Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Critical Areas Floodplain topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Snoqualmie pauses critical-areas changes pending flood-elevation work and FEMA LOMAR grant
Summary
Councilors asked staff to re-evaluate proposed critical-area buffer increases after questions about underlying flood-elevation data; staff said a pending FEMA LOMAR/CRS effort and consultant review will inform revisions.
The committee discussed a proposed critical‑areas update and whether parts of the draft ordinance relied on unverified flood‑elevation information. City Administrator Chambliss and staff said the city has applied for FEMA funding to update flood elevations and pursue a Letter of Map Revision (LOMAR) and that proceeding with buffer changes before completing that work would be premature.
Why it matters: buffer expansions can affect existing properties and property owners on Snoqualmie Ridge; council members and planning commissioners raised concerns that proposed buffers could be onerous and affect homes located above steep slopes with intermittent streams.
What staff reported: Director Davis said the city applied for a FEMA grant (FEMA GO grant) and that Tetra Tech is the consultant assisting with the CRS/LOMAR work; she said grant funding for that specific application had not been cut and that she is following up with the consultant and FEMA. Director Davis described LOMAR/CRS work as the appropriate technical step to establish or revise flood elevations. “This would help our property owners that are currently in the flood plain if those elevations were changed,” she said, describing a potential reduction in flood insurance burdens if elevations were adjusted.
Council and planning concerns: Council Member Johnson and others described a planning‑commission recommendation that would have increased some buffers from roughly 50 feet to as much as 300 feet for intermittent streams, a change some council members said would effectively run through existing homes. The city attorney clarified that local governments must record and rely on the “best available science” in the record when adopting critical‑areas regulations but that the phrase does not require a locality to generate all original scientific data; it may rely on state or federal expert resources.
Next steps and distinction between discussion and decision: staff will reexamine the draft critical‑areas language with the city’s critical‑areas experts (including outreach to Jeff Gray with OTEC) and the LOMAR/CRS consultant before taking revised language back to the planning commission and the committee. No ordinance was adopted; the committee directed staff to seek technical review and to remove flood-elevation elements that lacked supporting analysis until the LOMAR/CRS work is complete.
Ending: Staff expect to return with revised critical‑areas language informed by technical analysis and the LOMAR/CRS outcomes.
