2009/2010 Annual Report

k

Regional Flood
Control
D
istrict
k
Pima County, Arizona

Pima County Administration
					

2009/2010

Board of Supervisors
Ramón Valadez, Chair, District 2
Ann Day, District 1
Sharon Bronson, District 3
Raymond J. Carroll, District 4
Richard Elías, District 5
County Administrator
C.H. Huckelberry
Deputy County Administrator
Public Works
John M. Bernal
Director and Chief Engineer
Suzanne Shields
Deputy Director
Chris Cawein

Flood Control District
Advisory Committee
David Parker, Town of Oro Valley
Janice Hughes, District 4
Keith Brann, Town of Marana
Mike Zeller, Chair, City of Tucson
Andy Dinauer, City of Tucson
Justin Turner, District 3
Linwood Smith, City of Tucson
Joel Gastellum, City of South Tucson
Phil Pearthree, District 5
Doug Shakel, Vice Chair, District 1
Vacant, District 2
Robert Welch, Town of Sahuarita

Message
from the Chief Engineer

O

n behalf of the Board of Directors
of the Pima County Regional Flood
Control District, I am pleased to present the District’s Annual Report for
fiscal year 2009/2010. The following
are a few of this year’s highlights, which are
described in more detail later in this report:
In 2006, we received record rainfall events
in June, July and August with 8.6 inches of
rainfall; two inches more than the average.
FEMA approved $8 million in funding for
emergency work and repair projects for the
flood damage. Construction of flood damage
repairs and the design of improvements for the
Pantano Wash continued in fiscal year 2009/10.
In addition to bank stabilization and sediment
removal projects reflected in our CIP the debris
flows, erosion and deposition associated with
these floods as well as changes over time
necessitated the restudy of numerous foothills
floodplains. During FY09/10 numerous hydrologic and hydraulic floodplain mapping Special
studies were conducted on foothills washes
including; Trails End, West Speedway, Camino
de Oeste, Ventana Canyon, Esperero, Flecha
Caida, Woodlan and Craycroft Washes.
In September of 2009 the District completed
the Lee Moore Wash Basin Management Study
and entered the implementation phase. The
District worked with the City of Tucson, Town
of Sahuarita, and Arizona State Land Department on flood hazard mapping. This study is a
multi-year comprehensive study that estimates
flood and erosion potential for the watershed,
maps watercourses, identifies existing and
potential problems and develops preliminary
solutions and standards for sound floodplain
and stormwater management. The total
watershed project is approximately 213 square
miles including parts of unincorporated Pima
County, the City of Tucson, Town of Sahuarita,

Coronado National Forest and Arizona State
Land.
In addition to improved floodplain mapping
and risk identification, our Capital Improvement Program continues to be successful
resulting in the completion of several flood
safety projects each of which provide multiple
benefits including flood control, recreation
and neighborhood stabilization. These
include:
• Santa Cruz River Bank Protection in the
vicinity of Continental Ranch;
• Rillito River Linear Park, Alvernon to
Craycroft;
• CDO Bank Protection and Linear park at the
Omni Golf Course; and continued work on the
• Pantano Wash Bank Protection.
Perhaps most significantly during Fiscal Year
2009/2010 the Board adopted a revision to the
Floodplain Management Ordinance. Significant
improvements included a system of enforcement, authorization for adoption of technical
policies, as well as protection and identification
of Critical Facilities.
I hope you’ll take some time to read this year’s
annual report, which details our programs, CIP
projects and other District activities. This year’s
report and all previous annual reports are also
available at: www.rfcd.pima.gov.

Suzanne Shields, P.E.
Chief Engineer and Director
Regional Flood Control District

Regional Flood Control District 		

				Pima County, Arizona
Vision

The District will continue to be a
leader in providing quality flood protection and floodplain management
services within Pima County.

Mission

The Pima County Regional Flood
Control District is a regional agency
whose mission is to protect the health,
safety, and welfare of Pima County
residents by providing comprehensive flood protection programs and
floodplain management services. These
services emphasize fiscal responsibility,
protection of natural resources, and a
balanced multi-objective approach to
managing regional watercourses, floodplains, and stormwater resources.

