of said District Boundary and the Commissioners find that said District DOundar•y should be established and that it is in the best, interest of the Count}, the general public and the area to be served by said District: IT IS RESOLVED that the Jrfferson County Board of Commissioners doe=s hereby revise the Doundarv of the CAai.l.r.ene Flood Control Sub-Zone Iaistr:i.r..t, IT I': F t I R HER RESOLVED Choi the revised bounclary of s aid Fl U' l cene , Sub-Zone be describeci as fnllOWs; ? e 1}IE. 00ILCEN1E FLOOD CON I OL. SUP-ZONE PrHTRIC' That pOAaorr of Section 1.9, 'l'owncshi;l 27 N0rtl'1, F?onge 1 West, W.M. and that portion of Sections 4, 15, 22, 23, 24, 26, 34 and "35, onr -all of Sections 9, 16, 21, 27. 20. and 33 of l'ownshi.p 27 North. R-inge 2 West, W. M., and that portion of Sections 0, 9, 10 arld It, of Township 26 North, Range 2 Wrd r„ W.M., and that portion of the Olympic National. forest, nuilcone District, and that portion of. the Olympic. National F•arV. , and f.hat portion of Chai.lcene Pay m, La re particulorlr described a[. follow!::: i 71 J yes ?,. < ?`r ,tr Ply '? ??! _ M .. Beginning -at a point in CluiIcene B.ay on the section line common to : Sections IS -an 19, T. 27 N., R. 1 W., said point being the t} r intersection of said section line and the westerly boundary of the oyster claim deed under application no. 3500 (Tideland Tax C in ' Section 19); thence west along said section lane 23.1 chains more or less to the section corner common to Sections IS and 1.9, 'r. 27 N. R. 1 W. and Sections 13 and 24, T.27 N., R. 2 W.; thence continuing west along the section line comnon to Sections 13 -arid 24, T. 27 N., R. 2 w. to the section corner common to Sections 13, 14, 23 and 24; thence south along the section line- common to Sections 23 and 24 to ? the centerline of S.R. 101; thence westerly and southwesterly along said centerline of S.R. 101 to the east-west quarter section line of s Section.23; thence west along the east-west q,rnrter section lane to the 1/4 corner common to Sections 23 and 22; thence continuing west aF ", on the east-west quarter section line to the center of Section thence north along the north-south quarter section line to the 1/4 corner common to Sections 22 and 15; thence continuing north along the north-south quarter section line through the center of section 15 to the north 1/4 corner of section 15; thence west along the section line common 'to Sections 10 and 15 to the section carrier common to Sections 9r 10, 1.5, and 16; thence north along the section `,q Y+ line common to Sections 9 -arid 10 to the section corner common to Sections 3r 4, 9 and 10, thence continuing north along the section a line cannon to Sections 3 and 4 to the south line of the N1/2 of the } } N1/2 of Section A; thence west along said south lane to the boundary " r line of the Olympic National Forest; thence southerly along said National Forest Buundary to the ridge that forms the divide between Fenny Creek, its unnamed tributaries, and Dry CreeK, its unnamed 'T 3 4 tributaries; thence: westerly along the ridge that forma the divide ? between Fenny Greek, its unnamed tributaries, and Dry CreeK, i•t,s?"' .;? unnamed tributaries, to the southerly summit of Green Mountain laying within the boundaries of the Olympic National Forest; thence t? northwesterly along the ridge to the northerly summit OF ;.aid Green Mountain; thence westerly along the ridge to the eouther[Y summit of Mount Townsend; thence southerly and southwesterly atonvl the ridge to the summit of BucKhorn Mountain; thence southwe terl. along the ridge to Marmai. Pass; thence southerly along the ridq into filympic lea,{` ',,1 National ParK to Warrior Peal.; thence conLinuing southerly -along the S ridge to Mount Constance: thence continuing southerly along the ?twr?°p ridge to the boundary of the Olympic National ParK and the Olympic o- i Notional Fare,aLhence easterly along the ridge to Mount Crael; p t? "PS thence easterly and southeasterly along the ridge throurih Sections a { '.' l and 9r 1'. 26 N., R. 2 LI„ to P.rcl< Mr.,urrt,lin; thence ersterlyr as ` southeasterly, northeasterly and northerly Along the ridge that, 3v )a forms they divide between Elba Creek -arid Ma rple/Spencer CreeK uy: ` drainages through Sections 9, 16 and 10, I. 26 N., R. 2 W., to f WalKer Pass; thence northwcsterty and northeasterly along the ridge ? v'1 1?r a through Section 34, T. 27 N., R- 2 W., to the westerly summit of Mount WalKer; thence northerly along the ridge 1, h, Forms the southerly divide of the Big Oualcene River watershed through Section r hiGx ? t stC#?u a AIM ' 35, T. 27 N., R. 2 W., to the section lane common to Section; 35 and 26, T. 27 N.. R. 2 W.; thence east along said ,ection lane: to the x ??i~'ir Ott y ,oath 1:4 corner of Section 26; theme north oLonq the north-south quarter section line through the center of 26 to the North 1/4 rn +"k 47 corner of Section 26; thence east along the section line common to s + Sections 23 and 26 to the section corner common to Sections 23, 24, i7'a r+ f! a + 25 and 26; thence north along the section line r_nmmun to soctinns 23 r t r I l (. r a e?,,?,y? " ? + S r. F1rr. y pt1 rPr77T 4r. :a:. w zua ; 6 I r ? ??~ ? - - i }a ? 1 It ? r tp?y(Vr L? i fr Y{?J -i I r , rIr ?y X11 iF 7 A'? 1 Wlra ?? i 4 ? l r r r i. t? } _ ? r •? e? t r A ? rS t I AMY r ? ? ? ?, 14' v6 XoR ?` ? .. i• d^ ro. y .and 24 to the north line of the S1/2 of the S1/2 of Section 24; " thence east, along said north line to the center, of the SE1/4 of Section 24; thence solath along the west, line of 'the E1/2 of the E1/2 ?s° of Secti"JO 24 to the high tide line of the westerly limits of t Quilcene Bay; 'T'hence .,outherly along the westerly high tide line of Ouilcene Ray to the westerly projection of the north line of Tract 10 of the State Oyster Reserve at Oualcene in Section 25, ''. 27 N. 4 R. 2 W. and Section 30, T. 27 N., R. 1 W.; thence east along said pT•ojection, and continuing east along the north line of Tram 1.0 and along the south line of Tract 8 'to the east line of Tract 8; thence north along said east lane to the south lane of Tract 3; thence east • along said south line to the east line oP Tract 3; thence north alonra said east line to the nOT•th Ii.ne, of Tract 3, thence west along + Y a s!zid north line to the west line of an oyster claim deeded under application no. 3438 ('iidcland Tai; I: an Section 1.9); thence nortl along said west line to a point on the south line of an oyster claim deeded under application no. 3500 (Tideland Tax C in Section 19); -"? thence nor'thwesteT•l.y to the intersection of the north 1'.Lne of y Section 19 and the west, lane of 74 deland Ta:; C, the Point of Bpginni.ng. 't Containing 51000 acres. more or less. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED tIia1, the area nescribe•d heT•e' i. n incoT•porate any and all watershods located i.r, said described - boundaries ; ?-'' - /?1 T a' y DAY OF 1985. HIS _ 0c ADOPTED ' d t I . y S , _3ohn-1. Piti,s, Chairman ^- B. G. Brown, Member ! + ?'" ?a -? Dennison, Member L ? -. . {ti r r .!t SEAL i ,. ATTEST ?J &rdine C. Bragg blerK of the board sT ? ~ ? e ? ?.? t 1 ?• . ti 4 a t r` ... '?' •.7 .- e _ dt o. ,? kr ! yg1 r ?? Y 1 i- t Tuff.. A.... 5T'AIE: OF WASHINGTON COUN-i `' OF .JEFFERSON In the mui.ter of A Revision of the Boundary X Resolution No._---73.=.3$ of the Ole i, ICen A_ Flood x Control Sub-Zone Dis'tric't X ' WHEREfiS, on the 16th clay of September, 1985, :in regular meeting, the >.l. Hoard of County Conimis=.ioners upon their own motion unanimously passed Resolution Number 65-fl., 1.na.a.uLin9 the revision of the Boundary of the Oui.lcene Flood Control Sub-Zone District, in accordance With R.C.W. 56.15.010, - et sec.., and, 4HECEA''i, notice of a public he-ar:Lng of the intent of the hnlilifli<39ioners 'to revise the boundary of the Oui.lcene Flood Control Sub-Zone, District was given, _ ;made onu :-lbl:ishecl as provided by .Iaw, said hearing wa's held on the 7th day of October. 1995, rt the hour of 2c00 P.i'li„ i.n the COmmlSl.lnner= Chambers of the County Courthouse located in .Jefferson Countr, Washtnciton, the date -and place fixed by such Resolution -arid Public No bice for soad hearing, and{ ' WHEREAS, ?1.L persons -attending said public heariny were given the '- opportunity to be heard and comment on the revision of said District Boundary > and the Commissioners find that said District Boundary should be established -arid that it is in the best interest of the County the general public and the area to be served by said histrir.tl IT IS RESOL.VEIi that the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners does hereby revise the Boundary of the Cluilcene Flood Control Slib--Zone Bistrirt; IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the revised boundary of said tluilcene Sub-Zone be described as follows; THE QOIL99NE I_I„p[Ip C9N'IF01_ SIJP::ZC1NE hISTh:IC.;T T'h,at portion of Section 19. Townshr;a 27 North, 2anne 1 West, W,M., and that portion of Sections 4, IS, 22, 23, 24, 26•, 34 and 35, and all of Sections 9, ii„ 21, 27, 20, and 33 or 'Township 27 North, Range 2 West, W.M., and thot portion of Sections 0, 9, 10 and le.; of Township 26 North, R-3nge 2 W,?st, W,M., and that, portion of the Olympic National Forest, Quilcene District, and that portion of the Olympic. National Park, and that portion of Ouilcene Bay more porticulorly described ar, follow" 8 8:5 .s r Hr , _? f ? hest MSM, r)7? Beginning a+, a point in Ouil.cene Croy on the section line common to Sections 18 .a n 19, T. 27 N., F. 1 W., said point being the intersection of said section line and the westerly boundary of the oyster claim deed under application no. 3500 (Tideland Tax C in Section 19) ; thence west along said section line 23.1 chains more or less -to the section corner common to Sections 18 and 19, T. 27 N. R. r 1 W. and Sections 13 and 24, 1'.27 N., R. 2 W.; thence continuing west along the section line common to Sections 13 and 24, T. 27 N., rt r 2 w. to the section corner common to Sections 13, 14, 23 and 24; s thence south along the section line common to Sections 23 and 24 to ° the centerline of S.R. 101; thence westerly and southwesterly along said centerline of S.R. 101 to the cast-west quarter section line of Section 23; thence west along the east-west quarter section :Line to -the 1/4 corner common to Sections 23 and 22; thence continuing west on the east-west quarter section line to the center of Section 22; thence north along the north-south quarter section line to the 1/4 corner common to Sections 22 and 15; thence continuing north along the north-south quarter section line through the center of section 15 to the north 1/4 corner of section 15; thence west along the s $ section line common 'to Sections 10 and 15 to the section corner common to Sections 9, 10, 15, and 16; thence north along the section line common to Sections 9 and 10 to the section corner common to Sections 3, 4, 9 and 10; thence continuing north along the section ` a line common to Sections 3 and 4 to the south line of the N1/2 of the NI/2 of Section 4; thence west along said south line to the boundary line of the Olympic National Forest; thence southerly along said National Forest Boundary to the ridge that forms the divide between, Fenny Creek, its unnamed tributaries, and Dry Creek, its unnamed tributaries; thence westerly along the ridge that forms 'the divide between Fenny Creek, its unnamed tributaries, and Dry Creek, iss , unn,amRd tributaries, to the southerly summit of Green Mountain laying within the boundaries of the Olympic Na'Li.onal Forest; thence ^ northwesterly along the ridge to the northerly summit of said Green Mountain; thence westerly along the ridge to the southerly summit, of Mount Townt,e'ind; thence :iOUtherly and southwesterly along the ridge M 1'.o the summit or Ruckhorn Mountain; thence southwesterly along the ridge t.o marmot lass; then( southerly along the ridge into (.77.Ympir. LL Ma Lion naI F-ark to Warrior Peoid; thonce ccmLi.niing southerly along the ridge to Mount Constance: thence r..rntinuinu southerly along the a ridge to the boundary of the CI mpic Notionai F'arK and the Olympic National w rest; thence eaasLerly along the ridge to Mount Crog; thenc, easterly and southeasterly along the ridge through Sections 8 n and 9, 1'. ::6 N., R. 2 W., to Bruck Mountain; thence easterly, d t ' sauthe.asi.erly, northeasterly and northerly along the ridge that, a ' forms the divide between E.1bo Creek and Marple/Spencer OreeK_ drainages through Sections 9, .l6 and 1.0, T. 26 N., h. 2 W., to W-tlKer Pats; thence northee,-.rerlY and northea"iterty along the ridge r E°f through Section 34, T. 27 N., R. 2 W., to the westerly sun)mit or A t? v Mount Wa1Krr; thence northerly along the ridge that, Forms the ;r,tr'r southerly divide of the Big Gnilcene River watershed through Section err '? - ttti 35, T. a7 P7.. R. 2 W., to the section line common to Sec. tlons 35 and ?c z?r 26. T. 27 N.• R. 2 W.; thence east -along said Section line to the , F ` ?1 rA ;.auLh lie ro)nNr of Se. j. o n 26; thence north along the north•:o,rth r Sr ` ?W ' 175vit. T > quarter •;rclaon Lune thrraugh the center of 6 to the North 1/4 corner of 5actian 26; thence rust, along the aer.t,ion line common 60 & L4 TT 1'?} ' ,art +1 1r Scctaons 2d and 26 to i,he section corner common to Sections 23, 24, 25 ; S' ?k? 5f v } and ?6: thence north along the section line common to sections 23 w w s , - ' ,?y i r 1 , k 'q r; p n yY )4 Y???i?'t_ wSY1A' - , 1 Illy. y?i lgg c h 7 1 ) :) t ylt ''iiFFt r r ) r r _ II{{' r 4 7 1, ?I. ?. s ? r ?? 1} r i.- z v ? kt +)?r ? r Y 2 Ty ? r;?1 s g, S ? Ik and 24 to the north line of the S1/2 of the S1/2 of Section 24; thence east along said north line to the center or the SE1/4 of ` Section 24; thence south along the west: line of the L-'1/2 of the EI/2 of Section 24 to the high tide line of the westerly lin,its of Ouilcene= Iiay; 'T'hence southerly along the westerly high tide line of Oui.lcene Iiay to the westerly projection of the north line or Tract 10 of the State Oyster Reserve at Ou:lc ne in Section 25, T. 27 N. ; R. 2 W. and Section 30, T. 27 N., R. 1. W.; thence east along lair! projection, and continuing east along the north line of 't'ract 10 and along the south line of Tract: 8 to the east line of Tract 8; thence north along said east line to the south line of Tract 3; thence east { -a long said south line to the east line of Tract 3; thence north along said east line to the north line of Tract 3; thence west along said north lane to the west line of an oyster claim deeded under application no. 3438 ('Tideland Tar E an Section 19); thence north ?. along sand west line to a point on the south lone of an oyster claim deeded under application no. 3500 (Tideland Ta:; C in Section 19); thence northwesterly to the intersecLion of the north line of 4! Section 19 and the wee?L line of ii.deland Tar C, the Po i.nt of Heginni.ng• Containing 51000 acres, more or less. IT lS FURTHER REF01_VED that the area described herein incorporate -any -arid all. watersheds located :i.n saaid described boundaries: ADOPTED THIS DAY OF 1985. John L. Fitts, Chairnnan? S y, H. G. Drown, Member Tr Wennis•on, Member .. ? SEAL ATTEST Pr_Cdh..11L1... Praggq C?erk of' the Board - v? r. y aS =a'.5? ? is-a-o°s FARLTC HEARING N917CE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to resolution Number b5rB5_____. a Public Henr:ing will be held by the Jefferson a County Board of Commissioners on Mciida 198,5, at the hour of the ComuUssioners:_.Chambers - +i C9Dr.tbouseµ-P.t..-Town je Id.-WA,to tale testioiony on the revision of the boundary of the Quilcene Flood Control Sub--Zone District. DATED TH:[S_lbth_IiAY OF 1985. __ John L. Fitts, Chairman fi€t i f 1 71 wA'.gi+' . 5•X ?( r .? 7 + If „+z' Y'ti?tJf?99a r ro m ?3?n ' ? ? ? +9?"dn a Pd ti ;` tt?r ?, }NMI a+b4r pU q-u.k , ,'a wnr,( +Yn ? Y[t"?'lh?f r V , W? a ? °j r{ ? tr Y . ??nr % p y?. 1 5 u, 8TAl'E OF WASHINGTON c COUN"Y C'F` JEFFERSON In the matter of x Intent to revise, x Resal a*sio:; 00. _.-.._ Boundary of the Ouilcene X Flood Control Sub-Zone X T,istrtict x , WHEREAS, there i.s a nea.d Le reviSC., the boundary of the C7ui:lcene-- Flood '.3 Control S, -Zone Iltstr.l._tv est:h]iihed on the ]'rth ca of ilecembclr' 1923. s -?6 , tjy r Resolutioi No. 95-84, to better _,erve the public „eres6, and to be tLe • reoreseni 'th .Ire-as Lo be .;•rw?d b said Sub gone lll tTI c1.3 1.. .?R IT TS 1 h. OLVED Lh a l c: 4. f ievsorl Goun DUQT F CUlrlma64iOrIeM. in'tendS to revac;c he bould',ry of LYe1 r1 -t I.,erie F1ooa f;c.ntr iub•Zono IIL .tI,iCty ' 11 IS I UkTHER RFSO1 VED Lh 1 in ^ccord c - W'tl the prrav: 10119 of Fi W " 66..15. e*. eq + Ire Bohai o' run 1S. One . i 1,. i l l n t . l , n p u b ]ie he.-,,ring i n : . the Comm. 7oneI,s' ClltmheT o.,Y LIIou F• I;rt fr wn:.end, W;shS nn Lon on ? 73 Mol tJaYr 01 tot 'r, ;', 194 ]l the I our of ? '3t1 .. (, ha ,t . IT ] FURTHER RE .SOLVED h:t, it c: rc: d b I G'ar`y of '.ic d C,u:i ] . • .. cer,c :S. U 'Zone b... df_. c.ribed a_, i .. _. . f E QUILC.o.Ill. F1 . 10" : i,o i f. C; .. SUb--MM: Y L F; C That, portion of Section 15'r rowhshi1) 2,' North Range 1 West., W.M., and that no'rti f S t F R on o ec eons 4. 1 22, 23, 24, 2r., 34 ,arid 35. ad all of Sections 9, 16. 2.,, 2T, S, and 33 of 'Township 2'7 N0T'th, Range 2 W.M.. and th aF portion a'F Sect ean•; 8, 9 10 .lnd 16 of Township 26 North, Range 2 West, W.M., and that portion of thc? Olimlic Notdnn,il Forest, Dljilc-rie District, and flint, portion of the 0 1ym31c National F'arK• and t.l,.,t, POT t..iof . rf Ctu::Lu•nn F10 Y mere sw pa r`tl c u l a rly described aS fq LJ.O WS3 - ' Elea nn a n a at. a I: C nt :u't 01.I :._f: lie T':ia of i r Gc m III or, 'I',o x f •• 4 Sr':8 an 5r T. 2 7 N., F' . I 5 I tnt b.',I 1 1.11e intersecti n f d o o Sa7 ,ectjorY ]].1 a •,nd .hr 4- I Y 7, hr.and'ar• f., > f the 41 w oystet r. I.a:l.lrl deed inder nphlteatiol; no 35t ifarJeIand Tax G in " £ Section 1.9), Lhencf we i along sand snci ic,l Jit)(% 'i.1 chains more or ?* f d 1 less to the coon corner ronnnon to ,+rt]ons 1rr and 19T. 27 N. R. 1 41. -arid Section„ 1 and r . 2; 1 N t f 1 r ! s . . . , r d thence rn; t.i uli ncI l r r „ .} ? . west a ong than sect+.on llnr cC(:mi to 1 t .'.,s 1 i and 24, '. 27 N,. +1 7 R. 2 w. to the sect>on corner coomor, 'Lc Sege to-n 1°•. 14, 23 and 24, thence >>uth alo., the 4+c i l ? a t g , on a 1r canlrlon t.., S.. Linn 2;? and 21 tr.• the ren terj,ne, of S R 101 th ' I . . , enc wes ..L rlr an( F•rluthwesterly aaonf; said cente line of S .R. 101 to the a.t,' wr r, q, rr t.er ,«1cLic.n line of ?• Section 22:3 :hence we St Aor2 'the e .a k t• g1l..if;r 1,ecti011 Lade to p the 1/4 corner common to Sections 23 alit thence t:ontinijing wes I on the east.-west, quarter fct inn ]i. rte to the re.lter' of Section ?2j Fd, rGt 4' fit' T r- he thence north along the north South glui+tr:r ser•eta.,l; Tin-: to the 1/4 corner common Lo Sec t7onr, -. and 15, thence coi.tinoing north -along S r' - L '.4 1 ? 7711 ta1"x 4 •- to y? the north-south quart section line through th enter of section o? y 15 to the north 1/4 corner of section 15; thence west along the section line common to Sections 1.0 -arid 15 to the section corner common to Sections 9, 10, 15, and 16; thence north along the section line common to Sections 9 and 30 to the section corner common to vu r y 1 Sections 3, 4, 9 and 10; thence continuing north along the section ? line common to Sections 3 and 4 to the south line of the N1/2 of the ' NS/2 of Section 4; thence west along said south line to the boundary ; line of the Olympic National Forest; thence southerly -along said National Forest Boundary to the ridge that forms the divide between Penny CreeK, its unnamed tributaries, and Dry Creel:, its unnamed tributaries; thence westerly -along the ridge that forms the divide between Fenny CreeK, its unnamed tributaries, and Dry Creek, its unnamed tributaries, to the southerly summit of Green Mountain x laying within the boundaries of the Olympic National Forest; thence ° e northwesterly along the ridge to the northerly summit of said Green ( / Mountain; thence westerly along the ridge to the southerly summit of & A ' Mount Townsend; thence south erl.y and southwesterly along the ridge 3 to the summit of BucKhorn Mountain; thence southwesterly along the ridge to Marluot Pass; thence southerly along the ridge into Olympic National ParK to Warrior FeaK; thence continuing southerly along the th d e ridge to Mount Constance; thence continuing southerly along , ridge to the boundary of the Olympic National. Parh and the Olympic National Forest; thence easterly along the ridge to Mount, Crag; thence easterly and southeasterly along the ridge through Sections 8 I and 9, T. 26 N., R, 2 W.. to Buck Mountain; thence easterly, southeasterly, northeasterly -arid northerly along the ridge that ? forme, the divide between F.:1bo Creek and Marpl.e/Spencer CreeK t o drainage, through Sections 9, 16 and 1C: T. 26 N., R. 2 W.r WalKer Pass; thence northwesterly and northeasterly along the ridge r through Section 34, T. 27 N., R. 2 W., to the westerly summit of " u-, W Mount WalKer; thence northerly along the ridge that forms the ' A ' southerly divide of the Big Quilcene River watershed through Section 35, T. 27 N., R. 2 W., to the section line common to Sections 35 And 26, T. 27 N.r R. 2 W.; thence east along said section line to the south 1/4 corner of Section 26; thence north along the north-south a quarter section line through the center of 26 to the North 1/4 corner of Section 26; thence east, along the section line common to Sections 23 and 26 to the section corner common to Sections 23, 24, 25 and 26; thence north along the section line common to sections 23 and 24 to the north line of the S1/2 of the Si/2 of Section 24; a 1 thence east along said north line to the ,.enter of the SE1./4 of Section 24; thence south along the west line of the El./2 of the 151%2 of Section 24 to the high tide line of the westerly limits of Quilcene Bay; Thence southerly along the westerly high tide line of Quilcene Bay to the westerly projection of the north line of Tract 10 of the State Oyster Reserve at Quilcene in Section 25, T. 27 N. x' R. 2 W. and Section 30, T. 27 N., R. 1 W.; thence east along said projection, and continuing east along the north line of Tract 10 and along the south line: of Tract, 8 to the east line of Tract 8; thence north along said east line to the south line of Tract 3; thence east along said south line to the east line of Tract 3; thence north tr along said east line to the north line of Tract 3; thence west al.nng q said north line to the west line of an oyster claim deeded under ' application no. 3438 (Tideland 'I a;.: B in Section 19); thence north a. along said west line to a point on the south line of an oyster claim deded under application no. 3500 (Tideland Tax C in Section 19); Nl?t' u thence northwesterly to the intersection of the north line of r'f t r S?gy ".174'"°"" 'TR'?,""^I"„t'Vlf .n -f l,t wrv m .axF^vrw,.n+ i w' y 5 •y a 1•i t J ^ 1 ?? '? y a i ? Y al ?y t ' 1 '' ti ? ; fy ? yv k ` ? w t 1y t,?,?(¢uy?'?hra 't a'?'4;? ?r f tk ls'? +t ?? s.? c 1 t ?TM 1? i l ? r ; l x ? dt 1 i ' ft C t+V? f dr ?ry t w1q? Section 19 and th t i e wes B i i line of Tideland Tau C, the Point of eg nn ng. Containing 51,000 acres, more or less. m ADOPTED THIS [ 1985 iiAY 4 Z 4i? r . . . -- .5 John L. Pitts, Chairman f f ; --------------------- B- G. Browm, Member ? ?? 'S!{f 1Y U'$M1C - ? , Zed Y.O?]N '?NWTi'r.A4'?'•C' "^`°'4"^5,{-0{I?i ??(f !iX r?.IWYr`?{:,? 41N ,}iql t?? y t N? 1u P.1N''v?t _ ?V I ?f 11 F? r %? t 4 :y; allot 1 llrk' t ' r r(sM.l J a _ 21- _s, n$r a _ r _ rn it STATE" OF WASHINGTON _ +V COUNTY CF JEFFERSON In the matter of x Ass:' -;i Intent to revise x Resolution No, Dound,iry of the Ouil.cene x ? . Flood Control Sub-Zone X Tristri.ct X WHEREAS, there is a nerd lr revise the boundary or the nui.lcene Flood Control Sub -Zone District, e. tablirhed on Lhe i7th r'a- f D cember, 1984, by , Resolution No, 95-84, to b tLcr verve: the public nL•ere t, and to better represei t the areas to be >r-rvFd by o-aid SubZone Di-lr^-r ?. TT 25 I F IOLI'ETi thal. t.Lc- J f Person County board of (onn t sioner> intends a Lo revise the boundary or the Duilcene Flood Control Sut _n•.: TlLstric-t; IT IS FU;iTHER, RESOL.VED thoi in occord,ance with t.l rarovisionL of IRC:W 86.;5. eI eq., tile Dourd Li,` Commissioners will a public heraring :in - the Con nu ;OrrerS' Chaml .-IT Courthouse Fort 'iown rn:i. Wash:inrton on Man 11Y, ok. be1, 7, ;.98 71 1.1 tour of 2 0 F'rl; 1T IS FURTHER RES.(.il_'.l_D h„t. 1,he rr v-d t• liIiClary 0 e.aid 0UiIcenr• Sari Zone b,a described ns fatlc, .n NE OUILCENE FLilOT, COPTROL. Sl1T.-:CONY , F:TC:' That portion of Section 15', 'township 2 North, Range 1. West, W.M., and that portion of Sections 4. 1. 5, 22, 23, 24, 'E, 34 and 35. acid all of Sections 16, 2., 27, 2S, and :i';i a{ 7iJlJl',',ih].p 27 North. Rouge 2 We,itr W.M.. and that, portion of Sections F3, 9„ 10 ,and 16 of Township 26 North, Range 2 West, W.M.. and that, portion of the Olympic Notional FOr'est„ Ciu:il.c-ne District, and that, portion of the Olympic N-ationo.l Fork, and ttrat portion of CBaf i.¢ene 11'ay mare paI,ticulnrIy described as follows: Degsnrri.ng at. -a GairrL: 1,1 PuHcene T.say on the sar.;ion lino ccmnnon Lo Ser, Lions 1.8 on 1.9, 7 . r N... R, 1. i,i.. 1r' pa.irsr, ng t h e i n to r•tec t i on of said Scat ion Ii. rue and the we5rtrrr baundarl o(• the: oyster c.lni.m deer) inder npplicol,ion no. 3500 ,T.idel-and Tax C in Section 1.9); thence West alonq said section Iin(. 2,;.1 chains more or less to the section corner common to Serbia.- IC; and 19, T. 27 N, R. 1 W. and Sections 13 and 24, T.27 N. R. W. i.hence continuing west, l=ong the section lino common to '•nect!uns 1,5 and 2,1, . 27 N. R. 2 w. to the section corner common to Secticm. 14, 23 and 24, thence south nl.ong the sr:,cl,ion line common tc Se-:t.ionr, 22 and 24 to the cen I.Prl2ne• of S.R. 101, 1,hencF we St.erir and enuLt.WO elerl.Y along said c.mter.line of S.R. 101 to the east-we, I, q-11 Pt9r section line of Section 23,; 1.hen rF west !.,long the eo=.;t-west gnt:,Les eertion 79ne to the 1/4 corner common to Sections 23 and 22; tnenee zontinuing west. on the east-west quarter nect.ion line to the rente, of Section 22; thence north along the north-•r,outh quarter sr:.rLion l.in., to the 1/4 corner commun to Sections, 2' and 15; thence continuing north along N ' the north-south quarter section line through the center of section e 15 to the north 1/4 corner of section 15; thence west along the section line common to Sections 7.0 and 15 to the section corner ;'• common to Sections 9, 10, 15, and 16; thence north along the section +?s line common to Sections 9 -and 10 to the section corner common to - Wl' ?.. Sections 3, 4, 9 and 10; thence continuing north along the section line common to Sections 3 and 4 to the south line of the N1/2 of the ' '. y N1/2 of Section 4; thence west along said south line to the boundary n line of the Olympic National Forest; thence southerly along said National. Forest Boundary to the ridge that forms the divide between Penny Creek, its unnamed tributaries, and Dry Creek, its unnamed tributaries; thence westerly along the ridge that forms the divide phi between Fenny CreeK, its unnamed tributaries, -and Dry Creek, its 5 unnamed tributaries, to the southerly summit of Green Mountain 1 laying within the boundaries of the Olympic National Forest; thence northwesterly along the ridge to the northerly summit of said Green Mountain; thence westerly -along the ridge to the southerly summit of s Mount Townsend; thence southerly and southwesterly along the ridge {r to the summit of BucKhorn Mountain; thence southwesterly along the s ^ ridge to Marmot Pass; thence southerly along the ridge into 01ympic ' 4 $ ` National ParK to Warrior r c:ak; thence continuing southerly along the rid e to Mount Constance; thence continuin southerl l th k g g y a ong e Ya ridge to the boundary of the Olympic National Parl; and the Olympic National Forest; thence easterly along the ridge to Mount, Crag; thence easterly and southeasterly along the ridge through Sections 8 and 9, T. 26 N., R. 2 W., to BucK Mountain; thence easterly, . southeasterly, ortheasi.erl y and northerly a101-10 the ridge that n y i de between F:lbo CreeK and Marple/SpencE•T• CreeK Forms the divi a q ;, drainages through Section; 9, 16 and 10, T. 26 N., R. 2 W., to ; 1 Walker Pass; thence northwesterly and nartho..=_t.eT•ly along the ridge ' through Section 34, T . 27 N., R. 2 W., to the westerly summit, of off, Mount Walker; thence northerly .along the ridge that forms the southerly divide of the Big Quilcene River watershed through Section } 35, T. 27 N., R. 2 W., to the section line common to Sections 35 and 26, T. 27 N., R. 2 W.; thence east along said section line to the qr south 1/4 corner of Section 26; thence north along the north-south ;+F a quarter section line through the center of 26 to the North 1/4 corner of Section 26; thence east along the section line common to Sections 23 and 26 to the section corner common to Sections 23, 24, ?- 25 and 26; thence north along the section line common to sections 23 and 24 to the north line of the S1/2 of the S1/2 of Section 24; i thence east along said north line to the center of the SE1/4 of ' Section 24; thence south along the west, line of the EI/2 of the E1/2 of Section 24 to the high tide line of the westerly limits of ( Quilcene Bay; Thence southerly along the westerly high tide line of ( Quilcene Bay to the westerly projection of the north line of Tract 10 of the State Oyster Reserve at Quilcene in Section 25, T. 27 N. R. 2 W. and Section 30, T. 27 N., R. 1 W.; thence east along said projection, and continuing east along the north line of Tract 10 and along the south line of Tract. 8 to the east line of Tract 8; thence north along said east line to the south line of Tract 3; thence east, j i along said south line to the east line of Tract 3; thence north along said east line to the north line of Tract 3; thence west -along said north line to the west line of an oyster claim deeded under application no. 3438 (Tideland Tax B in Section 19); thence north ? e' alonq said west line to a point on the south line of an oyster claim i I deded under application no. 3500 (Tideland Tax C in Section 19); thence northwesterly to the intersection of the north line of k: Bch r g-RT i1 ' I ? L Cj1/. i 3 ? • a ?T /1? I'S'???R?Y A ? ?I t ?? f? J it '~ ? ' ` 4J S 1 1 ? I . 4 .C i. 1?}' IG ? ? h ? I f:. ff llyyyy ?,. al ? Cr k, S F `, y ? !n 4 , I t - S ? y Y3M1 1 r ti A aY? i S P ? r M,a M a % 1 9 S ` Section 19 and the west li Beginning. ne of Tideland Tux Cr the Feint of Containing 51r000 acres, more or less. ADOPTED THIS _I ?_? UA OF ? i cif,! 198 ---- ohn L. Fi ptts,-Chairman ---- ._, B. G. Brow,, Member a y --°------------------- ------- Larry W. Dennison, Member " SEAL t ATTEST e x Brag ? C di g j. . er ne 4 d ' Elerk of the Hoar HILE YOU WERE T TO Q0IC_CF'rjC7 e-oy-m ?Lr't1 i F 2 A.M. Cate Time P.M. of -7 Phone S . -7, 7 Area Code Number Ext. Telephoned Please Call Celled to See You Will Call Again Returned Your Cell Urgent Message Taken by Ask - `?ooD Cn ?T.ep e. ?d'?/aeEu6 L?DNE (7/3/R/LT .?/EEYIV6 - r a 6?iD?BS . i aka U r ?! . 1t7fiil7Be'/e5 P.EESE?/1. _? ,? , ,? ? Nic,? •vA/Ln ' i H'IAKVy ANDG/LSDi+ ? yOE 6,CAGE R`, uG 6-D &D r ?' U /. NEw &Z/o6? pvw.? - nroTN/. $tr ?'? - t ?^ L[N?E2 OGD Bf/LTJi - ?//? QNIO GM/ST.Q/C7J ? GNNtiNE c . 1 ti ?. ?q,2S G(Qj?T.CEAA^ /=P?7/ ODD B2/oG? .VE?? I qc"/w r r Co/C/v>? NEc.P o,F? fad ?ir/? - ti ,?' T/ ?'+13E r2 i-v Duets r/z? JCO-2&S7- 5E,2?• '; ,aCGtCT/o r+ /N ?j'7u /tcC.v G a7y. r yy n - /YIA 'f.(i, /1•?/? C2Jo-, f/OTtd (/i 6 C/N9/R.i'1)4N ,?,,.{{- ? /?ATNy 5441S .?. LexJb Rs/./sE j??R?5. + .,1 2??,y?1??y,??cd? .Jc Z ??" nvl ?tv5, 4iuNS'? _ a ? •rc,!avr.? ?rnr.?.: rf ?,? a. „pavrnxrecn _jQMVero? rg'?n ? - ??,, f I Y ?,L 1" a ? 4 I 'i JLl.l.l f ? t L * „{y?i?i n tiA r { y 'll.V art ?..7 wS MEMO t ? q July 1, 1985 I .?s To, B.O.C.C. . From, Public Works ,s Sub,j, Report of meeting of the Guilcene Flood Control Zone District Advisory Board ; a?. ?ks The Lluilene Advisory Hoard has met twice with Public Works, on May 20, n and on June 10, 1985. At the May 20th meeting, 3-, ' ji Members present, Nick Ward Cathy Ellis `. Maury Anderson Jeff Lucia t Also present were, John Fitts, Gary Rowe, and Bruce Laurie. , ' 3 J Q A review of the role of the Advisory Board was conducted. The Hoard discussed short, and long term goals of the Zone District, including funding, planning, and implementation of flood control. John g aei+. Fitts suggested that Wolf Hauer, consulting engineer and expert on river dynamics be contacted to help in the design of flood control projects. i4 The members decided to walk the river from the mouth to above the GL! Lingerlonger Bridge to determine what type of protects could be accomplished this year to minimize flood damage in the coming flood season, and then meet on June 10th to report their findings. 1 At the June 10, 1985 meeting, Members present, Nick Ward Maury Anderson Clyde Grace a Also present, Gary Rowe,and Bruce Laurie. „ The Board members reported that they inspected the River from the mouth to approximately 1/2 mile upstream of the Old Lingerlonger Bridge. They found that the river from the mouth to the New Lingerlonger Bridge is in relatively good condition in that the main channel is fairly clear of debris grid bars, and that only .a major dedging project would improve the channel at this time. The major problem requiring imeadiate attention, the Board felt, is a restriction at the Old Linger Longer Bridge caused by the settling of rip-rap into the channel at the north abutment and the encroachment of brush and debris Just downstream of the south abutment of this bridge. This restriction causes an increase: in the elevation of the surface of the river which decrease the ePfecti.vness of the existing upstream dikes and increases the liKelyhood of floating debris to cause damage to, or worse, total destruction of the bridge. Additionally, the board members stated that the restriction is probably adding to the build up of gravel bars between the Old -and New Linger Longer Bridges because of the decreased velocity of the river downstrean of the restriction. The area between the bridges is an -area of concern of the Board because of the gravel bars decreasing the capacity of this already narrow section of river. Also noticed on the inspection of the river was the accumilation of debris and gravel upstream of the Old Linger Longer Bridge to extent of causing the river to change its main channel. The Board felt, that some of the debris and gravel, should be removed selectively to reduce the amount of debris floating downstream during high water periods and increase the capacity of the upstream channel. k'A Funding of these project; and long range plans were also discussed. T ?. The Board indicated that they would like to persue other funding sources, as well as any that might be genernted from the District, f h ? ° rom those w o what they feel have contri.nut.ed to the flooding bl th ifir l th D N R F t S t ti i d b pro om, spoc ., ores e . , e erv ce, an priva e , m er y i tr companiea, through logging operations. Also, Any agency honifiting t from any protects should partic:tpnte in the cost of the protect, ? +{5 F' 11 ? In summary, the Advisory Board recortlend% that a pro ect. be intiated to r p jyi e remove, the, restriction at, the Old Linger Longer Bridge this rummer, that all possible sources of funding be explored, and a long range, J MYiYrHI ` . h. r plan be developed to reduce the risk of flood dmm.igo. u qtr ?. +r 1 _ 1 t d After the discussion, the board elected Maury Anderson Vice Chairman, i `r, ?g"a 1 and Kathy Ellis an Secretary. ? { i+, t No other meeting with Public Works was scheduL<,d, r r h 1i1 4 b .' 1 + 1" ?k?y/? 5^F S q+ _ 1 1{ l?r^ X i t A ? +. L 1 BOARD/COMMISSION: QUILCENE FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT ADVISORY BOARD Date of Listing: April 1989 Meeting times: to be set Number. of Members: 5 Length of Terms: 3 years y Notices to/Contact Person Gary Rowe- PUBLIC Works airman o oar. MEMBERS: Names Address Phone: Term Expires 1) Nick Ward (???n Aa>?l P.O. Box 423 ((o5-j751 3/31/88 ' ui cene, a. 6 - 2) Cathy Ellis ?(? ?nX Iri3 (/e?i-3?L(1 3/31/87 G u,kc mss., Luc, . 3) Clyde Grace P.O. Box 384 766 11g3/31/86 uL cene, a. 98376 - a f 4) M.L. Anderson P.O. Box 10 rllo5-.3700 9/11 /87 Quilcene, Wa. 98376 TP f ucia. P.O. Box 321 7(05-379A 3/31/88 Quilcene. wa. 98376. '. 6) t - '1'?txt21? 7r h; y8 Ill Mr. Nick Ward P.O. Box 423 Quilcene, Wa. 98376 Dear Mr. Ward, The Quilcene Flood Control Sub Zone District was established by Resolution 95-84 in December of 1984 in accordance with R.C.W. 86.15.010, for the purpose of "planning, engineering, constructing, .? and maintaining flood and stormwater control facilities." ro In order for the County to serve the needs of the people in this District in the most effective manner possible, we were pleased ?m to appoint you to serve as Chairman of the five member Quilcene Flood Control District Advisory Board. Your term of office will' be-.for three years and will expire on March 31, 1988. The other Advisory Board members are: Jeff Lucia, M.L. Anderson, Cathy Ellis, and Clyde Grace. Attached are some guidelines for Advisory Board members. Gary Rowe Acting Public Works Director, will be•contacting you in the near 4 future to arrange an organizational meeting of this Board. We appreciate your willingness to serve the County and the Quilcene area in this manner.` Sincerely, rtli j,ar JEFFERSON COUNTY ,?k k BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS f w{ tt 2B.G. Brown, "i p Acting Chairman BGB/ld, wu cc, Public Works ,..9,ieo }MF /? 114 , lY I ?f / L\I 1} X1?? 6 s ? P/ - Jefferson County BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Port Townsend, Washington 98368 • Phone (206) 305.2016 LARRY W. DENNISON, DISTRICT 1 B.O. BROWN, DISTRICT 2 JOHN L. PITTS, DISTRICT 3 April 23, 1985 x` i R ,,. ?....d ?,....-.•...•-.m. ...?,.. Jefferson County BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Port Townsend, Washington 96368 • Phone (206) 385.2016 LARRY W. DENNISON, DISTRICT 1 B.G. BROWN, DISTRICT 2 JOHN L. PITTS, DISTRICT 3 April 23, 1985 Cathy Ellis Quilcene, Wa. 98376 Dear Ms. Ellis, The Quilcene Flood Control Sub Zone District was established by Resolution 95-84 in December of 1984 in accordance with R.C.W. 86.15.010, for the purpose of "planning, engineering, constructing, and maintaining flood and stormwater control facilities." In order for the County to serve the needs of the people in this District in the most effective manner possible, we were pleased to appoint you to serve on the five member Quilcene Flood Control District Advisory Board. Your term of office will be for two years and will expire on March 31, 1987. Attached are some guidelines for Advisory Board members. Gary Rowe Acting Public Works Director, will be contacting you in the near future to arrange an organizational meeting of this Board. We appreciate your willingness to serve the County and the Quilcene area in this manner. Sincerely, JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS B.G. Brown Acting Chairman BOB/ld cc: Public Works Nick Ward tI I CLLR ? n '? r r, 7 ? ???+}j/yy?;l1" ?'SI 0. Y*'1'ht r ° r C {` r . I y a? t i , i4M _,_ Y , A?l .t errs Jefferson County , . BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Port Townsend, Washington 98368 i • Phone (206) 385.2016 77777 LARRY W. DENNISON, DISTRICT 1 . B.G. BROWN, DISTRICT 2 JOHN L. PITTS, DISTRICT 3 April 23, 1985 , . Mr. Clyde Grace P.O. Box 384 .£ Quilcene, Wa. 98376 Dear Mr. Grace, The Quilcene Flood Control Sub Zone District was established by Resolution 95-84 in December of 1984 in accordance with R.C.W. 86.15.010, for the purpose of "planning, engineering, constructing, and maintaining flood and stormwater control facilities." In order for the County to serve the needs of the people in this District in the most effective manner possible, we were pleased to appoint you to serve on the five member Quilcene Flood Control v District Advisory Board. Your term of office will be for one year, U' and will expire on March 31, 1986. Attached are some guidelines for Advisory Board members. Gary Rowe I.> Acting Public Works Director, will be contacting you in the near future to arrange an organizational meeting of this Board. We appreciate your willingness to serve the County and the Quilcene ?. area in this manner. " Sincerely, x JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS B. G. Brown Ss Acting Chairman ?. r nr M,lirai BGB/ld cc: Public Works y ?. Nick Ward ' I ?5 I 1 ?W.j1 {??Cr '! v t m ?; ?? .?.__..__- .?.yd'+u'iW?W?..„a1.Yh'C. f rr?, ? \.. • '?"