Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Floodplain topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Greene County retains DNR-recommended two-foot floodplain elevation; surveyor says special flood-hazard permit and building-permit process required

5812298 · September 16, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

County Surveyor Dylan briefed the commissioners on DNR and FEMA expectations for the special flood hazard area and commissioners voted to keep the state-recommended two-foot elevation above federal floodplain for regulated improvements; staff will maintain a special flood-hazard-area permit form and a disclaimer to limit county liability.

Greene County commissioners voted to retain the Department of Natural Resources’ recommended two-foot elevation above the federal floodplain for structures in the special flood hazard area after a presentation from County Surveyor Dylan.

Dylan told commissioners that a DNR site inspection on Sept. 5 recommended a higher local standard than the federal baseline and that DNR had asked the county to adopt a special flood-hazard-area building permit to remain in compliance with FEMA. "The current DNR standard is 2 feet higher than the federal floodplain," Dylan said. He described preparing a county-formatted building permit focused on the special flood hazard area and said he added a letter of disclaimer "which absolves the county from any mistakes that we might make." Dylan said the county must have a special flood-hazard-area permit to maintain FEMA compliance.

Dylan warned that raising the standard beyond the state recommendation could be burdensome for existing homeowners who want to repair or substantially improve structures in the area. "To me, this is prohibitive for people who own property, who already own homes," he said, adding that higher local elevations mostly affect owners attempting post-damage repairs or improvements. Several commissioners voiced concern that increasing the elevation requirement beyond the state recommendation would affect more people without a commensurate insurance-premium benefit.

Commissioners discussed practical issues raised by Dylan, including the role of elevation certificates and interaction with septic and sewer permits: Dylan said an elevation certificate establishes how high a structure must be built for its specific site and that the county’s state-form permit would be used for special flood-hazard-area projects. A commissioner suggested the health department should withhold septic permits until the floodplain elevation and related documentation are satisfied.

After discussion, a commissioner moved to keep the state-recommended two-foot standard; the motion was seconded and approved on voice vote. Dylan said he will use whatever final permit form the county adopts and will continue to coordinate with DNR and FEMA for further clarification.

The transcript includes technical remarks that county staff recommended the state minimum to avoid imposing potentially prohibitive elevation requirements on existing property owners; the record contains no ordinance or county code change enacted at the meeting—only the commission’s vote to retain the DNR-recommended standard and to adopt a special flood-hazard-area permit process.