Overview
of the District
To comply with federal law, the State of Arizona
passed the Floodplain Management Act of 1973.
This act authorized Arizona counties to adopt
rules and regulations concerning management
of floodplain areas. The Arizona State Legislature
subsequently authorized flood control districts
to levy taxes on real property to finance district
operating expenses. The Pima County Board
of Supervisors, which sits as the Pima County
Flood Control District Board of Directors (Board),
organized the Pima County Flood Control District
(District) on June 5, 1978. The District first became operational on July 1, 1978.
Provisions of state legislation also allow incorporated cities and towns within Pima County to
undertake their own floodplain management
duties and regulatory functions. In Pima County,
the incorporated areas of the City of Tucson, the
Town of Oro Valley, the Town of Marana, and
the Town of Sahuarita have elected to assume
floodplain management duties in their respective
jurisdictions. The District is responsible for floodplain management activities for the remainder of
unincorporated Pima County (with the exception
of national forests, parks, monuments, and Indian
Nations) and for the City of South Tucson.

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

5

Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives of the District represent both flood control and resource
protection. The District’s approach varies from traditional flood control approaches
because of a multi-benefit public philosophy. The District recognizes that it is necessary and desirable to maintain a balanced relationship between human communities
and the land and resources that sustain them. To that end, the following policy goals
and objectives have been adopted by the Board as part of the District’s Floodplain and
Erosion Hazard Management Ordinance:
• Minimize flood and erosion damages.
• Meet or exceed state and federal
requirements relating to floodplain
management.
• Establish minimum flood protection 		
elevations and damage protection
requirements for structures and other
types of development.
• Regulate encroachment and building
development within areas subject to
flooding or erosion.
• Encourage the most effective
expenditures of public money for flood
control projects.

• Help maintain a stable tax base by
providing for the protection of regulatory flood and erosion hazard areas.
• Inform the public when property is in a
regulatory floodplain or erosion hazard
area.
• Encourage the preservation of natural
washes and enhancement of the 		
riverine environment.
• Emphasize overall watershed
management.
• Protect, preserve and enhance
groundwater recharge.

• Minimize damage to public facilities,
utilities and streets located in regulatory
floodplain and erosion hazard areas.

6

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

District Organization
Board
of Directors

Flood Control District
Advisory Committee

General Manager
(County Administrator)

Director
Public Works

Manager
Engineering Division

(Deputy County Administrator)

Manager
CIP/Project Delivery
Division
Chief Engineer
(Director)

Manager
Floodplain
Management Division

Deputy Director

Manager
Water Resources
Division

k

Manager
Planning and
Development Division
Manager
Infrastructure
Management Division

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

7

District Activities

Service Programs
Customer Service
The District encourages residents
to become familiar with flood related
hazards that may impact their properties or properties they are considering
for purchase. In order to assist in this
research, the District maintains an
abundant amount of information at our
customer service counter which includes
floodplain maps, elavation certificates,
detailed hydrologic and hydraulic studies,
historic and current aerial photos, and
topographic information.
Residents may discuss any of this
information with a hydrologist who can
provide additional information regarding
any limitations on the property or requirements that may apply for proposed
improvements due to the extent of flooding or erosion hazards.
Floodplain Management also provides
an efficient Special Flood Hazard Area

Identification service. This information
is conveniently provided in writing via
a Flood Hazard Information Sheet. This
form identifies whether the property is
located in or out of the federal floodplain
and/or floodway and whether the structure is in or out of the floodplain. This
service can be provided at our customer
service counter. Since 07/08 the District
has offered an online Flood Hazard Map
service. By going to http://rfcd.pima.gov/
fpm/hazard.html a user can enter a parcel id or address and download or print a
Flood Hazard Map.
Another customer service component
provided by Floodplain Management
includes performing field investigations in
response to constituent complaints and
concerns. Through these field investigations, Floodplain Management is able
to ensure that property owners are not
being adversely affected by improvements that they or their neighbors
construct, and can provide advice regarding improvements that can be made in
order to minimize the potential of flood
damage. If non-compliant improvements
are observed, Floodplain Management
personnel will proceed with compliance
enforcement actions.

Flood Protection Assistance

8

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

Floodplain Management
The goal of Floodplain Management is to
provide floodplain information, establish
development requirements and provide
assistance to Pima County residents with
drainage questions in order to minimize
the threat to life and property from flooding and erosion hazards. This includes
ensuring that any new development
within the floodplain is safe from flooding
and erosion hazards, does not adversely
impact adjacent properties, and maintains
the integrity of the floodplain.

Another important goal is protecting
natural resources within floodprone areas.
Floodplains typically support important riparian ecosystems and associated wildlife.
These riparian areas are also important
for their role in mitigating flood hazards by
maintaining stable flood flow conditions,
providing natural erosion control, as well
as promoting recharge into underground
aquifers. As such, it is beneficial to all
residents of Pima County that these critical
resources are protected and maintained.