` _'' ' Sr?A?' 4 . } !? ? r Jefferson County BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Port Townsend, Washington 98368 • Phone (206) 385.2016 • , LARRY W. DENNISON, DISTRICT 1 . B.O. BROWN, DISTRICT 2 JOHN L. PITTS, DISTRICT 3 April 23, 1985 Mr. M.L. Anderson P.O. Box 10 Quilcene, Wa. 98376 Dear Mr. Anderson, The Quilcene Flood Control Sub Zone District was established by Resolution 95-84 in December of 1984 in accordance with R.C.W. 86.15.010, for the purpose of "planning, engineering, constructing, and maintaining flood and stormwater control facilities." In order for the County to serve the needs of the people in this District in the most effective manner possible, we were pleased to appoint you to serve on the five member Quilcene Flood Control District Advisory Board. Your term of office will be for two years and will expire on March 31, 1987. Attached are some guidelines for Advisory Board members. Gary Rowe, Acting Public Works Director, will be contacting you in-the near future to arrange an organizational meeting of this Board. We appreciate your willingness to serve the County and the Quilcene area in this manner. Sincerely, JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS A Acting Chairman BGB/ld cc: Public Works Nick Ward i. r _• t ?y ,rl, 7? ?Nl 4 ??}Yy C l q YT}' ))i titi h I ti? h? f 1 - F?H? 7 A?'? '11 }u ? Y f u? 1} 1{ t ? 4 I `'ef i t? ? ? 'i 1 , Li r k , "IL t A 2 2 Jefferson County BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Port Townsend, Washington 98368 • Phone (206) 385.2015 a 'Alt, LARRY W. DENNISON, DISTRICT 1 D.O. BROWN, DISTRICT 2 JOHN L. PITTS, DISTRICT 3 April 23, 1985 Mr. Jeff Lucia P.O. Box 321 Quilcene, Wa. 98376 Dear Mr. Lucia, The Quilcene Flood Control Sub Zone District was established by Resolution 95-84 in December of 1984 in accordance with R.C.W. 86.15.010, for the purpose of "planning, engineering, constructing, and maintaining flood and sitormwater control facilities." In order for the County tosecve the needs of the people in this District in the most effective manner possible, we were pleased to appoint you to serve on the five member Quilcene Flood Control District Advisory Board. Your term of office will be for three years and will expire on March 31, 1988. Attached are some guidelines for Advisory Board.members. Gary Rowe, Acting Public Works Director, will be contacting you in the near future to arrange an organizational meeting of this Board. We appreciate your willingness to serve the County and the Quilcene area in this manner. Sincerely, JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS G. Brown, Acting Chairman BGB/ld cc: Public Works Nick Ward i a A GUIDE FOR FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICTS ADVISORY COMMITTEES The law authorizing the formation of Flood Control Zone Distrin;s provides that the Board of County Commissioners may appoint an Advisory Committee for on; zone or combination of any two or more zones. The Committee shall consist of not more than five members and serve without pay, but may receive their reasonable expenses, and serve at the pleasure of the Board of County Commissioners. PURPOSE The purpose of a Flood Control Zone District Advisory Committee is to advise and assist the Board of County Commissioners with respect to flood control matters which affect the r Flood Control Zone District. The function of the Advisory Committee is advisory only. All administrative functions are the responsibility of the Board of County Commissioners and the County Engineer. However, the assistance and advice provided by the Advisory Committee will aid the Board of County Commissioners in the formulation of decisions and policies and the administration of flood control matters which concern the Flood Control Zone District. The Advisory Committee shall study any particular problem as requested by the Board of County Commissioners. APPOINTMENT Each Advisory Committee member shall be appointed by the Board of County Com- missioners. TERM OF OFFICE Tire tern of office for each Advisory Committee member shall be three years. The terms shall be staggered so that the expiration of the term of no more than two members shall occur any any one year. The term of office of the members initially appointed shall be one, two or three years, as appropriate, to provide for staggered terms. OFFICERS Each Advisory Committee shall have a chairman as designated by the Board of County Commissioners. The Advisory Committee may select from its membership a vice-chairman and a secretary. MEETINGS Meetings shall be held as deemed necessary and appropriate, provided that at least I one meeting will be held each year. Tie meetings will be called by notice from fire beahe d to determinee the chaiviews oftrloccalninterests.ncSuch meeti gs rmay be held sby,?oand in the name of, the Advisory Committee. t IN, lima `x ? ? lkj- ? •" Sua ' ?a, ?^. ... '- 519 ? T ..'$'. 1.. .?..-,+?,'''£?a1ar? .?, AA i ._ ? 4 , ..; _ ? rises ATTENDANCE Regular attendance is essential to the continuity of thought and action of the Ad- visory Committee. Therefore, if a member misses four consecutive meetings, his mem- bership shall be terminated, unless excused by the remainder of the membership. If o membership is terminated, the Board of County Commissioners shall be notified that a y position is vacant. The Board of County Commissioners shall appoint a new member to fill . the vacancy. FIELD TRIPS Field trips shall be made as appropriate and at the discretion of the Advisory Comm- ittee. ASSISTANCE BY THE COUNTY ENGINEER i The County Engineer shall assist the Advisory Committee by providing transportation, - engineering and staff assistance, and furnishing such technical information and assistance _ ,i as may be required by the Committee. The advisory Committee may request technical ineer f E Chi h E " ng e ngineer or t e information and other assistance directly from the County of the Flood Control Division. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES As provided in RCW 86.15.070, reasonable expenses incurred on field trips or in the s 6 regular course of meetings shall be reimbursable. t PUBLICITY All news releases, publicity of any kind, and information made available to the public val of d i l appro ew an l be subject to rev pertinent to the Advisory Committee activities sha ?ry the Board of County Commissioners prior to being released or made public. RECOMMENDATIONS, CONCLUSIONS, AND REQUESTS All recommendations, conclusions, or requests for assistance of the Advisory a. Committee will be submitted to the Board of County Commissioners. Copies of the ap- f i i t d or o stra m n propriate information shall be sent directly to the County Engineer as a d f h B oar o e Flood Control Zone Districts. All policy matters shall be referred directly to t County Commissioners; all administrative matters to the County Engineer. RECORDS The Advisory Committee shall keep a record of all transactions, and a copy of the y`• minutes of each meeting shall be sent to the Board of County Commissioners and the County Engineer. t J 6 e'? ? f T L k 1 1r `? 4 ? ?'V!? i , y ? V 91 IM? ? e L f r ' ? ?5 ,? ti •t 9 Ap ?J C ;t R 9Lq E; R 9V11E ?? . rrca r ?,?:? JEFFERSON COUNTY, BbARO. OF, COPAWSSIONERS . .:z:rch 17, 1985 . t. Jefferson County Board of Commissioners Jefferson County Courthouse Port Townsend, Washington 98368 Dear Commissioners, I recieved your letter requesting a list of citizens from,the Quilcene area interested in making up a five member citizen board for the Big Quilcene flood district. Hera iu •the list of people that said they would be interested in doing so: Nick - 765-3751 Jeff Lucia - 765-3782 M.L. Anderson- 765-3700 Cathy Ellis - 765-3241 Clyde Grace -765 -3984 L'.'feel those people will work very hard with the County Commiissioners, the County ''In3lneer, and the Public ',locks Department, for the Big Quilcone flood district. incorely, Charles (Nick) Ward 4 - n a" Y ' . _. n.,' MA lA, .: YDS.:: RESOLUTION NO. 95-84 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE QUILCENE FLOOD CONTROL SUB-ZONE DISTRICT -WHEREAS, on the 19th day of November, 1984, in regular meeting, ?s the Board of County Commissioners upon their own motion unani- mously passed Resolution Number 84-84 initiating the creation of the Quilcene Flood Control Sub-Zone District in accordance with R.C.W. 86.15.010, et seq., and; WHEREAS, there is a need for Jefferson County to sponsor United States and State of Washington Flood Control Projects as author- ized through any agency with powers to handle the same, and; WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing of the intent of the Com- i missioners to establish the Quilcene Flood Control Sub-Zone District was given, made and published as provided by law, said hearing was held on the 11th day of December, 1984, at the hour of 7:00 P.M. in the Quilcene Community Center located in Quilcene, Jefferson County, Washington, the date and place fixed by such Resolution and Public Notice for said hearing, and; WHEREAS, all persons attending said public hearing were given the opportunity to be heard and comment on the establishment of said District and the Commissioners find that said District should be :A established and that it is in the best interest of the County and the general public health, safety, benefit, welfare, and economic development and use, and to protect public roads, facilities and r environment; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners does hereby establish the Quilcene Flood Control Sub-Zone District for the purpose of planning, engineering, con- structing and maintaining flood and stormwater control facilit- ies; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said District shall have all the powers, authorities and duties provided in R.C.W. 86.15, et seq., and any and all amendments, changes or alterations thereto or laws pertaining to such, and including provisions as herein pro- vided; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Boundaries of said Quilcene dist- rict be described as follows; ' THE BIG QUILCENE RIVER WATERSHED { ` w3 v f ' That portion of Section 19, Township 27 North, dt : Range 1 West, W.M., and that portion of Sections s, j 4, 10, 15, 22, 23, 24, 26, 34, and 35, and all of Sections 9, 16, 21, 27, 28, and 33 of Township 27 North, Range 2 West, W.M., and that portion of Sec- f n , E 94' A A, ? y?. 1?fzz a ?_ . ri' £Y .txf? ?.,i. .?a.M: 1 s`aal4'w'e'xrrdar A'S.;,?a _ u _`P.._.:sY610fYiNt.? 'f tf&2'}Jh? ?- f - ..5 tions 8, 9, 10, and 16 of Township 26 North, Range 2 West, W.M., and that portion of the Olympic Nat- ional Forest, Quilcene District, and that portion of the Olympic National Park, and that portion of Quilcene Bay more particularly described as fol- lows: Beginning in Quilcene Bay at the high tide line at Fishermans Point; thence northerly along the easterly limits of said Quilcene Bay at the high tide line to the easterly projection of the divide between the Big Quilcene River and the Little Quil- cyre River watershed; thence westerly along said easterly projection to the westerly limits at the high tide line of said bay; thence continuing along said divide through Section 19, T. 27 N., R. 1 W., and Sections 24, 23, and a portion of 22, T. 27 N., R. 2 W., to a ridge laying in the NE 1/4 of said Section 22; thence northerly along said ridge through said Section 22 and Sections 15, 10, and a portion of Section 3, T. 27 N., R. 2 W., to the summit of an unnamed knoll laying in the NW 1/4 of said Section 3; thence westerly and southwesterly along the ridge that forms the divide between Penny Creek, its unnamed tributaries, and the Little Quilcene River, Dry Creek, its unnamed tributaries through said Section 3, and Section 4, T. 27 N., R. 2 W., to the southerly summit of Green Mountain laying within the boundries of the Olympic National Forest; thence northwesterly along the ridge to the northerly summit of said Green Mountain; thence westerly along the ridge to the southerly summit of Mount Townsend; thence southerly and southwesterly along the ridge to the summit of Buckhorn Mountain; thence southwesterly along the ridge to Marmot Pass; thence southerly along the ridge into Olympic National Park to Warrior Peak; thence continuing southerly along the ridge to Mount Constance; thence continuing southerly along the ridge to the boundary of the Olympic National Park and the Olym- pic National Forest; thence easterly along the ridge to Mount Crag; thence easterly and southeast- erly along the ridge through Sections 8 and 9, T. 26 N., R. 2 W., to Buck Mountain; thence easterly, southeasterly, northeasterly and northerly along the ridge that forms the divide between Elbo Creek and Marple/Spencer Creek drainages through Sections 9, 16, and 10, T. 26 N., R. 2 W., to Walker Pass; thence northwesterly and northeasterly along the ridge through Section 34, T. 27 N., R. 2 W., to the westerly summit of Mount Walker; thence northerly, northeasterly, easterly and southeasterly along the ridge that forms the southerly divide of the Big Quilcene River watershed through Sections 35, 26, 23, and 24, T. 27 N., R. 2 W., to the high tide 2 ? r e 1 ? - ?H%SnftL } 55 f9 ? k f ? ? jj Mi^' i? 9M1yMN.7!N IVMf wµh'nn h .• H? w' k??'^.,? J l r?r d? dui 1L v, Hl ??,-?? iy d? 1 A?'. 1 fF 1 ? 4 7h Ih > ti v c i 1 f '' „1 9? .' y + .7 r 51 ?!{?? d I ? ? ? k, ? ? ?f? ?2 ,.? ? >°'h s? f .f 7 t 7i t ?? i 5 I + 1 Y j I q t ` 1 F Y ? ? l 1 1 f3 ,'? 3 h. .iq? t1k F+ a Ati?s?k? ??e 7 aa„-• RESOLUTION NO. 95-84 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE QUILCENE FLOOD CONTROL SUB-ZONE DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the 19th day of November, 1984, in regular meeting, the Board of County Commissioners upon their own motion unani- mously passed Resolution Number 84-84 initiating the creation of the Quilcene Flood Control Sub-Zone District in accordance with R.C.W. 86.15.010, et seq., and; WHEREAS, there is a need for Jefferson County to sponsor United States and State of Washington Flood Control Projects as author- ized through any agency with powers to handle the same, and; WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing of the intent of the Com- missioners to establish the uiIcene Flood Control Sub-Zone District was given, made and published as provided by law, said hearing was held on the 11th day of December, 1984, at the hour of 7:00 P.M. in the Quilcene Community Center located in Quilcene, Jefferson County, Washington, the date and place fixed by such Resolution and Public Notice for said hearing, and; WHEREAS, all persons attending said public hearing were given the opportunity to be heard and comment on the establishment of said District and the Commissioners find that said District should be established and that it is in the best interest of the County and the general public health, safety, benefit, welfare, and economic development and use, and to protect public roads, facilities and environment; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners does hereby establish the Quilcene Flood Control Sub-Zone District for the purpose of planning, engineering, con- structing and maintaining flood and stormwater control facilit- ies; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said District shall have all the powers, authorities and duties provided in R.C.W. 86.15, et seq., and any and all amendments, changes or alterations thereto or w laws pertaining to such, and including provisions as herein pro- r vided; ' BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Boundaries of said Quilcene dist- rict be described as follows; µ THE BIG QUILCENE RIVER WATERSHED t *, That portion of Section 19, Township 27 North, Range 1 West, W.M., and that portion of Sections j, 4, 10, 15, 22, 23, 24, 26, 34, and 35, and all of ?'rt4i4 Sections 9, 16, 21, 27, 28, and 33 of Township 27 ?ev North, Range 2 West, W.M., and that portion of Sec- v;? r it 2 t IL A tions 8, 910, and 16 of Township 26 North, Range e 2 West, W.M., and that portion of the Olympic Nat- s. tonal Forest, Quilcene District, and that portion . of the Olympic National Park, and that portion of ? Quilcene Bay more particularly described as fol- lows: « Beginning in Quilcene Bay at the high tide line °« at Fishermans Point; thence northerly along the easterly limits of said Quilcene Bay at the high tide line to the easterly projection of the divide between the Big Quilcene River and the Little Quil- c3re River watershed; thence westerly along said easterly projection to the westerly limits at the high tide line of said bay; thence continuing along said divide through Section 19, T. 27 N., R. 1 W., and Sections 24, 23, and a portion of 22, T. 27 N., R. 2 W., to a ridge laying in the NE 1/4 of said Section 22; thence northerly along said ridge through said Section 22 and Sections 15, 10, and a portion of Section 3, T. 27 N., R. 2W., to the summit of an unnamed knoll laying in the NW 1/4 of sterl th d l 4 y sou we y an said Section 3; thence wester ide b tween Penn di l th id th t f th . y e v e a e r ge d orms ong Creek, its unnamed tributaries, and the Little ; E.. Quilcene River, Dry Creek, its unnamed tributaries through said Section 3, and Section 4, T. 27 N., R. to the southerly summit of Green Mountain 2 W. ? , laying within the boundries of the Olympic National wse` Forest; thence northwesterly along the ridge to the northerly summit of said Green Mountain; thence westerly along the ridge to the southerly summit of 'r Mount Townsend; thence southerly and southwesterly along the ridge to the summit of Buckhorn Mountain; thence southwesterly along the ridge to Marmot Pass; thence southerly along the ridge into Olympic National Park to Warrior Peak; thence continuing F southerly along the ridge to Mount Constance; e to the the rid lon th l i ( g g y a ng sou er thence continu boundary of the Olympic National Park and the Olym- pic National Forest; thence easterly along the ridge to Mount Crag; thence easterly and southeast- erly along the ridge through Sections 8 and 9, T. ' 26 N., R. 2 W., to Buck Mountain; thence easterly, u southeasterly, northeasterly and northerly along the ridge that forms the divide between Elbo Creek `.Y. . and Marple/Spencer Creek drainages through Sections r r 4, 16, and 10, T. 26 N., R. 2W., to Walker Pass; -,?, ^ +4 " thence northwesterly and northeasterly along the ?? ridge through Section 34, T. 27 N., R. 2 W., to the thence northerly t W lk f M ?i er; a oun westerly summit o the asterl alon th l l d y g e y an sou northeaster y, easter ridge that forms the southerly divide of the Big h 1!,r Quilcene River watershed through Sections 35, 26, h 23, and 24, T. 27 N., R. 2 W., to the high tide FF r line of theeste l e li th i f i r y enc m ts o Qu lceneay; southerly along the westerly high tide line of Quilcene Bay to Frenchmans Point, thence easterly _„ , to the high tide line at Fishermans Point and the ' point of Begining. Containing 52,200 acres, more or less. t BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the area described herein incorporate 4 any and all watersheds located in said described boundaries; ADOPTED this_Zf?day of _/de-/ 1984. ?t JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS B. G. Brown, Chairman John L. Pitts, ember n ember Lar Denni son. Attest l r ne r g9 Clerk of the Boa 3 rt , ? r t er ? 4 ? ? i 1 ? ' r rs r r .a s a;y ?71'4`'v , f t?Y n ??r )a 4,? 1 7-,- r r= Y m {L -Y f ? J I QiL.ri ? i 1, IN Jet i I ?I lII E 1 1 i? 1 E VIN?¢, ? R A, ? r5Y',? o-F , C. R. LYON ENGINEERING x P. O. BOX i07 LYNNWOOD, WASHINGTON 98036 _ N I November 19, 1969 % h Mr. Ed, Becker PE Jefferson County Engineer s County Court House Port Townsend, Washington Dear Sir: , Engloced are two (2) copies of a formation petition for a Water District in the area of Four Corners and Haddlock, Jefferson County, Washington. • ' . C > x ? It is requested that you check this legal and let me know if it meets with your approval. y We would appreciate any thing that you. could do to expedite this approval. r ? ? ]]] Ver ruly yours, ? ?? k Charles CRL:bl Enclosure CC: Ralph Theriault (Theriault Building Supplies) !? M E?±y ,?l ??r Tj ,i. ?. :..4 IP`7I•I'ye? .?[NliS,?-- nwrm .,, t?? f f , r ViNd0 1 4? - 4 , f r •'-•• a•..• -._- ._u-. d.w.._ _ _ ?iXi12 641,. 5._..ut6WVC ..__?. (?.__..•.•..- 4% S F PETITION FOR THE FORMATION OF A WATER DISTRICT TO: THE BOARD OF COUNTY CUMMISSIONERS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTON v- Comes now the undersigned, constituting at least twenty-five percent (25%) of the qualified electors, who are qualified electors as of the date of filing this ,. - petition, residing within the DISTRICT hereinafter described, and respectfully ' petition the Board of County Commissioners of Jefferson County, Washington, that a 14ATER DISTRICT be formed comprising the territory hereafter described, which is all located in Jefferson County, Washington. Your petitioners state that the object for the creation of said DISTRICT j is for the acquirement, construction, maintenance, operation, development, and i regulation of a water supply system for the area hereinafter described. Your petitioners further state that the establishment of said DISTRICT } will be conducive to the public health, convenience, and welfare and will be of us ? ?• special benefit to all the property hereinafter described to be included therein. The boundaries of the DISTRICT petitioned for are as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the north line of Section 31, Township 30 North, Range 1 Ilest, N.M. with the line of existing high tide in Port Discovery Bay; thence easterly along the north line of ,id Section 31 to its intersection with westerly u + 1 lin f block 13 in the plat of 1 ey's Addition as recorded in volumeZ$ of plats, w r P?b pag records of Jefferson Cn.,ty, llashington; thence northwesterly along said westerly line to the northerly li=: of said block 13; thence northeasterly along said northerly line to the easterly line of said block 13; thence southeasterly along said °d v 1 easterly line to its intersection with the north line of said Section 31; thence east along said north line of said Section 31 to its intersection with the northerl li n + y ne of black 2 of said T1Jloy'.,, Addition; thence northeasterly along the northerly line + of blocks 2 A 3 of r, id 1.1Fey's Addition and its extension to point 150.00 feet easterly, as measured along said e ..r!nsinn, of the east margin of Mamie Street; thence southeasterly along a line being 150.01 feet northeasterly of and parallel to the east margin of said ' Mamie Street to the north line of said Section 31; thence east along said north line S i ? Ix of ection 31 and the north line of Sections 32, 33, 34 and Section 35, Township 30 North Range 1 Ilest, I11, to its intersection with the line of existinn hinh tide in Port Tormsend LSay Eh ncr in a nr ll . j ne ra ,y southernl.y direction•along,.•ui,i J'ne of existing ° ' , high LidC r ying? 114 t '19 W I mu P 1 d Ln -,nna ortane Cana).,; thrncr. southeas er y a on2?Pi 17TefTter}fne=to .. i Y t Ti n ? l ri? ' VIA. d 4' f qq '4Y? I "} _'?I l 1 71Y ?'Y. I _ r `Sii9 .IMA?R. 444222111 . ,? ?4!.?'?'v.??TA •^+r ?m.w: X14lt?.b'I'! . •'.? l l .z'r''wfni+ Y 1J11 ??1 h.rvIJ! 1 .;t7i {Af' t„ ? ' 1 4 r, »R fii t a' q d; ti. a,?Yn_Lho-intor_&LcLiWLltitlLth?south-liucr-caf i Section 7, Township 29 North, I?onge i Gast, 11. i1.; thence west along sairi south line to the crest line of io.rn hi i 29 'forth, Ran{e 1 Cast, U.N.; thence southerly along f Y' said west line and the east line of Section 13, Township 29 North, Range 1 West, f ?t I1.11. to a point 150.00 feet south, as measured at right angles to the south line of w the .7 1/2 of NE 1/4 of said Section 13; thence west on a line parallel to and 150.00 feet South of the south line of the 14 1/2 of the NE 1/4 to a point lying 150.00 feet westerly of the west JIM16 of said NE 1/4; thence north along a line being 150.00 feet Swesterly of and parallel to said west line of the NE 1/4 to the north line of said w? Section,l3; thence east on said north line of Sections 13 and 14 to the east line of ra fY/1/i' ;,,, -of Section 14, Township 'lorth, Range 1 blest, ' 1•i.; thence south along said east 4J. line to its in Frsectioi mar in ?K?N°n thence nn . trucst:rl?,'[ ?.a?lryry-?q sa'?I ° ?iar?in o its??)1ntersection ?iithofC°•rw the l i no of the 7 -?°MrY?!?f ?j'r-46 l ? f f Sf t fbh? l?"Ji rn? i N-,u3 157 thence westerly along `atd`,?tne to Ehe :4est line of said Section 14; thence northerly along the wrest line of Section 14 to the north line of said Section 14; thence west along the south line of Section 10, Township 29 North, ?r Range l blest, 1.1.11. to the east line of the Sll 114 of the SW 1/4 of said Section 10; thence north along said east line and the east line of the NI) 1/4 of SI1 1/4 and the east line of the SW 1/4 of 7111 1/4 of said Section 10 to t. the South line of the (11,1 1/4 of the N11 1/4 of said Section 10 t-, P-41 ' alonw 'thence west th Lii line of said NW 1/4 of the N1.1 1/4 of Section 10 to the east ine of Section 9, Toonship 29 Worth, Range 1 blest, thence northerly along nid-east line of Section 9 to the north line of said Section 9; thence iiest`on the north line of Section 9 and Section 8, Township .. 29 North Range 1 West, l"1 to the intersection with the line of existing high tide of Port Ui covcry fay thcn,,e northerly along said ling. of high tide }Surer-rei}er+'Y a, Ps s.l egAe ?• '1"41PS?, 1 v^lo the point of beginning all Incat.erl in ,)r:ffrr oir county, bla.hinnton. asp... ?: °'... ,,.. Sorf?r41?"? a....s.. . •F ?d8-t,r "ti Aa'.. A".y bin Y i i mnlf .y . -mat- W 'OF . ............ Na 41, LU j I OL MP. 1 1 (3 N I to 0 CC) w CL x Z" uj S, I 17 X4 x 1?1 jr Lo 7f JIM 10 - 49 ............... Lo 1V 71,17 , 7T xw a " ? h`..1y„ g ..•?aa'.ts':a• is w'"xr'_c -.r,`_ _ . c.. r.?:ak'S; .>?r:';a?,..le.. 'Ge?e,•.t..., .? tskt'1;+31 _ I 5- `?• °T, ??/r !emu G f, '? A„ { t .t. ? ?J ? ?/.?f?-_ ... ''4- ?L t•? t rF_ : Ie. f?n: ? I, 5 ..?. C O? Y OQ `r-f t O ? „I p ?f CLX Sr ? ,n , csc?? `""? %, ! i?jC1 sy ? ?°.' ar #' ? L_ I ? m I ? /• ? L ? o • T• NnoY c err IJ r+ t?i?l Jy?' t<I y`? N/? f'? h I t 1 UA 3 ?`° '_ ?E=_y f '? ? _s F sr ,?7' U '^ I s g. ,? "" rs c,? ???.. ?_ '?E __ 1<?.'J ?'? V9 v. k ) a p '? F WI f•-` t t ,_ ?:1 rs-?' •• ? 4...7 ? :?. ? Is^_ G I r o $ ? •?- u" ?j ???Ip .0?2 Q \? '?r?, ( '3 6?v` mil. u rc=I o Ia( i" I ,l FT- ?? ? _ 1 ` \t?.Y! ?a'_ r -??".'z` :.i«"• ,. 1 z b tlsf" = o? •?oe-rJ?s ? '?" r L r• .; ? o? r\ ?- I a ?°rt?,.S \` ti 7 ves?apu0! I u fbi9DY t ? i ? 6 ^?I , M \ J ^ ? ? ' II ? J I "• .. v sn 1 ? p?. .c, { ?r ? II ?YYn o...s = i / _•`h . _ n? II ? > v. 'nst , l o°1bYYnl Ovs Y OV'vl i 0 I ?r i tir1, ' 4r' %: i sn '.. ?j ?\ r' ?I i? I r ?? g,,,? ,?? ?• .?.-J -r'' r J r a y r ,I, h r ' ? r?' 3 a 7 l •/1; : ;'.?_ ? ? .-` : /,, i ? ' ?f ?'? - - ? ?.{- • ? • ? I?r ' s 7j ? ?' f ? 4 ??, ? T'L? 'L' F t i m© +° r 1{} ? ` + tit ? . ; '-'`??u•t. Y ., ..ln # ? : =ii s ? 00. '?-=' ' ?,? :? a `;' f' t` 1 t ? ? ? rsr if rl ..3 , J Sr ? ? h y rStrl l d{, uF9° r. ? ?? .,_...; ". r a?',r,..+ a ?r,,.v vr?l 'F""' "+?•,??. ??.Fr to t ? ry ? In to PETITION FOR THE FORMATION OF A WATER DISTRICT TO: THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONLPS OF f JEFFL'd1SON COUNTY, IIASIIINGTON Comes now the undersigned, constituting at least twenty-five percent (25N) ' cj v of the qualified electors, who are qualified electors as of the date of filing this r E petition, residing within the DISTRICT hereinafter described, and respectfully x petition the Board of County Commissioners of Jefferson County, Washington, that a t WATER DISTRICT be formed comprising the territory hereafter described, which is all i.. located`in Jefferson County, Washington. K Your petitioners state that the object for the creation of said DISTRICT 1 is for the acquirement, construction, maintenance, operation, development, and * regulation of a water supply system for the area hereinafter described. Your petitioners further state that the establishment of said DISTRICT will be conducive to the public health, convenience, and welfare and will be of special benefit to all the property hereinafter described to be included therein. '. The boundaries of the DISTRICT petitioned for are as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the north lino of Section 31, Townhip 30 North, ? Range 1 West, W.M. with the line of existing high tide in Port Discovery Bay; thence to easterly along the north line of said Section 31 to its intersection with westerly L{: x I line of block 13 in the plat of Tuke•y's Addition as recordd in volume 2 of plats, E, page 20, records of Jefferson County, Uashinoton; thence northwesterly along said A d' westerly line to the northerly line of said block 13; thence northeasterly along said ' northerly line to the easterly line of said block 13; thence southeasterly along said easterly line to its intersection with the north line of said Section 31; thence cast along said north line of said Section 31 to its intersection with the northerly line of block 2 of said Tukey's Addition; thence northeasterly along the northerly line of blocks 2 U 3 of said Tukey's Addition and its extension to point 150.00 feet easterly, +,I ' as measured along said extension, of the east margin of Mamie Street as shown on the said plat of Tukey's Addition; thence southeasterly along a line being 150.00 feet M northeasterly of and parallel to the east margin of said Mamic Street to the north line a of said Section 31; thence east along said north line of Section 31 and the north line ,)•• `of Sections 32, 33, 34 and Section 35, Township 30 North, Range 1 West, W.N. to its 't intersection with the line of existing high tide in Port Townsend Bay; thence in a aa, e generally southerly direction along said line of existing high tide on the vast side of Port Townsend Bay, Portage Cannal, and Oak Bay to the intersection with the south line of Section 7, Township 29 North, Range 1 East, W.M.; thence west along said south wL line to the west line of Township 29 north, Range 1 East, 14,11.; thence southerly along said west line and the cast line of Section 13, Township 29 Borth, Range 1 (lest, W.M. i r kt to a point 150.OU feet south, as measured at right angles to the south line of the 11 4 1/2 of AE 1/4 of said Section 13; thence west on a line parallel to and 150.00 feet south of the south line of the 11 112 of the NE 1l4 to 1 a point lying 150.00 feet wasted J Y s. v.; ` r q„ k,l r 77 { a ?fp ?A?tpl?i yy V w !1 , x {'?ryp! wow ?,k . Y Of the west line of said NE 114; thence north along a line being 150.00 feet westerly of and parallel to said west li ne of the HE 1/4 to the north line of said Section 13; thence east on said north line of Sections 13 and 14 to the east li As ' ne of sessors Tax Io. 63, Section 14, Township 29 North, Range 1 West, 4J.h1.; thence south along said cast line to its intersection with the nonrestorly line of A s „i ssessors Tax Ile. 46; thence southeasterly to the north corner of Assessors Tax No. G0; thence 'southerly along the east line of said Ta N GO x o. to its intersection with the north margin of County Roar) 11o. 12; thence northwesterly along said north i marg n to its intersection r•rith the north line of the Robinson Donation Claim extended to the east; thence westerly along said extension and the north line of R bi r f ? o nson Donation Calim to the west line of said Section 14; thence northerly along the west line of Section 14 to the north line of said Section 14; thence west along the south li f T . ne o Section 10, ownship 29 North, Range 1 I-lest, W.M. to the east line of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of said Section 10; thence north al - a x ong said east line and the east line of the NW 1/4 of S'd 1/4 and the east line of the SW 1/4 of N41 1/4 of said Section lU to the south line of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 f i o sa d Section 10; thence west along the south line of said .111-1 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 10 to the east line of Section 9, Township 29 North Range I West W 1 th , , . .; ence northerly along east line of Section 9 to the north line of said Section 9; thence northerly along the east line of Secti 5 on , Township 29 North, fRange 1 West. I.I.M. to the south line of the IE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of said Section 5, thence west along the south line of the NC 1/4 f o the SE 1/4 and the south line of Government Lot 3 of Section 5, Township 29 North, Range 1 ! to the intersection with the line of e i ti lost, x s ng high tide of Port Discovery Bay; thence northerly along said line of high tide on the east side of Port Dsicovery Bay to the point of beginning all located in Jeff erson County, Washington. *y AII a u, -2- q 1 ti{ k ? , Y 4 ? r Jt .k^. ? ? 4 4i 4. 7? -H4G i b: i3 ?? y , Y7?i'hm S J^` . vati f sull t 4 '?5 1 A t ( In ? ( J iry k t / 61 1 r ' , t 1 "t } h+n ?p rt l'!C'2'"T'"'Ti41pJ'""''.,:...'?yfM{???r•-•y,,-::: I?- r!?'V'.[ nn?^'J' I'9°Y iN.. 1 p pq??N?a?wp? r lry. t ??` ` y r b ,a fir, 1 a ?'0 r,, q ? ' ? lip tl r'? ? '? MIT Y} 7 1 ? l UfM"? 11 : 5 rw°tl + ? Y 1 dS° i r alf a t w r ?4'? ?' j ?i?:?ii n ."y?+?,',"-.?'"?my.'"'.' .?^!'@A S'"!°SS. ?',;",?„',. ,,.: ? ";';py- ,.dye ? ?..-?' '.,•"'" ; n.. 'r."""y" ,,?"'"Tj'? .. ) syy ? '',. Oct 1 1 Y 7 S + K yf, e t F 1 Z j t Y 1 ? ?F?'rr n, Dl a ? L ? ? - ? ? i tf xP +a r ! r a ?t a v 1 ?j,Wd?s??',?i?'i'?y"?r,s°?f?i?kr%h'?rt?5l???.? S.?aS`????,'??? aati'or,•i????R,?i ?, w fy?r,i?4,7r',?7?!{? ', S` ? ?' ? -:,i? ? Y ? 1 'nk. t J i rg FLOOD CONTROL ZCNE DISTRICT Establishment • Petition of 250 of voters within proposed district; or intent to form by majority vote of County Commissioners • Public hearing and affirmative vote of County Commissioners Administration • Supervisor of district is the Board of County Commissioners • County engineer administrative officer Five person.advisory committee General Authority (municipal corporation) • Acquire property, easements, etc. • initl tenfloodtcontrolrmeasuresr, maintain, and i • Sue or be' sued • Accept funds or property by loan, grant, gift, etc. Funding (As authorized by voters in district) • (doesunotoaffecctpother0ttaxingedistricctsition • Issue bonds (revenue and general obligation) Budget • Submitted to and approved by Board of County Commissioners • District treasurer is county treasurer Poll' a Cjf4 i t r ;y 7 r FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT Establishment • Petition of 25% of voters within proposed district; or Intent to form by majority vote of County Commissioners • Public hearing and affirmative vote of County Commissioners Administration • Supervisor of district is the Board of County Commissioners • County engineer administrative officer Five Person-advisory committee General Authority (municipal corporation) • Acquire property, easements, etc. • initiatenfloodtcontrolrmeasupresr, maintain, and • Sue or be sued • Accept funds or property by loan, grant, gift, etc. Funding (As authorized by voters in district) (doesunotoaffectpother0ttaxingedistrictsition • Issue bonds (revenue; and general obligation) Budget • Submitted to and approved by Board of County Commissioners • District treasurer is county treasurer NO r, r P Jr; X Establishment • Petition of 25ro of voters within proposed district; or Intent to form by majority vote of County Commissioners • Public hearing and affirmative vote of County Commissioners Administration • Supervisor of district is the Board of County Commissioners • County engineer administrative officer • Five person..advisory committee General Authority (municipal corporation) Acquire property, easements, etc, • Plan, construct, acquire, repair, maintain, and initiate flood control measures • Sue or be' sued • Accept funds or property by loan, grant, gift, etc, Funding (As authorized by voters in district) • Levy up to $ 50 per $1000 assessed valuation (does not affect other taxing districts) • Issue bonds (revenue and general obligation) Budget • Submitted to and approved by Board of County Commissioners • District treasurer is county treasurer y Y' '1r f ?' - S kv4 ? y FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT Establishment r r Petition of 25' of voters within proposed district; or intent to form by majority vote of County Commissioners ?? c hearing and affirmative vote of County u Publ • ° i Co M1 Administration • Supervisor of district is the Board of County Commissioners County engineer administrative officer • Five person..odvisory committee General Authority (municipal corporation) • Acquire property, easements, etc. sr, maintain, and s olrm t n ea flood contr Initiate urre • Sue or be, sued • Accept funds or property by loan, grant, gift, etc. ` Funding (As authorized by voters in district) uation val assessed 00 0 $1 p e r 50 $. • Levy up to cts) r x t r h o t fe ct af • Issue bonds (revenue and general obligation) Budget • Submitted to and approved by Board of County Commissioners • District treasurer is county treasurer 9 Mi. ?s dM r 4 a,? +ya° xaa? (dw gf rP a .72 rz? ? ? , i n rh 'f 1 r'y rl }? ;?r ,? sir {r.'` + ?41 "Al Y rt t+ :u ? It ? 4° {{ ` ~ f 1; irr? ?4 1 ? kr?? 4 - i ? lt`r1j1F( J i r ? 4 .. ? sr S?,I +.t r Aft FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT Establishment Petition of 251 of voters within proposed district; or Intent to form by majority vote of County Commissioners • Public hearing and affirmative vote of County Commissioners Administration Supervisor of district is the Board of County Commissioners • County engineer administrative officer Five person..odvisory committee ti4 General Authority (municipal corporation) • Acquire property, easements, etc. Plan, construct, acquire, repair, maintain, and initiate flood control measures • Sue or be sued • Accept funds or property by loan, grant, gift, etc. unding (As authorized by voters in district) (doesunotooffecctpother0ttaxing districtsjtion ,. Issue bonds (revenue and general obligation) t Budge and approved by Board of County • Submitted to s • District treasurer is county treasurer s ? - FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT Establishment ° Petition of 25% of voters within proposed district; or Intent to form by malority vote of County ' Commissioners • Public hearing and affirmative vote of County Commissioners Administration Supervisor of district is the Board of County Commissioners t, • County engineer administrative officer Five person..advisory committee G 4 General Authority (municipal corporation) Acquire property, easements, etc. a sr, maintain, and p lr t n flood contro Initiate measu re • Sue or be' sued n. ? Accept funds or property by loan, grant, gift, etc. • t Funding (As authorized by voters in district) : a x r, • Levy upotoaf$,fec50tpoetrh$1r00t0xassngedssedrvalcts)uation Issue bonds (revenue and general obligation) • Budget • Submitted to and approved by Board of County Commissioners • District treasurer is county treasurer dv y aµ d?g"9Rg4? 5& 14 N :#kiA 1 E';?L?f?+?a1 C6yyTMa P 6? ^JX'fS1h94d ?? yI !l d I 4 ,r U JIM Il?? a i IR 1,Y? y, z ,. ? r , I t 1`, h y?Gi 1 (y I ? u 1 I ? k' FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT Establishment ' • Petition of 25% of voters within proposed district; or Intent to form by majority vote of County Commissioners rc? F Public hearing and affirmative vote of County Commissioners Administration A n ) Supervisor of district is the Board of County Commissioners ?n .." • County engineer administrative officer • Five Person-advisory committee ' General Authority (municipal corporation) • Acquire property, easements, etc. x sr, maintain, and p trolrm s nfloodt n ea itiate I con re u • Sue or be• sued s -' Accept funds or property by loan, grant, gift, etc. ., undin (As authorized by voters in district) . • Levy up to E.50 per $1000 assessed valuation (does not affect other taxing districts Issue bonds (revenue and general obligation) x , Budget • Submitted to and approved by Board of County Commissioners • District treasurer is county treasurer K NTROL ZONE DISTRICT FL D CO OO Establishment • Petition of 25% of voters within proposed district; or Intent to form by majority vote of County Commissioners • Public hearing and affirmative vote of County Oil Commissioners Administration 8 Supervisor of district is the Board of County Commissioners County engineer administrative officer • Five person..advisory committee General Authority (municipal corporation) • Acquire property, easements, etc, sr, maintain, and p trolrm t l n con ood f re easu nitiate Sue or be sued Accept funds or property by loan, grant, gift, etc. und-M (As authorized by voters in district) • (doesunotaof ectpather00to I ngedistrictsjtion • Issue bonds (revenue and general obligation) Budget tted toand approved by Board of County • Submitted commissioners • District treasurer is county treasurer T' r h 414 „ .W d I? X ufl 1? 5 C 1 I .f x Yr1 {i4J ?yr ., 77 i FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT ..,' r Establishment f Petition of 25% of voters within proposed . district; or intent to form by majority vote of County z, Commissioners • Public hearing and affirmative vote of County Commissioners a Administration Supervisor of district is the Board of County -` Commissioners • County engineer administrative officer Five Person-advisory committee x' General Authority (municipal corporation) • Acquire property, easements, etc. i • Plan, construct, acquire, repair, maintain, and Initiate flood control measures • Sue or be sued • Accept funds or property by loan, grant, gift, etc, ` undin (As authorized by voters in district) SFL` i ,Y y?1 • Levy up to 5.50 per 81000 assessed valuation 7 (does not affect other taxing districts) t , t?t • Issue bonds (revenue and general obligation) Budget • Submitted to and approved by Board of County Commissioners • District treasurer is county treasurer i?