Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-12-27 PZC MINUTESCITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION December 27, 1977 I. CALL TO ORDER. The Special Meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Com- mission was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Vice-Chairman Eddie Tanguma. Members present: Draper, Parker, Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Williams Wanush, Ex-officio Members absent: Lathrop, Owens, Pierson Also present: Assistant Director Dorothy A. Romans II. COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE §22.4B Flood Plain §22.8 Definitions Flood Hazard Boundary Map H 01-04 Flood Insurance Rate Map I 01-04 CASE #28-77 Mr. Tanguma stated that the Public Hearing scheduled this evening pertains to the amendment of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, §22.4B, Flood Plain, and §22.8. Definitions, and the adoption of the Flood Hazard Boundary Map/Flood Insurance Rate Map. Mr. Tanguma stated that anyone wishing to speak on the matter before the Commission would please come to the podium and be sworn in. Williams moved: Smith seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #28-77 be opened. AYES: Williams, Draper, Parker, Smith, Tanguma, Wade NAYS: None ABSENT: Lathrop, Owens, Pierson The motion carried. Mr. Tanguma asked for the staff presentation. Mrs. Dorothy Romans was sworn in, and testified that Public Notice of the Public Hearing did appear in the official City newspaper, the Englewood Herald Sentinel, and the flood plain areas as depicted on the maps have been posted, giving notice of the Hearing. Mrs. Romans asked that the staff report for Case #28-77 and the Certification of Posting be made a part of the record of this Hearing. -2- Mrs. Romans stated that with the increase in population, areas which were heretofore undeveloped along the rivers and drainage-.. ways are now being developed. Property owners who were heavily ~ exposed wanted to be insured; but the insurance companies found that they could not handle the insurance for these persons who wanted to develop in the flood plain areas. The Federal Govern- ment made studies of the need for insurance for property owners in these areas, and Title 13, the Flood Insurance Act, was en- acted in 1968. Flood Plain Management regulations were developed by the Federal Insurance Administration, and municipalities were given two years to adopt a flood plain ordinance and to apply for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program; the incentive for adoption was that insurance would be available under the Federal subsidy program at a reasonable cost to property owners. If a community chose not to participate in the Federal Program, insurance was not available to property owners in the flood plain in that community. Englewood adopted the Flood Plain Regulations, §22.4B of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, by Ordinance #37, Series of 1971. Englewood was one of the first communities to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program, and on February 26, 1971, property owners within the 100-year flood plains in the City became eligible for the subsidized rate on Flood Insurance. Because maps of the specific flood plain areas had not been made available by the Federal Insurance Administration, the entire City was designated as an area of special flood hazard. With the adoption of the Flood Plain Ordinance, all building permit applications would be reviewed to determine if the property was in a flood plain area prior to issuance of the Permit. The staff made use of studies on Little Dry Creek by McCall-Ellingson, Inc; of studies of Big Dry Creek by V.T.N., and of the South Platte River by the Corps of Engineers in 1964, to determine whether a specific property was in a flood plain area. Flood Plain maps have not been adopted officially by the City to this date. The Federal Insurance Administration has revised the regulations the Englewood Flood Plain Ordinance is based on and the F.I.A. is requiring that all jurisdictions adopt these revisions before February 1, 1978, to remain eligible for flood insurance subsidy. Mrs. Romans reviewed the major changes in the proposed amended Flood Plain Ordinance: 1. The Flood Hazard Boundary Maps and Flood Insurance Rate Maps which have been prepared by the Federal Insurance Ad- ministration, are declared to be a part of the Flood Plain Ordinance. 2. If deemed necessary, approval from Federal, State, or other local governments will be obtained before Building Permits are issued within the Flood Plain. 3. No structure will be permitted in a floodway. -3- 4. "Special Exception Permits" have been redesignated as "Development Permits" and the administration of the Develop- ment Permit becomes the responsibility of the Flood Plain Ad- ministrator. Because the criteria for issuing a Development Permit is based on technical requirements, the Flood Plain Administrator appears to be the logical enforcement agent. Under the present provision, Planning Commission is designated as the approving authority for Special Exception Permits. To this date, no application has been made for a Special Exception Permit. 5. A new section has been added which requires anchoring of mobile homes and other protective measures in new or existing mobile home parks. An evacuation plan for mobile home parks must be prepared and filed with disaster preparedness authorities. 6. The Director of Community Development or his assignee is designated as the Flood Plain Administrator rather than the "Director of Planning". At the time the Flood Plain Ordinance was adopted, the Department was "Planning" rather than "Com- munity Development." 