05-18-2010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Not Approved map amendment will have to obtain another Inver. Ms. GurWhach explained all existing LOMA's should be incorporated into due new system. Motion by Commissioner Zishu accounted by Commissioner Nichols-Mmkaiti to close the Public Hearing Approved 60, the Public Hearing was cbmd Chair Howard asked if residents are requhed to do anything regarding the new maps. Ms. Gwdlach reported Insurance Companies will contact residents if there are changes to individual properaies. Commissioner Danger asked if there was data indicating when the last 100 year Flood has occurred. Ms. Gundlach did not have met information available. Commissioner Nichols-Matkaid asked if the language in the ordinance is the language recommended by FEMA, Ms. Gundlach confirmed it was. Councihmember Phillips questioned if the City's ordinance reflects the State's requirements for non- conforming structures. Ms. Gundlach replied there are very few principle structures in flood plains, currently our ordinance does not follow the State's requirements. Chair Howard questioned if FEMA would take precedence over the State law, Ms. Gundlach stated she would check with the City Attorney, but suspected that was the case. Commissioner Danger asked if there is information detailing how far up the flood lime could go, as there are many lake properties who have added onto the back of their homes. Ms. Gundlech explained when a building permit is obtained the homeowner is reyumed to provide information related to their elevation to determine if those structures are outside me 100' flood elevation assigned to the ares, as well as obtaining verification fours the Rice Creek Watershed District. Ms. Guin lath explained we are required to adopt the ordinance by June 4, 2010, and there isn't a choice in the matter if the City wants to ensure residents are able to purchase flood wsumnce through the National Flood Insurance Program, Ms. Gundlach recommended making a separate motion for staff to look into the state requirements on nonconforming uses and bow they compare with the floodplain ordinance standards on nonconforming uses. Ms Guadlach indicated she will follow up on the issue. Morton by Commissioner McPherson, seconded by Commissioner Alvey to make a motion to approve stag recommendation. Approved" It was determined an wait unfit a situation arises and look into the conflicting language between the Fedeai and State requirements at that time. 3. City of New Brighton requests consideration of a Zoning Code amendment emending Chapter 0 to clarify expiration dates for Planned Unit Development and Planned Residential Development approvals that are not acted on within a specified period of time. The City of New Brighton is requesting consideration of a Zoning Code amendment to Chapter regarding expiration dates for Planned Residential Developments (PRD) and Planned Uoit Developments (PUD). The current language Is either completely silent on explosion dates (PUD standards) or indicates that the City Council must establish expiration dates at the time of approval (PRD standards). The