{y K' s r , 1 Y' a Ima ii: A GUIDE FOR FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICTS ADVISORY COMMITTEES The law authorizing the formation of Flood Control Zone Districts provides that the Board of County Commissioners may appoint an Advisory Committee for any zone or combination of an two or more zones. The Committee shall consist of not more than five M members and serve without pay, but may receive their reasonable expenses, and serve at the pleasure of the Board of County Commissioners. -' PURPOSE' " s The purpose of a Flood Control Zone District Advisory Committee is to advise and assist' the Board of County Commissioners with respect to flood control matters which affect the Flood Control Zone District. The function of the Advisory Committee is advisory only. All administrative functions are the responsibility of the Board of County Commissioners e and the County Engineer. However, the assistance and advice , provided by the Advisory t Committee will aid the Board of County Commissioners in the formulation of decisions and ff policies and the administration of flood control matters which concern the Flood Control Zone District. The Advisory Committee shall study any particular problem as requested by the Board of County Commissioners. e+ APPOINTMENT Each Advisory Committee member shall be appointed by the Board of County Com- missioners. fry:,. TERM OF OFFICE " y The term of office for each Advisory Committee member shall be three years. The sM terms shall be staggered so that the expiration of the term of no more than two members shall occur any any one year. The term of office of the members initially appointed shall be one, two or three years, as appropriate, to provide for staggered terms. OFFICERS Each Advisory Committee shall have a chairman as designated by the Board of County ' Commissioners. The Advisory Committee may select from its membership a vice-chairman " and a secretary. MEETINGS s Meetings shall be held as deemed necessary and appropriate, provided that at least one meeting will be held each year. The meetings will be called by notice from the9 p chairman, or the vice-chairman acting in his absence. As appropriate, meetings should be held to determine the views of local interests. Such meetings may be held by, and in )_` r the name of, the Advisory Committee.` k y ?t?Iky 9fdYV \ ql ?t r? F,? t -1f i 1 - rl ai 1 + s" r?w?_?' , w JAN, gG ? r ' '? S Y t ? ?' ? >F g- r R rY ?, U L ATTENDANCE Regular attendance is essential to the continuity of thought and action of the Ad- ' visory Committee. Therefore, if a member misses four consecutive meetings, his mem- bership shall be terminated, unless excused by the remainder of the membership. If a membership is terminated, the Board of County Commissioners shall be notified that a • ` Z" position is vacant. The Board of County Commissioners shall appoint a new member to fill the vacancy. FIELD TRIPS Field trips shall be made as appropriate and at the discretion of the Advisory Comm- ittee. y. 41 ASSISTANCE= BY THE COUNTY ENGINEER f The County Engineer shall assist the Advisory Committee by providing transportation, r r 'j' engineering and staff assistance, and furnishing such technical information and assistance I .a as may be required by the Committee. The advisory Committee may request technical information and other assistance directly from the County Engineer or the Chief Engineer of the Flood Control Division. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES As provided in RCW 86.15.070, reasonable expenses incurred on field trips or in the regular course of meetings shall be reimbursable. PUBLICITY All news releases, publicity of any kind, and information made available to the public ertinent to the Advisor Committee activities shall b t t i l f b d a y p e su jec o rev ew an approva o the Board of County Commissioners prior to being released or made public. RECOMMENDATIONS, CONCLUSIONS, AND REQUESTS , Yfi! All recommendations, conclusions, or requests for assistance of the Advisory Committee will be submitted to the Board of County Commissioners. Copies of the ap- propriote information shall be sent directly to the County Engineer as administrator of Flood Control Zone Districts. All policy matters shall be referred directly to the Board of ll C C mi i d i i om ss oners; a a m n ounty strative matters to the County Engineer. RECORDS The Advisory Committee shall keep a record of all transactions, and a copy of the minutes of each meeting shall be sent to the Board of County Commissioners and the j County Engineer. r } y si i ? ??. n- f ,,I I r! e t ! - it f t " ? r k 2 A GUIDE FOR FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICTS ADVISORY COMMITTEES The law authorizing the formation of Flood Control Zone Districts provides that the Board of County Commissioners may appoint an Advisory Committee for any zone or combination of any two or more zones. The Committee shall consist of not more than five members and serve without pay, but may receive their reasonable expenses, and serve at the pleasure of the Board of County Commissioners. " PURPOSE The purpose of a Flood Control Zone District Advisory Committee is to advise and assist ' the Board of County Commissioners with respect to flood control matters which affect the Flood Control Zone District. The function of the Advisory Committee is advisory only. All administrative functions ore the responsibility of the Board of County Commissioners and the County Engineer. However, the assistance and advice provided by the Advisory Committee will aid the Board of County Commissioners in the formulation of decisions and policies and the administration of flood control matters which concern the Flood Control Zone District. The Advisory Committee shall study any particular problem as requested .., by the Board of County Commissioners. to APPOINTMENT Each Advisory Committee member shall be appointed by the Board of County Com- missioners. s TERM OF OFFICE The term of office for each Advisory Committee member shall be three years. The terms shall be staggered so that the expiration of the term of no more than two members shall occur any any one year. The term of office of the members initially appointed shall be one, two or three years, as appropriate, to provide for staggered terms. OFFICERS Each Advisory Committee shall have a chairman as designated by the Board of County Commissioners. The Advisory Committee may select from its membership a vice-chairman and a secretary. MEETINGS Meetings shall be held as deemed necessary and appropriate, provided that at least one meeting will be held each year. The meetings will be called by notice from the chairman, or the vice-chairman acting in his absence. As appropriate, meetings should be held to determine the views of local interests. Such meetings may be held by, and in the name of, the Advisory Committee. x 7 `s. (l4? ?t!`fiA6'w7 ?? a WW ??'?^` ? t••?.T T.3} ?' ?iy ? -,. 1 A-, •M x?w t r u I be ' ?t c " ? f Ctiu ? !M s , t ?? ?,L N z ' S a yr r i;. n ,era y rl , , ,, ?, i t ? I y,Y s , I e {{ r ? t B f f ? 1 _ ?4 ?? k. a r 3 ?.tsr4Y',n, b' ? ?7fi]4{py?.. .?L?xaa rawc?uK'l ?1.rs,c sr:12a.-.? + +h ATTENDANCE - Regular attendance is essential to the continuity of thought and action of the Ad- hi ti ngs, s mem- visory Committee. Therefore, if a member misses four consecutive mee the remainder of the membership. If a used b l s d i t y , un es exc na e bership shall be term membership is terminated, the Board of County Commissioners shall be notified that a of ` e rt position is vacant. The Board of County Commissioners shall appoint a new member to fill the vacancy. 5. FIELD TRIPS Field trips shall be made as appropriate and at the discretion of the Advisory Comm- ittee. ' - ASSISTANCE BY THE COUNTY ENGINEER The County Engineer shall assist the Advisory Committee by providing transportation, engineering and staff assistance, and furnishing such technical information and assistance as may be required by the Committee. The advisory Committee may request technical r :ra t. information and other assistonce directly from the County Engineer or the Chief Engineer r M of the Flood Control Division. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES f As provided in RCW 86.15.070, reasonable expenses incurred on field trips or in the ble i b ll b h t . ursa m a e re regular course of meetings s r ? PUBLICITY All news releases, publicity of any kind, and information made available to the public s pertinent to the Advisory Committee activities shall be subject to review and approval of the Board of County Commissioners prior to being released or made public. 1 RECOMMENDATIONS, CONCLUSIONS, AND REQUESTS a All recommendations, conclusions, or requests for assistance of the Advisory f th i C es o e ap- op Committee will be submitted to the Board of County Commissioners. f i i strator o n propriate information shall be sent directly to the County Engineer as adm Flood Control Zone Districts. All policy matters shall be referred directly to the Board of s County Commissioners; all administrative matters to the County Engineer. RECORDS The Advisory Committee shall keep a record of all transactions, and a copy of the minutes of each meeting shall be sent to the Board of County Commissioners and the . ` County Engineer. I'I+ F ? ? ? ?4n:il! hf'?W ?'J I'{ 1.(.?1??} pair 'Y 1?".l v.?'i N^.+ti s e...g F '3 Jn r rr1 k? aKMa P?` 9 ' p ?u' F S' r w 14rv ? e .I '' ? ! }* ? C? MATTHEW 1. COYLE . ..... y Acling T.Tir dor a ,e.. a°r M STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE EP 231 986 Olympia, Washington 98504-(x)I.x) AN-AX-o' JEFFERSON COUNTY ASSESSOR JACK WESTERMAN III September 18, 1986 The Honorable Jack Westerman, III Jefferson County Assessor. 1820 Jefferson Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 RE: Floor Control Zone Districts Dear Jack: Through our conversation of September 17, 1986 concerning Flood Control Zone District levies, I stated that I would send to you a confirmation of our agreed determinations. As you mentioned, RCW 86.15.160(3) gives the supervisors (Hoard of County Commissioners) authorization to levy a tax not to exceed fifty cents. This levy is above and beyond the current expense levy of one dollar and eighty cents. Please note that this levy, however, is also one of the first to be eliminated through proration if the maximum levy of $9.15 is exceeded or the one percent limitation is exceeded. This is stated in the Department of Revenue's levy calculation booklet distributed to you on August 11th on Page 64. If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE STATE OF WASHINGTON ?s 17 Q Linda L. Lethlean Program Coordinator. Property Tax Division LLL:gt W ii?4 ,,y, . ?5 .-, P s i s. )i . =?eoa' -•?..n,.b ?. .Iln•`. ..w?:h?er:,?,',ia^e.w: `c3:w>, .. .. ,?vk' .,?? . 1 a JEFFERSON COUNTY COURTHOUSE NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE PORT TOWNSEND. WASHINGTON January 30, 1985 Honorable Brent ShLrLey, Mayor CLty of Port Townsend 540 Water Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 Dear Mayor, Jefferson County Department of Public Works COURTHOUSE PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON 98368 TEL. (206)3853505 BRIAN L SHELTON. DIRECTOR The Department of Ecology recently provided Jefferson County wLth a status update of the Flood Control. AssLstance Account (Chapter 86.26 RCW) regardLng fLnancLaL assLstance for fLood controL maLntenance. The Port Townsend Beach RestoratLon Project has been determLned eLL- gLbLe and LncLuded Ln the Department of EcoLogy budget for fundLng, subject to LegLsLatLve approval. FundLng Ls effectLve JuLy 1, 1985 for the 1986/87 bLennLum. You wLLL be kept Lnformed of any further project or program develop- ments. If you have any questLons, please contact me at 385-3505. SLncereLy, BrLan L. Shelton, P.E. DLrector xc: FLLe r. JOHN SPEUM:IN 04.'' ON.AID K. BUKKOWS D Dint Iris SPATE OF WASHINC1ON r..cz DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE - , 11504 hi S-A '-02 b W ,e ngfon 9 &I- Olynp , DATE: January 2, 1985 ,v , TO: All County Assessors ~?Il 'fir, ,•.,` r FROM: Robert S. Petersen,"Civil Engineer, Property Tax Division RE: County Code Area Map Changes This is the annual request for information on annexations or boundary changes to taxing districts, cities and towns, and new, missing or terminated dis- your county for the 1985 assessment year, taxes payable in 1986. tricts in In accordance with RCW 84.09.030 and WAC 458-12-140, the county assessor is required on or before Marc s to transmit this data to the Department of Revenue, Property Tax Division. Please check with your county auditor, county commissioners, superintendent of schools and persons responsible for taxing districts to be certain you " have been informed of any revisions, additions or deletions. We would like to have thk ew ordinances with attache when adopted rather than waiting for the March is-t dea ilne: 2?n itfe'ZNse o annexation or consolidation, please advise us of any segregations that remain due to bonded indebtedness to the original areas. Utility companies spread their investment breakdown to the code areas shown on the county code area maps. Apportionment of certified utility values are matched to the utility company's placement of their operating property on the maps. We are moving our office to a new location sometime prior to March 1st. Due to the anticipated confusion in moving, we would appreciate annexations information as soon as possible. We appreciate your continued cooperation in helping us keep the code areas current. Revising code areas due to annexations takes considerable effort but will result in your county getting,its proper and fair apportioned valuations. ASP:rw U (? ? cal .;AN ( 1988) hSilN COUNir ASSLSSU1, ,ACK WESTERMAN ED '?? w G c e ? ? i 1i 1+ xi K ?2,u,a?_u r a' I t ?'? +Jt 1 la`e7aFt4'Ar?t??`? r YI?f''` 4S? 1`t }II b {I 1 t t r ?+L } ? C ?} Ftt - ?? 1 , r _ 3 {JOHN SPELLMAN? "s DONALD R BURROWS ? ' . Governor Director STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Olympia, Washingfon 98504 MS-AX-02 -, 6 = k January 3, 1985 JAN 04 1985 JEFFERSON COUNTY ASSESSOR JACK WESTERMAN III The Honorable Jack Westerman III I ` Jefferson County Assessor t5b p,) 7d ` f J/7 ??j6t/ . 1820 Jefferson Street [/iC Port Townsend, WA 98368 Dear Jack: Your request for information on forming a flood control district has been assigned to me for response. I apologize for the delay getting this off to you. - RCW 86.15.160 seems to beat fit your purpose. This statute authorizes: ., r- (1) an annual excess levy with a majority of three-fifths of those voting and the k - ' majority equal to forty percent voting at the last general election, _ (2) a benefit assessment (an assessment based on anticipated benefits), t.. (3) a fifty cent regular property tax levy provided it will not take away from the statutory dollar rate ($9.15) of any other taxing district unless the levy is released by another district or cause the combined levy to exceed the constitutional 1% limit. This levy would be subject to the 1065 levy limtitr (G."..rY LoA'gYJSJeNR(.f As .SNP6R?1aopJ /F FmeG CeNrAOL ZON!'J WY Arry/,bplzr) y{? (4) the county commissioners to estabish a charge to those who benefit from or contribute to increased water runoff, and t ' (5) local improvement districts that may issue bonds on all property including public (county, state, etc.) property. I'm including the portion of the manual "Special Purpose Taxing Districts" published by Washington Forest Protection Association that concerns flood control ? zones, districts, and diking and drainage districts. Keep in mind this is a 1983 tiSStn: publication and was prepared by WFPA. .•'%,- , F P S- d' n r + }. r: , ? $ i ?. ? Oi 101601' C flk The Honorable Jack Westerman III January 3, 1985 Page 2 I l i r am enc os ng a copy of the levy limit calculation bulletin (PTB 83-5) since - - there is a provision for a regular levy and the $9.15 , 1%, and 106% limits apply. _ ;. w I hope this meets with your satisfaction. } Very truly yours, - DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE ?• STATE OF WASHINGTON 0 Edward C. Rackleff A ssessment Standards Advisor P 222ppp roperty Tax Divisio n ECR:slc t Enclosures To[Effign JAN 04 1985 jyj:ERSON COUNTY WES ERMANSSMSUR MOM rl"01 85.05.010 Districts authorized-Po.:ers- Afanagement.. Cases Diking district is distinct corporation free from control of count)' authorities. Bale v Flo%d (1939) 199 W 503, 91 P2d 1025. Diking district mac be organised on tide- lands. lonrs % Hammer (1927) 143 W 525, 255 P 955. In absence of statute exprrssl) declaring lia- bilit%. diking district is municipal corporation not liable for torts of its officers or agents. Shimada v Diking Dist. (1926) 139 W 168, 245 P 916. Upon organization diking district becomes legal entity as public corporation. Columbia Ricer •1 . K L. Co. v Commissioners of Diking Dist. (1919) 108 W 148. 183 P 134. Diking district rommissioners have' discre- tionary po%%ers which will not be reviewed by coups in absence of fraud. Columbia R. 1'. K L, Co. v Commissioners of Diking Dist. (1919) 108 W 149, 183 P 134. Lrrors going ui validu. of organization of diking district ma% not he consitivied on ap- peal from final judgment. Calispel !liking Dist. v )sfcLeish (19111 63 W 331, 115 P 508. Dike and ditch taxes levied subsequent to adoption of state constitution by districts orga• nized prior thereto, air void when in conflict with constitutional provisions. Pickering v Ball (1898) 19 V1' 185, 52 1' 1022, Original enactment of this section field not violative of state (onstitution, art 7, fig, pro- viding restrictions on delegation of legislative power tb authorize local impro%emens. Han• sen v Hammer (1896) 15 N' 315, 46 P 333. Attorney General Workmen's compensation art as affecting diking district. 49 AGO 9• -49- Where face of petition for diking distrirt es. 'tablishment shows insufficiency, extrinsic es•i• dente may not show owner of Jr.., than majority of acreage signed as agent for other owners. Ruffin s Sewell 0925) 134 N• 208, 235 P 31. Petition for establishment of diking district is jurisdictional requisite. Ruffin v Sewell (1925) 134 W 208235 P 31. Personal service of notice of petition to orga- nize diking distri rt mal;'nut be neressary, Han- sen % H•tmmer.(1896)15 \s• 315, 46 P 332. 85.05 030 Petition to be published- Hearing-Fixing. of,boundaries-Findings of commissioners.. • ' Attorney General Holding of land )s, diking district. 31 AGO 123. 85.05.050 Qualification of voters-Board of commissioners-Bonds.. Cases Diking district is not "Precinct" within RCN' 19.b5.0 10. authorizing contests of e'le'ctions for all count. and precinct offne•rs. Wkirten v Sil- verman 0919) 105 W 338. 177 P 737, Courts must have express statutory authority to assumr,jurisdiction over co mest of election for diking district commissioners. Whiten v Siherman (19151) 105 W 248, 177 P M. Failure of ditch commissioners to rile bond in required amount may not imalidate• their as- sessment as de facto officers. Ex rcl Afataon (1906) 43 W 491, 85 P 264. Attorney General Extension of sewer service fullowing irriga• Lion district-Srwer district consolidation. 79 AGO No. 7. u,: s-??taiA i .. t w t 4 ? i t ?r ? ? +! ` 3? yr r 1 ?t : ? r s k ? ry ? ' t 'A 85.05.110 Summons-Contents-Service.. Cases Publication of suuunons reciting that totn. ple•te description %et out in petition suffike, upon immediate publication of petition. Pone, } v Hammer (1927) 1-13 W 525. 255 P 955. 85.05.120 Appearance of defendants Jury- Verdict-Decree.. rt Cases %landatorv writ ntay iskuc to compel county treasurer to foreclose diking district asses.- t ment. Buell v McGee (1941) 9 IC2d 94. 1 1:1 P2d 522. Count) commissioners' apportionment of as- sessments may be final. where no appeal taken. N. P. R. Co. v Board of Cty. Comm. (1919) 107 W 261. 191 P 868. Determination of benefits to lands from "maintenance" of dikes does not uncon- atitutionalfy disturb vested rights determined as to benefits from "origimil construction." Ex rcl Conner (1914) 81 W 480. 143 1' 112. 85.05.140 Proceedings may be dismissed when.. Cases RCt\' 4.08 110 and 4.09.120, authorizing ac- tions by or against county, incorporated town, school district or other public corporation of like character. does not include "diking dis- tricts." Shimada v Diking Dist. (1926) 139 \s 168. 245 P 916. Upon dismissal of proceedings to establish diking district, property excluded from district during pendency of proceedings should not be assessed for expenses incurred therealier• Noble v Oman (1024) 131 W 6114. 230 P $27. -5n- t :J?i 11"19, I? P .-n ?•,..;. r 7 A ,1 A k u M Al a , t' h d54 rm}. h ?, ki e hu^(I11 5 1 "?, ?i r tNyl T.Q 1 flllP[tC 4 *'?$,'S. R , 'w)?? ? ? r•11 4 e r - r r St Q r?? k ys¦o ` n i. •?? r i. t y fh q y 85.05.060 Election of district commissioners-Terms of office.. Attorney General Time for holding election. 54 AGO 274. 85.05.070 Eminent domain-Powers of district.. Attorney General 111ts'er (if diking district to improve the chan- nel of a stream foliated outside its boundaries. operate a pumping plant which ts•ould evacu- ate waters Froth district lands into a river bordering the district, construct and operate a flood waxer retarding structure located outside its boundaries. 65 AGO No. 48. Operation of irrigation system by diking dis. trict. 34 AGO 275. 85.05.071 Resolution to construct drainage system.. Other Creation of fee or casement by deed for drainage. 136 .ALK 407. 85.05.077 Assessments for drains and dikes to be segregated.. Attorney General Segregation of diking district assessments. 35 AGO 49. 85.05.100 Employment of assistants- Compensation as costs in suits.. Cases RCW .46.32.200. providing requirements for employment of special attorney to perform du- ties of prosecuting anorncY. has no application to employment of special acorn" for diking districts. ;hiller v Ungemach (1929) 154 W 480. 282 P 840. ft; t • REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON DIKING DISTRICTS AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX 85.05.270 Certiorari is ptopcr method to retiesi judg- 85.05.180 Construction-Contractors-- mcnt of originallprorrrdmg awarding damages Performance bonds.. ' . or- a•scssing benefits lot appropriation of land ' ? for diking purposes. Ex rel Davis (1914) 82 NC . Cases 91. 143 P 168. Dike construction bidder mat not obtain re- lief from deposit for forfeiture due to mistake 85.05.160 Transcript of benefits to auditor- in assuming use of h)draulir method, where plans and specifications fulls advised that Assessments-Collection.. method could not be adopted.* Eagle Livery & T. Co. v Lake Chelan Recl. Dist. (1930) 155 Cases N' 101, 283 P 678. Diking district bond holder may by manda- mus compel counn to take, steps for payment Failure to let contract on bids does not inval- of delinquent assessments. Ex rel Cowlitz Mtg. idate bonds issued. Jones % Hammer (1927) Co. (1943) 19 W2d 456, 143 P2d 304. 143 W 525, 255 P 955. Diking district assessments are regarded as Bond executed under RCW 39.08.010, may taxes in matters relating to their collection. authorize diking district contract. Jones v Ham- Buell v McGee (1941) 9 W2d 84, 113 P2d 522. mer (1927) 143 W 525, 255 P 955. This section provides additional method for foreclosing delinquent diking assessments to that provided b) RC.W 85.04.510. Buell s McGee (1941) 9 W2d 84, 113 P2d 522. Commjssioners may not assess district lands in excess of benefits received. Espy Estate Co. v Pacific Cry. (1905) 40 11' 67, 82 P 129; Ex rel Espy Estate Co. (1908) 48 W 230, 93 P 326; Perkins & Cu. v Diking Dist. (1931) 162 W 227. 298 P 462. 85.05.260 Incorporated town may act as or be included in diking district.. Cases County may condemn another municipal cor- poration's property, where county instituted condemnation proceedings to establish road on top of dike and diking district appeared and consented thereto. Ex rel Seaborg (1921) 116 W 457, 199 P 755. Attorney Genera! Duties as tat assessment collections. 30 AGO m County commissioners may not establish li - ing or drainage districts within corporate li- GU9. its of city. Wcatherwax v Grays Harbor Ct)•. Moor) distribution upon dclinquency crrtifr- (1921) 116 W 212, 199 P 303. cafe foreclosure. 2d AGO 308. Payment of diking district as%essment to 85.05.270 Estimate for maintenance and county treasurer. 24 AGO 191. repair-Emergency expenditures.. Other Attorney General Agreements to pay assessments. 167 ALR 10 Estimate of the cost of maintenance and re- Pair under this section to include amount lev- 30 red on each parcel of land, 65 AGO No. 36. 85.05.170 Tax to pay cost on dismissal.. Authority of drainage district commissioners to issue warrants of the district independently Cases of the county auditor's office, 64 AGO No. 104. Nun-benefited property within district may be proponionately taxed for expense of ascrr• Regulation of time in which drainage district laining whether proposed improvement should commissioners can submit estimates of im- br carried out. N. P. R. Co. v Pierce Cry. proyement costs to count) auditor-mandatory (1908) 51 W 12, 97 P 1099. or director), nature of statute. 63 AGO No. 73. -51- 1 qF '?' ?, tit trtg y ?' rv ?X> pp ?? ? ryYR 1 '1 i#? fS15Y8°kY1 1 h eI nda4t _',?69 't In t * {? Y t.d k u 1 S R aa" I P' 55 ? t • S ?jz ? ? < 7, ? ?` f T K It `" "? 1Ft : a t P ? t ? - ' °3 Uy, _ o h1 v u ? AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX 85.05,280 DIKING DISTRICTS BPC ANNO jATIONS Tp b 85.05.280 Organization of board-Warrants, how issued. 85,,05.3.65 Certificate] of delihquency_ . roreclosure-Sale- U?e of proceeds s t ? • ases ., Cases x 5 ? Diking district may issue and pay warrants This section provides method for f out of treasury money belonging to dike fund. oredodtt delinquent diking assessments additi e Bale y Floyd (1939) 199 W' 503, 91 P2d 1225. onal that provided by- RCW' 85.05.160, Buell ' t a , AfcCee (1941) 9 W 2d 84, 113 P2d 522, 85,05.290 District bonds-Authority. to Attorney General 7 • Y issue-When due and payable--No sale under par.. Property not bid in foreclosure of d ' .r + e•lin. quent assessments. 46 AGO 560. , ? Cases 6 Cities could issue bands in payment of cos[ 85.05.480 Bon repairs, etc., in of local improvements under prior law. Seattle Hill 1 extraordinary circumstances.. c ( 896) la W 487. 45 P 17. Attorney General 85.05.340 Assessment for payment of Dike district assessment for new tide gate. 28 AGO 873. ?Fg coupons-Coupons as warrants.. >r +r ,. Attorney General 85,05,520 Denominations-Interest rate- r _ t As to bond retirement levy in excess of fixed maximum benef t 30 AG Order of payment.. i s. O 713. Attorney General t rr Assessment fundc as to paying bond interest "Interest" as to diking district coupon coupons. 14 AGO 519. bonds. 19 AGO 37. Other Crediting expenditures as to annual assess. ments. I4 ALR 146G. 85.05,360 Warrants presented for indorsement-When and how paid.. Cases Statute of limitations may not begin to run against warrants issued by diking district until holder has notice enabling presentment for payment from fund having money for pay- ment. Bale v Floyd (1939) 199 W 503, 91 P2d 1025 (overruling Matapan Nat. Bank v Seattle (1921) 115 W 596, 197 P 789, and Perkins v Ellensburg (1926) 138 W 641, 244 P 996). Presentment of diking district warrants. 33 AGO 90. Attorney. General Outlawing of diking district warrants. 47 AGO 57, Chapter 85.06 DRAINAGE DISTRICTS AND MISCELLANEOUS DRAINAGE PROVISIONS 85.06.010 Districts authorized-Powers- Manzgement.. Cases Appeal from dismissal of action to enjoin collection of alleged illegal tax under RCN. 84.68.010 may not review drainage district or- ganization. Etter v Kronlund (1939) 108 N' 341, 88 P2d 417, City with perpetual right of diverting stream waters for domestic purposes may discontinue use without liability to lower drainage district- Drainage Dist, v Everett (1933) 171 W 471. 18 P2d 53. County commissioner's order that area with designated number should be organized and declared "drainage district" under state law's' -52- I Al 1 ' REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON sufcienth establishes district. Ex rel Abbott n (1922) 121 %V 181. 209 P 17. Establishment of drainage district upon ap- plication therefor is within board's discretion. In re Drainage Dist. 0922) 119 \S S. 204 P 1050. Drainage district may be formed where im- ptoscmrnt benefits majorit% of lands within .' proposed boundaries. N. P. R. Co. y Pierce Cty. (1908) 51 AV 12. 97 P 1099. Power of legislature to authorize tax levy on drainage district does not depend on district's being municipal corporation. N. P. R. Co. v Pierce Cq'. (1908) 51 %1' 12. 97 P 1099. ? Drainage district officers are personally lia- ble for torts committed in excess of their au- thorin. Bice v Brown (1917) 98 \1' 416. 167 P 1097. r Attorney General Contracts with cities of the fourth class. 56 AGO No. 275. wt' License fees of drainage district motor vehi. cles. 19 AGO 66. Other As to "levee and flood control acts." 70 ALR 1274, 5 ALR2d 59. "Owner" within Drainage District organiza- tion Statutes. 2 ALR 791, 95 ALR 1092. Commissioner's liability for negligence of employees. 61 ALR 300. Liability of drainage district. 33 ALR 77. 85.06.020 Petition-Contents-Bond.. Cases Plans for proposed district meet "outlet re- quirement" by provision for construction of dam with pumping system as outlet for water thereafter. Kadow v Paul (1925) 134 W 539. 236 P 90. County commissioners may establish drain- age district without posting of required bond by petitioners. In re Drainage Dist. (1922) 119 W 8, 204 P. 1050. Drainage district may condemn right-of-way outside of district for main ditch outlet. Ex rel Hardesty (1914) 82 W 497, 144 P 708. -5:s- w EI DRAINAGE DISTRICT'S AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX 85.06.030 Attorney General Warrants for work prior to creation of drain- age district. 24 AGO 76. 85.06.030 Petition to be published- Hearing-Fixing of boundaries-Findings of commissioners.. Cases Order mistakenly made in proceedings to es. tablish drainage district may be set aside for further hearing. Ex rel Granite Inv. Co. (1924) 131 W 20, 228 P 842. impracticability of draining certain lands may not be urged as objection to drainage dis- trict establishment. Ex rel Abbott (1922) 121 IV 181, 209P17. Proceedings leading up to formation of drainage district may not be collaterally at- tacked: N. P. R. Co. v Pierce Cry. (1908) 51 W 12. 97 P 1099. Landowner making no objections to proceed- ings establishing drainage district may only ob. ject to constitutionality of law. N. P. R. Co. v Pierce Cry. (1908) 51 AV 12, 97 P 1099. Evidence may not be admitted to show want of consideration for "waiver of damages" signed by property owners as desiring forma. lion of drainage district and alleging necessity of waiver therefor. Drainage District v Arm- strong (1906) 44 W 23, 87 P 52. Prior amending law not held unconstitu. tional by inclusion of unconstitutional section. Ex rel Matson (1906) 42 W 491, 85 P 264. County commissioners may not be perma- nently disqualified from entertaining petition for establishment of drainage district. O'Con- nell V Baker (1904) 35 W 376, 77 P 678. Other Provisions as to notice and hearing. 84 ALR 1098, 145 ALR 1196. "Interest disqualification' as to participation in drainage district establishment. 11 ALA 193. f '. r ¦ I nmrJ ^j' C 'civaR4T N ". ?. i k ? 1'? v J tt {{ 1 Y ? .5. uu}} r M t 7 ?. 1? ?7 y J?, ? A o REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON DRAINAGE DISTRICTS AIRCRAFT FTIEL TAX 85.06.160 it 85.06.120 Appearance of defendants-Juy- 85.06.190 Assessment of benefited lands Verdict-Assessment of damages and formerly omitted-Procedure-Appeals,• benefits-Decree.. i Attorney General ,Y a - Cases Basis for computing maintenance a„e„• menu. 65 AGO No. 36. Drainage district assessments for interest on bond, map be charged against maximum bene- fits. ° - 9. rc] Montesano Stair Bank (1939) 172 '85.06.140 Dismissal of proceedings, when- N' .59. _(1 P2d 18. Costs.. Jur) finding of maximum benefits accruing Cases 4 to propene owner in proreedings to establish drainage system is conclusi,v. Poolman s• Petitioners and owners may not evade pav- Langdon (1917) 94 W 448. 162 P 578: Perkins mein of cost by quo %%arranto. where no objet- 8 Co. v Diking Dist. (1991) 162 W 427, 298 I' Lions made or appeal taken from orders 462, establishing drainage district and assessing proceeding costs against district. Ex rel O'Phe- u Determination as to whether prol-sed drain- Ian (1918) 103 W 339. 174 P 440. _ age system is "practicable." means from engi- neering standpoint. Ex eel Granite In,. Co. (1924) 131 W 20. 228 P 842• 85.06.160 Transcript of benefits to auditor- As s ess m ents-Collec ti on=Su pplemental No fraud may be shown in drainage district assessment.. 'i establishment without evidence showing ditch Cases , constructed with reference to special benefits to some person. Ex rel Abbott (1922) 121 W Tenant in common paying drainage assess- 181, 209.P 17. menu is entitled to reimbursement as for tax payment. Plebuck c Barnes (1928) 349 W 221, Where in establishment of drainage district 270 P 823. two ditches were more feasible than one origi- nally planned, cost may include both. Shoultes Assessment in excess of maximum benefits s Quasi (1920) 109 W 510. 187 P 356. would be unconstitutional as impairing vested rights. Poolman v Langdon (1917) 94 W 448, - Stair constitution, an 7, §9. is not violated 162 P 578. b) this section as imposing dote of making as. judgment showing collection of original as- sessment on court and jury, assessment being sessmrm for drainage construction may bar made, by commissioners alter jury detrrmina• supplemental assessment proceeding to cover lion. Ex rel Matson (1906) 42 W 491, 85 P deficiency. Poolman v Langdon (1917) 94 W 264. 448, 162 P 578. This section does not unconstitutionalh del- In proceeding by warrant holder to compel egate legislative authority. Ex rel Matson levy of assessment to pay warrants on aban- 1,i w,?n CAF ? (1906) 42 H' 491, 85 P 264. doped drainage ditch project, court pray levy y x r : y assessment with or without completion of F )s ditch. Espy Estate Co. v Pacific Cty. (1905) 40 # f? Attorney General N' 67, 82 P 129. yu ?? w Basis for computing maintenance assess, t r ' y ments. 65 AGO No. 96. Attorney General tPtm e -c Further hibilit) of one paying fixed drainage P l _ As to proceedings determining "benefits." jd y assessment. 30 AGO 713. 47AGO54. i ?7'• + As to "Delinquent Assessments." 15 AGO Other 11. 20 AGO 255. t ti As io contesting drainage assessment, 9 Fee of county clerk preparing list of "bene- I +7 r ALR 842. feted." 17 AGO 118. f 'v o- -54- f 7 i!` `N• :fef i .i?" Y ?, r 'nkN Q f tai v hi • y T, ??' A?4 o i i. i•.? + ? ti ?7 1'. ? h1 . 71 j4?? ' •? t ?it,ti r z i t 1 11 ' , , ?,? 1 ? 7 a 9r11 <?. Y 1;' ,jet\. 1 , Wg AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX 85.06.180 DRAINAGE DISTRICTS RPC ANNOTATIONS To s 85.06.180 Construction-Contractors- 85.06250 prganization of board_Warra ° Performance bonds.. n I how ijsuet?.. y. Other Attorney General Specific performance as to Drain construo Authority of drainage district commissioner to issue warrants of the district inder end k Lion contract. 164 ALR 802. p cull, of the counq auditor's office. 64 AGO _r 104. 85.06.190 Substantial changes in plans- , Procedure.. 85.06.321 Refunding bonds-Form, term u , interest, etc.. Cases Attorney- General „ Low lands owner assessed for dam construe- i b i l d i i hibi i State purchase of diking or drainage distr41 yF F e ent L on may t e to njunct on pro t ng water raise above level fixed on com letio f refunding bonds. 48 AGO 91. p n o work. Ouomeier v Spokane Cty. (1925) 133 W Levy of assessments paying for drainage int. r 12I. 234 P 1036. provement. 18 AGO 226. _ 85.06.230 City or town may act as or be 85.06.322 Levy.. Y ue included in drainage district.. .i s Cases i Attorney General Legislature may enact statute authorizing as. y Drainage districts may include municipal sessment to cover cost of work on drainage im- provement under void law. Ex rel Latimer boundaries. 46 AGO 9?i. (1902) 28 W 38, 68 P 368. 85.06.240 Estimate for maintenance and 85.06.324 Payment of assessment.. repair-Emergency- expenditures., Attorney- General Cases Church property as being exempt from 7 drainage assessments. 49 AGO 27. Property owners failing to use injunctive y ( remedy under RCW 85.06.400 or to take ap. + q4 peal from findings of benefits from establish- 85.06.325 Execution, sale and exchange- ° ing drainage system may not contest foreclosure of drainage delinquency certificates Redemption with money from levy and sale.. " - on grounds of failure of officers to complete Other rte, ,@; i r or keep up system. Snohomish County v An. drews (1927) 144 W 320 257 P 851 e district bonds bs s of d i a S i y,,._ { x a ' , . g u equent s ue ra n 87 i li ' on. gat ob as impairing prior creditors va' This section is not unconstitutional levy ALR 397. q t 1 F? ' made without nntice or hearing accorded prop. " " d i d i z t I r^ cost erty owners, as once eterm ne s leg- islotive declaration as to benefits -ascertainable 85.06.328 Refunding bonds-Assessment iy { from simple calculation. Snohomish Cty. y An- drews (1927) 144 W 320, 257 P 851. roll-Delinquency-Foreclosure.. g?iw r Drainage district maintenance assessment may be void without cost estimate. McDougall V Bridges (1909) 52 W 396, 100 P 835. Cases Drainage district assessment against city May be city "debt." Ex rel Keck (1935) 181 W 511, 43 P2d 621, -55- 7 7 ? s I p& AtlGWt6 ? i 7 _ ? r, v ,t: r I ? AY u, ' I II I I ? r h ?f . It r r 3 , xt rX i I . -5 REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON DRAINAGE DISTRICTS AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX 85.06.560 Attorney General Tax ri"4-closure sale as anecting assessment. 37 AGO 73. Purchaser's liability as to "accrued assess- ments." 08 AGO 433. 85.06.350 Public lands subject to assessment-Rights and liabilities of public corporations.. Cases Purchaset of state lands may take title free from assessments, where jurisdictional pre- requisites for assessment • not met. Paine v State (1930) 156 %1 31, 280 P 89. Drainagr assessment on state lands without notice to commissioner of proceedings for for- mation of district, was void under prior enact- ment. Paine % State (1930) 156 N' 31, 286 P 89. Commissioner's receipt of award for drain- age district condemnation of lands may not estop stag from contesting invalid assessment for benefits. Paine v State (1930) 156 Vs' 31. 286 P 89. Attorney General Liabilirs of property escheating to tatr for drainage district assessments. 59 AGO 49. 85.06.380 Compensation of commissioners.. Property owners failing to use remedy pro- vided b) this section or to take appeal from findings of benefits from drainage system -es- tablishment. may not contest foreclosure of drainage delinquency certificates on grounds of failure of officers to complete or keep up system. Snohomish Cty. v Andrews (1927) 144 N' 320, 257 P 851. Void drainage warrant holders may not b). mandamus compel county to make property reassessment. Ex rel Seymour (1909) 53 W 608, 102 P 651. Mandamus is proper remedy to secure issu- ance b) drainage commissioners of warrants in payment of services. Ex rel Narto (1907) 46 \1' 474, 90 P 660. Other Mandamus as to municipality's improvement of drain. 46 ALR 271. ' 85.06.510 Annexation of territory.. Attorney General Maintenance of consolidated drainage ditch. es. 48 AGO 125. 85.06.590 Election returns-Certification of result-Liability of annexed territory.. Attorney General County auditor as to conducting drainage district elections. 50 AGO 74. Other 85.06.550 Pa ment of preliminary expense Compensation of officer collecting drainage where proceedings are dropped.. district assessment. 114 ALR 1098. Cases This section through RC%V 85.04.750 indi. 85.06.40.1 Powers of court-]njunetions.. vidually constitutes complete procedural laws not falling within constitutional prohibition Cases against revision or amendment without setting Court may grant mandator injunction rom. out of act. N. P. R. Co. v Pierce Ct), (1908) 51 N' 12, 97 P 1099. pelling diligent operation of floodgates by drainage commissioners. Misich v McGuire (1946) 24 W2d 758. 167 P2d 462. 85.06.560 Nptice to present claims- This section originally enacted to subject ads Registration.. miniwaiise and discretionary functions of Other commissioner to discretionary supervision of superior court. Misich v McGuire (1940) 24 Water user as party to action involving M'2d 758, 167 P2d 462. drainage district. 100 ALR 56). -So- v y w y,^ .t ' I ? N .,•??\ i:i t ?-rho.. \ I 1 4?3 F 7 - ? k ? 914MI" ,? 77&& 7 T f f AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX 85.06.560 DRAINAGE DISTRICTS BPC ANNOTATIONS T 7 O ' a Venue of action against drainage district. 93 85.06.700 Powers are additional-''Dr i ALR 500. a na ge district" defined.. t I As to claims against drainage district. 24 Other Xr r ALR2d 998. Statute drainage district. 6inALR 573. . ing to new 85.06.580 Hearing to be fixed-Order for publication of notice.. 