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

One of the ways Floodplain Management
accomplishes these goals is by implementing floodplain regulations contained in
the Pima County Floodplain and Erosion
Hazard Management Ordinance (Ordinance). The Ordinance was developed to
conform to the National Flood Insurance
Program administered by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA),
which allows residents of Pima County to
purchase flood insurance. In addition, the
Ordinance includes provisions regarding
the construction of buildings and other
man-made structures within regulatory
floodplains. The Ordinance applies only
to those areas prone to flooding where
the peak discharge is 100 cubic feet per
second or greater, or prone to sheet
flooding. In other areas, the Ordinance
does not apply; however, other ordinances
may apply, such as the Grading Ordinance
administered by the Development Services
Department.

9

Floodplain and Erosion Hazard
Management Ordinance Revisions
The Arizona Revised Statutes provides authority to flood control districts to enact and enforce floodplain regulations. The adoption and
enforcement of these regulations is mandatory
for communities wishing to participate in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Residents and property owners may obtain flood
insurance only if the community implements a
responsible floodplain management program.

During FY 2009/2010 the District proposed the
following Ordinance revisions to clarify and
enhance floodplain requirements:

Pursuant to this authority, the Pima County
Regional Flood Control District (District)
currently enforces the Floodplain and Erosion
Hazard Management Ordinance No. 2005-FC2
(Ordinance). The purpose of this Ordinance
is to promote public safety and minimize the
potential for flood and erosion damage for developments that are impacted by the 100-year
or base flood.

16.08.350 Floodway area – Expands definition to inlcude areas of “confined flow” due to
increased hazard. This was the result of the
appeal of the Chief Engineer’s decision by the
Campbell Wash Coalition.16.08.770 Written
Finding by Chief Engineer – Adds a section to
define written finding in order to provide clarity as to what decisions are subject to appeal
to the Floodplain Board of Directors.

Floodplain management and flood control
improvements increase public safety, reduce
flood and erosion hazards, and protect public
and private property. For example, the July 31,
2006 flood on the Rillito Creek was measured
by the U.S. Geological Survey to be 39,000
cubic feet per second (cfs), which was greater
than the flood of 1983 (29,700 cfs). FEMA
established that there was a 100-year discharge
(32,000 cfs), yet the flood damages along
the Rillito were minimal because of structural
improvements and floodplain management.

16.12.050 Improvements to Non-conforming
Uses – Adds standards to ensure that improvements do not increase the flood damage
potential of a non-conforming use.

As Pima County continues to grow and in
response to changes in the NFIP, it is necessary
for the District to periodically update its Ordinance so that the language remains clear to the
public and relevant to the goals of responsible
floodplain management. The proposed revisions to the Ordinance will further ensure that
development within floodplains does not adversely impact adjacent properties, minimizes
the disturbance of regulated riparian habitat,
establishes erosion protection guidelines, and
improves compliance enforcement.

10

16.08.150 Cumulative Substantial Improvement – Defines cumulative improvements that
are made to non-conforming structures as
through the life of the structure as opposed to
just the last five years.

16.16.070 Floodplain – New delineations
required when – Adds requirement for District
approval and submittal to FEMA of Conditional
Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) prior to
recording of final plat, and District approval
and submittal to FEMA of Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to Release of Assurances or
Certificate of Occupancy.
16.20.015 Floodplain Use Permit – Exemptions
– Adds a section clarifying that improvements
that do not require a permit are NOT exempt
from the standards.
16.20.070 Certification of Elevation – Expands
requirements to conform to FEMA requirements.

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

16.26.050 Structures, Construction restrictions – Clarifies how to apply the standard for
emergency access during times of flooding
(depth times velocity squared).
(depth times the square of the flow velocity, or
DV2) restriction.
16.26.055 Critical Facilities – Adds new provision that defines a critical facility and requires
protection from the 500-year flood.
16.34.030 Manufactured Homes- Location and
placement conditions – Adds language that
allows for the development of construction
standards for piers, stem walls, and fill pads.
16.36.030 Grading, stormwater and drainage
improvements – Requires the delineation of
maximum encroachment limits so that developable portions of property can be disclosed
during the platting process. This is intended
to reduce the cost of engineer services for
individual property owners.
16.36.030 Grading, stormwater and drainage
improvements – New language that establishes timeframes for completion of subdivision
drainage improvements. (E.g. basins to offset
increased impervious area prior to building
permits)

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

16.36.030 Grading, stormwater and drainage
improvements – New language to emphasize
adherence to Clean Water Act requirements.
Chapter 16.38 Maintenance of Private Drainage Improvements – Expands the requirement
to maintain drainage improvements from
FEMA floodplains to all floodplains.
Chapter 16.56. Appeals and Variances –
Significant process revisions to clarify hearings
associated with appeals and variance versus
those associated with violations.
Chapter 16.64 Violations--Penalty – New
language defining the role of a hearing officer
and significant rewrite associated with new
compliance enforcement authority provided
by statute.
The revised Ordinance was approved in a 5-0
vote by the Pima County Board of Supervisors
acting as the Board of Directors for the Pima
County Flood Control District on May 4, 2010.
The Ordinance became effective June 3, 2010.
The proposed Ordinance revisions can be
found in their entirety at: www.rfcd.pima.gov.

