In this article, unless the context otherwise requires:
1. "Area of jurisdiction" means the incorporated and unincorporated areas of the county, including public lands, excluding those incorporated areas of cities or towns which have elected to assume floodplain management powers and duties pursuant to section 48-3610.
2. "Board" means the board of directors of a flood control district organized under this article.
3. "Development" means any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations or storage of equipment or materials.
4. "District" means a flood control district organized pursuant to this article.
5. "Flood" or "floodwaters" means a temporary rise in water level including groundwater or overflow of water onto lands not normally covered by water.
6. "Floodplain" means any areas in a watercourse which have been or may be covered partially or wholly by floodwater from the one hundred-year flood.
7. "Floodplain regulations" means the codes, ordinances and other regulations adopted pursuant to this article relating to the use of land and construction within the floodway and floodplain areas.
8. "Floodway" means the area of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas necessary in order to discharge the one hundred-year flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one foot.
9. "One hundred-year flood" or "base flood" means a flood that has a one per cent chance of being equalled or exceeded in a one year period, based on the criteria established by the director of water resources.
10. "Person" means an individual or the individual's agent, a firm, partnership, association or corporation, or an agent of the aforementioned groups, or this state or its agencies or political subdivisions.
11. "Regulatory flood elevation" means the elevation which is one foot above the base flood elevation for a watercourse for which the base flood elevation has been determined and shall be as determined by the criteria developed by the director of water resources for all other watercourses.
12. "Watercourse" means a lake, river, creek, stream, wash, arroyo, channel or other topographic feature on or over which waters flow at least periodically. Watercourse includes specifically designated areas in which substantial flood damage may occur.
Notes of Decisions
A Tumbling-T Ranches v. Flood Control Dist., 217 P.3d 1220 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 8× “Further, during proceedings before the trial court, the District acknowledged that it designed and constructed its projects under the enabling statute for flood control districts, and not, as its immunity argument would suggest, under the Act.”
Smith v. Beesley, 247 P.3d 548 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 3× “¶ 31 There was no dispute here that the driveway and culvert Beesley constructed would impede the flow of water in the drainage easement and that the land within the easement constituted a “watercourse” as the term is defined in A.R.S. § 48-3601(12). Likewise, there was no…”
Sabina v. Yavapai Cnty. Flood Control Dist., 993 P.2d 1130 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).
“”) § 48-3601 et seq. The ditch, a natural drainage course, and the land that it traverses were formerly owned by Yavapai County but were transferred to the City of Sedona when the City was incorporated in 1988.”
White v. Pima Cnty., 775 P.2d 1154 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 2× “The Act of 1973 and additions has been renumbered as A.R.S. § 48-3601 et seq. 2 . We do not address at this time the issue of the liability of those persons who have failed to comply with the local regulations but who would have received a permit if they had applied for one.”
ABC Sand & Rock Co. Inc. v. Maricopa, Cnty. of (D. Ariz. 2023).
· cites it 2× “23 Arizona law requires flood control districts to regulate floodplains, which are areas 24 in a watercourse that may be covered partially or wholly by water from a 100-year flood.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 48-3601(12) — 1 case
Smith v. Beesley, 247 P.3d 548 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011).
“¶ 31 There was no dispute here that the driveway and culvert Beesley constructed would impede the flow of water in the drainage easement and that the land within the easement constituted a “watercourse” as the term is defined in A.R.S. § 48-3601(12). Likewise, there was no…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 48-3601(5) — 1 case
A Tumbling-T Ranches v. Flood Control Dist., 217 P.3d 1220 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
“Further, during proceedings before the trial court, the District acknowledged that it designed and constructed its projects under the enabling statute for flood control districts, and not, as its immunity argument would suggest, under the Act.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 48-3601(6) — 1 case
ABC Sand & Rock Co. Inc. v. Maricopa, Cnty. of (D. Ariz. 2023).
“23 Arizona law requires flood control districts to regulate floodplains, which are areas 24 in a watercourse that may be covered partially or wholly by water from a 100-year flood.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 48-3601(9) — 1 case
A Tumbling-T Ranches v. Flood Control Dist., 217 P.3d 1220 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
“Further, during proceedings before the trial court, the District acknowledged that it designed and constructed its projects under the enabling statute for flood control districts, and not, as its immunity argument would suggest, under the Act.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.