85.06.710 Costs in excess of estimate- - Authorized-Warrants validated.. Other Other Notice and hearing as to drainage proceed- ings. 145 ALR 1196 Authority of drainage distric•trommisdona• ?- . rv to issue warrants of the district independentlh of the county auditor's ()(Tice. W AGO N o 104. 85.06.640 Additional imFros•ements- Authorized-Change in plans.. a8i Chapter 85.07 Other Abandonment of drainage project. 82 ALR MISCELLANEOUS DIKING AND 559. DRAINAGE PROVISIONS Natural water course as affecting surface water drainage. 28 ALR 1265. 85.07.020 Dissolution of district-Hearing- Notice.. Other 85.06.650 Methods of payment.. Preferences as to assets of insolvent drain- age district. 52 ALR 755. 90 ALR 208. Attorney General Authority of drainage district commissioners t i 85.07.030 Sale of property-Disposition of o ssue warrants of the district independently ' proceeds.. of the county auditor s once. 64 AGO No. 104' Attorney General Sales tax as to diking and drainage district,. 85.06.670 Acquisition, sale of property- 39 AGO 72. a Contracts to share expense.. Other Delegation to courts of power as to drainage districts. 69 ALR 285, Authority of commissioners of drainage dis• trict to contract with an incorporated town whereby latter would furnish money to main. twin the drainage system. 65 AGO No. 62. Authority of county' commissioners to in. clude nontaxable Indian lands on a reservation within a drainage improvement district. 57 AGO No. 97. -57- 85.07.040 Benefit to public road, how paid.. Cases Statute of limitations for assessment collcc•• lion applies to action against county for en- forcement of payment of diking district assessments apportioned to its county roads. Ex rel Cowlitz Mtg. Co. (1943) 19 W2d 456- 143 P2d 304. Other County's liability for payment of assessments upon roads in boundaris of diking and drain' age district, 35 AGO 74. w .4 ^k d REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON 65.07.050 Basis of supplemental assessments.. other --.Additional assessments." 63 ALR 1179. Prior ,judgme•nt as precluding re-assessment tits ALR 513. Chapter 85.08 DIKING, DRAINAGE AND SEWERAGE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS 85.08.010 Definitions.. Cases A drainage improvement district organized pursuant to Ch. 85.08 RCW is not a municipal or quasi-municipal corporation and does not haze tttr eaparity to sue or to be sued, since ultimate control over such district is with the i nmq': thus, allowing a drainage improvement district to clo business without incurring the usual corporate obligations attaching to such business does not offend notions of suhstan- nat justice'-the counn is the party responsible lot such obligations. Ruth v Drainage lmprove- rncot Dist. No, 5 (1964) 04 W2d 586, 392 P2d 11112. Diking district is not "association, company "t corporation'' within state constitution, art ?. W. forbidding counts to loan mono)' or nrdit thereto. Foster v (;omm. of Cowlitz C:n. 'I'•t18) 100 W 502, 171 11.539. Diking district law dors nut viohov disc proc- `• of law guarantees of state and fe'de'ral (on. 'ututions. Foster v Comm. of Cowlitz Ctv. 1118) 100 fit' 502, 171 P 539. 85.08.020 Districts authorized-Area in city or town.. tMes Cuunty ma) be liable to property owners for d'ntaKe's from flooding of roadside drainage dnrlt. Harku9 v Nhat(om Ctv. (1952) 40 N2d 241 P2d 932. 1%" Legislature linto,oramaN tcd esiabli0i cit. Weatheragx drainage district 4,6.t C l . (1921) 116 W 212. 199 P 303; DIKING, DRAINAGE & SEW. IMPROV. DIST. AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX 85.08.040 Weatherwax c Grays Harbor Cty. (1922) 119 W 68. 204 P 1058. Legislature ma, authorize drainage districts to make improvements at expense if property specially benefited. Thurston Ct). v Clausen 092q) 118 1Y 653. 204 P 787. Drainage district law meets due process re. quirement of state and federal constitutions in assessment levies by affording hearing before bode making assessment. Oregon-Nash. R. &- N. Co. s Board of Comm. (1918) 103 W 480. 175 P 37. Greater assessment on one property than others requires some special benefit to such properti. Oregon-Wash. R. S- N. Co. v Board of Comm. (1918) 103 W 480. 175 P 37. . Diking district may be established upon county commissioners decision alter hearing upon nature and extent of proposed improve. ment. Foster v Comm. of Cowlitz Cry. (1918) 100 11' 502, 171 P 539. State constitution, art 7, §9, vesting cities, towns and villages with power to make local improvements by special assessments does not prohibit legislature from conferring power on diking districts. Hansen v Hammer (1896) 15 IV 315, 46 P 332: Foster v Comm. of Cowlitz Ct}. (1918) 100 W 502, 171 P 539. County may be liable for damages caused by its negligencr in construction of drainage' ditch. Linn v Walla Walla Cty. (1417) 99 W 1124. 1611 P 323. Other Boundaries of district. 70 ALR 1062. Municipality's duty as to drain obstructions. 43 ALR 964. 85.08.040 Petition of owners or resolution of county commissioners-Bond. Cases Petition contains sufficient description with metes and bounds designation and showing of "location, route' and termini" of proposed dikes and drains by attached map. Kadow v Paul (1925) 134 W 539, 236 P 90. -58- 77 ,erg s kin n,ytir Y ? t ? f ? t t @t ? ? ` e ( t ?.i it ?}In?.?1w' _. .yK? _ '?" •? ?t .tuuw•' -,^ ? _ ?.?WF' . . J W AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX 85.08.070 DIKING, DRAINAGE de SEW. IMPROV. DIST. BPC ANNOTATIONS L r TO 85.08.070 Petition or resolution to director- Resolution for hearing-Notice.. Cases Notice of hearing upon proposed diking and drainage improsement disu'ic•t ma) not be ren- dered de•fcctii,e by fourth publit•ation. Kadow v Paul (1925) 134 %?' 531). 236 P 90. 85.08.120 Favorable report of engineer- Survey, plat and estimate.. Cases Board of counq (ommissioners may review and muddy e'ngineer's findings as to proposed sewerage improyentent district. Cowlitz Cty. v Johnson (1940) 2 N'2d 497.98 P2d 644. Fact cost (jr improvement by consolidated district more than doubles estimates for origi- nal districts may be immaterial where no objec- tion by landocyners. Thurston Cry. v Clausen (1922) 118 W653, 204 P 787. 85.08.150 Hearing to be fixed on engineer's report-Notice.. Cases Notice and opportunity to be heard upon question of benefits precedes assessment levy against landowners within proposed sewerage district. Cowlitz Cty, c Johnson (1940) 2 W2d 497, 98 112d (144. 85.08.160 Hearing-Change of plans and boundaries.. Cases \lay not he claimed that commissioner's de- duction of acreage M boundary change when establishing district. would increase damage as defined by R(:%V 85,08.010. Kadow v Paul (1923) 134 W539. 236 1' 90, District finally formed mas be charged with costs necrssarv in its preparation. Shoultes v Quist (19_'0) 109 W 510, 181 1' 356. County commissioners may not charge engi. neer's expemes which are rut incurred in con' nection with plans substantially as recommended. Shoultes v Quasi (1920) 109 t•V 510. IS7 P 3511• -59- After estimate of damages and benefits front hearing on objections by cngineer• count,, commissioners may not change plans so as to require new notice to owners. Foster c (:ottrt of Cowlitz Cty. (1918) 100 11' 502. 1 i 1 P 530. Other Statutes providing changing of drainage di,. tricts. 69 ALR 285. 85.08.190 Eminent domain-Consolidation of actions.. Cases Benefits accruing to landowners from drain. age district iniprosentent mas be constitution. ally offset by jun against damages for land condemned for ditch right-of wav. Pierce Cts. v Thompson (1914) 82 W 440. 144 P 704. Attorney- General Drainage district filing fees. 16 AGO 112. Count% acting in behalf or drainage district. 16 AGO 41. 85.08.200 Verdict to fix damages and benefits Judgment.. Cues "For the benefit of improvement district" means county takes title for use b% impruse- ment district. Pierce Cty. v 'Thompson 1111141 82 W 440. 144 P 704. County is proper party defendant in pt."• ceoding to compel count, c ommissioners its establish ditch fund and levy special asst's" ment to pay warrants issued in part payntc'm of ditch. Espy Estate Co. v Pacilic Cty. (1!8)5) 40 W 67. 82 P 129. Where- county treasurer collects and dishun- es dike taxes, diking district nut necessun party defendant to action enjoining payment of illegal warrants. Abbott v Gaches (1899) 1" W 517. 56 P 28. Damage by drains. 2 AI.R2d 717, 7 ALR=d 364. Drainage district liability as to personal tutu' ries. 37 AI.R 77. t ?S , it ' 1 10,1SED CODE OF WASHINGTON r M. 85 08.220 Warrant for damages.. Wj es This sertion is not violative of state conctitu- t,,n, an S. 47. prohibiting count) from loan- it, credit. Kadow v Paul (1925) 134 W ;y{)• 236 P 90. _°- 85.08.230 Levy for preliminary expPenses- Collection-"Preliminary expenses" deftned.. Cases ,.' All property within improvement district rna? be subject to general lien for cost not to ., exceed maximum benefits on original or sup- = elemental assessments. Kadow• v Paul (1925) 134 W 539. 236 P 90. 85.08.240 Cost of improvement, how paid- Assessment of benefits-Payment in bonds or warrants-lnstallments-Call for bonds- Register..' Attorney General Collection of assessment installments. 14 AGO 423. 85.08.280 Sale of bonds and warrants.. Cases %ta% not be presumt•d that commicsione•rs will not unnply with laws as tr, issuance of hands for improvement district. Kadow v Paul 11925) 1 34 W 539, 236 P 90. Objection may not be made that district's bond sale prior to issuance was premature. Ivaduw v Paul (1925) 134 W 539, 236 P 90. 85.08.290 Elections-Notice-Qualification or electors.. Attorney General "Voting" of diking district lands. 26 AGO 264. juint interest rule in elections. 26 AGO 264 DIKING, DRAINAGE & SEW. IMPROV. DIST. AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX 85.08.385 85.01 .300 Supervisors-Election-Terms- Duties.. Attorney General Ilse of named schedule by drainage improve- ment district supervisors. 60 AGO 136. Power of Supervisors. 46 AGO 545. 85.08.360 Total costs-Apportionment- Board of appraisers.. Cases Payment of additional assessments to meet requirements of bonds, equalling full amount of benefits with prior assessments paid, dis- charges improvement district from further lia- bility on bonds. Boyd v Cunningham (1931) 164 N' 335, 2 P2d 697. Total amount of assessments may not ex- ceed benefits accrued. Linn v Walla 14•alla Cty. (19377) 99 N' 224. 169 P 323: Foster v Comm. of Cowlitz Cty. (1918) 100 W 502, 171 P 539: Kadow v Paul (1925) 134 W 539, 236 P 90 (af- firmed 274 US 175.47 SCt 561, 71 Ltd 982.) Arbitrary assessment in disproportionate sum may not be sustained because property is benefited to extent of assessment. Ore•.-Nash. R. & Nay Co. ) Board of Comm. (1918) 103 W 480, 175 P 37. Attorney General Anorne)'s fees as to diking district. 28 AGO 448. 85.08.385 Drainage ditches along highway, etc.. Cases judgment enjoining count) from proceeding with construction of drainage ditch may not preclude condemnation for ditch righbo6way b% county. Gray v Ramsay (1921) 117 %V 255, 260 P 1074, 204 P 4. -60- a a-- i' J v ?.7 if ,RCP'd {'" 1 '?49 7 Pn'"3? ) cr idr.A ?ttik &? PiX 7.tx ? ^4't ?P 1 7 Y t v r ? 4 • ?' ry 1 S 'P4 4 ' i t ', J1 {?-IV l A p t t ? t LL NN 7 }'.: i` AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX 85.08.430 DIKING, DRAINAGE & BPC ANNOTATIONS FOw SEW. IMPROV. DIST. 85.08.430 Payment of assessments- Interest-Lien.. Cases local imprmement assessment liens haw priority oscr all hilt general tax liens. Universi. ty Nat. Co. s Grays Harbor Cot (1942) 12 W2d 549, 122 P2d 501. 85.08.440 Appeal from apportionment- Procedure.. Cases Wen day appeal period from county commis. sinner's order confirming drainage assessment commences after journal entrv of order. In re Drainage Imp. Dist. (1992) 123 W 340, 210 P 796. 85.08.480 Collection of assessments- Certificates of delinquency-Foreclosure.. Cases Count)- treasurer's deed to irrigation district may relieve land of prior drainage district as- sessments alter expiration'of redemption from sale for irrigation district assessment. Kiona Irr. Dist, s Benton Cty. (1934) 180 IV 197, 39 P2d 394. On foreclosure sale For general taxes, drain. age district land remains subject to lien of all drainage assessments or installments not due at time of forcc'losure decree. Baldwin v Fris- bic• (1928) 149 1V 294, 270 P 1025. Attorney General Refusal of delinquent irrigation or drainage disiriet asscsstncois. 59 AGO 14. Assessments on tax (foreclosure. 47 AGO 57. 85.08.490 Title acquired at sale-Foreclosure for general taxes-Lien of assessments preserved.. Cases %Vhere tax foreclosure proceedings and rlss,l to county of land acquired thereat, do not close improvement assessments, con with this section will be•presuu1ned. Abelpliavn,r Uik. ing 8 Drainage Imp. Dist. ( 9.13) 19 %V2d :1,in 142 P2d 1017. Other 'fax sale as freeing property from liotht•r drainage assessments. 1 I ALR2d 1133. 85.08.500 Resale or lease by county- Disposition of proceeds-Tax statements.. Cases Immaterial that deed on resale by count% of land acquired at tax foreclosure did not dis- close improvement assessments. Abel v Diking & Drainage Imp. Dist. (1943) 19 W2d lati. 142 W2d 1017. Fact that purchaser of property, acquired by county under tax foreclosure, takes free From commercial waterway district assessments aloes not support contention as to same treatment of diking, drainage or sewer improvement as- sessments. Abel v Diking & Drainage Imp. Dist. (1943) 19 %V2d 356, 142 P2d 1017. This section was not implie•dly repealed be RMV 84,64.270 and 84.64.290,providing pro- tedure for general resales by county of tax it- quired realty. Abel v Diking & Drainage Imp. Dist. (194:1) 19 W2d 356, 142 P2d 1017. Purchaser at resale of land acquired by coun- ty at tax foreclosure takes title free from lieu of all local improvement assessments past due. Thestrup v Grays Harbor Ctv.(1942) 12 %V2d 545, 122 P'dd 797. County may resell tax acquired propert% at lesser stint than that appearing in notice of sale. Thestrup v Grays Harbor Cry. (1942) W W2d 545. 122 P2d 707. 'fax foreclosure sale is affecting diking and Where county acquired property at tax fore, drainage district assessment. 37 AGO 73, closure proceedings is resold pursuant to thi? section, owner of property at time of forecl- sure nut entitled to surplus realized on resale. Certified assessment as to certificate of delin. Longview Cu, V Co%litz Cty. (1939) 1 %v2d quency for general taxes..27 AGO 124. 64, 95 P2d 376. -61- _t 71, Y C aEVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON ••pc•nnn" should be construed to mean rn,rnty and varicnrs wnrking fund% rather than n,ener of land at time of tax foreclosure. Long- ,,. Co. v co,dity Coy. (1939) 1 \t'2d 64, 95 p:,d 376. count. purchasing lax foreclosure land sub- Iru M drainage assessmevu, acquires title in -not for state and other taxing municipalities. .cnh obligation to apportion proceeds as re- quired. Shelton s' Klickitat 0%. (1929) 152 W Ina. 277 1' 839. (:ount?'.s resale of land acquired at tax fore- cimore subject to drainage improvement as- sessmrnn not then due. does not constitute release or discharge of property from lien of general taxes levied for state purposes. Bal- d,cin s Frisbic (1928) 149 W 294. 270 P 1025. bn resale of property acquired by county for general taxes. purchaser takes title subject to drainage improvement assessments not then due. Baldwin v Frisbie (1928) 1451 W 294. 270 1' 1025. 85.08.520 Supplemental assessments.. Cases Irrigation district', arquisition of title to ptopert% within drainage impro%eme•nt district does nut deprive drainage bond holders of am te•med% theq might host. against drainage dt%trirt pnopeny, 6iona Irr. Dist. s Benton 0%. (1934) 180 IN' 197. 39 112d 3514. cnnnmissioners ma) Iev, supplemen- tal as.essmrms against drainage district prop- en, although irrigation district has arqurred tide thereto. Kiona Irr. Dist. s Benton Cty. (1934) 180 NN' 197, 39 112d 394. Rovision for reassc•ssnu•nt of deftcienry in a.srasment fn public imprmemern violates no cumtitutional rights as long as individual "ben- eftls" exceed prorated assessments. Raduw v 1Lul (15127) 274 VS 175. 47 SCI 561. 71 Ulf 982. Other Re-assrssment to cover deficiency in assess- ments for public improvement. 40 ALR 1352. 42 ALR 1185. -62-. 85.08.530 Levies against county, city or town, how paid.. Cases Drainage imprmement assessment against cit% for special benefits received is general ob- ligation of city. Ex rel luck (1935) 181 W 511. 43 P2d 621. Drainage improvement assessment against riry for special benefits received in nature of convenience. does not exceed limitation of stare constitution, art 8, §G, referring to man- dator) obligations necessar\' to corporate exis- tence. Ex re) Keck (1935) 181 M' 511, 43 P2d 621. 85.08.580 Consolidation-Resolution-Time for hearing.. Cases Where one diking districc redemption fund has surplus upon consolidation with other dis- tricts, surplus should be refunded pro rata to district prope•m owners. Longview Co. v Ren- ner (1939) 200 W 147. 93 P2d 389. All provisions applicable to original drainage districts apply to "consolidated districts." Thurston Ctv. v Clausen (1922) 118 W 653, 204 P 787. 85.08.600 Objections-Determination.. Cases No neressity for public hearing befur coun- t) board u, adopt plans for ronsulidate•d dis- trict improvement, Thurston Ctv. v Clausen (1922) 118 W 653, 204 P 787. Order for consolidation of two districts mar be sufficient b% description of area included in original districts. Thurston Ctv, v Clausen (1922) 118 W 653. 204 P 787. 85.08.620 Powers and duties after consolidation.. Cases Funds from assessments levied to liquidate consolidated district obligations become trust fund for liquidating particular obligations for which levies made. Longview Co. v Renner (1939) 200 W 147, 93 P2d 389. v. 1 I ?f? t ? t H 1 ?M1 4 t ' ` T ? t ?,E f 1 'r t V l i i" f 14 ? . ? ? ? ?1 1 ?tr I 1 (r k r A t ?_ p L :* N0? xino-tek,r y .? F 5 t _ I M?;: I j .. 2 M REVISED CODE OF WASHINGTON DIKING & DRAINAGE DIST. AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX 85.24.240 t Chapter 85.15 Chapter 85.22 REORGANIZATION OF DISTRICTS INTO IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS-1933 ACT DIKING, DRAINAGE, SEWERAGE t IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS-MAINTENANCE AND (No pertinent Annotations.) EXPANSION-1967 ACT $ Chapter 85.24 (No pertinent Annotations.) DIKING AND DRAINAGE DISTRICTS IN Chapter 85.16 TWO OR MORE COUNTIES s t MAINTENANCE COSTS AND 85.29.140 Appeal.. ag J LEVIES-DIKING, DRAINAGE AND a SEWERAGE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS Other Discrimination as to rates outside drainage district. 4 ALR2d 610. .,1 'a. (No pertinent Annotations.) 1'. i 85.29.210 Maintenance levy.. Chapter 85.18 Ch Attorney General Drainage district maintenance assessments LEVY FOR CONTINUOUS against state. 48 AGO 126. BENEFITS-DIKING DISTRICTS 85.24.230 Bonds-Issuance and sale-Form, (No pertinent Annotations.) maturity, etc.-Call-Register.. E Chapter 85.20 Cases :3 Landowner may use drainage ditch water C'?, ?.. •d upon compliance with this section and RCIS' I 85.08.660. Bmce v Frve Lettuce Farm, Inc. 1 }. REORGANIZATION OF DISTRICTS INTO (1935) 181 W 157,42 P2d 444. Mk' IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS-1917 ACT dl u 85.24.240 Counties to contribute for benefits' Y t? to roads, bridges, or health of people.. ^ ,z 85.20,010 Reorganization authorized.. Cases 2{ +, Diking districi assessment on county road is `- f Attorney General "debt" payable through county's exercise of Redivision of consolidated diking districts. taxing power. Ex rel Cowlitz Mtg. Co. (1943) „ 53 AGO 154. -63 19 N'2d 456, 143 P2d $04. { tl' Y rL,ay? ??t? ` r n t+ r Y ??? )r k ?; ?, I c ?.° y r F+ t7 t~ 1 L ? ` t ii ! r r,; r:N 12 RE%11SED CODE OF WASHINGTON s TITLE 86 FLOOD CONTROL Chapter 86.05 .a ul FLOOD CONTROL D1ST,-1935 ACT AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX 86.05.390 86.05.260 Name to be given-Election directed-Commission terminated.. FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICTS-1935 ACT Cases In view of this section, abolishing commis- sion upon establishment of boundaries, certio- rari is not proper remedy to review final action of commission. Weyerhaeuser Tbr. Co. v.Banker (1936) 186 W 332, 58 P2d 285. (Substantive provisions of this chapter have been repealed by L 1965 c 26. Annotations have been 86.05.270 Election-Notice, ballots, conduct, ,,tamed for whatever value the) may still have.) result.. 86.05.010 Districts authorized-Purposes- surface and drainage .raters.. Cases Primary purpose of 1935 act is local im- prosement of land in the district for benefit of the owners. Weyerhaeuser Tbr. Co. v Banker 0936) 186 W 332, 58 P2d 285. 86.05.030 Landowners' petition.. Other . Who is "owner" within meaning of improve- ment petition laws. 2 ALR 789, 95 ALR 109). 86.05.040 Contents.. Cases "Benefited" as usrd in this section means in. creased in market %aluc by reason of the im- Nint-me-nt. Wr%e•rharuscr Tbr. Cu. v Banker 119361 186 W 392. 58 P2d 285. 86,05.220 Boundaries described in notice- Method of description-Alternative method.. Cases Timbered watershed above stream valle% not a•nefited by proposed flood control district not includable under 1935 att. Weyerhaeuser 776r. Co, v Banker (1936) 186 N' 332, 58 P2d tbs. Under 1935 act, only lands as will be bene- fited may be included within proposed district. Weyerhaeuser Tbr. Co. % Banker (1936) 186 W 332, 58 P2d 285, -64- Cases Court has equity jurisdiction to enjoin elec- tion for formation of flood control district where property rights involved. N'e%crhaeuser Tbr. Co. v Banker (1936) 186 W 332, 58 P2d 285. 86.05.340 Powers as to' control of waters subject to flood conditions-Construction, improvements, condemnation, etc.. Cases Under this section and RCN' 86.05.390 relat- ing to eminent domain and flood control, and Const. 9th Amend. relating to eminent domain in general, liability for damages is not limited to the propene appropriated, but also includes damages to the remainder of the property not actually taken or appropriated. Marshland Flood Control Dist, of Snohomish County v Great Northern Rv. Co. (1967) 71 W2d 365, 428 P2d 531. Law Review Liability for diking floodwaters: Rejection of the "common enemy" doctrine. 44 WLR 516. 86,05.370 Annual tax levy-Limits.. Attorney General Application of 40 mill limit to flood control levy. 39 AGO 90. 86.05.390 Eminent domain-Procedure.. Cases Under this section and RCN' 86.05.340 relat- ing to eminent domain and flood control, and Const. 9th Amend, relating to eminent domain AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX 86.05.390 FLOOD CONTROL BPC ANNOTATIONS TO DIST.-1935 ACT in general, liability for damages is not limited to the property appropriated, but also includes damages to the remainder of the property not actually taken or appropriated. llarshland Flood Control Dist. of Snohomish County v Great Northern Ry. Co. (1967) 71 W2d 365. 428 P2d 531. Other 'raking property for flood control purposes. 70 ALR 1281. 86.05.400 Adoption of comprehensive plan of control-Procedure when more than one county.. 86.05.430 Contracts-Public bidding- Notice.. Attorney General Expenditure of flood control funds outside commissioner's district. 48 AGO 115. Law Review Competitive bidding on public construction contracts. 39 W'LR 796. 86.05.590 Contract interest barred-Penalty.. Other What relationship is barred by rule forbid- ding n0icer to be interested in public contract. 74 ALR 792. Rule against public officer being interested in public contract as applicable to officer as creditor of contractor. 73 ALR 1352. 86.05.630 Bond sinking fund-Annual levy required.. Other Effect of failure to maintain sinking fund. 90 ALR 1240. Liability of officer for loss of sinking funds. 25 ALR 1358. -65- 86.05.710 Claims-Allowance and payment.. Other Statute of limitations applicable to govern. ment warrants. I I I ALR 986. 86.05.720 General obligation bonds authorized-Election to incur indebtedness- Vote required.. Other Validity of single proposition covering sever. al projects. 5 ALR 538. 4 ALR2d 617. 86.05.730 Form, issuance, sale, registration.. Other Delay as affecting power to issue bonds. 135 ALR 768. Discretion of issuing officers as to terms or conditions of bonds. 119 ALR 190. Chapter 86.09 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICTS-1937 ACT 86.09.001 Districts authorized-Purpose.. Cases 1937 Act as declaration of legislative policy that flood control is police power, authorizing damage without liability. Short v Pierce Cty. (1938) 194 W 421. 78 P2d 610. Attorney General Applicab1ity of constitutional (art 8 $6) debt limitation to flood control district organized under this chapter (86.09 RCW). 66 AGO No' 94. 86.09.013 State school or other public lands includable.. Other Public property as subject to local improve' ment assessment. 90 ALR 1137. Assessment of school property. 36 ALR 1540. S ? b1 '? r, ' g? f tGw f 'r ?i: I W f ??t? 3 l; ?? rt t kb i i I t t i N ? ? st r nr ?. 1? i ? f n yy ? ? tt{ LL t t t,r t { 0 0. FE11SED CODL OF WASHINGTON FLOOD CONTROL DIST.-1987 ACT AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX 86.09.520 - Assessment of leasehold in exempt public A purchaser is entitled to vote where benefit. pnd. 23 ALR 248. ed properi) is the subject of an ordinan real estate contract. 65 AGO No. 75. 96-09- 151 General posers of districts.. Attorney General 86.09.397 Assessments-Classification of lands by appraisers-Classes described.. Applicability of ronstitutional (art 8 §6) debt brnitation to flood control district organized Other under this chapter (86.09 RCW). 66 AGO No. W, Assessment of railroad right-of-wa) for flood control. 37 ALR 762. 86.09.166 Contracts with United States or state-Control, management of %orks- Contribution of funds.. Other - Potter of administrative board to contracts - for period beyond its own term. 70 ALR 794, 149 ALR 336. r 86.09.202 Eminent domain-Authorized.. Review Liu i Liability for diking floodwaters: Rejection of .? it the- "common enemy" doctrine. 44 WLR 516. 96.09.208 Eminent domain-Consolidation of actions-Separate verdicts.. Other 4 r Who is -owner" under eminent domain star. t. otcs. 2 ALR 785, 95 ALR 1090. 86.09.490 Assessment lien-Priority.. Other Priority of assessment lien over contractual liens. 78 ALR 513, 159 ALR 832. Priority as between tax and assessment liens. 5 ALR 1301, 65 ALR 1379. 99 ALR 1478. 86.09.502 Sale for delinquent assessments- How conducted-Certificate of sale-District as purchased-Fee.. Other Personal liability of property owner for deft. ciency after sale for unpaid assessment. 127 ALR 590. Sale of railroad right-of-way for unpaid as. sessment. 37 ALR 242, 82 ALR 431. 86.09.211 Eminent domain-Damages, how determined-Judgment when damages exceed benefrts 86.09.505 Sale for delinquent assessments- .. Entries in assessment book-Book open to Other inspection-lien vested in purchaser.. Liabilit% for damage caused by flood control Other nteasures, 5 ALR2d 59. Compensation for lands left outside levee. Respective sights of successive purchasers of property sold by different taxing agencies. 167 20 ALR 302. ALR 1001. 86,09,364 Elections-Qualifications of electors 86,09.520 District lands exempt from general .. taxes-Leasing; application of proceeds.. Attorney General A husband and wife holding community Prupert)•, who are otherwise eligible, are each Other Tax exemption as including special assess- entitled to additional votes, 65 AGO No. 75, menu. 90 AIR 1157. -66- •#n ? tic ? Sr'?y?'RT?w ? • ? I ? At?t? ? t N ?}?j J dl's ?64 N,??q?yl^• v ,y?'7ky t a 1l 4 ? ?I t yP! .t 1 ? 7 I .I t ? ' ?+ r ? ' tl t DI? ;l?l? 17 r?Y ? L ?h ?1 f r -t 1S 5 1 r ?i L ? J 1, -.a a AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX 86.12.010 FLOOD CONTROL BY COUNTIES Lk "I Chapter 86.12 FLOOD CONTROL BY COUNTIES 86.12.010 County tax for river improvement fund-Flood control maintenance account.. Cases Twenty-five vear contract made under this section not objectionable on ground that it is binding on future boards of commissioners. F•x rel Schlarb (1943) 19 W2d 109, 141 P2d 651. Contract for specified period of time, provid- ing generally for control of certain streams. leaving details to be worked out, substantially complies with this section. Ex rel ',fountain Dec. Co. (1937) 190 W 183.167 P2d 861. Purpose of intercounty action under this sec- tion is flood control, not improvement for nav- igation purposes. Conger v Pierce Cty. (1921) 116 W 27, 198 P 377. 86.12.930 Eminent domain, how exercised.. Other Taking property for flood control purposes. 70 ALR 1381. 86.12.033 Expenses to be paid out of river improvement fund.. Attorney. General Use or obligation of cumulative reserve river improvement funds. 60 AGO 153. Applicability of county budget law to river improvement fund. 29 AGO 368. Expenditure of river improvement fund out. side county. 12 AGO 202. Landowner cannot recover for dam caused by emergency effort to control age flood but is entitled to damages for harm caused hv. continued occupation after danger passed. Short v Pierce Ctv. (1938) 194 W 421, 7 610. 8 P2d Counties not liable to private owners for damage caused by emergencv flood control measures. Short v Pierce Cty. (1938) 19q (,• 421, 78 P2d 610. Where authorized by statute, counties may take flood control measures under police power without liability for damage to proper. n•. Short v Pierce Cty. (1938) 194 W 421, 78 P2d 610. Counties jointly improving river are liable for erosion damage caused by shifting current. where operation not excusable as exercise of police power. Conger v Pierce Cty. (1921) 116 W 27, 198 P 377. Other Liability of ernment for damage caused by flood controlgovmeasures. 5 ALR2d 57. Chapter 86.13 FLOOD CONTROL BY COUNTIES JOINTLY 86.13.030 Tax levy in each county- Intercounty river improvement fund.. Cues .Mandamus by other county is proper reme- dy to compel levy for purposes of intercounty contract made pursuant to RCW 86.12.040. Ex rel Schlarb (1943) 19 W2d 109. 141 P2d 651. 86.12.037 Liability of county or counties to 86.13:040 Eminent domain-Procedure- others.. Acquisition by purchase authorized.. Cases This section has no application to actions for damages arising from a drainage project. Hamilton v King Cty. (1938) 195 W 84, 79 P2d 697. -67- Cases Parties to intercounty flood control contract may act jointly in condemnation proceedings. Ex rel Mountain Dev, Co. (1937) 190 W 183• 67 P2d 861, BPC ANNOTATIONS Tp S9 RE%'ISED CODE OF WASHINGTON FLOOD CONTROL ZONES BY STATE AIRCRAFT FUEL TAX 86.16.120 g6.13.110 State's title to abandoned channels anted to counties.. Cases 141terc old channel permanentl% abandoned prior to statehood, rivet imprm'ements do not p,•e state title to pass under this section. (,eorge v Pierce Cty. (1920) 111 W 495. 191 P 406. Chapter 86.15 FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICTS 86.15.080 General powers.. Attorney General Consent necessar for flood control zone district to acquire drainage district property. 62 AGO 131. tionally required. Maple Leaf Investors, Inc. v Dept. of Ecology (1977) 88 N'2d 726. 565 P2d 1162. 86.16.025 Authority, of supervisor.. Cases Department had statutory authority to issue regulation prohibiting the construction of dwellings within floodwa%I Maple Leaf Invest- ors. Inc. v. Dept, of Ecology (1977) 88 N'2d 726, 565 P2d 1162. This chapter is a proper exercise of the po- lice power. Maple Leaf Investors, Inc. v Dept. of Ecology (1977) 88 W2d 726, 565 P2d 1162. Regulation forbidding the, construction of dwellings within floodwavs was not a taking or damaging for which compensation is constitu- tionally required. Maple Leaf Investors. Inc. v Dept. of Ecology (1977) 88 W2d 726, 565 p2d 1162. 86.15.210 Transfer of property.. Attorney General Authority of drainage districts to convey title to its property. 62 AGO 131. Chapter 86.16 FLOOD CONTROL ZONES BY STATE (For regulations issued under this chapter, see NAC Ch. 173.142 and Ch. 508.60.) Attorney General Powers and duties of flood control supervi. sor. 45 AGO 200. 86.16.090 Improvements without permit as nuisance-Abatement.. Cases Bulkhead and landfill constructed without permit was subject to abatement where it in- creased flood hazard. Bavle% c Kane (1977) 16 WA 877, 560 P2d 1165. 86.16.010 Statement of policy-State control Assumed 86.16.120 Flood damages defined.. Cases Department had statutory authority to issue regulation prohibiting the construction or d-ellings within Ooodways. Maple Leaf Invest. ors. Inc, v Dept. of Ecology (1977) 88 W2d 726, 565 P2d 1162. This chapter is a proper exercise of the po• le power. Maple Leaf Investors. Inc. v Dept. of u Lcology (1977) 88 W2d 726, 565 P2d 1162. Regulation forbidding the construction of dxelltngs within floodways was not a taking or damaging ear which compensation is consuu. Cases Department had statutory authority to issue regulation prohibiting the construction of dwellings within Ooodways. Maple Leaf Invest- or. Inc. v Dept. of Ecology (1977) 88 W2d 726, 565 P2d 1162. This chapter is a proper exercise of the po- lice power. Maple Leaf Investors, Inc. v Dept. of Ecology (1977) 88 N'2d 726, 565 P2d 1162. Regulation forbidding the construction of dwellings within Ooodways was not a taking or dmaging for which compensation is constitu- -68- y 3 a rc *? ?, ??» ?se.t? aft ?.,, tm ??.,?. s,r ? ??v?„ n taw r, v!- i G iwt t? !?w ? 7New m yaeuaanw^?,H ?a ?`f 1 ! rk. rti 4 (..a 4 ,? } 1 ti T _ , ? 5 1 h r7 + ?j? 86.26.U60 State Participation, Maintenance ;; -.. ti RCW 86.15.110, been found to be of benefit to a zone d the administration and enforcement of all laws relating 11984 c 212 § 2; 1951 c 240 § 3.1 d control flo t _ an or participating zones. The bonds may not excee . o o ;p 77 i amount, together with any outstanding general obliga- equal to three-fourths of one percent lion indebtedness 86.26.020 Repealed. See Supplementary Table of ? ?e ' , of the value of taxable property within the zone or par- lue of the taxable prop- " Disposition of Former RCW Sections, this volume. x . va ticipating zones, as the term ll b ` , e erty" is defined in RCW 39.36.015. The bonds sha CW 86.26.030 Repealed. See Supplementary Table of a ? . issued and sold in accordance with chapter 39.46 R : 1983 c 315 9 21; 1983 c 167 § io P 62 Disposition of Former RCW Sections, this volume. M? a r r . 11984 c 186 § 211; 1961 c 153 § 17.] 86.26.040 Duties of local engineer-Approval of F Purpose-1984 c 186: See note following RCW 39.46.110. plans, etc., by department or ecology. Whenever state e Sererability-1983 c 315; See note following RCW 90.03.500. -1983 c 167: See RCW 39• bilil grants under this chapter are used in a hood control within of the count i cr ? y Liberal construction. Serers y neer maintenance project, the eng f .46.010 and note following. or which the project is located shall approve all plans the project and shall supervise the work. The approval of such plans, construction and expenditures by the depart- - a ,„tea Chapter 86,16 ent of ecology, in consultation with the department 0f fluent , FLOOD CONTROL ZONES BY STATE fisheries and the department of game, shall be a condi- A" tion precedent to state participation in the cost of any sections project. 11984 c 212 § 3; 1951 c 240 § 6.] . 86.16.095 Repealed. - dz e 86.16.095 Repealed. See Supplementary Table of 86.26.050 Projects in which state will partici- pate-Allocation of funds. State participation shall b s " Disposition of Former RCW Sections, this volume. - in such flood control maintenance projects as are of- reeled with a general public and state interest, as differ- ' P ? 26 ter 86 Cha entiated from a private interest, and as are likely to with the t r = t . p e bring about public benefits commensura { STATE PARTICIPATION IN FLOOD CONTROL NANCE amount of state funds allocated thereto. No participa- al corpo- or other munici t i h ? ."d . MAINTE p a coun y t tion may occur w makes a finding f ecolo di .,,. gy rector o ration unless the t;. Sections control assistance account -PstabGshment- 007 Flood 86 26 that the county, city, or town having planning jurisdic- over the area where the flood control maintenance i - ? . . Use on l rlt i l f d ' . and enforcement. 010 Administration 26 n a n p loo project will be engages ?' • " " .? ., I 86 . . 020 Repealed. 26 86 g ilics, on the one hundred year hood plain plain surrounding : „, '+ . . 030 Repealed, 26 86 such area, that are adequate to protect or preclude flood . y, . . 86 .26.G40 Duties of local engineer-Approval of plans, etc., by damage to structures, works, and improvements that 3 ` ' department of ecology. 050 Projects in which state will participate-Alloca0on of,_ - 26 86 ; may be built within its planning jurisdiction on such has i i i ,? S r iw . . funds. on c pat ihood plain after the request for state part 0tv ,? y.. p gg {p 86.26.060 Allocation or funds. orts of municipal corporations d t l b been made, including restriction of land uses within a ali• flood-com l d ' ' " rep ge u 86.26.080 Annua Allocation of funds. -' 090 Scope or maintenance in which state dl p itid pate 26 86 p way to on y s meander belt or floo river blc uses. No participation may occur with a county or i , t . . 100 Agreement el to participation-Limit on mount. 26 86 neer other municipal corporation unless the county eng i e . . $6.26, 05 Comprehensive flood control management plan R of the county within which the flood control mainte- 4f + quitemcnts-Tim<forcoinpleuonr nanee project is located certifies that a comprehensive { 1 j 86,26.110 Repealed. flood control management plan has been completed and - ! .. d control assistance account-Es- 7 Fl adopted by the appropriate local authority, or is being h ] . L' , oo 86.26,00 istance ac- l er area, prepared for all portions of the river basin or ot t ^ ass tablishment-Use. The flood contro within which the project is located in that county, that r r h count is hereby established in the general fund. At the h 5 are subject to hooding with a frequency of one hundred , '. ' , t e beginning of each biennium after June 30, 198 d to' l f years or less. Such participation shall be made from un state treasurer shall transfer from the genera t an amount of money u grants made by the department of ecology from the + 1 + f s - n the flood control assistance acco when combined with money remaining in the ac• which flood control assistance account ] 1984 c 212 § 4; 1951 c ,v , ual four tail- will e i bi ] q um, enn count from the previous s ' lion dollars. Moneys in the flood control assistance account may be spent only after appropriation for n 86.26.060 Allocation of funds. Grants for flood con- 'f, i oy§, r? pW .46r, specified list of projects under this chapter. 11984 c 212 trot maintenance shall be so employed that as far as unfore- ds will be on hand to meet unusual, f ibl t y r, _ § 1 ] un poss e, seeable and emergent flood conditions. Allocations by 86.26.010 Administration and enforcement. The dc- the state of fo h the department of ecology, for emergency purposes, shall in each instance be in amounts which together with p , q 2 r arge partment of ecology shall have c Ik1 P - - P RL1f Supp-gate 7511 11984 ?tsi i• r t., , ' Y C t ? + -lf' t Il I If ?4 t - 7 f i r . a y?o+'YI y + '' t i h'a f1t • ? "aa?arlY ' t j a: _. z5,J k a: ? w JAN 04 1985 t? !EFFERSON COUNTY ASSESSOR JACK WESTERMAN M Q WASHING STATE DEPARTMENT (REVENUE Property Tax Bulletin September 6 1983 PTB 83-5 Rescinds PTB 73-15 PTB 74-1 PTB 76-8 PTB 80-4 PTB 81-4 PTB 81-5 PTB 82-3 LEVY LIMIT CALCULATIONS 106% Limit Computation Chapter 84.55 RCk limits the amount of regular property taxes that can be levied by a taxing district. The levy is limited to an amount that will not exceed one hundred six percent of the highest amount lawfully levied in the last - - three years. To this is added an additional dollar amount calculated by multiply- ing the increase in assessed value in that district resulting from new construction, improvements to property, and any increase in the assessed value of state-assessed property by the regular property tax levy rate of that district for the preceding - year. This bulletin 'is intended to provide the guidelines for determining what the levy limits are. New Construction New construction means the creation of something new rather than the repair or improvement of something already existing. It is the building or erection of something which did not exist before, as distinguished from the alteration or repair of something already existing. The following should be considered as new construction for 1062 computation purposes: 1) New buildings and additions, 2) New mobile homes, both real and personal, 3) Physical improvements to land (site improvements), such as water, sewer or septic, power access roads, driveways, sidewalks, etc., and 4) Machinery, equipment and other personal property affixed to real property so as to become a permanent part of a structure. The following should not be considered as new construction: 1) Increases in value resulting from platting, and 2) Personal property not affixed to real property. The valuation date for new construction is July 31st and may be placed on the assessment rolls until August 31st. Improvements to Property In the most general sense, an improvement is any beneficial or valuable change or addition to the property. It is generally thought of as a betterment 7"R,'?L,.