11

ALERT

One of our most used services is the
District’s Automated Local Evaluation in
Real Time (ALERT) system, which has
been providing precipitation and stream
flow data from a series of gauges located
throughout Pima County since 1981. The
ALERT system was established as part of
a three-way agreement with the National
Weather Service (NWS), the Arizona
Department of Water Resources and the
District. The ALERT system was initially
installed to provide advanced warning
of potential flood flows on the upper
Cañada del Oro watershed as a result
of the Golder Dam breach. Federal and
state financial assistance combined with
funding from the District has allowed us
to expand the ALERT system. The system
of gauges now covers most of the large
watersheds in eastern Pima County
and currently includes 93 precipitation
gauges, 36 stream gauges, and four
weather sites.

12

The precipitation gauges relay rainfall or
snowfall amounts and intensities, stream
gauges measure the depth of flow in
streams, and weather stations provide
precipitation information plus wind
speed, temperature, relative humidity
and barometric pressure. This network
of automated gauges transmits data in
real time using radio telemetry transmitted directly to the District, NWS, and the
Arizona Department of Water Resources
office in Phoenix. The NWS uses this data
to produce flash flood watches and warnings and to ground-truth radar estimates
of precipitation. District personnel utilize
the information to assist emergency
response agencies including the Pima
County Department of Transportation's
Maintenance Operations staff during
storm events. Data generated by these
sites may be viewed at the
District’s rfcd.pima.gov/wrd/alertsys/
index.htm

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

Management Programs

Lee Moore Wash Basin
Management Study
In September 2009, the District completed the Lee Moore Wash Basin Management
Study to identify the regulatory flood and erosion hazards within the watershed and
develop alternatives to address those hazards. This study, one of the largest planning
efforts ever undertaken by the District, is a comprehensive study that estimates flood
and erosion potential for the watershed, maps watercourses, identifies existing and
potential future problems and develops preliminary solutions and standards for sound
floodplain and stormwater management.
The Lee Moore Wash basin was selected for this study based on the high-level of development activity that is expected to occur in this watershed over the next few decades.
The total project watershed is approximately 213 square miles including parts of unincorporated Pima County, the City of Tucson, Town of Sahuarita, Coronado National
Forest and Arizona State Land.
During prior year’s efforts to collect data, known flooding hazards were identified
including researching historical flooding data and current land use plans, map floodplains, as well as soliciting input from stakeholders and the public.
Based on this information, the District has formulated a floodplain management approach consisting of structural and non-structural alternative solutions to reduce or
eliminate flooding hazards and erosion. These include preservation of flow corridors
and rules of development.
The District has a comprehensive
assessment of flood and erosion
hazards and, once implemented,
the strategies in the plan should
reduce damage to property, loss
of life from drainage issues and
stormwater flooding.

Lee Moore Wash Basin

13

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

Foothills Washes Hydraulic and
Hydrology Studies
In 2006, Pima County received record rainfall events in June, July and August with 8.6
inches of rainfall; two inches more than the average. With these events large amounts
of debris including sediment flowed from the National Forest headwaters of the canyon
washes into the foothills residential area and more intense development within the
geologic floodplains of the desert basin floor. Since that time the District had focused
attention on repairing damages including restoring channel capacity along the major
watercourses and where damages were the most severe.
In addition to bank stabilization and sediment removal projects reflected in our CIP the
debris flows, erosion and deposition associated with these floods as well as changes over
time necessitated the restudy of numerous foothills floodplains. Furthermore a significant rainfall event in 2007 flooded homes along the Valley View Wash and highlighted
the need for updated mapping and hydraulic studies. During FY09/10 with completion of
the Lee Moore Wash Basin Management Study District staff turned their attention to the
numerous Hydrologic and Hydraulic floodplain mapping studies needed in the following
foothills washes;
•
•
•
•
•
•

Trails End,
West Speedway,
Camino de Oeste, Ventana Canyon,
Esperero,
Flecha Caida, and
Craycroft Wash.

