1 / 50

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Planning Process Meeting

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers S a n F r a n c i s c o D i s t r i c t. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Planning Process Meeting. September 12, 2002. Today’s Agenda. Introduction & Agenda Overview District Commander Mike McCormick, US Army Corps of Engineers

sienna
Télécharger la présentation

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Planning Process Meeting

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. U.S. Army Corps of EngineersS a n F r a n c i s c o D i s t r i c t U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Planning Process Meeting September 12, 2002

  2. Today’s Agenda • Introduction & Agenda Overview • District Commander Mike McCormick, US Army Corps of Engineers • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Project Background • Tom Kendall, US Army Corps of Engineers • Review of Project Alternatives for Mainstem & Tributaries • Ada Squires, Walter Yep , Inc. • Project Schedule • David Patterson, US Army Corps of Engineers • Questions & Answers • Dave Dickson, MIG, Inc.

  3. U.S. Army Corps of EngineersS a n F r a n c i s c o D i s t r i c t U.S. Army Corps of EngineersProject Background

  4. Background Information A long history of floods & planning efforts… 1966 Federal Flood Control Act authorizes new project 1974-5 Local community declines to support any identified project alternative 1982/6 Flooding occurs along Salsipuedes/Corralitos Creeks 1995 Major flood event breaches River levees; flows exceed capacity 1997 Flooding occurs along Corralitos Creek 1998 Flooding occurs on Pajaro River mainstem 1999 Pajaro River mainstem is combined with Salsipuedes/Corralitos Creek project 2001 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers agree to Community Planning Process 2002 Corps evaluating a range of alternatives including those emerging from the Community Planning Process

  5. Background Information National Economic Development (NED) Plan • Plan developed in complete detail to: • Optimize flood damage reduction benefits consistent with protecting environmental quality. Federal Investment • Benefits must exceed costs. • Federal participation is capped by NED Plan.

  6. Status of Vegetation Maintenance Plan Planning Assumptions • Outcome of Operations & Management settlement will be considered in the final NED Plan. • Roughness coefficient will not be less than value established in Interim Plan. • Operations & Management manual to be developed after project construction.

  7. Selection of a Preferred Alternative October 2002 through January 2003 • Develop a NED Plan based on economic feasibility. • Counties asked to comment and concur on preferred alternative(s). • If local sponsors prefer a different plan, it is recognized as the Locally Preferred Plan. • A recommended plan supported by the Local Sponsors is presented to Army Corps of Engineers Headquarters.

  8. Corps of Engineers Alternative Evaluation Pajaro River Mainstem: • Raising in place • 100-foot set back • 225/100-foot setback • Floodwall in lieu of levee • Environmental corridor

  9. Corps of Engineers Alternative Evaluation Corralitos and Salsipuedes Creeks: T1. Raise in place T2. Setback T3. Hybrid

  10. U.S. Army Corps of EngineersS a n F r a n c i s c o D i s t r i c t Review of Project Alternativesfor Mainstem

  11. Level of Protection: 30 years Land Impacted: 56 acres Alternative 1 Features: Floodwalls/Levee Raise in Place Reach 1: • Reach 2: • Reach 3: Reach 4: • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Vegetation Roughness: • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Levee • No setbacks • Height: +4’ • Vegetation: moderate • Levee • No setbacks • Height: +4’ • Vegetation: moderate • Levee/Floodwall • No setbacks • Height: +4’ • Vegetation: moderate • Levee • No setbacks • Height: +4’ • Vegetation: moderate

  12. Cross Section Diagram: Floodwalls/Levee Raisein Place

  13. Economic/Financial Feasibility: Floodwalls/Levee Raise in Place Preliminary Estimates in Millions: • LERRD’s $ 7.4 • Construction 119.4 • E&D, S&A (15%) 19.0 • Total Project Cost* $145.8 • Annual Cost $ 10.4 • OMRR&R (1%) 1.2 • Total Annual Cost $11.6 • Benefits $15.8 • Net Benefits $4.2 • Benefit:Cost Ratio 1.36:1 • Non-Federal Cost (25%) $36.4 * Total annual cost does not include environmental mitigation or cultural resource costs.