( F'°,""f,? ni??,; "C,'y,.r:; ..?F1n4'i1 i , woo 9 I Page 2 PTB 83-5 in the condition of real or personal property. Improvements are permanent additions to or betterments to enhance the value of the property. Keep in mind that the distinction between an improvement and a repair is not always clear. Nevertheless, such a decision rests in the hands of the assessor. An improvement is everything more than a repair that enhances the value of the premises permanently. .. A good test to distinguish repair from improvement is: Repair - preserves property in its original condition Improvement - where permanent changes are made enhancing the value of the premises In order to account for the new construction and improvements in a given dis- trict, records are required showing the new construction and improvements. Improve- ments to residences that qualify for the three-year exemption from property tax should be considered as an increase to assessed value when the improvement is completed. This should help alleviate some of the book work that would otherwise be created by waiting three years. i Improvements to residences that qualify for the senior citizen assessed value exemption should be considered as new construction for 106%, limit purposes. New buildings and improvements to property of organizations exempt under RCW 84.36 1! - should not be considered as new construction for 106% limit purposes. GENERAL PROCEDURES FOR CALCULATING THE 106% LIMIT - 1. An existing district has not levied within the last three years. a. Determine the 1973 assessed value for the district and multiply by the rate that could have lawfully been levied in 1973 (statu- tory or 106% limit, whichever is less), plus b. New construction and improvements since 1973 (do not include 1973, but include the current year), multiplied by the levy rate proposed to be restored or the statutory rate, whichever is less, but in no case to exceed the following: Deduct the assessed value of all new construction and improvements since 1973 from the current year's assessed value and divide this value into the amount that could have been levied in 1973 (as per "a" above). This is the maximum rate that can be levied for the current year. NOTE: It is important that the new construction and improvement figures be maintained each year for each district whether or not that district has a tax levy. It is difficult to go back to 1973 and reconstruct those figures when a dis- trict that hasn't levied before decides to establish a levy. i ?^ pry +?my??ry?.+ ?ti ?'4^i1TNL K ack42!'s?w4?z'T.TiJi^ Z7777, (E " '=' !u, x,Mi a.. _ 4l. ..r, w:* rf h PTB 83-5 Page 3 2. For the first levy year following annexation, determine the 106% limit in the regular manner for the original district as if there had not been an annexation and then add the following amount: y a. Divide the amount above by the current year's assessed value 1 of the original district before annexation to determine the r levy rate. b. Multiply the current year's assessed value of the annexed area by the above rate. 3. When a taxing district loses an area through annexation to another district, the 106% limit for the losing district is not affected. This can cause an increase in the $/$1,000 rate due to the lesser value. - However, the district is still subject to the maximum statutory rate. - 4. When a taxing district is created by consolidation of existing districts, the new district's first levy will not exceed 106% of the combined highest levies of the preceding three years of each component district, plus an kk amount equal to the increase in AV due to new construction' and improve- I, ments of each component district multiplied by the respective property !!! tax rates of the component districts for the preceding year. 5. When a taxing district is newly formed, other than by consolidation or annexation, the 106% limit will not apply to its first levy. 6. A number of taxing districts submitted a vote to increase or remove the levy limit as provided in RCW 85.55.010. The following guidelines apply to the new levy base: a. The vote to increase the limit does not create an excess levy; it still comes within the $9.15 regular levy limit as provided in RCW 84.52.043. b. The district changing the limit will be allowed, upon request, an amount up to the rate limit provided in the ballot. In the case of a junior district, this higher levy rate, together with the levy rates of other junior districts, must be placed within the total levy rate available to junior districts under the $9.15 limit. Otherwise, a proration of the junior district levies will be necessary to bring the total of the regular levy rates, excluding port, PUD and EMS levies within the $9.15 limit. , c. The amount levied for a taxing district, as a result of raising the e 106% limit by a vote, will serve as a tax base from which the taxing district's prorata share, under RCW 84.52.010, is to be determined if, in fact, a prorate situation exists. d. The first budget request following the raising of the 106% limit by a vote will establish the 106% limit base for subsequent years (assuming, of course, that this amount is the highest year of the past three years' levies). r INE 5 $P"P`i-?YJ 7777i4'J.",°M i.n f'SIuli .whiw4"CAM v:a? / In accordance with an Attorney General's Opinion, dated October 6, 1975 (AGO 1975-86), all levies, whether voter approved or not, were to be combined for each port district's 106% computation. The entire sum of both voter ap- proved and non-voter approved port levies were to be used to determine the highest levy of the three most recent years, regardless of whether or not any individual levy is continued in the current year. Likewise, the previous year's levy rate was the sum of all levy rates for each port district. Voter approved levies beginning in the current year will be in addition to the maxi- mum levy thus computed under the 106% limit. Non-voter approved levies beginning in the current year were to fall within the total maximum levy calculated under the 106% levy limit. Chapter 3, Laws of 1982, 1st extraordinary session, (RCW 84.55.045) removed the port industrial development levy (RCW 53.36.100) from the combined port district 106% levy limit calculation. The port industrial development levy under the 106% is now a separate calculation from all other port levies. The 106% levy limitation does not apply to the first levy enacted. RCW 53.36.100 was further amended to permit the port industrial development levy to be extended up to six years beyond the six years allowed in the original act. The district must publish in one or more newspapers of general circulation the intent to levy. If eight percent of those voting in the last gubernatorial election petition against the levy then the proposition to levy the seventh through the twelfth year shall be submitted to the voters in accordance with RCW 29.70.200 and 29.13.070. The levy must be approved by a majority of those voting in the port district. The 106% levy limit is calculated in the seventh year (first year of the second six-year levy) continuing from the sixth year (last year of the first six-year levy) without lifting the 106% levy lid. See example on page 5. b PTB 83-5 Page 5 EXAMPLE: Last Year Rate Levy Amount Levy Type AV $100,000,000 $.35 $35,000 General Purpose 100,000,000 .30 30,000 Industrial Development 100,000,000 .15 15,000 Voted G. 0. Bonds $100,000,000 $.80 $80,000 Current Year 106% Calculation $50,000 Highest Prior Levy for General Purpose and Voted G. 0. Bonds x 1.06 $53,000 + 2,000 ($4,000,000 New Construction x $.50) + 1,000 ($2,000,000 from State Assessed Public Utilities r. $.50) $56,000 Highest Allowable Levy $130,000,000 Total AV Including New Construction 6 State Assessed Utilities $.4308 Maximum Levy Rate for All Type of Levies Excluding Port Industrial $30,000 Highest Levy for Industrial Development x 1.06 y $31,800 fj + 1,200 ($4,000,000 New Construction x $.30) j + 600 ($2,000,000 from State Assessed Public Utilities x $.30) $33,600 Highest Allowable Levy $130,000,000 Total AV $.2585 Maximum Levy Rate for Industrial Development The new maximum levy of $56,000 has a rate of $.4308 to be shared by all levy types, except port industrial, which will have a maximum levy of $33,600 and a rate of $.2585. An expired levy (excluding industrial) may be used for the remaining levy. The levy share allocated for general purposes (excluding bonds) cannot exceed the statutory $.45 rate. City Annexed by Fire and/or Library Districts Under RCW's 27.12.390 and 52.04.190, a city or town may levy up to $3.60 per $1,000 of assessed value when annexed to a fire protection and/or library district, provided that the 106% limit of RCW 84.55 shall still apply. The levy computations for the districts are outlined as follows: 1) Compute the fire protection district levy using the city assessed value as the district's annexation assessed value. The department's 1062 computation sheet provides the format for this calculation. '?•?':.;. , c'vn.„ ?5;??1°"9?!",?d't'??'E'.?:?.","g5 r?i".w.E.-?'?i"i??? ",'?i!.9?1?'???`?'?'+??? % 1 ti Page 6 PIS 83-5 b ove 2) Subtract the fire district's levy rate, arrived at in the a calculation, from the city statutory rate of $3.60. This $3.60, less the fire district's rate, is now the city's maximum levy rate allowed by statute without regard to the 106% limit. 3) Calculate the 106% limit for the city independent of the above calculations. 4) The levy rate for the city will be the lesser of the two rates calculated in 02 and 113 above. The fire district levy may be placed between the $3.60 and city's levy rate under the 106% limit without further reducing the city levy if the difference between these two levy rates is large enough. In future levy calculations for the city, the maximum levy allowed by statute will be computed the same as in 02 above. That is, as long as the city remains annexed by the fire district, the fire district's levy must be subtracted from the $3.60 rate. Each year this reduced levy must be compared to the maximum levy allowed under the 106% limit and the lower of the two rates adopted. The calculations for library districts annexing cities are the same as above. If both fire and library districts annex a city, then both of the districts' rates must be subtracted from the city's $3.60 to determine the the city rate under the Similarly statute d bl a , . e un er . maximum city rate allowa d . 106% limit is compared to this and the lower of the two is adopte 8 1 Proration of Earmarked Funds Chapter 155, Laws of 1980, states that cities and counties may reduce certain earmarked funds in the same proration as their regular property tax levies are reduced by the 106% limit. According to the wording of the statute, such reduction is optional on the part of the legislative body of the city or county - it is not required. The earmarked funds affected are the city maximum rate of 22-1/2C for the firemen's pension fund (RCW 41.16.060), the county 2-1/2C for mental health and retardation (RCW 71.20.110), and the county 1-1/8C to 27C for veterans' relief (RCW 73.08.080). Each of these rates are set forth in statute in different terms. The f firemen's pension fund levy rate of 22-1/20 is a maximum rate and if all o h e this levy is not needed to maintain the actuarial soundness of the fund, t tal remainder may be used for city general purposes. The 2-1/2C rate for men nds resulting from f th i u e s, health and retardation is an absolute rate. That The minimum of 1-1/8C and this rate must be used for this specific purpose. e wherein the veterans' relief levy may be adopted. ran th g e maximum of 270, sets The levies for mental health and retardation and veterans' relief are within the county current expense limit of $1.80/$1,000 and 106% calculation. ` !A FIB 83-5 Page 7 EXAMPLES $2.80 City Reduced Rate - Under 106% Limit 3.60 Statutory Rate .7777 Proration Rate $.225 Firemen's Pension Fund Maximum jjj x•7777 Proration Rate $.1750 Prorated Firemen's Pension Fund Maximum $1.50 County Reduced Rate - Under 106% Limit $ 1.80 Statutory Rate .8333 Proration Rate - $.01125 to $.270 Veterans' Relief Fund Rate/Range x.8333 x.8333 Proration Rate $.0094 to $.2250 Prorated Veterans' Relief Fund Rate/Range - $.025 Mental Health and Retardation Fund x.8333 Proration Rate $.0208 i, NOTE, These prorations will be made only when the city or county levies are reduced b th y e 106% limit. If the city or county voluntarily reduces its regular levy below that allowed u d n er the 106% limit, the provisions in this statute for reducing the earmarked levies d o not apply, Emergency Medical Services Levies •IC ' Although voter approved, the EMS Levy is defined as an "additional regular property tax levy (RCW 84 52 069) Th . . . e 106% limit will not apply to the EMS levy for the first assessment year following voter a pproval, but will apply for the next five years or until the next voter approval. If any EMS levy is a co t d id pprove un yw e, this levy replaces all EMS levies by other districts withi n the county. It will greatly simplify the 106% limit calculations if the EMS levy is com- puted separately. If this is done it il , w l avoid the difficulty of reducing the districts' levy if the EMS levy is pre-empted by the county or fails rea l pprova . ?",r' I ?` ? ,?.+:?r9,? ,?. .a'^a???;"?`+','"!ry.'x,?*,+w'tl'?'?1,•4'." ;,?'*",,,m?,?r.",a`i', r ,.. ?' r, , ' S. Page 8 PTB 83-5 t t f CALCULATION OF CONSOLIDATED LEVY RATE $9.15 Limit r The consolidated levy rate should be checked for compliance with the $9.15 f regular property tax limit. To calculate a consolidated levy rate to check against the $9.15 limit, the state school levy is added in at the rate used for the entire state. This is due to the fact that the entire state comprises the district, not the individual county. The EMS, port, and PUD levies are not subject to the limit, as well as, excess and bond levies. EXAMPLES: Inside City Outside City County Current Expense $1.7531 County Current Expense $1.7531 State School 3.2346 State School 3.2346 City 3.5546 Road District 2.1010 Metro Park .3743 Rural Library .4566 $8.9166 Fire District .9500 Metro Park .3743 1 $8.8696 In the above examples, the $9.15 limit was not exceeded. If this check had shown that the levy rates had exceeded $9.15, RCW 84.52.010 provides that the assessor shall first include for extension on the tax rolls the full lawful rates certified to him for state, county, county road districts, city and school district purposes. Then the remaining districts shall be reduced by such uniform - percentages as will bring the consolidated levy within the $9.15 limit. If a fire district is included, its levy will be reduced until the limit is achieved, or to 500 (RCW 52.16.130 and 140), whichever occurs first. If the fire district levy is reduced to 500 and the limit still exceeded, then all junior districts shall be reduced in equal proration until it is achieved. See example on page 9. Y r r.J ,.?r . !:i:':° .m't;?i",`:?..7 ?+:?„ ;?'"'R'?' , ,. ^+??r n...; ??• 77"? °8"' .h. ???v:i,?r 'iwa:?i?1?:s PTB 83-5 Page 9 EXAMPLE: Levy Rates Based on Original Certification s Actual State Schools $3.60 County Current Expense 1.80 i 1 i } County Roads 2.25 Fire District .95 Library District .45 Hospital District .65 Cemetery District 1125 Maximum Allowable $9.15 Total $9.8125 First to be Extended Actual Maximum Allowable F - State $3.60 $3.60 County Current Expense 1.80 1.80 County Roads 2.25 2.25 Remainder to be Extended $2.1625 $1.50 (E Adjustment Prorated Levy Fire (reduced to 50C) $.50 x .8759 .4380 Library .45 x .8759 .3942 Hospital .65 x .8759 .5693 pp Cemetery .1125 x .8759 .0985 t Total $1.7125 $1.5000 Adjustment Calculation F Maximum Available $1.50 .8759 Adjustment Factor Original Levy 1.7125 _ One Percent Limit The calculation of whether the regular property tax e xceeds 1% of the true and fair value is done in a different manner. To mak e this calculation, we must consider the average levels of assessment of real and personal property _ in the county. In our example, the real property ratio is 80%, and the personal property is 95%. The calculation includes the state schoo l levy at the rate to be applied to the local tax rolls, and excludes port, PUD, excess and bond levies. See examples on page 10. N" 14 7?'?gy,;,!1 v. Page 10 PTB 83-5 EXAMPLE: Inside City Outside City F County Current Expense $ 1.7531 County Current Expense $ 1.7531 State School 4.7791 State School 4.7791 City 3.5546 Road District 2.1010 Metro Park .3743 Rural Library .4566 $10.4611 Fire District .9500 Metro Park .3743 $10.4141 r Since the 1% limit is in reference to true and fair value rather than local assessed value, the effective tax rate should be calculated and compared to the 1% limit. To calculate the effective tax rate, multiply the above con- f solidated levy rates by the respective real and personal assessment ratios: Inside City $10.4611 Local Levy Rate $10.4611 Local Levy Rate x .80 Real Property Ratio x .95 Personal Property Ratio $ 8.3689 Effective Rate $ 9.9380 Effective Rate Outside City = $10.4141 Local Levy Rate $10.4141 Local Levy Rate x .80 Real Property Ratio x .95 Personal Property Ratio $ 8.3313 Effective Rate $ 9.8934 Effective Rate j In the above examples, the 12 limit is not exceeded on the true and fair value even though it is exceeded on local assessment values. The different y effective tax rates for real and personal property were considered and approved by the State Supreme Court in Sator at al vs Department of Revenue. If the 1% limit had been exceeded, the same procedure would be used to reduce the levy $ to l%, as is used for the $9.15 limit. State School Levy The state levy certified to the county by the Department of Revenue will exclude the amount which will be collected through the timber excise tax. When calculating the rate necessary to raise the state levy total from the assessed r?. "Pa value of the county, do not include the timber roll. To do so will result in an r - under-collection of the total levy. Assessors Authority to Determine the 106% Levy Limit Chapter 223, Laws of 1983, states that the county assessor is required to determine the maximum levy rates for all intracounty taxing districts and is , f .r ? _ , , ? > .r t??,h'Nf?tl"ra??1°?"i,?."'I?i?Y??i"-" ..7'? `!?t??? ';i?5 ?? ?k ???'f???'?i?l?1.q'?n ,. - _271 PTB 83-5 Page 11 given the authority to insure that the maximum rate is not exceeded. The Department of Revenue shall determine the maximum state levy rate and inter- , county library districts shall determine their own maximum rate after con- sulting with the assessors in the respective counties. -«- Included in this bulletin is a revised form for calculating the 106% limit and levy rates, and a revised taxing district levy list. f :f i F: : F7 . >. N c w VI 0 u E m - N C IJ G U 'M •M C L J-1 • a7.1 d 7 N G G T C a0+ 3? N f w u t ub E Gm m r 0 F ,. yUj N '00 c •O N 0 'O N N E E e ro L > p C2 U N O y u N 3 0 0 N ,y O Y 0 m U w w c N r 01 C c u Y J 0 1 c O O U L c it •.1 m ? O M aJ Y 'M c O N N Y Y w A > Ci N xri . r•1 N ^I O 'O 01 c W I N N > Y > W O O u N U N O 0.0 s E N M 0 U N Z O' Y 0 c lTi W O b C b N w N U ` Y ro 0 0 c t E N N> T O ?1 O N •.1 M O/ 01 0 E ++ al W c N T O W C i Q c c 0 O N 01 o E o N 01 W L o u W O E u a r u O •ti .. S -1 W u u y N X y 7 U X: N 3 C p ; w R u\ D m i N N w O 0 w L > v- 0 ? 0 . al N r0 a1 w A ... Z 30 N W O C u T E O W E T ol N •.1 N .c N 3 •N .-1 N 0 C t •.1 c •.1 O T 'a 1 w 3 ' 'O 7 O C O •.1 01 Q N u M 'O 3 m E E 0 al x a+ T m E . O ? v N P t aG Ed L y yi . E O 1 1 b i 0 b T O N 0 6 > A 4 E u y LD N O E c t E>1 0 b N r W F 0 .-I al . 7 O > D O 7 0] F E '00 u .0 j 0 . 0 o 0 0 o rl o o r, o 0 - N O N N O O O O O O m Q 1D v r 10 N ul 10 1n O M N ut 10 ti 1') ,? u O 01 .ti N O N .-1 .-1 Q 111 N Q M1 10 1 ' p ..1 .•I Y N Y N N N M M N ? _ v u Q, Itr 01 ol U. a, w w w n ? ? a w z a w a w a a w a a a I u 4 4 O O U Ill 4 Ill ? O N N N M1 1+1 111 M1 N N O m N N - OI M1 N H N ? C 1 N . •L - N O rl rl ° ? 4 ? c c r c O 0 L Y c c c O w 0 U u u mN F U (O j U M N C N M 0c1 i Y u u . - H O Y N O 'p 4 W aJ O M N G. x N a N 0 'O . , O 0 ro c J j C 8 N L y Q) w U) ® W p V Y V c y u M L Y Y O .•7 •.? 8 d Y N M y Y u 6 G G 4. s s u Y a a M u O PAa rI 'r t}fiN?f<Rth)l"IT? ?i 77 7"r .'t?.r.,. IS;. ;1.. 4Q f i ?l 1 "-i ? m I .-I O N W C 0 y w y'O O "I y A . 7 ? U c e q o ro O m E ? 0 W ? N w - ?. i a m E 'O w u i u + v a 'O O N O! W w tir 7 M N N C N y W N N " y •A 'O C p > - N Yi M Cl E T N N am 0 N N ' U 'O U N . O y W -, Y N J W w E W N O m w 'O N M W b C + m t O N l N • W ,0 d m + . A w 6 O T d 3 w d s W y o X o m w > E a T a N y N U 'O M L a A L M M w C C m M y W m W M O .y W y C d N > 7 CL N G O o T ?O O G L C 0 w .•, s i p d N O d U r Y > r ' y 0 .A 7 N f p W N ? ~ N O y C N G C N N d d y C C > W X .-I .1 d O 3 O b C U a C L 7 M N A O OA N N O N N y O O N 7 N O C m w A N 1 u O Y 3 lO O Y WO .N C d Y N C Q t O w s u? N A L i V W E •A O w D u w >> V. C F y b OR N O> JI N ' 0 C T N -OI . 6 w 7 Q A R A w . .. ib O w u • CI O " j O .+ .A W . p b y N O W ' O d 'O L C . O N U i w . y O Ol G . 1 N • 13 7 b d r N O. ,p W .•, w r O M N N d L b T . . Z U . L L !J b 'O V A u y U C b W O U M Y O a G O ti .bl b . ~ N y... ro w, O O 7 . : V O C E1 O S7 I 7 u W G ?O •A .C U V 3 M x m 41 3 L N O y W w m ti O w N w v y t . A T dy y b C O O d O O M O + W ? O U r O N .•1 a! E W M C T •A N 'O 1] 'O N O. O ^J O 'O 7 ?-I W z 4) y? •p 3 'O N C O c w N N O 0.. O 7 w N C £ 7 N 7 7 7 Q7 y . [0 L b W M Gp maw A t W N W W U OO C r w i? ° o ° v p, ^ ^ o 0 0 0 o o ° ° ,t .? N + u N N N N N M n co o n v ° N + N c 1 19 r r 10 10 co 10 1 ' j a „? m r r co N > Z M ? ? b ,p b N 1 W U 7 u rn a, m u ' T a m u a a v a a In a O y 4 4 w 4 4 it N N N ?!1 N m \ N. O V` N ,D N O O N N .a O O r •I 1 G x w y G C N w 7 C C C C ti T o N u Ir C 6 > y y M u O C > O Ui A M a V /?' a .A N M rl •a d M M Y y N O N O m y d IE H N C d M O O N tJ C y ... T T N O H m O M O 7 U 7 U '? N J ? U? A ? N N L b ?! L wp ,'7 'D O w y w > 4 > A b ° 15 ?. ? w a K ¢ a f w s . .I " ?? ? ' '? n !m tr ?. 4?*" ? ? f 71?" .Z;'F!Qv .v ? r i ,.. . n>t •. „ ,. , ?.up__:: SSL..•.f.•. ••r rr•.? i? ? r •?il ' ?? {d •. N 1% ...` _ .??.« .... .-.-.i .?.. _-.. _, ... ..,..... r_...itivn.... ?..?_ ..•? _ y ?d '.? N O v. E b v?v vwv Y > U •0 > U 0> O t N O\ , - j w O N H O 4 C O k Y 01 U N N X Y W v A7 N Y U A •--1 N N Ol .-1 N N . O W -A w -M Y Y Y •M Y Y O Y M U C M ? O Ol N W T N Y U O i u C •N O E U C •N ..1 C N U 7 01 •N 7 U ll O) a .f ' ' O Ol N? N .y L N Y N fy N Y T > E W N Y o W E ? k O. > ? U •-1 T N .-I T N Ol O N O y •M O .-1 •p - L ? •M Y •O c .•? •M 4 3 o m v -M N •M 3 O •d H O N o •O ••1 A r/a y ' o. o v c m Y Y .-? Y v\„ .M .ti ? L U U N •M O U Y 7 M •1 Y 01 Y 7 N H Y •--f N N L U f0 4 .. ? O N 4 O O! i0 L Ol i0 L N Y \ 4 N Y IO N N N W C N. U O L O d N W Y Y A N O W V Y ? N O •N d f11 4 ? 0) C 7.a, N W y 0 01 r A Z O T > u Y 7 N \ b TO L T R7 L O C O O O O yp - ? H F ? k O •N > A ti N Y .-I C Y C N •M .-1 C Y C 16 •M L O G> •N G 0> b y Y ti 'O N T Y O ,0 •O O 3 1 O 3 'O O 'O Ol •--1 N O) N O . 0 M A C N N •- O NO .-1 O N b d O t N 0 L 0 Y H L W Y •O' U O W Y O O W •O T QI Y U 01 „ C O O C Ol C Ol •N O C N N -N U O f0 •M L > 01 4 > > O X Y w O > • M OJ Y A > •.1 ./ O) Y ,q \ .-1 4 A O X T 01 A • T Y •C A C Ol U N •N a 4 Y 0 U 0 O 0 f -f > Y .1 ^J E Y O I-1 7 E Y O ,0 ul Y >,,a C > w O U O1 •O C E u w O Y 3 U O •M T s+ T d O N N O 0 G L 0 •? U Y O U NO > •M N X> •N Y w 1 Y . L 0 O Y A N C A.Y N C O! O1 O O Y M U N 0 O L W }. U la-C Y Z X y U U T T C Ol T C Ol w u T W 01 N Y O. y 7 N O - W C71 ••1 •.? N b N O w A X W N T E A N O L E U 3 N O A E U 3 O X W O) C d ti Q n7 01 N O W •-1 Q C A m •.1 m v i O . 0 O O O 0 m m Q ID O? 10 N QI e•1 N N Q N .O ti 10 l0 .•I N 10 Q Q V• O r•I N .N•1 Ffy C4 w m m ut N O O n 00 r N r N r N t Y y ? R ?0 n7 N A N N A' O H V w '? fT 7 O. 7 O O O+ 7 O+ 7 O. 7 O+ 7 T ^J S . .1 7 IT A Ol O . 7 bl a w v a a a v a v a v a U a v a % a a r a a c ., v a ??v'?• O O 4 tO 4 V1 Y1 4 O u O u O u O V 10 4 VI 4 4 4. f O N N N u O V N U O Ln y N f ? V ? u M 1 N w ? T lop Y Y O F Y N C N q Y U Y U M u O aU O U •. i •. i U N u 4 M N 4 d S M w •.Ui w N N p N • 4> Y N 4 N O p C C K o-Ci "? 9r O C T N u u N Y ..1 .•n O O 4 U y p •'? O O O N N 4 N 1 _ u? w Y C w 4 m 01 N 0 A • d q i 01 ? N w V ; 4 w Y w N ° N •4 ~i ? A y c i . x i H a a a k . • ,~ Y . ' .,. . ?/q ifs:i.N'.rJ.. '?Jh '? N?T»+.?.. 07T' -q as: ?'" :i i;' ; IT?ri i,?4F4?, .e• yrt. i??3 `-'°;?" "`a°'+ u iv ?a '?'rw f,i? ? : p J „ ? C H oay .?-? V ,0 N T T C E w 0 c U H d 7 A 0 7 C C C E H •'? L T ' ' 'O d d T +? d a a 0 b t Y Y N 0 H R7 •? W Y N F 0 Y O Y > C - + > N E p ti N c w O Y d N Y d > d 0 O> Y N N ` 7 •? C A ,0 N •N O ,0 0 ' • L d L Q= u U d C •M aJ O •O > O H H ••a d H d d o O E c p Y C L nl L ? all O +? Y L N L c 0 d a a O N Y d F 'O Y d I Y N A O U d - •2 0 0 d w c u - ,p L O Y N Y> 7 'O d F 0 •'y M O Y 7 N T Y 'p O - - . - d N F vi A Y ..1 d a O ?-4 Y 0 C a O d A N d H O A u Y a d c 'O •M L 0 M Y d ' .1 N L 'O F T + N c T O A d F U> ••? N d 'O N c N L .-1 .•1 c 7 N d .1 O N> 'O'C .Y N 7 Y N d O d . c - . ' $ M Y d ? O •.i a O a> U O •ti Y d .O 7 C ti 0 Y 7 Y w F >v E O I Y A O Y u Y p 7 d U O N w .y ' •• > H 'O O H 0 d 'O - C > d L •N Y> In 7 d 7 d ' C •ti a •.? i U E d d d A K Y [ d d o 'O 0 H •.1 O Y H r >r E 0 ti O a c N •• a c ••? N d > Y [ [ _ E Y >. d 4 •M d •-1 F L > d Y T N N a W d U •y Y O 0 •+ a O T ••? tLG E N C Y Y 'O O •.y • C a O L 7 4 A O U •M L N w d H 0 • E N a E N L c . 2 7 O G L W w 0 a d O c O 0 u m .a 0 c a m E H d 0 .. ° L O 0 ••1 a t0 C O d F c d d N d .0i ` C 0 0 ••I M O b W c c m c •.i Y 0 a .•? 7 d N Q ,p i0 d N N W O L Y F F U U N ' N d H C ••1 N •M T > H A T N ••? O ••? > CS w O T L N O W •H Y d •••1 Y 0 W W Y 3 X d C1 O C N N d d • 'O ^+ N A % O p d w U 0 U w O 'O W 'O N C N 7 w d U c O d d C c H H •a O d L N •N N L m Y N.L a W C 0 C •.1 % 7 T O w d, - d L c •ti N X Ct W 'O •-I Y F c 0 W Y 0 C d L d C . >O N R 7 d N O N •'I T. d p, N C d O H d a O L> > U d d T L E O T L n7 M "tu. p4 d •O 0 d U m d N M Y Y W C w > d W O b x Y 7 a F u N F d ••? T Y U 'O Y? u A Y N % Y d •ti r•1' M d O 0 L M ••? E d b E d F 'O b '•? Y ••+ O 4 7 b d ••? N Y Z w E d > d C N d T L E ? M T Y Y d 0 L W d T d o 0 d> H 0 0 m 'd t ( 9 U l ? d? O .? N E W . i £> Q. O a 0 . + .0 O 0 a a 0 Y - ti ? O O O N O -I O O O O N O r O O t0 O O? O R O N N . N ? v O O ? N m co 9 co a, co 10 X11 t[1 I(1 N N t0 l0 f•1 l?l 1•'1 f?l 3 -3 U Q to , to r r N r 10 rt to t't to rf to nt to C co r? rt .? .-I t n ' ? N - .-I N r•1 L N 'V H H L Q () a v U U $ o U w U w t U a U o 7 a U w t v W K U) U) N V1 a , N , N 5 V7 C O U O V N N U N 4. ? tort ' N ' . O t p N r [I' C a M N M ~ ~ N O N .. W S S ~ Y a 4 4 Y Y Y 4 C N c to C C C U U ? A a Y O Y 0 U U Y C: 5 • 4 L L G ' ~ Y ? Y O O N 1 • 'O 'O Y N Y M Y M . O >? L p p O, 4 O, V •.~i Yi p a q 0 ,0 O G G w 4 p o p M a L a c' c M Y c X Y Y Y - q L Y 4 Y N N Y H H Q L ° L p 4 H a a S UO ° 3c a w a 0. ,? ?"! .M i AVW+.?r•Al2*G?' 1 r•A1?:ff 't__'f:'?t?j+??I ?',.V'v:; lit 1.{,-MMi h .,!i?1iwA R'f*1iW' _ /hH'• - . , +, ti. I 1•i O c 0 O 04 C i0 t" p A y [E { N N W G O M W ?. • t+ N. 'O 9 O T N pp N O N O N ? - rr t. a N O Y fa •.+ w N O - C { W . O b N C W O M 'p 7 M 7 O1 A N 4 N N O N C W Ul N E G .-1 E a 01 N X Vyl 'M O N Y W U O C - m 0 y V N W W y 3 m> E T u N ; E Y .? y v u >, v b 'O L a a ti M C c•. i O 'O .Ti A OM .0 v O TA w N N u N O L r Q, O 01 C ro W O) 'N ?.C N N O C' 0 01 Ol W 1Oi - 0 TL U E T V G V N W ? O a > > w 10 O1 O C O N W M N d ..qj CO > H O M W O U 11 •M m E N •M 4 1 O 01 1r W 01 O 0! O W ~ Y N a N G N N z ' a v m c c m" o V w w r>i w N x M E Y x •G O O0 C O O N W O N w -.I E u D O u N N E O N •.? m Y F O N b F E - C t? Q O ^'I p to M O O O ? Q ti to m O O .-I O N C vl u i E m r?i n m ? ? '. v 0 > k ? I F .r a rv z x. °' w N m a rn a y N N Yl ? V N V M N ? V •y N O N W V ? e O 4 Y vi .., u •. j > 4 N d N 4 11 ? .? . y W O D U "? N D Q 4 3 9 M M u a° a a N N m N x S E-11117=117-1 .111 Ill .s oc3 t.5 `°`°» 3?^ Tc mo`o? s?, -J T ?j ?? m x E - ? ? o .m. ? u•? P N ur??A i. q q ° ? ? O N •5 o„ 'psi '? ?[ T P7 S n xY o_ ? E? $?•o ?i , r?=e• 'S ?.., H ar-4 uW9°1q51n '??a 39 "Rim T ?? •Q O T F? ? 'O }? $ u .n G q ° 'O O C t O 6? O G 6 G u p° '? "? N L D .. y,• L L F .2 P u r!r? N N ` VIA H® P p, °° S F a'C P°. 9 C •D t N u 5 T C g O ?? O S ? :a'. u T '? S .-? •^E10 SQ oD V-°nG ?S ?o? go'c ?" ??`??APm ea°o`•c c'o2 tt?°T s?q?o ? Ga,y VI N •a u z C u r ° L u ry. u L .r°. G a ?' p C Y aC iu A G O O .° •O RI P" V •a m Y O ._ t cd 4 Y P q ?O '? O rm °oS3°a$'o d F.?..D zp D°°•aO?-T•.ctlovY°: ",? •a ..Wa.? •O?°pm° YL s?^5o35_+rn'S 5?uvti ?•°O°S RI??'O f`?• 6 y .i ? ??.5 'OD ?? Y.d ,q0 "tr q A.O '...uY•' L7YW ?YD C ?'P q • a ° m > C N, a 3 >: F? `0 3 .?, c L " 5N, y "• •° ? ? u q c°. ?s a O .° 9 S 9 t? D C ri q,a C WC E C . p "??9 ?$ m ?cua Ys?Y'a3 2? 'Cu ° `L5 k 4P .?.?°qg q9" e?? :a E c° >?M?c?E DY•??..ap •G `?Z to^=°-. #?m - iti?t Ti3 'ohsi o$°`o •??2x? oos?o'-op.c a1 ?'d? •'a?? C'??`? •?3o B•..?wD Pw D'J ..•.^.. m_P_? ?F ?.. ?a ?`+MP u°$S nEu `o t!i •?v c`S r? -0 VC V: ]go H2-11 it HIS DPW 5P_Z.: G.. C•5 'mac Z!' ail T° 5?8?: r€ sS• vY?pG? '?,°t7^ . 6 3 y q > a ? '? K D ? r L 3 n 8 >: p .5 - r L ..'Wil ?. i'v .b ea°7.R ' t9 mogc ? .?o Kb';?ccmg°.c ffi•?u °'_ €_l na u'ri .. ,[ i :' ¢ y 5 ?' •9 ey °o 'a5i ° P ; ? 9 .? ..? :Y '? q ? 3 '° ? ?Np `C" p t 5 5 O' y G 3 P C 00 m P. p O t y N S Y q C N? F a Y 9 ?. " , b y - r, ,., °,. g o 0 3 5t 9 .c t Y; q •O O D ^ N ...? o$. D q 0 •C VY yy >`o ..S"•3 ?rP °'C3 ?„ 3•. 'J.v•?' Yl Wit. ,.,s 7? ? ? 8? .?T° ? E 5??•5? .g: ?y.oy Ygggm•2 ?Y m 6?g.? t?s 3 td i ?, Y+?'d6 ? Pl?~,y?.a n°?D.S??P.t?.. ?rS??t?i7 ?a???i?•r?ye°6i pe. '?,v ?? + a'? ^. ?_. :a. .??T Yb S3o? ?t6LO'CL°c. °??EiOtcLO??ah YS cnEc? P ?h t a9??"s??e „'s3.??? r?i?'c?n'S'nffi •5go9aD'km r , •?.. - aiy 9?..o9b C$G FN'?r9s uSq FGOe t fir. ?, ,jy ? ?'n*"J lm.' ? ti $ ? 9 ? •°a ? a ? a 9 o ti O tl ?? q ° ° ? ? s ? ? ? L ? ° . 1n p?? u c y, 3.Op5 ., o?s?' u ra .S a ??' R ? _ , ' 1 $ ,y P rJ• ? •3 ' e V O y O?? 1.. O O P q q Y u d ? $ tp tl oSg Ana Fno.dQSmPO?q cR5?r3?t??EU' ?.•. ,Y ^\`? `l `l1 ?OO ?' gay, •ct°a'go'o,?p?Ys asTy$`P ? i 6,4x 0 S ,? °b °°•°rtor?a o '? ?:1. 4i ??S'?`.tae•?q?'.?°??NAWN&I :2.c? •? - ;?'. 1. ",g a q ° ' < $ ? p Y > a `'b Z y ? A .r _q? WPM, All a, \? q5 SFYS Y? t>'C>'?' r tr '' i• 9. s a b S i$ r 8 2 6 '• 9 .8 R. S q o , ?,•,'•,? nun'., ,?b9 ` a J?•?i 5 ?-' ?"?° ??:,?,`??m?me? ?•j?=s?? ?;?e? ?? Bo$ ? ri?S ? qp 9`o??ec (5G"0 "'°`o?. SS n ? d `? ? ? y L'I q G.Y ? PEI i Yo 8jg ffi P3 M 9 ° r 6`??`i?35`0gQram?bysq???pDy? a ;•?, 53`0D 8 m °`0 ,7 a "".•.3 X75 .. 'g oil; MCA m ? ?°?99o5t?=G;d?3o; ?'. "^ ?? ? ?. ??yy+3oA? ggX2`s?l?Sc ? L ??ggp?3g^??t'S%,? ?q ^4 a`?E ?mgaa $: zd5°°° ?Yy6iI i oS?5 5 ?litIli11 F w q s iC „1? ;?? ?? ? P ? F i r."^1r ?,•w??a;71'?l;?.r?+?,.?'?.? r,??a?",rv rare-r?? 11 +- i ?• J i ; x , Y • RESOLUTION NO. 94-84 1' ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COUNTY WIDE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT ?. WHEREAS, on the 19th day of November, 1984, in regular meeting, the Board of County Commissioners upon their own motion unani- mously passed Resolution Number 83-84 initiating the creation of i" the County-Wide Flood Control Zone District in accordance with ac, R.C.W. 86.15.010, et seq., and; ' WHEREAS, there is a need for Jefferson County to sponsor United States and State of Washington Flood Control Projects as author- i ' ized through any agency with powers to handle the same, and; . notice of a public hearing of the intent of the Com- WHEREAS , missioners to establish the County-Wide Flood Control Zone Dist- rict was given, made and published as provided by law, said hear- ing was held on the 17th day of December, 1984, at the hour of T t1 2:00 P.M. in the Commissioners chambers located in the Jefferson M County Courthouse, Port Townsend, Jefferson County, Washington, the date and place fixed by such Resolution and Public Notice for said hearing, and; t M ` WHEREAS, all persons attending said public hearing were given the r. opportunity to be heard and comment on the establishment of said D t i t d th C i i fi d h id Di i y; ` is r c an e omm ss oners n t at sa str ct should be y!, established and that it is in the best interest of the County and the general public health, safety, benefit, welfare, and economic development and use, and to protect public roads, facilities and y ti „- environment; n NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners does hereby establish the County Wide Flood Control Zone District which shall be and is hereby designated and named the "Jefferson County Flood Control Zone District" for the pur- pose of planning, engineering, constructing and maintaining flood and stormwater control facilities; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said District shall have all the powers, authorities and duties provided in R.C.N. 86.15, et seq., and any and all amendments, changes or alterations thereto or laws pertaining to such, and including provisions as herein pro- vided. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Boundaries of said Jefferson County Flood Control Zone District be described as follows; Commencing at the middle of the channel of Admiralty Inlet due north of Point Wilson; thence westerly along the Strait of Juan de Fuca to the north of Protection Island, to a point opposite the middle of f !_?.... .. ... 4 ."?ekl4 iW? c .. ?' _ ?. .' "J,.K... nV1t _..._:^`?. . _ ?.S4"?F'___ .,.-P? ,... _ ., acs.. .e ON ..C ri . . the channel between Protection Island and Diamond Point on the west of Port Discovery Bay; thence fol- lowing up the middle of said channel to a point di- rect east of the mouth of Eagle Creek; thence west to the mouth of Eagle Creek; thence one mile west from the mouth of said creek; thence south to the summit of the Olympic range of mountains, it being the southeast corner of Clall am county, on the north boundary line of township twenty-seven north, range two west; thence west to the west boundaryof the state in the Pacific Ocean; thence southerly along said west boundary to a point opposite the mouth of m the Queets River; thence east to the range line di- viding ranges six and seven west; thence north on said range line to the sixth standard parallel; thence east to the middle of the channel of Hood Canal; thence northerly along said channel to the middle of the channel of Admiralty Inlet; thence a northerly following the channel of said inlet to a point due north of Point Wilson and place of begin- ning. Excepting all portions laying in the incorporated City of Port Townsend. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the area described herein incorporate any and all watersheds located in said described boundaries; ADOPTED this 21? gay of 1984. r .., JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS B. G. Brown, Chairman John L. Pitts, Member H} a enr son, Member L w;'I a Attest: er ne Br g?.? ,CTerk of the Dotr? ' I 1, x 2 r RESOLUTION NO. 94-84 7k' .` ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COUNTY WIDE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT ` WHEREAS, on the 19th day of November, 1984, in regular meetin, g the Board of County Commissioners upon their own motion unan i- mously passed Resolution Number 83-84 initiating the creation of the County-Wide Flood Control Zone District in accordance with r R.C.W. 86.15.010, et seq., and; WHEREAS, there is a need for Jefferson County to sponsor United States and State of Washington Flood Control Projects as author- ized through any agency with powers to handle the same, and; WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing of the intent of the Com- missioners to establish the County-Wide Flood Control Zone Dist- rict was given, made and published as provided by law, said hear- ing was held on the 17th day of December, 1984, at the hour of 2:00 P.M. in the Commissioners chambers located in the Jefferson County Courthouse, Port Townsend, Jefferson County, Washington, the date and place fixed by such Resolution and Public Notice for said hearing, and; WHEREAS, all persons attending said public hearing were given the opportunity to be heard and comment on the establishment of said District and the Commissioners find that said District should be established and thdt it is in the best interest of the County and the general public health, safety, benefit, welfare, and economic development and use, and to protect public roads, facilities and environment; may' NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners does hereby establish the County Wide Flood Control Zone District which shall be and is hereby designated and named the "Jefferson County Flood Control Zone District" for the pur- pose of planning, engineering, constructing and maintaining flood and stormwater control facilities; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said District shall have all the powers, authorities and duties provided in R.C.W. 86.15, et seq., and any and all amendments, changes or alterations thereto or laws pertaining to such, and including provisions as herein pro- vided; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Boundaries of said Jefferson a County Flood Control Zone District be described as follows; Commencing at the middle of the channel of Admiralty Inlet due north of Point Wilson; thence westerly along the Strait of Juan de Fuca to the north of Protection Island, to a point opposite the middle of 3 ? 267w- PIRX*77: Lt usY ?? r ?$ ?k5 9 a K' d6AMLt ? , ? t ? ?f? ? ? ?i?nfY??? ? ? f flax y ? a } S 7,y. 4 1. , 1 1 ?1 I xy - 11 a i ?, 't{I ?? t , e ?1 _ , 4 V 1 n z ? ?, Ij r ?" 'a ri gg a' the channel between Protection Islan and Diamond Point on the west of Port Discovery Bay; thence fol- lowing up the middle of said channel to a point di- rect east of the mouth of Eagle Creek; thence west to the mouth of Eagle Creek; thence one mile west from the mouth of said creek; thence south to the summit of the Olympic range of mountains, it being the southeast corner of Clallam county, on the north] boundary line of township twenty-seven north, range two west; thence west to the west boundaryof the a state in the Pacific Ocean; thence southerly along }} said west boundary to a point opposite the mouth of - 5' the Queets River; thence east to the range line di- t F$ viding ranges six and seven west; thence north on said range line to the sixth standard parallel thence east to the middle of the channel of Hood o Canal; thence northerly along said channel to the middle of the channel of Admiralty Inlet; thence northerly following the channel of said inlet to a ' point due north of Point Wilson and place of begin- ning. s..j. Excepting all portions laying in the incorporated City of Port Townsend. xV BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the area described herein incorporate any and all watersheds located in said described boundaries; ° ADOPTED this /,L&ay of [+ 1984. e' .J JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS B. 0. Brown, Chairman John L. Pitts, Mem er y "{ r g 99 99 1?1y? I Larr enn f? m Attest:\ er ne r uNitr? , & Clerk of the Body 2 - VALUE Java e oPE" yACe Feoe4,a C. - I ITKrr- i-ANo COVNT-V - WIIJ - EX cwOW& crry Q QE kl f 48,411 A,- 18% 8se IA.c 9.49, 5,41 . Pad J,_a8??8.l0 0 io0yo - A$5mv VA(-,;II (o Z7.7 mIJ.. 15.3 mIL. '• d -,• (043 o rtrte 97.4 / 2.4% 0 % 100/ QU IL CE,J E 5Ll13-ZONE ARE.KI 970 A c. I 1 ,?O F o, 6-0,040 !90. 52, Zoo Ac. 2.3 /Onr . ,455:5E0 V41; 6.0 mac 0, / MIL - O- 6.! m??. 98.4 i B RINn/0A/ -- 5U8- ZONE EA i' 560 roc. 4,871 Ac 69, f&I R, '74,900 A 0 uj (0.5 92.7% /00°0 ii l i5f5FD VAL. i 2.5 mac 0.6 rmt B3.3 % l(o.7 % /00% r i ' A r Crow . N J rf i ?9 ? ! rLyµµ ""S f 7 i I I, r JEFFERSON COUNTY COURTHOUSE NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON -NEW& Jefferson County Department of Public Works M COURTHOUSE -:k PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON 98368 505 ! 7 - ' TEL. (206)385-3 GARY A. ROWE, DIRECTOR s y, r - $ . i1 February 7, 1986 Jerry Louthain, Supervisor Floodplain Management - Department of Ecology Mail Stop PV-11 Olympia, Washington 98504-8711 Re: Approved Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Grants Dear Mr. Louthain: Enclosed are the two originals of the executed agreements for the " following project: '- County Project Name Total Estimated Priority Applicant and Description Protect Cost 2 Jefferson Co. Rock Creek Rip-Rap $20,000.00 The Port Townsend Beach Restoration Project, County Priority Number 1, City of Port Townsend Applicant, was withdrawn by the City of Port Townsend on October 2, 1985 ( copy of letter enclosed ). Additionally, in accordance with WAC 173-145-030(5) a copy of the Jefferson County Public Works' 1986 Budget is enclosed. There is no "Line Item" for Flood Control Projects in the budget, however funds for flood control are included in the Maintenance and Construction portions of the budget. If you need any further information do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, t, Robert G. Nesbitt County Engineer Eno. xc:FLO 06.10 FLO 03-90" PWA 112 's ''r t ' ?Y ter ?; _ ?? WE ? ?? .a H .'NR? !5 t+ s?-S54?'i?'1?r . y? r,1-;fit i? Stu s.. 1 ft.. ?,' FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM FCAAP PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant 1 6 f? •`(: r: 19 Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) gy 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment Access Repair RANK. 