These studies, conducted in-house
by PCRFCD staff utilized approved
local, state and federal methodologies to determine discharge
rates and floodplains limits and
have in most cases been used to
submit Letters of Map Revision
for approval by FEMA. These
“Technical Data Notebooks” use
better topographic, hydrologic and
hydraulic data than was available when the original FEMA maps were created. Furthermore these studies identified specific infrastructure including culverts, dip sections
and bridges which may restrict flow. Notices have been sent to every impacted property
owner specifically explaining if their buildings or land has been determined to be within
or not within the floodplain.
RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

14

Water Resources and Riparian
Habitat Management
This program consists of activities intended to prevent flooding, erosion and riparian
habitat loss by means other than constructing structural flood control improvements.
The District promotes and supports regional riparian restoration with the goal of recovering natural functions within riverine systems and establishing habitat for native wildlife.
Mitigation Guideline Revisions
The Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Management Ordinance (Ordinance) requires compensatory mitigation for disturbances to regulated riparian habitat. The Regulated Riparian Habitat Mitigation Standards and Implementation Guidelines (Guidelines) were developed as a supplement to Ordinance Number 1999-FC1 to provide guidance for applicants
going through the mitigation process. Since its inception in 1994, the riparian protection
regulations of the Ordinance have been revised twice, first in 1998 (Number 1999-FC1)
and again in 2005 (Number 2005-FC2). In a continuing effort to meet the goals of the
Ordinance and to ensure that requirements are being met, the District began revising the
Guidelines in FY 2007-08 to incorporate Ordinance revisions adopted in 2005.
The District selected a project team to conduct technical studies which would determine
the effectiveness of the current Guidelines, study offsite mitigation opportunities, and
assist them with the public participation process. Because of the complexity of offsite
mitigation issues, the revision process was split into two efforts, revision of the Onsite
Mitigation Guidelines and development of an Offsite Mitigation Program.
Public participation is an essential aspect in revising the onsite Guidelines and development of the offsite mitigation program. The Mitigation Working Group (MWG) was
created to assist the District in the process of revising the Guidelines, and members were
selected to represent a broad spectrum of the community.
MWG Members
• Southern Arizona Home Builders
Association (SAHBA)
• Tucson Audubon Society
• Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection
• Rincon Institute

•
•
•
•
•

American Society of Landscape Architects
Metropolitan Pima Alliance
Westland Resources
Diamond Ventures
Pima County Resident

Two MWG meetings were held in FY 2009-10. These meetings occurred on November 4,
2009, and January 7, 2010. These focused on revising the onsite guidelines. The revisions
to the Guidelines were not completed at the end of FY 2009-10 and are continuing.

15

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

“Habitat loss contributes to flooding erosion hazards.”

“Healthy habitat absorbs floodwater.”

16

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

National Flood Insurance Program
Map Modernization
The national response to flood disasters
prior to 1968 was to install dams, levees, and
seawalls; however, this approach failed to
reduce flood losses. Flood victims were often
left destitute because homeowners and business owners could not purchase private flood
insurance. Insurers were either unwilling
to offer flood insurance or premiums were
too costly—consequently flood
disaster costs and the number
of flood victims continued to
increase over time.
In 1968, Congress created
the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The
three basic goals of the
program are to:
1) Promote sound
floodplain management to
reduce future flood losses,
2) Provide flood insurance,
and 3) Identify flood hazards and create floodplain
mapping. The Federal
Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) identifies
flood hazard areas by
publishing Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs).
The first FIRMs for Pima
County became effective in
1983, however, revising the FIRMs to accurately reflect flood hazards is a never-ending
process. Watercourses move and watersheds
change over time, so the maps are continually being updated.

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

Digital FEMA Data
On October 23, 2008 FEMA announced
its intent to discontinue distribution of paper maps and initiation of the distribution
of Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps or
DFIRM’s. In anticipation of this announcement the Regional Flood Control District
(District) has been working with FEMA to
create a digital GIS library that includes
hyperlinks to all map change documents
such as Letters of Map Revision, and Letters of Map Amendments. In Fiscal Year
2008/09, the District obtained digital map
documents for all of the incorporated
communities in Pima County that participate in the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP).
We also made available
digital map products in the
form of ESRI shape files or
AutoCAD files to engineering companies to assist
them in preparation of
map revision applications
to FEMA. Conversion of
the paper to digital Flood
Insurance Rate Maps
facilitated comparison to
recent aerial photography.
This enabled District engineers and landowners to work together
in submitting more accurate information
for FEMA approval. In FY 09/10 we created a Mapguide comparison site so that
property owners could look to see how
the map changes would impact them.

