My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2021-06-28-minutes-public-works-study-session
>
Meetings
>
2021
>
08. August
>
2021-08-03 10:00 AM - Commissioners' Agenda
>
2021-06-28-minutes-public-works-study-session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/29/2021 1:30:50 PM
Creation date
7/29/2021 1:27:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting
Date
8/3/2021
Meeting title
Commissioners' Agenda
Location
Commissioners' Auditorium
Address
205 West 5th Room 109 - Ellensburg
Meeting type
Regular
Meeting document type
Supporting documentation
Supplemental fields
Alpha Order
a
Item
Approve Minutes
Order
1
Placement
Consent Agenda
Row ID
79309
Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
88
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
FEMA R10 FAQ: Rescinded Policy on Fish Enhancement Structures in the Floodway <br />Why does FEMA require that habitat restoration projects undergo the same review and <br />permitting process as other floodway development? <br />Habitat restoration floodway projects have the potential to alter the risk communicated by a community's flood <br />maps and therefore must undergo the same rigorous review as other floodway development. NAP regulations <br />provide one set of requirements for all floodway development. <br />BACKGROUND <br />FEMA recognizes that habitat restoration projects promote the natural and beneficial functions of floodplains and <br />contribute significantly to a community's proactive long-term management of its flood risks as well as the recovery <br />and sustainability of threatened species. However, the installation of bloengineered revetments, large woody debris, <br />and other elements of channel complexity meant to provide shelter to fish, encourage meanders, or otherwise <br />restore the river or stream to a more natural state can also slow the current, increase the accretion of sediment and <br />alter the channel of the stream. The replacement and relocation of perched and undersized culverts also make <br />significant changes to the dynamics of a waterbody. These activities can result in changes in the BFE and to the <br />boundaries of the mapped floodway and SFHA. <br />Communities must ensure that their support of these important projects includes the same level of rigorous analysis <br />and permitting requirements that apply to all potential encroachments in the floodway so that habitat restoration <br />efforts can proceed without increasing flood hazards or invalidating the maps that communicate those hazards. Any <br />potential impacts must be anticipated, through H&H analyses, while the project is still in its design phase, carefully <br />reviewed and understood by the community that will assume responsibility for the development it chooses to permit, <br />and communicated to FEMA through the CLOMR/LOMR process so that the maps can be revised to reflect the best <br />available data. It is essential that community floodplain officials and proponents of habitat restoration projects work <br />together in the design phase to ensure that all floodplain management regulations are considered. <br />What if we have projects in progress that were designed and permitted based on the <br />former policy? <br />Projects completed in full compliance with the policy prior to its rescindment will be reviewed on a case-by-case <br />basis. Important to remember is that the former policy never waived the requirement of H&H analyses for projects in <br />the floodway. Permitting projects in the floodway without that analysis or allowing development to occur anywhere in <br />the SFHA without permits are violations of minimum NFIP standards. <br />Our community requires H&H analyses and we allow a rise up to 0,10' for habitat projects <br />without requiring a CLOMR. Why can't we continue to do that? <br />Allowing development to cause any rise in the floodway is a violation of 44 CFR 60.3(d)(3); however, per 60.3(d)(4), <br />a community can allow projects that would cause a rise but only if the CLOMR process, as laid out in 44 QFR 65.8, is <br />followed prior to the start of construction. The "No Rise" standard is 0.00.' <br />Do we need to remove references to the former policy from our regulations/publications? <br />Yes, references to the rescinded policy in regulations, ordinances, policies, guidance or other materials distributed <br />by NFIP communities and state agencies must be removed. Communities are encouraged to reach out to their State <br />NFIP Coordinators or FEMA for technical assistance. <br />Learn more at fema.gov Mar 2021 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.