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X F L 0 03. TU FLOOa COrVT/CC L r{56r% /Uc0itAd-r Pe r,?Laoc-1 C FCA4101 ?u. ham, ,C i d ,?. •ft '? + 1 ?- 1 1 , Fc;i .x}Pd?Yt ^w{ 'IV'rt W •i";T r M nr k ????ti h ?r ti?c4r? +r^ ? ? .i ri ,? ,iV „i{7,, " Y}'I? , t . e ? ? ? 1t9 4 N,1 r r ? ` 4 k ? I . 4 F 5 t ? ? t r =.?f ? - ' - k i GCE, 4 M ? ` ` FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Yk w iPW ''Sty f Project Name Applicant s , m Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet 7 PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING sri? Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 %_ - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 ». y Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = r ' small streams (0-1000 cfs) larger streams (greater than 1000 5 6 7 cfs) 8 9 10 r_ ' B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 , - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 - - PB Total a PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK w Channel Capacity 9 - Dike Repair g Y - Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control Debris Removal 5 ' Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 4 P8 Total x Work Activity Value Project Total x = Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public - Number of People Involved . Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = small streams (0-1000 cfs) . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence RATING - 67891D as r h 5 6 7 8 5 6 7 . - 9910 567 1. - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7.8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment- 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X k , 7 15-1 f 1 V. ? ? ,! 4? ? i L T 1 ' i` f ?r ry? ' y + ? 41(1".f Vi , I 'I. i ? R ° i Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram . Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 '^y - Number of People Involved 4 5 67 8 - - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) `. A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) S 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8*9 to B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal influence -. 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK . ?. Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 - Channel Alignment 7 } Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value > Project Total x v I'!tr '; '"''k';?lu?>' r??JY 7 r$.'', u ? " ?PdMr,?? to °Yh`VItY7r+t u n "t?tl'?'e' ors. .?"'".lkT? .. t .. 7 +RTifPr,TL', •. + ry 1 t ? i , ? n e r I? I l 1 k y t ! 9 :np i{ r t ?rt 1 `. - r;a 1? 1f! 3r, 11 ', ?? $ 1n r t t f? _ I { I 1 4 FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name r Applicant S. lr Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program - Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet ; .a'. PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 $ 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 $ ,^??•- - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) ; A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8,9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - i D sruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity y Dike Repair $ Channel Alignment - ] Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal '. Vegetation Management j Flood Control Machinery L Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X = 'TA Q i?1?1 b NA WR£aF" f , !del M"f 1R f4F"2? f)144 r ?G tb !? 7 r? P , ? ? F ?1 1Q{ } +' r A , k t MM ? t rF r. .a 1 r tW ? ' - - r mac' r w 1 ILL FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION .• Project Name _ Applicant - - ' Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program x Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet i PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, 1 - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) 1 ' A - Riverine Flooding • small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 " Disruption of Public Services 0 12 3 5 6 7 B 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment. 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair I PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X ?t1. y 77 .a? s r,?- m i 9 c a4 ell _ is '?.n " FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION A Project Name _ Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - '7 - - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 ,x, Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - -? - Water Quantit Co trolled (S lect A B) y n e or A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 _ ' , t larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B- Coastal Flooding/Tidal influence 9 to 8 5 6 7 fi - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total ? a. PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery F, Equipment Access Repair RANK PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total - X t, PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = small streams (0-1000 cfs) 56 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8'9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK. Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 - Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total m x Fri ` ti r sy i; ?Lf CS f. x FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant S Flood Control Assistance 8ES299ty Program + Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet I• ° _ + _ ?fy PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING H' ` - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 i ' itt 1 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 Y - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - - . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6.7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - Access Repair RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X s' 3 .Y3 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment• Erosion Control Debris Removal - Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery & Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 X Tr }} S;T aka! aAnW iM1A . -r? n ANT r YfS I cF r s -?d ? 3 L ? erp ? ? ? -' i ?w1 3uHx?rr`kns' FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating 'Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION ' Project Name ¢ c. .,- Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet y PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING r - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 i - Number of People Involved b 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) 'u A - Riverine Flooding = b . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8,9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 k4 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 eF A5 z. _ PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 ly Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery L Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total = X _ may. vap _ i., ? e 1 .1 t ?1. FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name "a Applicant a Pe, , .- ti Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATIN(', a Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 -?` ,' - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 x• i Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 56 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total 4. PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK ? - l Channel Capacity 9 A Dike Repair 8 - Channel Alignment. 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X k01rW`VJV[0 d" 7+ 21W N&I - x Ak,° &t ' Ik"kAYAda T ?,i NK r is i?l ? 1 N t 1 ? 1 I ' _ Y? Y;. .I FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet i ti JS PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment. 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X = wv 9 ni SE " ?z ti FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name r7a,,: - Applicant Flood Control Assistance Acunty Program Project Application ScoringcoRating Sheet PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal - 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery s Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total x 1 All 3 k{?? ` 1 M ffC 1 'W?IY/???? Mq Y 11 ??? r } I 461?'1fA '?? 0.l l4 I i? ? Y??4 ,, ? t ; ? Fi i 'y , r i LT I ? 1 t 4 PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS Protection of Property of General Interest to Public Number of People Involved RATING - 678910 45676 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7. 8.9 10 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence - Disruption of Public Services 5 6 7 8 9 to 567 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total Yam' : ?, J ?t r yi, .r te" FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK. Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = x Ci r [YNR y2 ?? T? WE," `?F.yry?. ' ?'^IIO y PI" '? 1?,7., • i+e ? s rxt?'? N.. FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Pr , Project Name Applicant t Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet „_ro PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, .? - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved G 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8,9 10 - ' B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal influence 5 6.7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK. Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 is Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair I PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X = r. . ?r? t h x41{ .. ?? ,_, f q IY ? F[ = kF?l3.. L h'"9 15 p???? T FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT E VALUATION ' Project Name r Applicant - I Flood Control Assistance Account Pro. ram "V Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet i 1 PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING • - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 , r r ;? ?( Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 ) 4 e:{ "a - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - - - small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to a ''m PB Total , FEIL - PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK. 4e , - Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Al ignment . 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 k Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 ,.. PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = -?xiF ?r ..? } ( f7 et p' f S ' :? , s vA}??r.Jr ` 4" Y f { H yx Ngg, r ??r, r I ra-' LF .. ;,_ , zll , A ? ?? I n ?A%'6^".° _ -..;+u?n.19't(1'n y2?d 1n.,4 ''??F a axe 91 , u; ? ' $ a+?v ? • ?? y '""?$' _ . . . „? ,0?+.. F FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION m?? ,e Project Name. Applicant i Flood Control Assistance Account Program - Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING . Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 ` ?Mt - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 y - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) - A - Riverine Flooding ' small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 f K x larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5.6 7 i - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 p' PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 pr',. Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control ] 6 - Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 „ c Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair l 4 :. s,?pµyy a, PB Total z Work Activity Value Project Total X v ?$i!"(M1?"???O ? +! M" 2!7 '?Y,a?tRi'Imlwm/ lY! t?h tEk7A5'`tr?. ?!M,n (pq 6 +? 1 ? 1 / 4 ? t I r .v z1 ;?4 I `? ? J ? a ? G I tl^ t ` h FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating 'Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved h 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = small streams (0-1000 cfs) . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence - Disruption of Public Services PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal - Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery b Equipment - Access Repair PB Total•x Work Activity Value = Project Total = 567 89 10 567 012345678910 PB Total RANK. 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 x = tlµ"' fi^8 [euensu. lv ?"u" r?'rt'iV'1fl'141w ? 11V?°' ii ?'1$ EI1 '?! '9' '?`+ 4.. F y ? 4 ' b Y' r + +1d'tf? i ? . ti ?P 11 ? . c Y! V 'F FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name 's Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program ' ?' Project Application Scoring/Rating 'Sheet . _(... 77 PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 rl - Number of People Involved h 5 6 7 B ?„ - - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding 5 small streams (0-1000 cfs) 67 8 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 9 10 ?r - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 ' - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ._ ` PB Total s PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK g: Channel Capacity Dike Repair - Channel AI ignment 7 6 ( r r? ( Erosion Control Debris Removal t i M 5 3 f anagemen on Vegetat Flood Control Machinery s Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total '. ? 1 ?? - h? 1 k?1e x+,?Y.AF UY ?•?'? M? A?? ll 6 S YAUV r N ) F + '? ! ? ? r g t , t J ?} , vp :- g'i. % d `? Y h 17 f C, 4 71 ? 77-?, x V? a N }y? L • FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION g Project Name Applicant ' Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating 'Sheet % PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, ? '+ - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 • - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) r A - Riverine Flooding = :e small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000. cfs) $ 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 516 7 Disruption of Public Services 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 77 PS Total dew. $.. ,'+?: Ig.' PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANY. s? Channel Capacity Dike Repair 8 - + Channel Alignment r _ G, Erosion Control 6 1 '" r Debris Removal Vegetation Management 3 t- Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 r w Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total x ,. 4?$ rPtti q?'.' w n' 9 ?¢ ? ? 4 tt ir4 ?,, @ 7 Yub ,q, 16 r ! 7 + 7 I" F'^ 1 rL Ir1r. k '• dh?l n' "( 1 ?n A rr 4 i -.1 ? } I M ? ??l ' ?? ? 1 ' t } I tr .1_ .? l r; ? s< C ,. lll;lll'yyy C f ? { r?C r ttt - s, S S FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION S e -^ Project Name ; a - Applicant a Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram i , _ Project Appl cation Scoring Rating Sheet kIr - o- F . Y - ,m w • PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 45678 • - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8'9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 _?qqa 'R u - Disruption of Public Services PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity :p Dike Repair ' Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery G Equipment i Access Repair 1?? x5M t -??'rorswZrawP. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X r + ?? --J A w ? K , ay r gy r ri ?'' 8f a K(il rid `T1 C WY fu M1 N?kVj?ir 1 •.j4 l ?, ? Il ' ? l k I n 1r . ??? x' FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating 'Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding _ . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) - 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total = X = ? d a ,. t FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM FCAAP) PROJECT E VALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Sco i r ng Rating Sheet r - PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 678910 - Number of People Involved ? 45678 ? " - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) g A - Rlverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) ' larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 5 6 7 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influ ence 567 ' - Disruption of Public Services 012345678910 'f PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity Dike Repair 9 Channel Alignment 8 Erosion Control 7 Debris Removal 6 Vegetation Management 5 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 3 Access Repair 2 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total X P, 4,111- t 14y4 +l??i1'S "?R .'SF?E?#,w Ftl"i v+ t cif ? F ?. '',h?.` R"?1R1'Ri?' ??S' ?tlut9Abr'??'&' ' tlh ' ?' 3 tL 13? p ' rrr? t iy ..ttttM? l? 1? TTTTTT fl e { 7J ? 1 l I 1? 1 1 r 1 ? M??' 1 a ggg l G ? 1 ' J4' 7 C` r'f 3.k . W .'..: S.WUW t FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION ? Project Name ?.'. ' use , R " Applicant 4 Flood Control Assistance _Accounty Program` Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING ti Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7. - larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 "- - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 lo PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 5 - r - Debris Removal 3 r Vegetation Management ' Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 F Access Repair 1 r 5i? • PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X c 'a p, S:M 11 ,_ r ''? t ll b I?/?'yt l 4 d g7d?k ?h?' A r fi^1? 4? 'H pp i ??^T I r I 4 s ?? 1 Tl?yyr?A,V ?td°q' a w V .J " .{'*'tTk' ri ti n { I' l 4 t ?w Itr?'• ?? ' }'i l? V l 7 { r- r 5( ? 1 fy- JS 1' S Y I I e ^Yf3 9 $ t Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating 'Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8'9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal - Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 X = I. "oa"lmwu.? 1 IkIli , 'N L µ 7 i • FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION n? ? FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM FCAAP PROJECT EVALUATION - Project Name _ ` • Applicant d Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram - Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet ti r PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING ? - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6789 10 'G. - Number of People Involved 45 678 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) ±. , k • A - Riverine Flooding = ? _ small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . --? i larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 89 10 Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 s PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select O ) ' r f ne RANK a 1 Channel Capacity ll Dike Repair 9 Channel Alignment 8 ' Erosion Control 7 Debris Removal Vegetation Management 5 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 N Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = x FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7' larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 89 10 . B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence -5.6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 8 Dike Repair 7 Channel Alignment 6 Erosion Control 5 Debris Removal 3 Vegetation Management 2 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment i Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total m x 7 n i x 9 ?t t f r ?c ? ?S ' ?? Iti 4 ? ?1 JQ l 4 7? '.1 Y { f V ? 1 1! ?1/2? 1 j 1 . FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM FCAAP PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant ° Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATINf, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 1C - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 I„ ! ., larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) g'9 10 ?i B.- Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity Dike Repair 9 . Channel Alignment 8 Erosion Control 7 6 Debris Removal Vegetation Management 5 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Values Project Total x r ^i 1Y y'j'"?' - ykk6 ?" ^?rA51Eifr ? "i k+ Wh" q,.+ i4 49 ?1SJt 5! -Jr ,r ? Ns4?i -@7f "r wvMb ' i ! i S S+TS4F FaRdaF"rt t r- t ti wrt N S _ e w n, FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION w a JI Project Name - R" Applicant F - Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING 'r - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 6 5 6 7 8 • - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding 6 !t:= small streams (0-1000cfs) 5 7 , ' • . larger streams (greater than IODO cfs) 8 9 10 {3Y: :f ?,' - -. B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ID PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK i r•; t ' Channel Capac ty Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 6 . Erosion Control Debris Removal --- -- 5 T ••. , l : etation Mana ement Ve i g g i 2 pment Flood Control Machinery s Equ Access Repair 1 v`y PB Total x Work Activity Value Project Total X [ 1 , 1Y EV, S r ? p ?? 1 77 i k ['?? rk?n h r! u . l" 1 [` ,t t I (. ?dy? yt V N r • r i ?1 l 1 r i r ? 1 l ,?,? s ' 1 r k 1 4 s I e 4 ? . --?APd?KFA55CikFd%es. ?'F?3 "d E3,ij"9 ,4'. i 1 ^?. - •?-?}4N:?'3?fi-- ?1 W"'.v?, ?-an••i? FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVA U L ATION Project Name Applicant a " Flood Control' Assistance Account Pro ram •. _" Project Application Scoring Rating 'Sheet 4 •> PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 Sm - - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 ' - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) ,4 A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) g'9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Cf1 ?' ??;; - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I _ PB Total ? ? - PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK _ Channel Capacity 9 - Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal a - Vegetation Management 3 a Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 ga.., Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total x - yk qua .? :'. ii 1,t P?,? v ? ? r M u e9? ? 7 An M. t?5 I?-( 'L ? 1 ? ??? ?' ? UV ?. YIFU? 1? '- a ?` - p 1 J A ?? Sy '+ ? 1 pp ? A`ds ?, U 7 n? ,?m?:e ? ?f •. hH (. 11 : ! t r: ? yy55qq?? . t ? a b? M Sl , C r? i i r I l h ? 1.: r. 4 Vrll ?} h 1 ?` IS F M 3 r •i.?sa. L.azf;i w 4..:,« ..`;,`, HJ. &lid.`?i??7?°?C,o.':.??°d..•^.s__..:,?5_'.uat?ihP.'e8 ?45iV'?• ' 77- FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION < `• - Project Name xf Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating 'Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 1... - Number of People Involved 1+ 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or 8) A - Riverine Flooding - _ W small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 P larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 ji Debris Removal ------ - 5 Vegetation Management 3 n Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 , , •,• Access Repair 1 ? i PB Total x Work Activity Value Project Total x = ? i ? ill 1 ? 1 f ? ffx F 4 V 1 t ? 6 k, f+ a ? ? . . a1 i 1 5.^' i FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM FCAAP PROJEC T E VALUATION •_ Project Name Applicant ,{ I Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Sc i ! x or ng/Rating Sheet ' PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RAT - Protection of Property of General Interest to Publi ING ` c 67891O - Number Of People Involved I' 6 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or 8) A 5 6 7 8 ; - Riverine Flooding . Small streams (0-1000 cfs) larger streams ( re 5 6 7 ". g ater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 8 9 10 , -.? G I Disruption of Public Services 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1D PS Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) , c x S ? W' Channel Capacity RANK 3 Dike Repair :i Channel Alignment 8 '- ?? Erosion Control Debris Removal 7 6 s +? Vegetation Management 5 ry' Flood Control Machinery E Equipment Access Repair 3 2 ,y 'r ) PB Total x Work Activity Value Project Total x ¢? Aso r #t m?M?.•-Hk r .{ 4 7 4 +?, ?f I , l 5?.?41 A 5 ?} L I JJ FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved L 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8'9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total X S ft l?? %s ? M oiF 4ay 'S. ^! »? 1dt.. R.. ??3 h. ??.. FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAA P) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program ''=2 Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 y' - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8. . { - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) NT, n A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) larger streams ( reat th 1000 f ) 5 6 7 x . g er an c s B - C 8810 ,. oastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 I - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ' PB Total y a. ? PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK n' Channel Capacity y +? z Dike Repair Channel Alignment 8 Erosion Control 6 e Debris Removal - ?..- _ Vegetation Management 3 f ' Flood Control Machinery E Equipment p Access Repair I PS Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total X ?YSdM1NIM,! tAG _ _ .9rai 9v4. .a-ru.?r._?Lt..,_al>WY91.._:.aeleG?L i.:.: X.:.. -4'?N- Tlp$:`..,JI'-? /mn44 0 ' 6 r s.? ay y r y FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant - - Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program 6n Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet ? - PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 - - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - ' small streams (0-1000 cfs) . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 5 6 7. 8 9 10 _ B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disru tio f P bli S i 1 4 6 8 C' p n o u c erv ces 0 2 3 7 9 10 5 .r. "'-- PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RAN K f Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 _ Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ------ -- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X - u'vapau .'?;mai rc .+aRA71 e,?a?W as ?n ..art yvr nnx xdvr,r :. wrcr n.eum ??Npa?'4W'Y Taur wrk r F 'Yl 1 1' 4 F S ti F a i t l ?, ! Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATINf, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 'Z - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = - - . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 w - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence _ 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total (` _ ._ _3;.`'•° PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK r Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment Erosion Control 6 _ Debris Removal ---- 5 ` Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 ; PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = _ X P.' Ul I"f ! i?w+ 5y, 1 ?, N irk 4 4 wn??'y?M1?? "M Yom. I 51 IN n ? ^ e :LfAd a1 ? _ ri d J ? lLiY ?F J FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Fj Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public Number of People Involved Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence - Disruption of Public Services RATING - 678910 h5678 567 8910 -567 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal --- Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment Access Repair PB Total RANK P8 Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = % = x rwa?r.H?frr k r a ' •y? ea....r i „?{?r ul u a k y uai , yl?ry y. r re ryi g d'r , } v NO tl a m'law ` E 1 I r yt ix ? ? i a ? ? ( j ? r ? ? 4 i rc? 7 i' , li ?+ t ? :F .ae ? . Ik FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION ' Project Name .?J Applicant {j "._" • ? ? Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program I ' n Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet L PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 ;'. ? - Number of People Involved b 5 6 7 8 - fe - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Rive.rine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY _PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ---- - 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery & Equipment 2 Access Repair I PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT Pf2OGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 23 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PS Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal --- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = % i. ' ? r to FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant • .?tu Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet - " PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - - - Protection of Property of General Interest co Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 6 5 6 7 8 _ Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - t y small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 +z larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 P. - - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 - PB Total- JOE, PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK , ? A Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 , Channel Alignment 7 ;+l Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ------- - 5 Vegetation Management 3 ` Flood Control Machinery E Equipment Access Repair 2 1 Y PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total m x a''Y?i "? ?r,i ° V ' . 1?? a '?d ?,???'??? ?.',q• q? ? i?? 4, ? ? dli; ? +" j?'? . °y?y?y?? ?' ,. ? ? 1 . ? r? j i A ? ? 1 t lF{ ? ? w ?J. 4, v a ? 1 ire FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION 'no Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING', Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10. B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5.6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal ?. Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery G Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total - RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 X . x ' 5 21fi?'(W. M ' Np a s w? h+ Applicant , m Flood Control Assistance Accounty Pro ram r. y Prof ect Application Scoring/Rating Sheet ? PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 % r - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 ' - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 -,j . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 , ' - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 4 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total c PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity _ Dike Repair 9 _ . Channel Alignment 8 .'. Erosion Control 7 Debris Removal Vegetation Management ?^ 5 , Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 3 2 Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X _ ? ? ? 1 ?, s a'y i??? i) ?? ? ? ? ? n 7Rt t`,. ? i? -?ur'+ r+(dtL akw C ?` vis t? r ? Clay I' OF C ,e 1 54 ? ? ? I s .rd7Sa a r i ?, ? 1 lbs. 4 :, ? ( , Y 4 i F v ?- t i i t?p ? ft ?ZkS (•r F ? `1;?1 wi 1 FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name ' Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program i Project Appllcatlon Scoring/Rating Sheet I ' . _ PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING ? - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved g 5 6 7 8 oyg - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 s B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 y' - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 - Channel Alignment 7 ' Erosion Control 6 M Debris Removal Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 - . Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value m Project Total = X - L? l ?fti,? iJi.LiMdl?{^}r}fE?l'Y µ ?_ 3??? 5P ?I` 5uy r t I ? ? / a 1 Y ? l % I ` 1 G ? Y ? ? 11 T y _ f ? . 1 i!' r' It: ' r }¢Iy V I I I ?}1 .1 1`] x 4 L FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION • _ Project Name - Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet 4 PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING ? ? - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - , small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 R B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 ?a ¢ ' y - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 _ Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal - ----• 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair I •,,. PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X r, r.; FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION r Project Name °y Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating -Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -„ PB Total N_ 3 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ----- 5 Y Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X ?k I 43r . ix 777-, c 6 n ?esla - r ik? r#iN2 3? g 7{ r ;;. FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP} PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant _ ' Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating 'Sheet r . k PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 ? - Number of People Involved G 5 6 7 8 'R p ' - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or 8) k - r A - Riverine Flooding !- small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 _ larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - C g 9 10 -`- , oastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 _ Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total ?r f. PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK ? ? Channel Capacity Dike Repair 9 . 8 M 17111 W Channel Alignment E 7 s rosion Control 6 Debris Removal a' Vegetation Management v Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 3 p Access Repair 1 S.Yv y u PB Total x Work Activity Value Project Total % 1 s a' A.M ti: t 5 :. A s e ,da t, N P !d' f^' •'• TYI9WIN'M y I. M"` ITT i eGl '+ 'w,' ? c 6n ? f t m r r LN "rte ! { s d , isr- FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION t ! r "a - } •' Project Name - Applicant •r Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet ri y?jcp PUBLIC SENEFIT FACTORS RATING '•` 1& _ Fi Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 6 9 10 Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 B Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 , ..} - . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal influence 5 6 7 - 5 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 - a I'A FS Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control Debris Removal 5 "'. ifiz, Vegetation Management 3 y Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2t? Access Repair 0 PB Total x Work Activity Value Project Total °AK r4 4 ? 1 4L ?A E ?r J.nIV d ?4? ?a - 1 ?Vv t ' 44 q?,t p d k^"? gY A,?'?ri?8y ? ?• r/ '" '? ? ? - •, r ? t it r , 1 ? iV Y Zarb j tl aa? ?7 s 1 r ? k Pot . ' W 12 l S s!F84?+ r ?. r'3 FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION y 40 Project Name • ?' Applicant , • x Flood Control Assistance Account Program x a,+; r Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING x; - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - ,h ' k B Number of People Involved 4 5 6 2 8 , Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) . 1 A - Riverine Flooding • small streams (0-1000 cfs) 56 7 ? . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 - " B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -- +t. PB Total ;. - PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK / Channel Capacity Dik R i 9 -?+- - r e epa Channel Alignment Erosion Control 7 6 } ?, Debris Removal ---- -- 5 - ,? Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 - .... Access Repair 1 c? PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = _ K l am 4 i iJ . ? 1 [ ? IL y. . t i ? p ? c { a FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet k PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public - Number of People Involved - - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding RATING, - 678910 45678 . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8,9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ----- -• 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair i PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = '"•z Project Name - Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet ' PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING , " - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 F • - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) r: A - Riverine Flooding - -?. small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 _ f . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5. 6 7 _ - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 - PB Total _ PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK. _ Channel Capacity Dike Repair 8 " Channel Alignment 7 ? Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ----- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 n Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X I . g G,? ; ? it 4.15 ??°? .>TC. S7k IfS5R5'tt9Yn r ? Js? `F l4f Wi?tE..,,?,a ."°"Y?M'iA ? S<nlt 1Md r am ??y? GVG Y4'NF V¢tk?1V '?z411i•su r i,x 2}YpiI,P37f 6rwr1y15Y, 7 w S ? t I r p ? 1 '?Rh i! I i ?f i I` t' 1 c ! i i ?4.?) XX "? c ,?i? I 1 I 1 ? L ? f d? I ? ? i Y• , 7 i FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name u?' n Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Protect Application Scoring/Rating Sheet i .91 PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved - 4 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Rlverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) ' 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - Access Repair RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total - X - P ? n s PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X w FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION spa a?n Y, Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public - Number of People Involved - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - RATING - 678910 65678 . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) ' $'9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total - PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 -' S 3 2 1 X = IT Sys A:. A t ` FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION k " y - Project Name __yy Applicant i Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram - Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet r {? PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 i - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 ?t I larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 3t° FA B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 ?. , w * - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -`a r PB Total - _M PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 F,. Dike Repair Channel Alignment 8 ] - Erosion Control 6 a' - ' Debris Removal Vegetation Management 5 j Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair P8 Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X = "rJl ti ?, rtr. ,tA, r? ? M w PV 1 ,. a? t?,?w rt vyyn11r{w r !ft'r la ,?! } ?i ??? 4 1'? i?'':al a' jl r'i<tl- t'( Y W P , r i r,l flj ?? S +, l I ? L + C, I ? ll ;: Eaa s - :wv rx - - O d FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) - PROJECT EVALUATION P N ?- roject ame - Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet g '+ PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 B 9 10 .'? - Number: of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - W :er Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = -- F ' . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) $ 9 10 - a B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total _ PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK + Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal A Vegetation Management 3 of 1 1• Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 r. Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = x = t P#:°,44 V•" 1111ttlM194 YA LY CnN4? 'Z f ? 1. i.' I I I + ? f r? I Vlrr df #4Yd h` 1?"J;<i¢ FnK"?'/?Yh ? ?, : "?^PJ# I x t I a1" :fi? 'r r y L 4 e 4 -' m r - r'7u FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE C , A COUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION o Project Name B Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Y , Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet T n wJ PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATINf fe - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 '' Number of People Involved L 5 6 7 8 ? Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) a A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 f ) g f i c s larger streams ( reater than 1000 f ) 5 6 7 8 y , ? g c s B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 9 10 5 6 7 t*`&` Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 <^s' PB Total " PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK i 3 ? - Channel Capacity ? ' •-t ?p ? Dike Repair 8 S ;• Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 ` a Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 , PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = x = FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION r Project Name Applicant u Flood Control Assistance Accoun[y Program ^ Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved -- 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) i. A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total {?. PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK fH Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ------ -• 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair I PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total x - 3 .y., ' ? ? i?.?'