17

Community Rating System:
Pima County a Top 6% Community
The Community Rating System (CRS) is
a voluntary incentive program that rates
local communities participating in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
who are interested in providing a level
of service that is above and beyond the
minimum NFIP requirements. Participating communities receive discounted flood
insurance premium rates in increments of
5%. For example, a Class 1 community,
whose service is considerably above the
minimum, would receive a 45% premium
discount, while a Class 9 community
whose service is nominally above the
minimum would receive a 5% discount.
A Class 10 community only meets the
minimum level required, which in turn

would not receive a discount for their
constituents.
The CRS classes for local communities are
based on 18 activities and are organized
under four categories: 1) Public Information, 2) Mapping and Regulations, 3)
Flood Damage Reduction, and 4) Flood
Preparedness.
In recognition of the excellent level of
floodplain management performed by the
District, Pima County is a Class 5 Community, which yields a 25% discount in flood
insurance premiums for our constituents.
Pima County ranks in the top 6% of all
participating communities nationwide.

Pantano Wash: Pantano Townhomes Bank Protection

18

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

Floodprone Land Acquisition Program
FLAP provides relocation assistance to property owners and purchases flood damaged
land, whether it is improved property or vacant land. Specific criteria used to rank FLAP
applications and determine eligibility include the extent of flood damage or severity
of potential flood and erosion hazards on the property. The highest priority is given to
improved properties that have or may suffer significant damage as a result of flooding.
This program is completely voluntary and is designed to assist property owners who
are likely to experience, or have experienced, flooding which resulted in severe damage and flood hazards. The community also benefits from these acquisitions, which
increase open space for overbank storage, enhance groundwater recharge, and provide riparian habitat preservation, wildlife corridors, passive recreation opportunities
and protects cultural resources. FLAP also protects emergency responders and county
resources from harm by reducing potential rescue needs.
Additional grant monies to purchase additional floodprone and damaged property
became available after subsequent disasters because Pima County had an established
floodprone land acquisition program.

Before Flood

After Acquisition

19

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

In 1986, after voters approved general obligation bond sales of $20 million for floodprone land acquisition, a land acquisition plan was adopted by the Pima County Board
of Supervisors outlining criteria to guide the District’s overall acquisition efforts and allow the dedication of tax levy revenues to be used for acquisition of floodprone lands.
This newly adopted plan aided in the expansion of the program to include purchasing
undeveloped land to prevent future floodplain development in sensitive riparian areas
and to meet the open space goals of the community.
In fiscal year 2009/2010 the District spent $4,244,185 and added 888.5 acres of land to
the FLAP inventory bringing the total of District-owned property to 10,343.76 acres at a
cost of $67,452,037 since the program’s inception.

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

20

Capital Improvements Program
Fiscal Year
July 1, 2009-June 30, 2010
CIP No.

Project Name

Completion Date

Total Cost

5SCRCR

FC5.09 Santa Cruz River Bank Protection in
vicinity of Continental Ranch

August-09

5,740,067

5RRLPA

FC5.08 Rillito River Linear Park, Alvernon to Craycroft

February-10

5,421,946

5FGOLF

FC5.10 CDO Wash Bank Protection & Linear Park:
Omni Golf Course

April-10

4,159,340

5WJAIL

West Branch Jail Erosion

May-10

3,370

5LNINO

Los Nino Park / Sewer Line Channel Erosion

May-10

828

5ACWTV

Agua Caliente Wash at Tanque Verde Road

June-10

873,624

5PTOWN

Pantano Wash: Pantano Townhomes Bank Protection

June-10

701,153

5PMULL

Pantano Wash: Mullins Landfill Bank Protection

June-10

515,399

5WBGCS

West Branch / 36th Street Grade Control

June-10

34,168

5GVDW7

Green Valley Drainageway #7 Erosion

July-10

118,770

TOTAL			

$9,143,828

FC 5.09 Santa Cruz River Bank Protection in vicinity
of Continental Ranch
The Town of Marana developed plans for bank protection on the west bank of this segment of the
Santa Cruz River between the Yuma Mine Wash and Cortaro Road as part of the development of
a regional park that was authorized in Pima County’s 1997 General Obligation Bond election. The
project included the construction of approximately 1.3 miles of soil cement bank protection between Ina Road and Cortaro Road. The County provided bond funding and flood control funds for
the park and bank protection, respectively. The District secured all right-of-ways for this project.

