Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Floodplain Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Scappoose reviews FEMA NFIP pre-implementation options; council moves to executive session on legal memo
Summary
Community Development Director Lori Oliver-Joseph presented three options to comply with FEMA’s NFIP pre-implementation requirements to address ESA concerns (no development, model ordinance, permit-by-permit or hybrid). Staff recommended a flexible hybrid approach and the council went into executive session to review legal advice ahead of the Dec. 1 FEMA report deadline.
Community Development Director Lori Oliver-Joseph presented an update on NFIP pre-implementation compliance measures required by FEMA to reconcile National Flood Insurance Program rules with Endangered Species Act protections.
Oliver-Joseph said FEMA has asked cities in Oregon to report by Dec. 1 which pre-implementation compliance measure they intend to adopt. She estimated the new rules could affect roughly 29 acres inside Scappoose city limits and about 10 acres inside the urban growth boundary, noting the acreage estimate excludes lots with no realistic development potential.
Staff outlined three options: (1) prohibit development in the floodplain (not recommended because it would trigger Measure 56 notices and potential compensation claims), (2) adopt the model floodplain ordinance (recommended with revisions but currently a moving target subject to FEMA/DLCD changes), and (3) a permit-by-permit approach requiring habitat assessments and mitigation for applicants (recommended with revisions for larger projects). Oliver-Joseph recommended a hybrid approach that would give applicants a clear objective path for small projects while allowing a permit-by-permit path for larger, more complex developments.
She summarized important upcoming steps and deadlines: communities must inform FEMA by Dec. 1 which approach they intend to pursue and begin collecting permit-related data by Jan. 31. Councilors disclosed recent ex parte contacts (emails/texts) from Joel Haugen related to the item and Councilor LeFrenz declared a potential conflict concerning acreage in the UGB. Because the council had questions about the attorney memo and potential legal risks for any option, members voted to go into an executive session under ORS 192.660(2)(f) to discuss exempt legal records and return to open session afterwards.
Oliver-Joseph emphasized the recommendation to proceed cautiously and retain flexibility so the city can adjust once FEMA and DLCD finalize model language.
