Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, <br /> <br />e. Prevent any encroachment on the ponding areas that would <br />decrease the capacities. <br /> <br />f. ~~intain and operate the project in accordance with the <br />regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army. <br /> <br />g. Assume full responsibility for all project costs in ex- <br />cess of the Feders! cost limitation of $2,000,000. <br /> <br />h. At least annually, publicize and notify all interested <br />parties that some flooding will continue to occur due to flows greater <br />than design magnitude. <br /> <br />i. Adopt such flood plain regulations necesssry to insure <br />compatibility between future development and the degree of flood <br />protection affordeu in the project area. <br /> <br />j. Publicize the flood plain information contained in Appen- <br />dix 4 of this report and make it readily available to all interested <br />parties. <br /> <br />k. Comply with the applicable prOV1S10ns of the "Uniform <br />Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of <br />1970," Public Law 91-646, and the requirement of Section 221, Public <br />Law 91-611. <br /> <br />The local sponsor furnished a letter of intent dated October 28, <br />1975 to fulfill the requirements of local cooperation. By a letter <br />dated November 29, 1976 the local sponsor reaffirmed its support of <br />the project and willingness to fulfill the requirements of local <br />cooperation. These letters are contained in Appendix No.6. <br /> <br />VIEWS OF tlOlJ-FEflRRAL INTERESTS <br /> <br />toes! intl'rests have actively involved themaelvl.!l in the proceRR <br />of ob taining adequate flood control for their comnluni ty. Pull lie <br />meetinga were held st Holly High School Cafeteria on 21 October 1971 <br />and 17 April 1975 during which active interest in the project was shown <br />by all attendees. The local residents have continued to voice strong <br />support for a flood control project. Following the 17 April 1975 <br />public meeting, letters were received from 57 residents, 2 businesses, <br />the local sponsor and the Mayor of Holly in support of the project <br />and recommended plan. One letter was received opposing the project. <br /> <br />REVIEW OF OTIIER AGENCIES <br /> <br />Presented in Appendix 6 of this report are copies of correspondence <br />with the following Federal, State and local agencies: <br /> <br />26 <br />