  14. Reach 1: • Reach 2: • Reach 3: • Reach 4: • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Vegetation Roughness: • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides Level of Protection: 50 years Land Impacted: 290 acres plus 7 homes Alternative 2 Features: 100-foot Setback • Levee • 100’ setbacks • Height: 12’ (+5’) • Vegetation: variable • Levee • 100’ setbacks • Height: 12’ (+5’) • Vegetation: variable • Levee/Floodwall • No setbacks • Height: 7’/+4’ • Vegetation: variable • Levee • 100’ setbacks • Height: 12’ (+5’) • Vegetation: variable

  15. Cross Section Diagram: 100-foot Setback * Representative section; will actually vary by location.

  16. Economic/Financial Feasibility: 100-foot Setback Preliminary Estimates in Millions: • LERRD’s $ 18.6 • Construction 133.9 • E&D, S&A (15%) 22.9 • Total Project Cost* $175.4 • Annual Cost $ 12.7 • OMRR&R (0.6%) 0.8 • Total Annual Cost $13.5 • Benefits $16.1 • Net Benefits $2.6 • Benefit:Cost Ratio 1.19:1 • Non-Federal Cost (25%) $43.9 * Total annual cost does not include environmental mitigation or cultural resource costs.

  17. Reach 1: • Reach 2: • Reach 3: • Reach 4: • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Vegetation Roughness: • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides Level of Protection: 65 years Land Impacted: 330 acres plus 7 homes Alternative 3 Features: 225/100-foot Setback • Levee • 100’ setbacks • Height: 12’ (+5’) • Vegetation: variable • Levee • 225’ setbacks • Height: 12’ (+5’) • Vegetation: variable • Levee/Floodwall • No setbacks • Height: 6’/+4’ • Vegetation: variable • Levee • 100’ setbacks • Height: 12’ (+5’) • Vegetation: variable

  18. Cross Section Diagram: 225/100-foot Setback * Representative section; will actually vary by location.

  19. Economic/Financial Feasibility: 225/100-foot Setback Preliminary Estimates in Millions: • LERRD’s $ 20.3 • Construction 133.9 • E&D, S&A (15%) 23.1 • Total Project Cost* $177.3 • Annual Cost $ 12.8 • OMRR&R (0.6%) 0.8 • Total Annual Cost $13.6 • Benefits $16.8 • Net Benefits $3.2 • Benefit:Cost Ratio 1.24:1 • Non-Federal Cost (25%) $44.3 * Total annual cost does not include environmental mitigation or cultural resource costs.

  20. Reach 1: • Reach 2: • Reach 3: Reach 4: • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Vegetation Roughness: • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Floodwall • No setbacks • Height:12’ (+24’ below) • Vegetation: moderate • Floodwall • No setbacks • Height:12’ (+24’ below) • Vegetation: moderate • Floodwall • No setbacks • Height:12’ (+24’ below) • Vegetation: moderate • Floodwall • No setbacks • Height:12’ (+24’ below) • Vegetation: moderate Level of Protection: 30 years Land Impacted: negligible Alternative 4 Features: Floodwall In-lieu of Levee

  21. Cross Section Diagram: Floodwall In-lieu of Levee

  22. Economic/Financial Feasibility: Floodwall In-lieu of Levee Preliminary Estimates in Millions: • LERRD’s $ 4.4 • Construction 275.8 • E&D, S&A (15%) 42.0 • Total Project Cost* $322.2 • Annual Cost $ 23.0 • OMRR&R (1%) 2.8 • Total Annual Cost $25.8 • Benefits $15.8 • Net Benefits -$10.0 • Benefit:Cost Ratio 0.61:1 • Non-Federal Cost (25%) $80.5 * Total annual cost does not include environmental mitigation or cultural resource costs.