FC 5.10 CDO Wash Bank Protection & Linear Park:
Omni Golf Course
This section of the Cañada del Oro Wash is bank protected from the Union Pacific Railroad on the south bank and from just west of Thornydale on the north bank to the Omni

21

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

Tucson National Golf Resort. The proposed project provided a river linear park on the
south bank between Thornydale Road and the north end of Omni Tucson National Golf
Resort plus a paved bike path connection to the Rillito River Park via Thornydale Road. It
included a paved pathway on the south bank, landscaping, irrigation, and 6 pedestrian
bridges. It also included underpass ramps at Thornydale, Ina Road and Magee Road,
a parking node at Magee Road with ramadas and a restroom, a parking easement at
Thornydale, as well as a reclaimed water irrigation system.

Pantano Wash: Mullins Landfill Bank Protection
On July 31, 2006 the observed peak flow in Pantano Wash at Broadway Blvd wash measured to be
15,900 cfs, this corresponds to between a 25-30 year event. Existing soil cement bank protection
toe was exposed at Mullins Landfill. The District provided temporary riprap to stabilize the toe and
worked with FEMA to provide a permanent solution to the potential failure created by the monsoon
flood. The temporay repairs were completed in 2007, while the permanent bank protection solution
was be designed.
The project included removal of the temporary riprap toe, extending the toe an additional 8 feet
below the thalweg, and providing 2 new grade control structures to reduce the potential for future
toe exposure at the landfill.
The project was bid and awarded on Nov. 17, 2009. Construction was started on Feb. 2, 2010 and
substantially completed by Sept. 1, 2010.

Pantano Wash: Pantano Townhomes Bank Protection
On July 31, 2006 the observed peak flow in Pantano Wash at Broadway Blvd wash measured to be
15,900 cfs, this corresponds to between a 25-30 year event. Existing rock and rail bank protection
failed adjacent to Pantano Townhomes and the TEP tower, threatening to further unravel the bank
protection and open the townhome to erosion. The District provided temporary riprap to stabilize the
bank and worked with FEMA to provide a permanent solution to the failure created by the flood event.
Temporary repairs were completed in 2007, while the permanent bank protection solution was be
designed.
The project included removal of the temporary
riprap bank stabilization, stabilizing and coating the
existing rock and rail with an 8 foot thick layer of
soil cement bank protection, new handrail, maintenance road and associated drainage structures.
The project was bid and awarded on Nov. 17, 2009.
Construction was started on Feb. 2, 2010 and substantially completed by Sept. 1, 2010. Landscaping March 2008, newly planted trees and hydroseed
mulch (looking west near the center of western
and handrail were completed by Oct. 2010.
project boundary)

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

22

Financial Overview
Revenues

Flood Control District Tax
Levy Rate 1981 to 2010

Fiscal
Year
Ending

*Levy
Rate

Tax

1981.............................0.5143......................$4,637,000
1982............................0.4683......................$5,342,000
1983............................0.5072......................$6,882,000
1984............................0.4739......................$7,652,000
1985............................0.5269......................$9,243,000
1986............................0.5102..................... $9,969,000
1987.............................0.5346.....................$11,713,000
1988............................0.7630....................$17,272,000
1989............................0.5592....................$13,730,000
1990............................0.5985....................$14,663,000
1991.............................0.5985....................$14,058,000
1992............................0.5871................... $13,689,000
1993............................0.5871....................$13,767,000
1994............................0.5398....................$12,678,000
1995............................0.4623.................... $11,379,000

Although the District receives assistance
from state and federal agencies to
construct major capital facilities, most of
the District’s funding is generated from
the property tax levy along with general
obligation bond sales authorized by the
electorate. Information on the District tax
levy rate is shown in the table at left

Expenditures
The table on Page 18 provides information on capital project expenditures for
projects completed during Fiscal Year
2009/10. The remainder of District expenditures goes toward debt service and
operating expenses, which include funds
allocated for maintenance of flood control
structures, floodplain management, planning and administration activities.

1996............................0.3596......................$9,368,000
1997.............................0.3596......................$9,467,000
1998............................0.3296....................$10,392,000
1999............................0.3246.....................$10,411,000
2000............................0.3046.....................$10,327,151
2001............................0.3046.....................$10,414,427
2002............................0.3546..................... $13,713,102
2003............................0.3546....................$14,467,389
2004............................0.3546....................$14,467,389
2005............................0.3546....................$14,467,389
2006............................0.3746....................$19,720,839
2007............................0.3746................... $22,620,303
2008............................0.3446....................$25,331,448
2009............................0.2935.................... $25,145,000
2010.............................0.2635.................... $23,142,303
Pantano Crumble

23

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

Financial Highlights

Fiscal Year 2009/2010
Revenues

The primary source of revenue is the
District’s secondary property tax levy of
$0.2635 per $100 of real property assessed
valuation (this figure represents a drop
in the rate from $.2935 in FY2008/2009).
In 2009/2010, the District received approximately $23.2 million dollars in tax levy
revenue. Other local sources of revenue
include revenue for capital improvements
from the sale of general obligation (GO)
bonds (2.6) and reimbursements from other
funds ($305,075). The total revenue from all
sources in FY2009/2010 was $26.1 million.
Revenues

