PHYSICAL DATA Improved channel: Loyalhanna Creek: Length: 21,150 feet. Bottom width: 100 to 150 feet. Cutoff channels: Number: Two. Length: 2,500 feet. Bottom width: 100 to 150 feet. Bridge foundation protection: One railroad bridge. Status (January 1, 1964).-Construction not started. Completion schedule.-Channel and entire project, June 1967. JUSTIFICATION The borough of Latrobe, with a population of 11,932, 1960 census, is a mature, stable and well-developed community. The flood plain bordering Loyalhanna Creek contains extensive heavy industries, commercial and residential developments, and railroads. In times of flood, access to the area is cut off, and the entire economy of the area is disrupted. The maximum flood control of recent record occurred on October 16, 1954. The proposed channel improvement project will contain a recurring October 1954 flood discharge within banks through most of the developed areas of Latrobe, and will reduce primary flood damages from a repetition of the flood from an estimated $1,678,000 under natural conditions to an estimated $133,000 under improved conditions. Fiscal year 1965.-The requested amount of $300,000 will be applied to Initiate channel improvement_ Engineering and design_____ Total $250,000 35, 000 15,000 300,000 The work programed for the budget year provides for initiation of project construction toward the ultimate objective of providing urgently needed flood protection by June 1967. Non-Federal cost.-Local interests are required to assume at least 20 percent of the cost (except costs of planning, design, and acquisition of water rights) of the completed project allocated to the production of flood control benefits, payable either as construction proceeds or pursuant to a contract providing for repayment with interest within 50 years. Local investment for construction is estimated at $608,000 broken down as follows: Lands and damages_. Utility adjustments_ Reimbursement-- Total. $164, 000 81, 000 363, 000 608,000 Local interests are required to maintain the project upon completion. The annual cost for maintenance is estimated at $11,200. Status of local cooperation.-The Latrobe (Pa.) Borough Council, the responsible local cooperation agency, adopted a resolution on June 9, 1958, expressing willingness to comply with the requirements of local cooperation. The Flood Control Act of 1960, however, changed requirements of local cooperation which in effect results in reapportioning Federal and non-Federal costs. The borough solicitor, by letter dated February 21, 1961, to the district engineer, stated that the Council of Latrobe Borough had passed a motion expressing its desire to continue with the project. The letter further stated that it is felt that the borough can obtain sufficient aid to comply with the changed requirement. Comparison of Federal cost estimates.-The current Federal cost estimate of $3.103,000 is an increase of $29,000 over the latest estimate ($3,074,000) submitted to Congress. This increase is due to higher price levels. Project cost estimate Summary construction program (PB-1), fiscal years 1964 and 1965 Item Mr. KIRWAN. This is a new local protection project with a 20-percent local contribution requirement. Please describe it, give us the date of the first contract, and tell us what the local contribution would have been on the regular ABC requirements. General LEBER. The project will consist of about 411⁄2 miles of channel improvement on Loyalhanna Creek at Latrobe, Pa. It will protect most of the developed areas of Latrobe bordering the creek, against a flood equal to that of October 1954, the maximum of record, and annual benefits are estimated at $197,000, all flood control. Mr. KIRWAN. Can you give us the rationale for the 20-percent requirement on this project as against other local protection projects you want to start where the requirement is less? General LEBER. The local interests are required to assume at least 20 percent of the cost, and are doing so. If they had only provided what you say would be the normal contribution, it would have amounted to $245,000 instead of the $608,000 which they are to contribute. BUCKHANNON, W. VA. Mr. KIRWAN. Buckhannon, W. Va., $175,000. (The justifications follow :) BUCKHANNON, W. Va. (New) Location. The city of Buckhannon is located on the Buckhannon River in Upshur County, north-central West Virginia. Authorization.-1962 Flood Control Act. Improved channels: Buckhannon River: Length: 23,820. Bottom width: 72 to 112 feet. Cutoff channel: Length: 350 feet. Bottom width: 32 feet. Drop structures (number): One. Bridge foundation protection: One highway bridge. Status (January 1, 1964).—Construction not started. Completion schedule.