  23. Reach 1: • Reach 2: • Reach 3: • Reach 4: • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Vegetation Roughness: • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides Level of Protection: 25 years Land Impacted: 290 acres plus 7 structures Alternative 5 Features: Environmental Corridor • Levee • 100’ setbacks • Height: 12’ (+5’) • Vegetation: high • Levee • 100’ setbacks • Height: 12’ (+5’) • Vegetation: high • Levee/Floodwall • No setbacks • Height: 7’/+4’ • Vegetation: moderate • Levee • 100’ setbacks • Height: 12’ (+5’) • Vegetation: high

  24. Cross Section Diagram: Environmental Corridor * Representative section; will actually vary by location.

  25. Economic/Financial Feasibility: Environmental Corridor Preliminary Estimates in Millions: • LERRD’s $ 18.6 • Construction 133.9 • E&D, S&A (15%) 22.9 • Total Project Cost* $175.4 • Annual Cost $ 12.7 • OMRR&R (0.4%) 0.6 • Total Annual Cost $13.3 • Benefits $12.0 • Net Benefits -$1.3 • Benefit:Cost Ratio 0.90:1 • Non-Federal Cost (25%) $43.9 * Total annual cost does not include environmental mitigation or cultural resource costs.

  26. Economic/Financial Feasibility Comparison(Preliminary Estimates in Millions):All Mainstem Alternatives

  27. U.S. Army Corps of EngineersS a n F r a n c i s c o D i s t r i c t Review of Project Alternativesfor Tributaries

  28. Flood Protection Concepts for the Creeks Concepts evaluated for hydraulic proficiency: T1. Raise in place T2. Setback T3. Hybrid

  29. Cross Section Diagram: Salsipuedes Creek * Representative section; will actually vary by location.

  30. Cross Section Diagram: Corralitos Creek * Representative section; will actually vary by location.

  31. Levee/Floodwall • No setbacks • Height: +3.5’/2’ (4’ below) • Vegetation: moderate to high • College Lake • LOP: 50 years • Land impacted: 12 acres • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Vegetation Roughness: n = • Highway 152 Bridge • Replaced • Green Valley Road Bridge • Replaced • Highway 129Bridge • Replaced Alternative T1 Features: Raise in Place

  32. Economic/Financial Feasibility: Raise in Place Preliminary Estimates in Millions: • LERRD’s $ 6.5 • Construction 24.0 • E&D, S&A (15%) 4.6 • Total Project Cost* $35.1 • Annual Cost $ 2.3 • OMRR&R (1%) 0.2 • Total Annual Cost $2.5 • Benefits $28.8 • Net Benefits $26.3 • Benefit:Cost Ratio 11:1 • Non-Federal Cost (25%) $8.8 * Total annual cost does not include environmental mitigation or cultural resource costs.

  33. Levee/Floodwall • 100’ setbacks • Height: 5’/1’ (2’ below) • Vegetation: moderate to high • College Lake • LOP: 50 years • Land impacted: 65 acres & 17 structures • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Vegetation Roughness: n = • Highway 152 Bridge • Replaced • Green Valley Road Bridge • Replaced • Highway 129Bridge • Replaced Alternative T2 Features: Setback

  34. Economic/Financial Feasibility: Setback Preliminary Estimates in Millions: • LERRD’s $ 20.6 • Construction 13.1 • E&D, S&A (15%) 5.1 • Total Project Cost* $38.8 • Annual Cost $ 2.5 • OMRR&R (1%) 0.1 • Total Annual Cost $2.6 • Benefits $28.8 • Net Benefits $26.2 • Benefit:Cost Ratio 11:1 • Non-Federal Cost (50%) $19.4 * Total annual cost does not include environmental mitigation or cultural resource costs.

  35. Economic/Financial Feasibility Information Non-Federal Cost Sharing • 25-50% • Includes LERRD cost and 5% of project first cost September 12, 2002

  36. Levee/Floodwall • 150’ setbacks • Height: 8’/2’ (4’ below) • Vegetation: moderate • LOP: 100 years • Land impacted: 75 acres • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Vegetation Roughness: • Highway 152 Bridge • Replaced • Green Valley Road Bridge • Replaced • Highway 129Bridge • Replaced Alternative T3 Features: Hybrid

