WSP09166 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

001188 What will happen if this urbanization is allowed to go unchecked, with no thought to flooding? And who is going to do something about it? Public Jurisdictions: A Jumble of Conflicts Like its flood water, the distribution of public authority in the Haikey basin is chaotic. Basically, the watershed is divided among four jurisdictions (Fig. 17): the City of Tulsa, at the northwest corner of the watershed; the City of Broken Arrow, scattered in a jumble of annexations across much of the upper and middle parts of the watershed; the lowland Town of Bixby, straddling the Arkansas River; and Tulsa County, which has primary responsibility for the unincorporated balance. Tulsa, incorporated in 1898 on a high bluff of the Arkansas River, already had urban problems by 1960, with a popula- tion of 182,000. But by 1970, its popu- lation had nearly doubled, and its prob- lems were proportionately bigger. An es- pecially ominous one was the threat of flooding-a threat which was borne out with the 1974 and 1976 floods, the lat- ter being the most costly disaster in the city's history. The 1976 flood gave im- petus to the city's previously half- hearted floodplain management policies, concocted at least partly in compliance with the National Flood Insurance Pro- gram, which Tulsa joined in 1970. As the 1976 floodwaters subsided, Tulsa de- clared a moratorium on all construction exposed to flash floods. This mora- torium lasted until the city commission adopted new floodplain ordinances in late 1977 whose general goal was to al- low only development that would not be flooded or aggravate flooding for others. Flooding concern also inspired related planning efforts: a growth guidance pro- gram for the city, of which floodplain management was an important part; and, as described further on, the Army Corps of Engineers' Tulsa Urban Study. Meanwhile, in other parts of the water- shed, Broken Arrow was rushing to other remedies in the face of the 1976 flood. Their solution was structural: a flood. plain policy committee of developers, engineers, and citizens recommended channelizing all streams in new develop- ments throughout Broken Arrow, to carry stormwater efficiently out of its jurisdiction. Fine, perhaps, for Broken Arrow (although rather costly rnot so fine for downstream Bixby (Fig. 18). Bixby, on getting word of Broken Arrow's intention, threatened a court suit to compel that city to control its runoff, which Bixby maintained would substantially increase-to the down- stream town's detriment-if Broken Ar- row went ahead with its proposed chan- nelization. Bixby's charges were borne out by preliminary findings in the Corps of Engineers' Tulsa Urban Study, which further found that channelization would be far more expensive than a suggested alternative: preserving the floodplains as open space rather than developing them at all. This finding, com bined with maintenance costs to be passed on to water users, persuaded Broken Arrow's voters to reject channelization. Broken Arrow then abandoned the scheme and switched to a more benign approach: it adopted ordinances pro- hibiting new construction on the 100- year floodplain and also prohibiting major stream channel alteration where the contributing drainage area exceeded one square mile. It also started looking for ways to finance storm water deten- tion and construction and floodplain open space compensation. Concurrently, Bixby-trying to put its own house in order-was considering putting them on stilts or higher ground: after a brief floodplain development moratorium, the town adopted requirements that new house floor levels be at least one foot above the l00-year flood level. It alao required that large construction allow flood waters to p888 underneath, and that development on higher ground have stormwater detention measures. All this took place in the two years following the 1976 inundation. Mean- while, what was the fourth actor, Tulsa County, doing? Very little. Although un- incorporated areas remain under its juris- diction, Oklahoma law does not give it the prerequisites of home rule, and it would have to formally seek zoning au- thority. It has not done so yet, although to qualify for federal flood insurance, it did, in 1975, adopt a building code. FonlDlS for Coordination t , I And who has been there to reconcile 34