-Channel and entire project, November 1966. JUSTIFICATION The city of Buckhannon, with a population of 6,386, 1960 census, is the county seat of Upshur County and is an important residential, commercial, agricultural, and educational center for an area containing about 20,000 people. Principal industries are manufacturing of oak flooring and other lumber items, and clothing manufacturers. Other manufacturing includes dairy, agricultural, lumber, coal mining, and building industry products. Development in the flood areas is principally residential and commercial. Floods almost annually overflow the river banks. The most severe flood of record was that of March 1918 and affected areas totaling 511 acres within the corporate limits of the city. Flooding isolates the business district from the remainder of the city, and disrupts most community activities with respect to economy and safety. Major floods, of the approximate magnitude of the maximum of record, have inundated about 50 percent of the corporate area of the city. The proposed channel improvement will eliminate damages from moderate river floods and will significantly reduce damages from major river floods. The primary flood damages resulting from a recurrence of the March 1918 flood are estimated at $439,000, July 1963 values. The proposed project will reduce these damages to an estimated $87,000 under improved conditions, a reduction of about 80 percent. Fiscal year 1965.-The requested amount of $175,000 will be applied to The work programed for the budget year provides for initiation of project construction toward the ultimate objective of providing urgently needed flood protection by November 1966. Non-Federal cost.-The initial investment required of local interests in construction of the authorized project is estimated at $60,000, of which $8,000 is for alteration of utilities and $52,000 is for lands and damages. Local interests are required to maintain the project upon completion. The annual cost for maintenance is $2,800. Status of local cooperation.-The Council of the City of Buckhannon, W. Va., the responsible local cooperation agency, adopted a resolution on April 21, 1960, expressing willingness to comply with the requirements of local cooperation. Comparison of Federal cost estimates.-No change from latest estimate submitted to Congress. Summary construction program (PB−1), fiscal years 1964 and 1965 Mr. KIRWAN. Please explain this new start and give us a date for the first contract award. In this case, the local cooperation is less than 5 percent, but the benefits are proportionate to those on previous projects. Would you comment on the relative abilities of the two towns to make contributions to their projects-assessed valuations, bonded indebtedness, and so forth? General LEBER. The project will consist of about 4.6 miles of channel improvement, including transition sections and a channel cutoff on Buckhannon River at or near the city of Buckhannon, W. Va. The project will provide a high degree of flood protection for the industrial and residential section of the city now subject to flood. The annual benefits are $75,900. The first contract would be let for the channel in March 1965. With regard to the local contribution, under the authorizing act there is no requirement here for the local people to contribute 20 percent. They are contributing the regular, normal land rights-of-way which we require in this kind of project, which, as you pointed out, amounts to $60,000, estimated, out of a total cost of $1,390,000. We have written to the city and asked if they could contribute up to the 20 percent. We have an answer here from the mayor of the city of Buckhannon, saying his town does not have the capability of providing more than the $60,000. Mr. KIRWAN. Will you put the letter in the record? (The letter follows:) CITY OF BUCKHANNON, W. Va., Re file No. ORPPG, local cooperation requirements, flood protection projects, Buckhannon, W. Va. PITTSBURGH CORPS OF ENGINEERS, U.S. Army Engineer District, GENTLEMEN: Reference is made to your letter of February 17, 1964, requesting the viewpoint of the city of Buckhannon concerning the present estimates of local costs for the above project. It is our understanding from your letter that the Committee on Appropriations have set the requirement for 20 percent of total costs as the local contributions share on local protection projects, and that this would mean that the local contribution share of the above project for the city of Buckhannon would be approximately $256,000. In view of our revenue picture, it is an absolute impossibility for us to provide in either work or cash the sum of $256,000 as our share for the above project. Our annual city budget is only slightly in excess of $100,000 and, you can see, that we simply do not have the resources to commit ourselves to payment of costs of this nature, despite the benefit which might be realized from the project. We feel that our original commitment represents the virtual limit of our share of this project, and any consideration that might be given to the making of an exception in our case would be appreciated. Sincerely, J. D. HINKLE, Jr., Mayor. EAST LYNN RESERVOIR, W. VA. Mr. KIRWAN. East Lynn Reservoir, W. Va., $500,000. (The justifications follow:) EAST LYNN RESERVOIR, W. Va. (New) Location. The project is located in Wayne County, W. Va. on East Fork of Twelvepole Creek, 11 miles above the mouth of East Fork and 43 miles above the confluence of Twelvepole Creek and the Ohio River. |