? ' ?_. ?•s?>?.ut4 c? _r?•c_;:" ?_ ?w_. _ •? a?,?. ?, ,?yy .?, ? ??: I ' t ?• FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8'9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment - Erosion Control Debris Removal - Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery & Equipment - Access Repair RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X = ? .? K -?4?3 3' •. _ 1 ??1f (r ;, •F?'?}, ruw? ? .. ?.1.e„?/j W. ??,p. r yy r a :?I 5• FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM FCAAP PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name u ., I A li pp cant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet J v°?E PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 678910 - - Number of People Involved 5 6 7 8 ' - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) ' A - Riverine Flooding s ra small streams (0-1000 cfs) larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 5 6 7 ' ilt - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence g 10 9 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services .-? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to , PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment Access Repair RANK 9 ° 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total = x f } nn .r?k 5 }DIY eiX'?'UAdµy¢'a't?jf l"'..1?'1A , t 'y'?tl'A ?! n z r}q I T?"+•,,?, r K u c ,?,?w-' r+^ w+nw ?.??, r `' n fafd9il a ? ?'. ? x^ tl _' '?3MJ 1? h xF ?0 r f 1f ' , f 1 S r W f i ? f F { ?r l l S ti M Sl I ?f ? f I JY r l'1 , i 7 t r.:H S1 t ? . ? 1 1 µ U I % 7 1 ' '? ? I !/ S{ 4 tk 14 ?IX r t? Y'S y ' y } 0 al t FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION • r Project Name - Applicant ?._ Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved --- 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK. Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ---- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery L Equipment -- 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X y r1uz:? '_, f N' . rE P . .; 5. °aL,n Few a FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name l.' Applicant a ?t ¢tir. Flood Co_ntroi Assistance Accountv Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 89 IO B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity Dike Repair 9 8 Channel Alignment Erosion Control 7 6 Debris Removal Vegetation Management 5 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 3 2 Access Repair I PS Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total - X "dam r ?a 't- f ?,- , Q A l FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION , ,,"i... Project Name r. Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program , a Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet p y ?r 9 PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING t. Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 "'"' $ Number of People Involved 1+ 5 6 1 8 .? ( 1 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - P $ small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 % - larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) -- 8 9 10 B - Coastal. Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - t - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > PB Total ?k7 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 } s 1 ?' FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM FCAAP PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name ' Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet t Fes: i PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public - Number of People Involved - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = sm 11 RATING - 678910 4 5 6 7 8 16-1 1r„aaa?'.,' a streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) . 8,9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment _ 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair I PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total m X = I 1 FLOOD CON TROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM FCAAP PROJECT EVALUATION _ Project Name - Applicant ?• Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application ScoringgRa[ing Sheet ti PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS _ ar - '? RATIN G - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6769 I0 Number of People Involved - 45678 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) S 6 7 _ larger streams (greater than 1000 B cfs) 8'9 to o-"' - - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence S 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 4 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 ad PB Total - PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) L RANK '%. l Channel Capacity Dike Repair 9 Channel Alignment 8 - Erosion Control Debris Removal 6 Vegetation Management 5 5 - Flood Control Machinery 6 Equipment a Access Repair 2 1 a. PS Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total - X _ FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating 'Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8,9 to B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment - 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ----- -- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair I PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = k k, z rt; t a C{ 9 f awl F i •' . - - . ?. } r'?.: b.Yr.Ji _ '?? l M YC ? t ? ' ? R?SPi '9TF'.''C'$.oEd,' ']/ _.G36f'awa. ??T'• ?'? ,?xt Y .qlg „iX?FF 9 ?? FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION 1 - Project Name „ Applicant a ? t Flood Control Assistance Account Program ?.r .. Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet . ' PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, a - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8.9 10 11i '• - Number of People Involved h 5 6 7 8 ,?..• ,. Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) - ' - A - Riverine Flooding = ll sma streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 au . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 8 9 10 5 6 7 - ,.'.- 'i y - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Tot al K "r I t • PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 4 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 ?=- Debris Removal 5 - Vegetation Management 3 - " Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 3 / "ts• ` Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total m FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION 'ta Project Name e Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram - Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet p- 'tom i' PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved - 4 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8'9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery 6 Equipment 2 Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total m x = r ? 3 J, ?P FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT P? OGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7, 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal - Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project 'total - PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 X kit. FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name - ' Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet ?y PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, - - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 u _ d - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 •, Water Quantity Ccntrolled (Select A or B) ' A - Riverine Flooding ` s small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 , larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 _ ? u B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - - Di f 0 1 2 i i 4 6 8 10 ??' srupt on o Publ c Services 3 5 7 9 a ut PB Total ' - a a PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) - RANK ? - Channel Capacity 9 - <° y Dike Repair 5 Y Channel Alignment Erosion Control 7 6 Debris Removal ---- Vegetation Management 5 3 j - ?A Flood Control Machinery L Equipment 2 1 Access Repair 1 ' l a PB Total x Work Activity Value =Protect Total = X , Pi z, , Y?1 k V?. 1 - r f f ? . l , r fV? t 1 '% , i r , `, J 'e & { ? r,w x.: `? r"ku?yh ? ?ssevf?. m ??...a,:x?.. •'?'? w?ursc'' sr 'l FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION 1 "j Project Name - a Applicant 1 Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program !=+ Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet 4 ` PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING t' - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved -- 4 5 6 7 8 y? + - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) es' A - Riverine Flooding F _ small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) ' 8*g 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 . PB Total ? PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 ti - - Dike Repair Channel Alignment 7 CCx Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment p Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X 9 4 ,?p? ? , ?"MMweuMS Y.?f ?+urJ 1 i'!'4 r?? ?'?1? ?'. Ib?4 II ?i ? ???I?)r Ni ssaWR? ?a RG? Ytt)?p I ? `{, 1 M1. r? FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Y ,. Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Pro ram 1 Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, F '';•: - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 ?A ¢J.^ - Number of People Involved --- L 5 6 7 8 •,?. ' - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 i. . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B'9 10 , ,., B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total } PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 a ?? Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment Erasion Control 6 Debris Removal (• Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery L Equipment 2 Access Repair I . + PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total R FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant t . Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program 5 Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, -f ` - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 r Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding _ • small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 - larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B- Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 m _ ? - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal --- - 5 _ Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery a Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 . PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total y X MfJ?a r ? ? ? r ( - S I' e ?,w( AA low F •, A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) . larger streams (greater than 1000 5 6 7. cfs) B 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services . 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 . PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK t Channel Capacity Dike Repair 8 } Channel Alignment Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal -- ---- 5 ky Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X N t LOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name --' _ Applicant __ ':'z."wr'laa b Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public - Number of People Involved Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence RATING - 678910 45678 5 6 7 - 8910 567 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X n? FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION 3 Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved L 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8.9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PS Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ----- -- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery L Equipment 2 Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total m X i 6f ?: 7r ?"T" ?r "'y}5T9 }}ddh ,c r ?` w kYn aFSA{ E M-?1..} ? } (i 1 ?? ? .Y.fiF & l?? ,""4'wyc"`Fz7`+`r'??e?. titH S.y kXY7 tC'9 t lm` ?+??V to l7 ? 'V4?? 'y,. J t'? I? ?j: r ? ? r 1 ? y ? } A ? ry } i?f! \? Nf b t ?p i i i. l 4 r ?, t flit r r . ` t rr M1? }fit ? , } t -: L I??Y. ? ? 4 r ? 1 FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION css? Project Name Applicant gl 63F' r ry Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 6 5 6 7 8 '' - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) g'y 10 } B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery b Equipment 2 Access Repair I PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X = % r r + e ? 1..E4 i 4 ?.fh, ? r? , ?y 4 s ?'9 f r - - q µti s f? a?a FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION r Project Name _ y Applicant s Flood Control Assistance Account Program } Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING LI, -'? - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved _ 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8,9 10 - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 w? Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total ?., PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment - 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ------ -- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = x = y^ t ? } FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Pr A li na'?" ?k^ oject pp cation Scoring Rating 'Sheet r ? PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - - - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 - - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = _- r • small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 G . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 89 10 ' B- Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 5 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ' PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK - - k _ j a Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal V i ?t egetat on Management Flood C t l M 3 - on ro achinery E Equipment 2 S Access Repair 1 t" PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total - s FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 -?`_ - Number of People Involved - 4 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) ?+- A - Riverine Flooding = I . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) . 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal - Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = 4 PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 X = C± Y' i 6 ` _ '4f q ' 0 1 } /tf(p b ?? rFr r 1 l FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJ ECT EVALUATION . Project Name --r + xxt Applicant ?? Flood Control Assistance Account Program _ i Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet - PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - - Number of People Involved p 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) #w#? - A - Riverine Flooding py. small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 ' larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B- g9 10 Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total ` N PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity Dike Repair 9 ' { '' Channel Alignment 8 f f i W ' a = Erosion Control 6 , Debris Removal -- 5 '?' 3 1A Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 µei + r•i Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = x _ FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - , . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery b Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 x = ? ?G r ® H 4T 1 i ? rac - tl `,? s ^ / ? M FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Protect Application Scoring Rating Sheet ; PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved L 5.6 7 8 - x ,I A? - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding _ j small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 ?.y, larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - C 8 9 10 i` I oastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK ! s Channel Capacity S- Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal Ve etation M a 5 g an gement 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 r I Access Repair 1 6 S ` rY' PB Total x Work Activity Value m Project Total X ' ? r FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 B 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 6 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - . small streams (0-1000 cfs) . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence - Disruption of Public Services 5 6 7 . 8910 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair B Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal -- -- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X e ;d a r, :.k ?. M J.i ? 4 / WN d i V u?.AV Inµ V 1 . ' T V 1 4 r C? T? ?? V T?yr{{I ? ? A f r t ? . YtR Y2 ? ? 4 r M Ww. r t r ? r ` r 1 ? r r ? 1? r? M v f li - r, - r - rr. - hive n ne riooarng - y small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence g 6 7 r' Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 T 5e PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK _ Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Y Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal -,. 5 Vegetation Management 3 r. Flood Control Machinery a Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total - x FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Y Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 910 - Number of People Involved b 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7, . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total - NK I PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 6 Erosion Control Debris Removal -------- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery & Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X p?F? .} ` t ?,pq?S, ?.; '?7.fN'?'?j?- FJ??? 5, 'u.ANP& et?1 aM _ ?? f 4;Y'N72i%'X4'C"F??,C JG ^rAU' W ,v+&hYtt3N S't4- W?°Fi Aditlkih ..'}r?,avrtl'" P39'r 4t 'aa' , kk r ? 1 ? , dI F i ?? r r'S? t[IF J t' k I y?7 I + r S q a, i3? L [. A Applicant .;? Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet - ,w PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 • - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding. - - small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 51 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK r -- Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 _ Erosion Control 6 rA Debris Removal ------ 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PS Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total % "V77, " a', l S? r :y a 71 . AMN - f .?.. Jlld 'F ?, ? ? ? ._„ +:Y$W281 _._?? ?.3?? Nsfe?4.'*A?s liKr'AYi.? ^'+Yk& 4 ? ? 't „ FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM FCAAP PROJECT EVALUATION = Project Name rt Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram r Project Application Scoring Rating 'Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS I? RATING - Protection of Property of Ceneral Interest to Pu blic 6789 to •E` - Number of People Involved -- b56Z8 N?. P - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 ? larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8'9 10 - ? _ B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 , - Disruption of Public Services 0 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ` PB T l ota PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK ?. ?! Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment 9 8 ?. ? Erosion Control 6 7 ' r Debris Removal Vegetation Management 5 - ? Flood Control Machinery E Equipment A 3 2 ccess Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total - X .err ? 3?;$zj?7?i 5a }i d §i °hY :.1l , 1 N, k FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name e Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet ,•`.'s,. PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - `. - Number of People Involved -- 4 5 6 7 g ' - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding ' small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 : larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 m- Ta B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - •? - - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 .. PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value a Project Total x' r 71. .. ?F.G?'. .»`4`?r ...:u34..; ,.. ,.. w,o.:, .: .w, .... .,, .,- ., #ker. ,ertac '=RS;.-m.?C%?a.? ?.??1..`,•..???-?3 ;kt?"d 'tY,S?'a.. FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant " o ? Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program va. a . - Project Application Scoring/Rating 'Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved -- 4 5 6 Z - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) - ?• A - Riverine Flooding - . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9.10 - PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ----- - 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value a Project Total X w ? ' 11 ? 1 X d ?? 1 i ?- Z d ? r ? ? y it 4 Fqr 4 ? a w a ''1 91 FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved L 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - , small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal --- -- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery b Equipment 2 Access Repair I PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X ZA Project Name _.11 Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public - Number of People Involved Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - . small streams (0-1000 cfs) . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence - Disruption of Public Services RATING - 678910 45678 5 6 7 . - 8910 567 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal -- --- ^ 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total - tit kr _ r _ s Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or 8) A - Riverine Flooding - , small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services _ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal -- Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total RANK 9 8 7 6 - 5 3 2 1 x - a n I ? W{r a ?, ? I{ I t I 1 .R ,*???. FFF ? I i y I t I V I ?_' I r tiw tyi;Jr?:, i s@ $i d FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name ? «r Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating 'Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING fir) - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - x - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 2 8 r Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) g A - Riverine Flooding - f 5 6 7 cd - P S small streams (0-1000 c s) larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 - x r_ % B -Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 '1 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 ll S PB Total ' r '! - PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK ?{r :r c 4 r Channel Capacity 8 Dike Repair Channel Alignment 7 +.`1 ? rs Erosion Control - 6 -- 5 ; < 14?E - Debris Removal -- 3 1 ' Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 ?i Access Repair 1 a 111 '.,? ? 4 F - r PB Total x Work Activity Value Project Total - x = _? y { ' SNi ILL xC 1 v 1 AWS ,. t tC" - A J `, Y W[ ?!3i "iS9 R"FT ltl"rLQ)1PKA15{? t ?7 " 'f' 7 '+rT 1 41. wT 1lIL k' - Number of People Involved Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - . small streams (0-1000 cfs) . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal. Flooding/Tidal Influence - Disruption of Public Services PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal - Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - Access Repair PS Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total - h5678 5 6 7 . 8910 567 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to PB Total RANK. Y tl FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Pro ram Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 rf - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 6 Hd Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) S'9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total " PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity Dike Repair 9 8 Channel Alignment Erosion Control 7 6 Debris Removal Vegetation Management 5 Flood Control Machinery s Equipment 3 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total x - r r. 411 1 '- FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name ?. Applicant 6 Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram w Project Application Scoring Rating 'Sheet ` , A I " PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING .y b Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 B 9 10 5-. - Number of People Involved 1+ 5 6 7 8 ,? - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . - i` . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 _ S'v? larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coast l Fl di 6 9 10 '- ' a oo ng/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 91?q PB Total v m- E a I k PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK l - , Channel Capacity 9 ?? r t Dike Repair Channel Alignment 8 7 l Erosion Control " Debris Removal 6 '? t ?' ?• Vegetation Management ,,?•`? _ .,.?• .. Flood Control Machinery E Equipment Access Repair 2 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value Project Total X j ,8 ?` c ? 4' kr u 10 9?'601110 ;,r F 71 41 hri 10?? ? r a r ?? * y ` l J 1 t _ c 1 'a : I 1? 1 1 ,'i? 1 1 I' i{ t 1 C L I , , 1. l 1 1A PS Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X = FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION t N P j ro ame ec - ?; Applicant - Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program _ • - Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet p= 'I PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING rA - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 w s 'y - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) ` a A - Riverine Flooding - _ • . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 • larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 + - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 67 1 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK i - Channel Capacity 9 ? .4 • Dike Repair 8 . e n Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 1 T Debris Removal ------ 5 _ ? I Vegetation Management 3 R Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 ? ? PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total x - Rx 9 $ r FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 45 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - , small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 - 5 3 2 1 X = x V, $ f FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM FCAAP PROJECT EVALUATION A Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram 0 ' { Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet jw PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 , - - Number of People Involved L 5 6 7 6 - - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) a A - Riverine Flooding - small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 ;. - - larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8'9 IO B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 516 7 _ r - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total 3 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK - Channel Capacity 9 .' Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 - Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 , Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total x I FIR ° FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION! Project Name - Applicant ,F Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet i PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING ve*? - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 - ' - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = r • small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 y 5 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) $ 9 10 - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ?X PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 " Dike Repair Channel Alignment 7 i - Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 X,F$ Access Repair 1 t: d? eve.. ''r ` PB Total x Work Activity Value Project Total X g ^: Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS Protection of Property of General Interest to Public Number of People Involved ---- Water O.uantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - RATING - 678910 45678 . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ^ - 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PS Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total X r ? a a , C PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 ,. a v FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION P N roject ame Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS Protection of Property of General Interest to Public Number of People Involved Water Quantity Ccntrolled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - RATING - 678910 L5678 small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8.9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value a Project Total PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 - 5 3 2 1 X W?r 6 sy4?yc, vK . ;. H? ° r, ?+f ',, /' : w r a°t° { s?1w a Lt y .., d p tr M D wM I } 1 i • T r l i f ?l h .? ??t. A21 I?' % ' 7 ' .j t {i ? I 1? ? r .. ! y ri fw tilt{.... y F?a w. . • .,.,,k..f .,,,.ua&?L ?_ha'v?' -.a??G'??i`i?i ? .Y?wz :%xxi. . mzn " ? ?' mm ?.?? "- ?-- S'. ? , ? e .. nk FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION -, Project Name , Applicant ? ? Flood Control Assistance Account Program %' Protect Application Scoring Rating Sheet 1 - t PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved -- 45678 ' - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) - A - Riverine Flooding = +"' E t`i d small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 y r B- Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 4 6 8 2 3 7 9 10 5 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 - _- Channel Alignment -- 7 Erosion Control 6 - Debris Removal __ ^ 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair I ^ PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = x PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X fi'` J 3 ? Z. i ? y ? ,t F r w V 4 ? h uq?.... 1{ & • R ? sS FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION a Project Name x r . Applicant r? ? Flood Control Assistance Account Program ? Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet a r' a PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, t? Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 1- - '- - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 Z 8 _ , Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) bT a A - Riverine Flooding ? small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5.6 7 j .. larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) $ 9 10 - - ?? B - Coastal Flooding/tidal Influence - 5 6 7 - - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total u, PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK - „- Channel Capacity Dike Re air y r - ` p Channel Alignment i E C l g ] ' ros on ontro Debris Removal 6 5 ? , ,,.bf Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value Project Total = X U;. b ?f5k 1 1 1. i ia- v i FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 6 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - , . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 l0 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 TIT ^? e PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9? Dike Repair 8",,', Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery b Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8.9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal -- Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = RANK 9 8 7 6 - 5 3 2 1 X = 't FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING ' - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 m t Number of People Involved --- - 4 5 6 7 8 ? = Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or 8) ' A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK - Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 ?.?.. Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 1"?+ Debris Removal -- ----• 5 Vegetation Management 3 `=>'c+>:-<=y Flood Control Machinery b Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total m X r? i .J$ '? 71 14 "1 .. 4rv } ? , y? FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant .i' Flood Control Assistance Accounty Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, ' k k - _ - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 i - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding ' . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 1 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ------ - 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery L Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total = N Xx r A ? S? 1? k ' k? f }l N y r % ] Y ? S , 1 e L "R ? I I ? y i ? t N?f f N ? L'. ? ? ?, r y ?fly R } l „ ?yy^ FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION a Project Name i Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Sh t i i R ;..i ee at ng ng Project Application Scor PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - ' - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - , 53? 1 - Number of People Involved L 5 6 7 8 - - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - ? 1•. . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 - ` larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total b PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK k - J s Channel Capacity 9 8 " Dike Repair . Channel Alignment 6 ` . Erosion Control Debris Removal -----'- -- 5 i Vegetation Management 3 ' Flood Control Machinery L Equipment 2 t Access Repair i PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total m X { r Injr rap?rva? ^mec r.rnr.. w.w z .,wry ,anti -?r a ?!+z?r a'annvr-,xwF yaw.wagazna.rl rra c,.z A , ? 7 V } R I ter F ?M1' { ` 1 Y 1 1j 1 f 1 ? ?( ??? ? ?1. {I. [ i 5 7 rl .. 1 ti 4?? L ? IJ ] 1 ry ] ` j I i flF a i ' t vl . .?_ Itl':e: Pfd?AYt.M.,d? III n C+r,,?. Wt :? C??' ? ? ? ?? r4-. ? '..5.._:-v. 4?fJ S ._:lPBan _ rk? .?,y -., ti-?ont•?`?a 4'?n? »ir11dv FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION f Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 •" - Number of People Involved -- 4 5 6 7 8 - - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or 8) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 89 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Ptl - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 " PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood.Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = r'. 9 X ?+ rrvv?? ,f4 ea.• ,? fY *' '? d? Am ?... r rl r^ f i 11 5 ' w r ?? ,Ye A ate -1W , wt ? E r r C } l .. u r m; X FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM FCAAP PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved _ L 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 89 lp B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 3 2 Access Repair I PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X r ?I i ( skx, FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PIROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved -- 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery 6 Equipment -- Access Repair PO Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 X = kA FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION FF i Projet Name Applicant r t Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram z Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet 4 ;a PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING ,e - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - j? Number of People Involved -, L 5 6 7 8 - a - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) ,- A - Riverine Flooding - small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 8 9 10 6 7 `? - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to a 98' PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 ?:` _ 'S_'.•' Dike Repair Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 3.r Debris Removal ---- 5 - Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery b Equipment 2 ? Access Repair 1 i 7t r ;y PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X ' ? j, s ?S b r ? ? f i z Y j' w RTI- .. c,..v i•-,....? _. a ??n ' w2,b?tw?.-.?.. , ?i?dn ?fe???.. s rM,4 ?? eT?"'?6#?- ,.. -... _??rz?.;,$?eL1?? : - .. -, }r . FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION` Project Namer Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet - PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved -- L 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7, larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK. Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 76 Erosion Control Debris Removal -----'-' S Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery b Equipment 2 Access Repair I PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total X F n ?. 1 A I I ` _ 1l 1 J •?? ? (JJ I I 1 f 'J. 1 6 l Y I ?' . 1? ?L s FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name `C 4 Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Program ,a f Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet ? ? 5TH ? PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 r - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - 5 22 ' t - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) } ?- `j A - Riverine Flooding _ small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 ; '. larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 ., - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 - r• ??? PB Total ' PRIMAR . . Y PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK m ?.? Channel Capacity 9 ; Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value a Project Total m x i t9Y xiM'?woF-? 1j??T7Y p)iR' ' ?1 ( Y ? '4 mac I ? i? ? , 5 p i 4 41 F , . 0 q? cA ?n 1 Vow- FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Namef Applicant 1 Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public - Number of People Involved - RATING - 678910 h 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal - Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total - PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 X a _ FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION f"h Project Name Applicant .. ,, Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program ( .. _, J?. . small streams (0-1000 cfs) larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence - Disruption of Public Services 5 6 7 - 8910 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ----- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PS Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total x PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - xx.. . - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 G p L - Number of People Involved 5 6 7 8 • - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) 't A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7. £ larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 89 10 6 a - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 7 xa? _ Disruption of Public Services 0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 t PB Total _ - PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK , c ' Channel Capacity 8 i 'y Dike Repair Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 •? Debris Removal --"--'-"- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair PS Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X = FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Pro ram Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence - Disruption of Public Services 567 9910 567 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X 'a Ir Y? . Via. FL r ?t ? 4 Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating -Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS Protection of Property of General Interest to Public Number of People Involved Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = RAT INr, - 67891o X5678 small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment -- Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total - PB Total RANK. 9 8 7 6 - 5 3 2 1 x = s FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK rhannel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total e x vv?)) M; f S J }) i SF'? 1 i r?' {? ' t 1 (? ?t t I li .? '?. ?? ? 1 r t t 1, ?r ' + t S w ? f 1 y 1, ? I Y .. PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X H y 4 1, k'A lA+n Yr,4 ,4 j ?' ` '.b 1 ti dW.M a'Nt4 M. RAft i iw PilE Fl '4GlM fA ?.-a? rG ? 4 / ?} ]? "Y' r 1 1? y?18° x ? z 1p A(,µ? ?3 k T I i Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 $ Number of People Involved 45678 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) S 6 7 . . