Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Floodplain Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fairview staff recommend adopting FEMA model ordinance with 'no‑net‑loss' standards, reject habitat‑assessment option as legally infeasible
Summary
Planner Alex outlined three FEMA pre‑implementation compliance options tied to a NMFS biological opinion: ban development in floodplains, adopt a model ordinance with no‑net‑loss standards, or require habitat assessments; staff and commissioners favored option 2 and will notify FEMA by Dec. 1.
At a Sept. 10 work session, Fairview planning staff briefed the commission on FEMA’s pre‑implementation compliance options that follow a National Marine Fisheries Service biological opinion and state rulemaking tied to the Endangered Species Act.
Planner Alex said the city must choose one of three options and notify FEMA by Dec. 1, and implement required code changes by July 2025. “These are pre‑implementation compliance measures required by FEMA,” Alex said.
Option 1 would prohibit all new development in the floodplain. Option 2 would adopt a model ordinance aligned with the 2020 Oregon model flood hazard management ordinance and include ‘no‑net‑loss’ standards requiring offset for added impervious surfaces and tree removal. Option 3 would require site‑level habitat assessments; staff said option 3 is not legally viable under Oregon law and cannot be recommended.
Alex explained that the model ordinance (option 2) would add definitions and a no‑net‑loss approach for undeveloped areas, impervious surfaces and trees greater than 6‑inch diameter. “When you develop something within the floodplain, you’re expected to come out no positive of an impact — you’re supposed to reduce as much as you’re improving the site,” Alex said.
Commissioners asked about the geographic scope (noting areas east of Fairview Avenue along Fairview Creek), map accuracy and whether the city can challenge FEMA mapping. Staff said FEMA’s maps reflect a 1% annual (100‑year) flood and that the city may pursue map revisions to FEMA where elevation or fill has changed, but FEMA has suspended map revisions pending the state process. Staff said they have consulted the city attorney and will return with updated maps and draft code language in the coming months.
The commission indicated a preference for option 2 rather than an outright prohibition. Staff said they will coordinate with the new city manager and bring recommendations to council and back to the commission in the spring for formal code amendments.
Next steps: staff will prepare draft ordinance language consistent with option 2, consult the city attorney for clear and objective standards required under Oregon law, and notify FEMA of the city’s chosen pre‑implementation measure by Dec. 1.
