Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Erosion Permit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Springdale OKs erosion hazard permit for river park work, with conditions if new structures proposed
Summary
The Planning Commission approved an erosion hazard permit for the George A. Barker River Park expansion after staff presented a Rosenberg Associates assessment finding no increase in flood or erosion risk; the permit includes conditions about streambanks, maintenance access and owner responsibility and flags that future buildings may need further protections.
The Springdale Planning Commission on Feb. 18 approved an Erosion Hazard Permit tied to the George A. Barker River Park expansion after hearing from staff that a consultant study found the current proposals would not increase flood elevations or erosion risk. Commissioner Terry Kruschke moved to approve the permit with conditions drawn from the Rosenberg Associates report; Paul Zimmerman seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
Principal Planner Niall Connolly told the Commission that an erosion hazard study prepared by Rosenberg Associates concluded the proposed grading and site work would not increase base flood elevation or cause additional erosion on or off site. Connolly noted one caveat in the study: if a new restroom building or other building were proposed later, deeper foundations or additional erosion protection could be necessary. Because no new buildings are included in the current application, no hard erosion protection measures were required for this phase.
"An erosion hazard study prepared by Rosenberg Associates found that the proposed improvements would not increase flood hazards or erosion," Connolly said.
Chair Jennifer McCulloch asked that the Commission include specific conditions from the Rosenberg report. The Commission adopted conditions (cited in the motion) emphasizing that streambanks must not be disturbed; stream stability and adjacent properties must not be affected; perpetual town maintenance access must be preserved; and property owners accept responsibility for risk and maintenance. The motion record notes that Rosenberg items 4.2–4.5 informed those conditions.
The Commission and staff also recorded that, should the project later propose a new restroom building, river viewing platform, or pavilion, the erosion assessment would need to be revisited to determine if deeper foundations or additional protections are required before any such structure could proceed.