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 89 10 i B- Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 ii - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment Access Repair RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 PS Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total m x dj4r+ w? t" M9N *a? n u fir, ?'?la pw b z "', M1 '' t ?[!`.' 17?r 1 ij 1 ? v r I •I kf?, -'r, ? iS?j' ? t 4 t` - ? 1 1 t o-? ) r, r t n x r? i.. - .. .» r- r,.'... '. ? e 4 a J. c...?.I.a r .. .,..ti 4,.4 ». ,.. ..?JOAiI q '.( ??it ? "'3':iilt ,:"" ??k1 ,:;?$ ? - `Y?• e.`CC n • . : w :, ??vf ?• +r.. :t, FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION ;f rt Project Name • Applicant " n Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program ' Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet r t PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING '•tr - - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 § x" - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) -'- A - Riverine Flooding * '. small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 - . (y . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8'9 10 . B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 + r - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total i PRI 1 MARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANY. ? r .,. + ?.s Channel Capacity - Dike Repair 9 8 ] ' r Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal --_-- Vegetation Management ? 5 3 4 ,.a r , Flood Control Machinery & Equipment . Access Repair • A w r ? p!' PO Total x Work Activity Value Project Tot l a il a X l FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION s Project Name .. Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram - Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING .t Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 -` _ - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 "? --5` - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) q A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK -_° Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Chanr,e; . I ignment 7 i Control r Oebis Removal Debris 5 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery b Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X 3L5. r S. t k .. ,?, ? 7j i M1 qr ? a •'r'y • S7 Sf1"• R y'' ? ' j{ ,"` ? ? iU '?!'?1 [ ?,?39h7 i? ,:. ? t .vl ? FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION a " r?s Project Name - Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram `'- Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved --- 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding _ . small streams (0-1000 cfs) larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence - Disruption of Public Services PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery b Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total 5 6 7 8910 -516 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 -' S 3 2 1 x = fi u 'A 1 . FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant i '*1 Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram - Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet ' - ..': ?a PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - , small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal - Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = x RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 (4 P ?'. FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant i Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program '.? Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet r t - PUBLIC BENEFIT (ACTORS RATING ggg ' ` ;? =Q•, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 _ Number of People Involved --- 4 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) v A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 r . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - C l 89 10 ° J y oasta Flooding/Tidal Influence 51 6 7 _ ,e - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK ° Channel Capacity Dike Repair 8 ^? Channel Alignment ] , - Erosion Control 6 '! Debris Removal Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment -- 2 s t,G 1 Access Repair 1 i 3 4 n PB Total x Work Activity Value Project Total x r '4lP A NTB LL ? qt f ?1 .0. ' 'S Yj.N., FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name • _ ' Applicant _ -; Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program `.r Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet + PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 f - Number of People Involved L 5 6 7 8 i ? Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding iJ3 _ small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 _ larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 y PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK 0 Channel Capacity - 9 Dike Repair 8 i Channel Alignment 7 - + t Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal -- ---- -- 5 ,?. Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 n~s. + PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total % _ ? r +ti i h ? f 1?? ? j+ r r ?p Qi > a i tJ \ ' a 1, df? ,? ff b 5 I dr it "+i . r , r. Q? i I Y ' ? ! 4? • ! ? Y i a PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X = Y J .? L J d. 1} r? ? C ? J , Y 1 - ti?l; t n FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION f p Project Name Applicants r Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs). 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal --- ^- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X = i ' n 7av r 7" 1 i=rtr FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name r? Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro Mm Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS _ RATING, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved -- 4 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8'9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal -- Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery G Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total - PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 X = { u? ?r A' H r I' ( f J ! 1 l ?j (ti. MS ,(? 1 r r tgr Y l i r cl .? rf ?.-`sl 6 ?. { 1 y ?i ? _ I - I 1 1. l? f w n n r k i ? f { ? w FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION - -- --------- Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal - Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery b Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 - 5 3 2 1 X 71 i sG (k`7 J ?' 4 t 7 _R4?^ !y? d F .fin t °. d4 I 1 ?, 1. ? lir ! w r 1 `t? I? w 7 1 ?: + P a it, 'ks7 pq ' ?= ' , # pCRe r „ ,?, _L "?2a ?rrr i r ra L e? ,t - FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name _ Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved L 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8,9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery L Equipment 2 Access Repair I PS Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total - X - 9 :A Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 t. - N b f _ um er o People Involved -- 6 5 6 7 -, - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8'9 10 ?. B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - - - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 s PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK 'rFf ' Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 • n6, _ o-, _ Channel Alignment . „r s Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management 3 6 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 <<., Access Repair l i _ rr PB Total x Work Activity Value Project Total x t FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 • - Number of People Involved L 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 ?d larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 .i - PB Total ;s PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery G Equipment - Access Repair PS Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 X N ?i PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved - L 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal - Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery s Equipment - Access Repair RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATINf, Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 + - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 89 10 ' B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 g:-f PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment _ 2 Access Repair i P8 Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = x 4j a m n tT?Fp7+?o?w? » ?y 4 4?. ., 4? b + 1 f ? + y? ,y J Y :Z .?.,xr izmLl ._ ' ? ? y dt ? FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name 1 Applicant r? - Flood Control Assistance Account Program i A li i S R i Sh t P Y A ' - pp cat cor ng at ee roject on ng x . r PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 h? Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) =lc 3 A - Riverine Flooding - • small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) - 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total - PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK dfr."" Channel Capacity 9 9 + '! Dike Repair 8 - '` Channel Alignment 7 ;(i r Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ------- - 5 " Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 - Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X Flood Control Assistance ACCOUnty Pro ram Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet r a r PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence - Disruption of Public Services 567 8 9 to 567 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X = ? m '7 - c : C • 1,6 " . FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name su Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program P t A li i ? rojec pp cat on Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BEN EFIT FACTORS RATING .,? - - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 , - -??"?^^ - Number of Peo le Involved 4 6 8 F ,? 5 p 7 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) •r.,;; A - Riverine Flooding • small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 - larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 89 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ' Y PB Total . ? PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 z ?' r Dike Repair Channel Alignment 7 x.11' Erosion Control 6 { Debris Removal ------- 5 Vegetation Management 3 q Sir. • Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 ' Access Repair 1 R PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant' t' Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet ' PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 , - Number of People Involved -- 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) p r A - Riverine Flooding - $ , small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total - PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery s Equipment - Access Repair RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X a r' h w I. r dh 7 S r F 1 r 5 Y' 11? 1qh? ?1,fP??yq? , J Y 1? 1 ?F u 1 V I FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION k° Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet ' `. _- t PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING ,-, •i - ,? - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved -- 4 5 6 7 8 •?' d ' - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) . _ A - Riverine Flooding - . ' ' • small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 -; larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 89 10 ?•?.. ;' ' B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 3E ; PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 7 r Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 a Debris Removal ----- - 5 ??. • Vegetation Management 3 - ;; i Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total ra X 'i Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating 'Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved . --- L 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8'9 10 8 - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 TO PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair I PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X k ` - r*c SS$ 1 k 7 ? r-?] ye aaaa. a? att.."., _;? lnP. 'R(!+' 'c. S" yytMy. 'h? ,c+ d s. - FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATINf, Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved - - L 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = "• A - small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal --_? - 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X Ab 7 Y I ?0"? 1 t, t7, C nry?? 7y 1 l -_ 4'Pm'? ! 1 A 1111 y V K ` , l ` 4 +l 1 ? t l . t i? r l 1 rQ ,.. .. ,..? _.:_:,.::.t<_...:..?._?,.,.:: ?_ .. .. ?. ?i1 ?..S°;`. -.?iL•.?_,.?.•J_'__?.a.c._.e,...iC4_.??'t.+rw'k>='wM ' Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram ?'3 - Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet :"• PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved _ L 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8,9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 t PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery s Equipment - Access Repair RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total - x = ?,' IV'4 5G 6 r 71 , FBA A 5 t & v ,a T AR- 1 ,i} Y 19 ? r ?^ 1 "? ? t i r 1SJi ? 4 ?? rtty'Wq'P + j ? L 1 v I l t t ?t .??,. I ? Fl ? ry u s ? ? A t? i Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal - Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery L Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 ? VQI X7.1 _ 4 d yy Mypy? .E ?.: FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION ?v Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet I.r ? PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 1• - Number of People Involved 14 5 6 7 6 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) = A - Riverine Flooding :. small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - C l t 8 9 10 oas a Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 w - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total ,f - PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity Dike Repair g i ,{ r e Channel Alignment Erosion Control D 6 ! ebris Removal Vegetation Management 3 - .. Flood Control Machinery E Equipment Access Repair p 1 ?axk . aw v,. PB Total x Work Activity Value a Project Total - x = FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION I Project Name y ?, real '????? s ' r kr$f as Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 TO B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 TO PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery & Equipment Access Repair RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X = ?Yf Y l y f 4r t ny ? ? Mil r ?. •? F ?Y t ? ? ?• m r? n. ? ? ?' a ,?M' J f? . ! ? t I r 1 h ^a, . " ?r!? afA '? ? ??, M;' r ? S°?fAa+e?'? ?1 ? ? ?y w t fat T t ?1 Iv 3?`ei??}?'1f ?{)F+l ??"?W tit r+.?o-?O? ? ? j f1 '! y ? f14 tip ? x '1 U + ._ . r M' 1i H :ti+f I - ? FI ,r 1 ! 1 ' y? y ,.•........,?,...,?..,.,. :, ;.. t. i.._:??.?. :_ :! •,.. ,. a__::? _.a ,,,, .•_ d ?•.?, a-? ,y.,, n? • ..+.k FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM FCAAP PROJECT EVALUATION h Project Name p ,i Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING Protection of Property of General Interest to Public - 6 7 8 9 10 ' - Number of People Involved - 4 5 6 7 8 ' - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) - A - Riverine Flooding = `? - small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 lar er ( 6 7 ' g streams greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - vu - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 R 6 I _ y PB Total i PRIMARY PROTECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 ` Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment - 7 . Erosion Control Debris Removal 5 3 Vegetation Management 3 , Flood Control Machinery & Equipment 2 r Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total x = . ? ? ° ??v?D I ? 4 IMsa,1t,?7?y?l?ts k3?{ rlkd ?r..B ?& i - 5 1? dr 14a > >{? r ? 5 ? r? ?_ ? Irk' (t?I; - f 31d+y rr ? I . ffi?( ._ r I „k+ ?? ? '6" ? y I? I r ? > ? ',{ yd ?^` list I I C IL ? f ? I ? k t ?" 1 f?4 ,? I ?t r ? A ,' ? }I 2} Ali !.. u1 ? I. {? r ? / ?? 1 r ? .?I ? 1 { I 4p ??? {?"? l? S 1 4 ? wr'f?n?"11 5 I i f ?G??} ? ?' 1. 1 ?1 ' r J f ti I -f r 11 J SI .'? I v % { r 1 }? 5? 1 F r ? I r L I ' ! ?T? )r? S i ,t. ? J1t lJr,?? r MIR Aw- h11 ,lp?yp 1 aI'1 IN, 4F isn,.?•.,?a_ .? ??? aa. - mom,, ? Ns ,?. ;ti. y FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION ?Ic d Project Name Applicant, Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet ? - k PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING ?-''•' `` - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 .? '° } Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 "M t _ Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) .,d A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 - larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8,9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ` i rtri h PB Total ?`- " PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 A Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6. Debris Removal. Vegetation Management 3 s Y Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 g ; Access Repair 1` } i PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATINI', - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved -- L. 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) _ A.- Riverine Flooding - , small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7. larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 :k B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 T Dike Repair 8 ''`? qn» Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal -- ---- 5 f-, - Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 i PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total % - a _ (. 512.'b" i cyn r,'?Lli 1 I K a aara?.?.alit'T.f•x .J?:'? ,...tYlS? Vve ?ul°u994«?"Y"J.illra'awrw .. Mh } $ S, 4 1 I ? 4 a?'fr J + is I _ d t ? 1 ? { f} RIIh „I f ? 1 ? S t ? ?'l"+8'rS ?? f ? ? .. 'J'. 7 ? end J err i ,u rr L Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Access Repair Equipment PB Total x Work Activity Value m Project Total m X no, r rig ? ? ? ds? r? se i 4 it f- 4 ! 1 1 ? rl 1 ?t 4 rr? PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK i ti r _ + - . ?.-as =ndn k,'- r ,?. -, •? . ,4u ( ? ;i? FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION - Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet 4, r, PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING. - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 h - Number of People Involved -- 4 5 6 78 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or 8) A - Riverine Flooding - - small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 .' l,u larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total "e i?r x? _..._-a.......?i? FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name t Applicant p'- .-; Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program 'L Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 3 'k - Number of People Involved L 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 ? - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 i t ? ? Disruption of. Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 a PB Total i ' r t .? PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK ;a - Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 - Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal --- -- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 , PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total - X = rr , s Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8.9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 )0 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channei Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery 6 Equipment 2 Access Repair I PB Total x Work Activity Value m Project Total - x '1<'?n < w?,¢nw N' 'rtt fJm"s,wm? iY "'?a`1?s ekwti??a?. N i V ? 1 ? L Y }AS 1 y ?,ro r$ Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING. - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved - 4 5 6 7 8 FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION 'g. f •<+ s Project Name :. Applicant - I Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram .? Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet - ," PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 ,. - Number of People Involved - 4 5 6 7 8 ` - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) t A - Riverine Flooding - ' ` small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Di i 6 8 srupt on of Public Services 7 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 ?., PB Total f - r PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK } Channel Capacity Dike Repair 8 •..f - Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal ---- - 5 ' Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment Access Repair 1 14 _ PB Total x Work Activity Value Project Total % N. ? n ?? 1`. °aR"9 ?.N.W4?L?Gs?fi" t k „-' ?, r tz aMrktF?`C stn"'"q?"'?1el7PkAd?l7fltrtM1'6n'GT<` 1A f r? JSIti? 5 r ? ? ? ,t 4 ? 4 1 ( 1 1. ?+ ? v ? Y a t [ ?ir? i y ? _ ode _ Sw h ? - a m FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating 'Sheet RATING, - 678910 h 5 6 7 8 . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8.9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public - Number of People Involved - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - , PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ----- - 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total = X qz, lA ?„? k?4b?,yr} Y ?I ?ffrm Tq ?? ?(?y{f"`1' ? 4 "Y ?? r % f?j 11 iW 4? n ? a ` .? I t? 1?4 a"t r h + ?4 ! !? ?! % x i"?4L r 1 nn . 1 f y ?6Y s i ?? r r FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet .... "„. •_• - PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATINf,e- d ? Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8,_?. - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) u A - Riverine Flooding { small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7. g'9 10 J larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) u B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.9 10 PB Total ([ ?l 'a. PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 6' ' Dike Repair 8 7 f Channel Alignment 6 J, Erosion Control } 5 Debris Removal -'-- r B I,. Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery b Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PS Total x Work Activity Value Project Total X rl:r 1 V } 4 1`? {a t y,}?, ti ? l "a'Ir a ne 4 : .. a T' r? J ?k • .w ' f*v" ?'a'i+!ofmCahnv"{04V'V"r V, ; r i?}Ys?' j J? - f dr JA 1 1 i Y r{ r f * f I fl 9 _ m 1 r , {` ~?ar a 7 af? 1 r - ` i W FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PF QGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name ?6k Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accoun[y Pro Em Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved L 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal --' -' S Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X 1 i 1 k1 FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet } PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved L 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) '., A - Riverine Flooding = small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity y Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery 6 Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X = 1 ' 4 I ;: I 4 1? t h i?) 'E 4! (t!' a nal L 1 1 M ?'' VFp n s? r?rGW?y1 c 1' C1 ? r ? ? ? ii 1 ?. .4 1 ? r `4 ` I 1V { l ? ? c 1 1 a d ? 1? l 1 ,. I LYvFI! F 1 i? '?l 1f1 Y F _ Tr_ PH- ? h G $ k' - az i? ?3`d57. ? M rf p?[p I ? A,- F l? ?rS .r''. 6 4+ ......J •' 2 ,. , ? FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant F` r Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Protect Application Scoring Rating Sheet k• -:;4?.. PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING P . _ Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved - L 5 6 7 8 b w { - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal influence 5 89 to 6 7 r - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ?• y 9 d PB Total r PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 yx,p . Dike Repair 8 P Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery & Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 ..' PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X = FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION RAS' Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public - Number of People Involved M' - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or 8) A - Riverine Flooding - , . small streams (0-1000 cfs) . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence - Disruption of Public Services PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal -- Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = RATING - 678910 45678 -567,8910 567 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 x = r ? ma 4 y.? {{ yy ? S 1 t ? ? Y rye ' gN dt'$1 ` . t 7 ? , - - ?..? kA '?3 ? •;. ' .. ,? -; ahn. o Y ? 'i?.wur Y Y E? ? Yp as. PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved - 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8,9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) ?"°- - Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management OF Flood Control Machinery L Equipment Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = RANK 9 8 7 6 r 5 3 ^R1 ? ? ^ - ' q t ?IY ? 1 77A l?? I t 1? 1 h y . ??I , i I ( f1 ] I + ? . ?j J FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public - Number of People Involved - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - . small streams (0-1000 cfs) larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence - Disruption of Public Services RATING - 678910 L 5 6 7 8 - 5 6 7 . 8910 -567 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment - 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ------- - 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control machinery & Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total X il- WVIW x.._1 f x4 FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant n Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program s} Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet } 4 r 1 " FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - , . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ------ - 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair I PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X c B FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = small streams (0-1000 cfs) . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence. F C' n t 5 6 7 8910 567 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment - Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery L Equipment - Access Repair RANK. 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 PS Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X - i a I ; ,,. r r " FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name , Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating 'Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved h 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) ., A - Riverine Flooding -' . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 j Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment Access Repair RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X r FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION w Project Name A li 1. pp cant ? Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet s' PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, "-? Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 14 ° .a r - Number of People Involved -- !. 5 6 7 8 x - .'?mJ - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) < A - Riverine Flooding = , • small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 ' larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 9 10 8 ?y B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 , ?? - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK , Channel Capacity 9 a- Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control Debris Removal ---_-- 6 - 5 ,?'-. Vegetation Management 3 A .-r Flood Control Machinery G Equipment Access Repair 2 1 - ? • ? ?, .}} f i v r r PB Total x Work Activity Value Project Total X = 's?v FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION v Project Name t E Applicant E Y Flood Control Assistance Accounty Pro E - Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved L 5 6 7 8? - - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) - 5 6 7 - . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8,9 10 - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 67 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 . Dike Repair g , Channel Alignment 7 _ Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair I PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = x = 9? k ,uJ'r; k s + - FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION .? 4 Project Name 7) f, Applicant s r '.. Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet 4 1 PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING 7 - - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved -- 5 6 7 8 "`- r - - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) - A - Riverine Flooding - • small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 I - larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 ' B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK - • ,? Channel Capacity 9 b` Dike Repair Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 fl ` Debris Removal ------^ 5 Vegetation Management 3 ti c Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 '14 I z ' I PB Total x Work Activity Value =Project Total % ` car r? . t •n .3 Y,J 4 r li a 1h3 ? f YYll.... L zl. '; r 4 (.gAlira@n,?e ' 1? 1)' Sr ;yyj, ? ?l r t Cri ' ??n J 1 - ? '?'C ?' 4??5?7i ? ? ,? r ?ke5 kn! +r ,r) y- t L k?f ? I?j"uT? ?f Th I { 1 rt f ? f ( - { r ' r to . - 1 i , , I ^ r f ?.. ?Y ?r t f r? IV lvi ? 5 1 rat. } f o a r y(1 .f t 1? ? 1? ria I - t ill 9 _. LA Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People Involved -- 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - , small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) $ 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment - 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ----- -- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - 2 Access Repair 1 PIT Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total = X H r?s y y .a l Ird" FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal - Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment Access Repair RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 PS Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X ?. 7om 5 - +v. ?N ``!a', l f ? - W s`Lt?A'F?Trm? c gyp, ?n P ?V d ,1 ?1* i? mch' h 't?1C' ?' y tl'44 . 4 ? ? F y f.l li P51r r ', y(' t,?'; k t 9 B . 'e oat d? e Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating 'Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People involved 4 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8,9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 • 4 ? ";? ; ? ? "?%a ?.. ?.?5p,y'? ? r1?r 1 aM tti ?,{ -?? v N tT, I ? ,y ?? ?.: li Hf ? •Y Ii L 1 + Ft 4 s i f 4f ?i - .._.?_.r.__._?-_ A,: _ -t_..,_...Y-?_i_,..4 ?.. _....u__z_._.??1?T. ? a__._. ..?.. - J.d i.. .... ,r.. nn a•?k!?hi ?!klii' I nCk FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PTOGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name ? - Applicant .. k.., *? Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating She;[ ,;;.. y - G r PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING Protection of Property of General Interest to Pub lic 6 7 8 9 10 _ - Number of People Involved ---- 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 9 9 10 r _ B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 _ .? , i . - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 PS Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK ? - r} _ Channel Capacity 9 ? ' Dike Repair 8 '. Channel Alignment 7 -.t Erosion Control 6 , ? 1 Debris Removal ---- 5 ? Vegetation Management l d 3 1 '- 4 - F oo Control Machinery E Equipment 2 ° Access Repair 1 s • i r ? PIT Total x Work Activity Value Project Total X = ggy?t, 5?. ? $ ? vav}?.r?'®y?._?u7?Ycw:?' ?YM754ti n/ '?:a?°:y" .s}15 -? ? ? c $?`k' eN?kiry? '• :$?7 « '' ta? C `N4ti m d ??. , , .. ., .. `e o--._ . . . u.a ...w ' . ._+ b_.W an 3 FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name 3 _ Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet " A PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 - - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 • • - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) } A - Riverine Flooding small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 ? - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total 1 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacit 9 ' y Dike Repair 8 .' . Channel Alignment Erosion Control 6 r Debris Removal --- -- 5 ?, Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery 6 Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 ,. 9 Fir ? l` PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X 1P 1 Y A y ?? i ,? .r{f;?T P f ' y} M1 F J t ? p ?? ? F r ? 11 'tf ? 4 J ? c JJJJJ `r a r k C r a ? ! y3? P? i .. .awe ?1,..?- •rv...! i ??? I aryl ? Ky ` t d y RA" FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION ' g Protect Name Applicant i Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring/Rat I ng Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Numberof People Involved h 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding _ small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 )0 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery L Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value a Project Total - PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 5 3 2 1 X a _ a' 9 ti ell, ?.7 Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program xI . Project Application Scoring/Ra U ng 'Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, ; - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 to - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) r A - Riverine Flooding - `p . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6.7 _ - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 io ? PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal ---'? 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery 6 Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total % = 2 'D FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name - ? Applicant 'Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet '?. PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 Number of People Involved - 4 5 6 7 8 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - , small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7. . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal -- - 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery L Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PS Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = X ?f yy? wv ? r 7tir' ? Ira 1 W kq FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public - Number of People Involved -- - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding - RATING - 678910 L 5 6 7 8 . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8.9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal --- Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery s Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = PB Total RANK 9 8 7 6 -- 5 3 2 1 X = r .ea r{ ) ?a5r?(i3brf ?? Yttt'd V 1y ? ? ? q ? R dt _ trey ? r ?vr M lsw.r Nz- f i ?.k,' r v .e 4 r fffN ? y ,f J :? ? ?1,Y R { ? ' 4 ? 1 4 f11 I k{h t ! y I i } _1 F ? t 1 FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet i. PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATINf, F, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 B 9 10 - Number of People Involved 4 5 6 7 8 'F - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 Y larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 - B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 51 6 7 f $ - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 - PB Total - ; PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Q Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal --'?-"'- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total X r< ?a z '?1 C n .Ar"1P" l GF :i?XYU r r s udLiTG..u ! tlil Pl{yrl,+h., , 4N". S t. 5 li ` OW 711 p T,% 1, c? l?6Fk7°?17J f?. 1 ?` ,t ?R{ } (.?.y ?, e ? ?? 17 r ? yh e F4 1 _ . P!n" .. ? ?t i1 ..k , ?t4? s t Applicant Flood Control Assistance AccoH Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public Number of People Involved -- - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = . small streams (0-1000 cfs) larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence - Disruption of Public Services RATING - 678910 45678 5 6 7, 8.9 to -5.6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal -- Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery E Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total = x 75?? RANK 7 L 5 3 2 1 t 1 ?t7 , Al 9 b 1 cd n t ? t V S? k 2 d a ? I { N ? tip 5j , _ r t y i ;. %r FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION , Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Account Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet P8 Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total = X ." a '«E Applicant r1 Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING, - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 - Number of People-Involved 4 5 6 7 8 "} v'A - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = , . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 F . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total ,t6 PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 - Channel Alignment ] Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery C. Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total % l ? t ?? a- ti ri. _h>sax.- ?a:,h'i{u''BII.::_'??x ?"s xxa ar_-?'x-,iws9a?_ a,, a _._.•,.,:" r A FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Protect Name d? Applicant r Flood Control Assistance Account Pro ram Pr A li .; -- i oject pp cation Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATINf, Protection of Property of General Interest to Public 6 7 8 9 10 .S h' , ? Number of People Involved p 5 6 Z 8 ° a.. ' - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) . A - Riverine Flooding = - . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 - . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8,9 10 B - C l - ,; oasta Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) Channel Capacity Dike Repair Channel Alignment Erosion Control Debris Removal Vegetation Management Flood Control Machinery & Equipment - Access Repair PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total s x RANK 8 AN 7 6 2 1 Th (, .,fib 1 a 01 FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant --,' r Flood Control Assistance Account pro ram L Project Application Scoring Rating Sheet PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS RATING 3?t - Protection of Property of General Interest to Pu blic 6 7 8 9 10 r - Number of People Involved _ 45678 ? - Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding = ., small streams (0-1000 cfs) . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) B -C 5 6 7 g'y 10 oastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5 6 7 - Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total i s PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment Erosion Control 7 6 Debris Removal 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery E Equipment 2 Access Repair 1 PB Total x Work Activity Value = Project Total - x y ,1 TP I ,? 5 "? N n d. r9 +11. ?m A i 6 yl i Y? Ybi'n. .,nf?l' 71? I ?~ -r x C t?l 7,7=43 i ?04? 6 , .>F '?ltG .I.I r t' ' '( !aik x Id.;l 14 { ? ff 1 wi yy 1 ?? r »' _ 1 ? a t, 1 ;(0,1,11 l ?r ? 11 ` k ?. 1 1 O. ti a FLOOD CONTROL ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT PROGRAM (FCAAP) PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name Applicant Flood Control Assistance Accounty Program Project Application Scoring/Rating Sheet d; 0 PUBLIC BENEFIT FACTORS - Protection of Property of General Interest to Public - Number of People Involved RATING 678910 u5678 Water Quantity Controlled (Select A or B) A - Riverine Flooding . small streams (0-1000 cfs) 5 6 7 . larger streams (greater than 1000 cfs) 8 9 10 B - Coastal Flooding/Tidal Influence 5,6 7 Disruption of Public Services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PB Total PRIMARY PROJECT WORK ACTIVITY (Select One) RANK Channel Capacity 9 Dike Repair 8 Channel Alignment 7 Erosion Control 6 Debris Removal --------?- 5 Vegetation Management 3 Flood Control Machinery G Equipment 2 Access Repair I PB Total x Work Activity Value - Project Total x