HomeMy WebLinkAboutZTA201300007 Legacy Document 2013-11-26�rRGtNI''
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
ZTA 2013 -07 Flood Hazard Overlay District (FHOD)
SU BJ ECT /PROPOSAL /REQU EST:
Work Session — Discussion on amending County Code
§18 -30.3, Flood Hazard Overlay District
STAFF CONTACT(S): Brooks, McCulley, Burbage,
Koslow, and Kamptner
AGENDA DATE: December 3, 2013
ACTION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
INFORMATION:
INFORMATION:
PUBLIC PURPOSE TO BE SERVED:
The purpose of these provisions is to prevent: the loss of life and property, the creation of health and safety hazards, the
disruption of commerce and governmental services, the extraordinary and unnecessary expenditure of public funds for flood
protection and relief, and the impairment of the tax base.
BACKGROUND:
The flood insurance rate map (FIRM) related to the Scottsville levee has been revised to place the Provisionally
Accredited Levee (PAL) note on the map for the A. Raymon Thacker Levee /Floodwall System in the Town of Scottsville
and Albemarle County (Attachment A). Because this flood map also includes unincorporated area of Albemarle County,
we need to revise our Zoning Ordinance flood hazard overlay district regulations (FHOD) (Attachment B) to reflect the
new map date, April 2, 2014. This ordinance revision triggers a review of our flood regulations by the Virginia Department
of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) for compliance with the minimum federal regulatory standards (Attachment C).
These federal standards include definitions (Attachment D), procedures and formatting that are inconsistent with our
current FHOD regulations. The amended zoning regulations must be adopted no later than April 2, 2014 in order for
our participation in the federal flood insurance program to remain valid. The Planning Commission adopted a resolution of
intent to amend the zoning ordinance on November 12, 2013 (Attachment E).
The majority of this amendment is prescribed by the Code of Federal Regulations (44 CFR) for compliance with the
National Flood Insurance Program. The Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) is the coordinator of
all flood protection programs and activities in the Commonwealth and is responsible for coordinating with the U.S. Army
Corp of Engineers, FEMA and other federal agencies and local governments. Because the mandatory revisions (for
terms, process, etc.) are fairly extensive, we will likely repeal the existing regulation with the adoption of the new
comprehensive amendment. This also affords an opportunity to both revise and clarify regulations which are currently
problematic and to codify existing practice which is working. However, given the tight timeline for adoption of the new
regulation, if necessary we will defer more substantive amendments to a later date.
Since their adoption, in an effort to limit the loss of life and property, Albemarle County's floodplain regulations have been
generally more restrictive than the minimum federal standards. Some of these increased restrictions include the following:
1. We prohibit certain uses and activities within the FHOD such as the construction of structures designed or
intended for human habitation, regardless of proposed usage. The Federal Regulations allow new construction
and substantial improvements of residential structures in the floodway fringe provided that the lowest floor,
including basement, is elevated to or above the flood depth specified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)
and is above the highest adjacent grade at least as high as the depth number specified in feet on the FIRM.
2. We prohibit storage of junk cars, petroleum products and the like within the FHOD;
3. We require a special use permit for uses and activities such as fill in the FHOD and bridges, boat docks and the
like (with a few exceptions); and
4. We do not allow substantial improvements of existing structures involving prohibited uses (such as residences).
The floodplain typically consists of the floodway and floodway fringe (Attachment F). A description of these two areas
follows:
The floodway is: the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved
in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one
foot. (definition provided by FEMA in their model ordinance glossary, p.21.) From the discussion of floodways
found in the FEMA Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for Albemarle (starting on page 22); The floodway is the channel
of the stream, plus any adjacent floodplain areas, that must be kept free of encroachment so that the 100 -year
flood can be carried without substantial increases in flood heights. Minimum federal standards limit such
increased to 1.0 foot, provided that hazardous velocities are not produced. The floodways are presented to local
agencies as minimum standards that can be adopted directly or that can be used as a basis for additional
floodway studies.
The floodway fringe is: The area between the floodway and the 100 -year floodplain boundaries. (from the
Flood Insurance Study for Albemarle County Virginia by FEMA, p. 45.) Practically speaking, this is the remainder
of the floodplain.
DISCUSSION:
The mandatory ordinance language must identify a Floodplain Administrator with an expanded list of duties (Attachment
G). Staff recommends that the County Engineer be authorized as the Floodplain Administrator because most of these
duties and procedures are technical in nature and are currently handled by the County Engineer.
In addition to the mandatory revisions, we recommend several additional revisions from our current regulations. If any of
these require additional time so as to jeopardize meeting the April 2, 2014 deadline for adoption, we will defer them to a
second phase. Many of these amendments provide for housekeeping changes that relate to the administration of these
regulations and will be provided for the Commission's information. We will separate out others for focused discussion and
input from the Commission.
For Information:
1. Stormwater Management Facilities (SWM)
Stormwater facilities have been permitted in the FHOD, although they have been discouraged by policy. The
County Engineer recommends that we no longer allow them, as they can cease to function and be damaged
during flood events.
2. Administrative Determinations of Floodplain and Floodway Boundaries
Staff recommends that the proposed ordinance address interpretation of maps, including the use of other sources
and information for the purpose of determining floodplain boundaries, floodway and flood fringe. FEMA provides
guidance for determining base flood elevations in these cases that we propose codifying.