  37. Orchard Park: • Levee/Floodwall • No setbacks • Height: 7.5’/3’ (6’ below) • LOP: 100 years • College Lake: • Concrete channel • No setbacks • Height: 4’ • LOP: 100 years • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Reach 1: • Floodwall/Levee Height: ft • Setback Distance: ft on both sides • Highway 152 Bridge • Replaced • Green Valley Road Bridge • Replaced • Highway 129Bridge • Replaced Alternative T3 Features: Hybrid (continued)

  38. Economic/Financial Feasibility: Hybrid Preliminary Estimates in Millions: • LERRD’s $ 11.0 • Construction 19.2 • E&D, S&A (15%) 4.5 • Total Project Cost* $34.7 • Annual Cost $ 3.1 • OMRR&R (1%) 0.2 • Total Annual Cost $3.3 • Benefits $29.7 • Net Benefits $26.4 • Benefit:Cost Ratio 9:1 • Non-Federal Cost (37%) $12.7 * Total annual cost does not include environmental mitigation or cultural resource costs.

  39. Economic/Financial Feasibility Comparison(Preliminary Estimates in Millions):All Tributary Alternatives

  40. Alternatives with Best Potential (Preliminary Estimates):Comparing Range of Costs & Non-federal Dollars

  41. U.S. Army Corps of EngineersS a n F r a n c i s c o D i s t r i c t Project Schedule

  42. Project Schedule ‘02 2003 2004 2005 2006 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Develop Selected Plan(s) USFWS Prepare HEP & dCAR Prepare dEIS/R & dGRR Public Review of dEIS/R Prepare fEIS/R & fGRR 1st Construction Phase Prepare Plans & Specs 1st Construction Period 2nd Construction Phase Prepare Plans & Specs 2nd Construction Period

  43. NED Plan Development Process • TaskDate • COE & local sponsors identifythe NED Plan February 2003 • Preferred plan(s) potentaillymodified by USFWS HEP/CAR July 2003 • COE & local sponsors distribute draft EIR/EIS for public review September 2003 • Public review period of draft EIR/EIS ends December 2003 • COE & local sponsors distributefinal EIS/EIR for public review June 2004

  44. NED Plan Development Process (continued) • TaskDate • COE & local sponsors submit final EIR/EIS & GRR for approval July 2004 • Division Engineer’s Notice/ROD August 2004 • 1st Phase Construction begins July 2005 • 2nd Phase Construction begins May 2006 • Financial close-out & turn-overto local sponsors June 2007

  45. U.S. Army Corps of EngineersS a n F r a n c i s c o D i s t r i c t Questions & Answers

  46. U.S. Army Corps of EngineersS a n F r a n c i s c o D i s t r i c t U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Planning Process Meeting September 12, 2002

  47. Reserve Slides

  48. Floodwalls/Levee-Raise In Place 225/100 foot Setback 100-foot Setback Project Alternatives – Mainstem Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 • Level of Protection: 30 yrs • Levee • No setbacks • Height: +4’ • Vegetation: moderate • Level of Protection: 50 yrs • Levee • 100’ setbacks • Height: 12’ • Vegetation: variable • Level of Protection: 65 yrs • Levee • 225/100’ setbacks • Height: 12’ • Vegetation: variable

  49. FloodwallIn-lieu of Levee Environmental Corridor Project Alternatives – Mainstem Alternative 4 Alternative 5 • Level of Protection: 30 yrs • Floodwall • No setbacks • Height: 12’ (+24’ below) • Vegetation: moderate • Level of Protection: 25 yrs • Levee • 100’ setbacks • Height: 12’ • Vegetation: high

  50. Project Alternatives – Tributaries Alternative T1 Alternative T2 Alternative T3 Setback Hybrid Raise in Place • Level of Protection: 50 yrs • Levee/Floodwall • No setbacks • Height: +3.5’/2’ (4’ below) • Vegetation: moderate to high • Level of Protection: 50 yrs • Levee/Floodwall • 100’ setbacks • Height: 5’/1’ (2’ below) • Vegetation: moderate to high • Level of Protection: 100 yrs Levee/Floodwall • 250’ setbacks • Height: 8’/2’ (4’ below) • Vegetation: moderate • College Lake & Orchard Park included

More Related