Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Floodplain Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission denies floodplain variance requests for two infill homes after FEMA/CRS concerns
Summary
Commissioners denied variance requests from an owner who had built two homes at lower elevations than required; staff and auditors warned that approving the variances could place the citys Community Rating System discount at risk and could expose the city to FEMA scrutiny.
The commission voted unanimously on Aug. 20 to deny variance requests that would have reduced the required finished-floor elevation for two single-family homes on Garden Street. The applicants had built or partially completed two houses with finished floors below the citys flood-elevation standard. The variance requests would have reduced the minimum finished-floor elevation from the one-foot (12-inch) freeboard to six inches above base flood elevation for the two parcels.
Applicants and counsel argued the cost to elevate the two houses or to remove and rework interior finishes would be economically infeasible; they said a Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA) process with FEMA could remove the lots from the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) if the communitys community-acknowledgment form were completed by the city. Applicants presented correspondence they had sought from FEMA staff and asked the city to sign the community-acknowledgement form to permit FEMA review.
City staff and the deputy city manager opposed granting the variances. Staff explained that local code and FEMA rules require adherence to elevation standards; granting the variance for these self-created, post-construction deviations would be inconsistent with the standards. The city also displayed written correspondence from the citys Community Rating System coordinator (CRS) and FEMA staff indicating that failure to enforce standards could "have the potential" to reduce CRS points and could increase flood-insurance costs for other policyholders in the community. Deputy City Manager Jim Morris said the city could not sign a FEMA form that would certify compliance when the structures do not meet the city and FEMA elevation standards.
Commissioners discussed the distinction between administrative FEMA processes (LOMA) and the local variance standard; they noted that the variance standard requires a showing of physical uniqueness and not merely financial hardship, and that self-created hardship does not justify a variance. After discussion Commissioner Cantu moved to deny the variance request; the motion passed 7-0.
Outcome: both variance requests were denied. The decision means the applicant must either raise the structures to meet the adopted finished-floor elevation (and building-code requirements), accept FEMA determinations through regular LOMA/LOMR procedures without a city certification that would be inconsistent with local records, or pursue other administrative remedies. The city's position is that it cannot submit a false community certification to FEMA on structures that do not meet the adopted code elevation requirements.