Because the County, and most applicants, have better topographic information than FEMA, this a frequent
administrative challenge. It applies to all flood zones, both approximated areas, and areas of detailed study.
3. Review of FEMA Applications
We need to establish a process and fee for review of FEMA applications. This includes CLOMR's, LOMR's,
LOMA's, etc. as well as data supplied for elevation certificates and administrative changes to the floodway.
FEMA requires a community acknowledgement on these applications, and typically relies on the community to
check for accuracies in local application, and to track changes to the floodplain.
4. Variances
As provided for under the federal regulation, the current ordinance allows waiver, modification and variance of the
regulations. The federal regulations appear to be based on floodplain management purposes and cases of very
small lots (lots less than '/2 acre) or functionally dependent uses. However, no modification shall be granted to the
prohibited uses. These variance applications, of which we've had one, are reviewed by the Board of Zoning
Appeals. Because our regulations are more restrictive by prohibiting more uses and not allowing substantial
ZTA 2013 -7 , ,,
December 3, 2013
improvements, we are evaluating to what extent we need to provide for variances. In addition, we are evaluating
whether the Board of Supervisors is a more appropriate body to hear these requests.
For Focused Discussion:
In each case, staff will present the current regulations and the recommended changes. We are seeking Commission input
on our recommendations.
Fill in the F000dplain
The current ordinance requires a special use permit for fill without regard to the following: the purpose, the
amount of fill, whether cut and fill are balanced and whether the flood elevation or floodplain boundaries are
changed. Some of the more minor fill proposals, such as to establish a level playing field or a parking area, do
not warrant a special use permit review provided the fill does not: a) increase the flood elevation and /or b)
change the extent or limits of the floodplain. The County Engineer will fully develop criteria that this minor level of
fill can be reviewed against. In addition, we recommend establishing a freeboard of 1 foot above the base flood
elevation (freeboard is a factor of safety typically expressed in feet above a flood level for purposes of floodplain
management). More significant fill or fill involving a structure such as a bridge or culvert should still be subject to a
special use permit. Staff recommends allowing the more minor fill proposals that meet those criteria to be
reviewed administratively. They will still be subject to the Water Protection Ordinance requirements for
maintaining the buffer and mitigating any encroachments. The special use permit process is still appropriate for
any of the more significant proposals of fill that should be reviewed against our policy of protecting systems
(critical slopes, floodplain, open space) in addition to the technical review.
2. By -Right in the F000dway: Projects Involving Fill Which are Reviewed by Department of Community Development
in Accordance with the Water Protection Ordinance
Under Section 3.3.05.1.1 (7) the current ordinance allows by right:
7. If paragraphs (a) through (d) are each satisfied, projects which: (i) are designed or directed by the county,
a soil and water conservation district, or a public agency authorized to carry out flood control or environmental
restoration measures; or (ii) are reviewed and approved by the department of community development in
accordance with the water protection ordinance. (Amended 5- 13 -09)
a. The purpose which will be served by the project, as determined by the department of engineering
and public works, is either flood control or environmental restoration;
b. The amount of fill material placed within the floodway, floodway fringe or approximated flood plain
does not exceed the amount of cut material removed from the same floodway, floodway fringe or
approximated flood plain in which the fill was placed;
C. No natural streams will be relocated; and
d. The project will use natural materials such as rock and vegetation, and will not use engineered
structures such as those identified in section 30.3.05.2.1(5).
Staff recommends several changes to this regulation:
(item b) Revise the criteria under 7b to instead reflect where the cut and fill take place (channel or
overbank) and how. This is more relevant than the amount of cut and fill;
(item c) Revise the reference under 7c because other ordinance provisions don't allow alteration or
relocation of watercourses;
(item d) Eliminate the requirement that all natural materials must be used. Sometimes manufactured
products or materials are appropriate.
Personal Wireless Service Facilities (PSWF)
The current ordinance allows Tier I and II PWSF by -right in the floodway (moving water during a flood event) and
Tier III PWSF by special use permit in the floodway fringe. It is staff's recollection that this provision is
comparable to how these uses were provided for in the other zoning districts without specific deliberation as to the
FHOD. Staff suggests that it is not advisable to allow new PWSF structures within a FHOD. However, additions
such as to existing power poles, should not negatively impact the FHOD and should be permitted. The practical
reality is that much of the FHOD consists of lower elevations which are not preferable for PWSF signals.
ZTA 2013 -7 Flood Hazard Overlay District
December 3, 2013
BUDGET IMPACT:
There is no expected budget or staffing impact.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Commission provide input on these focused areas and direct staff to draft ordinance language
and set a date for public hearing as soon as practical. Tentative public hearing dates are February 4, 2014 with the
Commission and March 5, 2014 with the Board.
ATTACHMENTS:
A: Revised FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map for Scottsville & Albemarle
B: Existing Albemarle FHOD Zoning Regulations
C: Ordinance Components per DCR
D: Glossary of Terms
E: Resolution of Intent
F: Floodplain Diagram
G: Duties of the Floodplain Administrator
ZTA 2013 -7 Flood Hazard Overlay District
December 3, 2013