FY 09/10

Property Tax
Federal Participation
State Participation
General Gov’t
Interest Income
Rents & Royalities
Misc.
Bond Proceeds

$23,142,303.00
$40,000.00
$$50,000.00
$35,000.00
$30,000.00
$150,075.00
$2,690,500.00
$26,137,878.00

Expenditures

88.5%
0.2%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.6%
10.3%
100.0%

The total expenditures for the District
in FY2009/10 were approximately
$22.6 million. The Capital Improvement
Program expenditures of over $12 million
were direct capital expenses. The annual
operating budget for the District was
approximately $10.4 million. The other
significant expenditure was $34,227 for
debt service on flood control bonds and
our contribution to the Pima Association
of Governments.

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

Expenditures

FY 09/10

Capital Improvements
Operating Budget
PAG
PimaCore/Debt Services

$12,169,981.67
$10,413,458.00
$30,266.00
$3,961.00
$22,617,666.67

53.8%
46.0%
0.1%
0.0%
100.0%

Breakdown of Expenditures
Capital Improvements

The expenditures for capital improvements
include engineering service costs for planning and design; construction costs; rightof-way acquisition and utility costs; and
other costs such as preparing new FEMA
Flood Insurance Rate Maps once a capital
project is completed.
CIP Expenditures

FY 09/10

Right of Way
Planning
Design
Construction
Utility
Public Art
Contingency

$4,160,019.55
$972,085.05
$456,795.01
$6,450,915.83
$130,166.23
$$$ 12,169,981.67

34.2%
8.0%
3.8%
53.0%
1.1%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%

Operating Budget

The Districts operating budget includes administrative, personnel, supplies, and service
costs associated with Flood Control Support,
Flood Prevention and Riparian Protection.
Flood Control Support Services include
programs such as customer service, permits,
public education, and financial management. Flood Prevention Services include
maintenance, flood warning, emergency
preparedness, and enforcement activities.
Riparian Protection services include the
environmental restoration, water resources
and riparian habitat management programs.

24

Coordination

A

with other gencies

Pima County Department
of Transportation
The District contracts with Pima
County for services from divisions
within the Department of
Transportation:
• Field Engineering Division
• Maintenance Operations
		Division

Federal Government

Local Governments

Several federal agencies participate in local flood control projects,
as listed below:

The District has entered into
intergovernmental agreements
(IGAs) to provide specific flood
control or floodplain management
services to, or to jointly fund flood
control activities with, the
following:

• U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
		(USACOE)
• Federal Emergency Manage		 ment Agency (FEMA)

• City of Tucson

• Real Property Division

• City of South Tucson

• Technical Services Division

• Town of Oro Valley

• Administrative Services Division

• Town of Marana

• Federal Highway Administration
		(FHWA)
• U. S. Bureau of Reclamation
		(USBR)

• Town of Sahuarita

Other Pima County
Departments
The District cooperates with other
Pima County Departments on
various projects and exchanges
information as needed:
• Pima County Attorney’s Office
• Development Services
		Department
• Department of
		Environmental Quality
• Health Department
• Natural Resources, Parks
		 and Recreation Department
• Tucson-Pima County Office
		 of Emergency Management
• Regional Wastewater
		 Reclamation Department
		(RWRD)

• U. S. Natural Resource
		 Conservation Service (NRCS)

Pima Association of
Governments (PAG)

• National Weather Service
		(NWS)

PAG facilitates coordination among
local government agencies, including the District, on environmental
matters affecting the community.

State Agencies
The District coordinates activities
with the following state agencies:
• Arizona Department of
		 Water Resources (ADWR)
• Arizona Department of
		 Environmental Quality (ADEQ)
• Arizona Game and Fish (AGFD)
• Arizona State Land Department

• U. S. Geological Survey (USGS)
• U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
		(USFWS)

Nongovernmental
Organizations
Other nongovernmental agencies
that the District works with
include:
• The Nature Conservancy (TNC)
• Cortaro-Marana Irrigation
		 District (CMID)
• Central Arizona Water 		
		 Conservation District (CAWCD)
• Metropolitan Domestic Water
		 Improvement District (MDWID)
• University of Arizona (UA)

25

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

Pima County Regional Flood Control District
97 East Congress Street • 3rd Floor
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1797
Design and layout by Pima County Communications Department

RFCD 2009/2010 Annual Report

26