Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City staff brief council on urgent FEMA biological‑opinion requirements that could reshape floodplain development
Summary
Staff warned the council of an urgent federal Biological Opinion and FEMA pre‑implementation compliance measures (PICM) that require local action by Dec. 1 — options include adopting a FEMA model ordinance, case‑by‑case habitat assessments, or prohibiting floodplain development; staff will return with recommendations.
City planning staff briefed the Roseburg City Council on a federal Biological Opinion (BiOp) and associated FEMA pre‑implementation compliance measures (PICM) that will affect floodplain development and may be implemented locally as soon as December 1.
Planning staff explained the city has three principal options to satisfy FEMA’s interim requirements: (1) adopt FEMA’s model ordinance that requires avoidance and mitigation to a "no net loss" standard for species and habitat; (2) require a habitat assessment and mitigation plan on a permit‑by‑permit basis; or (3) prohibit development in the floodplain entirely. Staff said the model ordinance could require a biological assessment for many routine activities — including moving fill or cutting trees over 6 inches in diameter — and noted that the requirement is tied to floodplain areas and FEMA’s definitions.
The presenter said the rule is statewide and could significantly increase costs to developers and staff workload: "There will be a considerable amount of staff time that will come into play...they would need to hire some type of certified individual to put this all together," the planner said. Staff identified two species of particular concern in the local area: green sturgeon and coho salmon.
Council members asked whether the case‑by‑case option could be geographically limited; staff replied FEMA's guidance applies to all properties within the floodplain and that case‑by‑case reviews are based on the scope of proposed work rather than the location alone. Staff said the city will likely return with a recommended option in October or November to meet FEMA’s December 1 requirement.
Staff also noted that certain floodplain relief mechanisms are no longer available: FEMA has effectively prohibited map revision based on fill in many cases, limiting a developer’s ability to move fill to take land out of the regulated floodplain.
The council did not adopt a policy at the meeting but recognized the decision is consequential, potentially increasing permitting costs and affecting projects already in development. Staff flagged that Oregon’s congressional delegation had requested more time from FEMA, and staff would continue to monitor developments as they finalize local recommendations.
