Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ocana Center topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council defers Ocana Center plan after floodplain and design concerns
Summary
The council unanimously deferred the Ocana Center preliminary master plan on Long Hollow Pike after extended discussion about floodplain locations, required flood-plain permits, buffer yards, architecture and parking; staff and the developer said a flood study is planned.
Council members sent the Ocana Center preliminary master development plan back for further work after staff and residents raised floodplain, architectural and connectivity concerns.
Brian Rose, the city planner and floodplain administrator for the meeting, described the Ocana Center PMDP as a proposed commercial multi-tenant building with limited warehousing on a 4.91-acre tract south of Long Hollow Pike. He noted a large portion of the property lies within a mapped flood hazard area and explained that the applicant must obtain a floodplain development permit and, where necessary, submit FEMA documents (a CLOMR-F and then a LOMR-F based on fill) and meet the city's floodplain ordinance to allow development in those areas.
Council members asked detailed questions about where fill might be placed, limits on the city—ondition that finished floors be at least one foot above base flood elevation, and whether the 70% brick-and-stone façade requirement would be enforced. Several councilmembers expressed concern that filling the floodplain could push water onto neighboring properties and emphasized the need to limit flood impacts. One member asked whether the council could require a higher freeboard than the city—ode nd staff said ordinance amendments (and FEMA coordination) would be needed for permanent changes.
The applicant's representative said the site has been manipulated previously, that lidar/topography shows areas of fill, and that the team planned a flood study tied to the final master plan; he said elevations could be established and that when base flood elevations are not established in FEMA maps, city rules can require the finished floors to be higher than the standard one-foot freeboard.
Council debated architectural details (roof pitch, materials) and parking connectivity; planning staff noted the planning commission recommended approval with conditions (including revising buffer yards, connecting parking areas and meeting façade requirements) but the floodplain concerns and pending flood study prompted council to defer action unanimously so staff and the developer can resolve outstanding technical items.
No rezoning or site-plan approvals were adopted; the council sent the PMDP back to staff/applicant pending additional engineering and floodplain information.