7. Certificates of Compliance must be issued before any de- velopment in the flood plain can be occupied or used and permanent records must be kept of these Certificates. Among other information, the certificate must state whether or not a structure contains a basement. 8. Requirements for Subdivisions in flood plain areas are added. 9. Variance procedures have been included and the Board of Adjustment and Appeals is designated to hear and decide appeals and requests for variances as they relate to the Flood Plain Ordinance. This is not a new procedure, but it has been clarified and criteria has been established to direct the Board's action. 10. Certain additional definitions have been added which are intended to assist in the interpretation of the Flood Plain Ordinance. Mrs. Romans stated that the staff has worked quite closely with Mr. Douglas Gore, the Flood Plain Specialist with the regional office in Denver. Mrs. Romans noted that if, after working with the proposed amendments and maps, changes are determined to be necessary, these changes can be accomplished with the approval of the F.I.A. Mrs. Romans indicated other key points in the proposed amend- ment, such as the right cl. appeal to the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Tanguma asked if there were questions from the Commission of Mrs. Romans? -4- Mrs. Wade asked how often changes would occur in the text and map? Mrs. Romans stated that changes would be made as necessary. She pointed out that this is the first time in seven years that the City has been told changes had to be made to stay in compliance with the Federal regulations. Mr. Smith referred to the statement in the staff report that" If deemed necessary, approval from Federal, State, or other local governments will be obtained before Building Permits are issued within the Flood Plain"; he questioned the necessity of this provision? Mr. Wanush stated that in most instances, the Federal or State governments would have no interest in the issuance of building permits; it is only a requirement to check to see if the proper procedures have been followed. Mr. Smith asked "who deems it necessary?" Mr. Wanush referred to Page 4 of the proposed amendment, which states that the Flood Plain Zoning Administrator must review all the building permits on a case-by-case basis. Mr. Smith questioned the definition of "floodway"? Mr. Wanush stated that a floodway is different than a flood plain, the floodway pertaining to the main flow channel of the water. Mr. Smith questioned what "substantial improvement" means? Mr. Wanush stated that this is in the present Flood Plain Ordinance; a substantial improvement is an improvement worth more than 50% of the value of the property before the improve- ment is made. Mr. Smith suggested that the title for this definition be changed to "Substantial repair, reconstruction or improvement." Mr. Smith asked if anything was discussed with Mr. Gore in regard to giving notice that a property is in the 100-year Flood Plain at such time as that property is listed for sale? Mrs. Romans stated that this was not discussed with Mr. Gore. Mr. Tanguma asked how many Federally subsidized insurance policies have been sold to Englewood residents? Mr. Wanush stated that around 38 policies have been sold --both commercial and residential policies. Mr. Parker asked if persons outside the designated 100-year Flood Plain boundaries would be eligible to purchase the federally subsidized insurance? Mr. Wanush stated that anybody in the City is eligible to purchase this insurance if the City participates in the Program. Mr. Tanguma asked how the premiums are determined on the Floal Insurance? Mr. Wanush stated that he understood the maps are divided into zones, and 1he rates are determined by the par- ticular zone and also the elevation of the property in relation to the 100-year flood elevation. Mr. Tanguma asked if there were any questions from the audience to be asked of Mrs. Romans or of Mr. Wanush? -5- Mrs. Donna Dutton 3165 South Elati -stated that she had seen the posting signs; the maps do not depict Cinderella City as being in any part of the flood plain. She stated that she was "afraid my property is going to be wiped out before a flood comes." Mr. Wanush stated that the hearing pertains to the amendment of the existing Flood Plain Ordinance; regulations already pertain to areas that are in the flood plain as indicated on maps available in the office. However, the maps depicting the flood plain areas have never been officially adopted. This hearing is concerned with the proposed amendment of the existing Flood Plain Ordinance, and the adoption of the Flood Hazard Boundary Map/Flood Insurance Rate Map. Mr. Wanush noted that property owners whose properties in the flood plain that would be damaged or destroyed by floods would be allowed to rebuild, but they would have to follow certain regulations for flood proofing. Mrs. Dutton stated "you aren't here to make any plans that are going to destroy homes?" Mr. Wanush reiterated that this meeting is concerned with the ameudment of the flood plain ordinance and adopting the flood plain maps. He stated that the maps were posted on the signs in an effort to notify property owners of what is proposed. Mrs. Dutton asked "who initiated this; did the City invite someone to survey the area?" Mr. Wanush stated that the City has been concerned with the flood plain for some time; the actual impetus to pass the ordinance was initiated by the Federal Government, which said that they would provide a means for property owners to obtain flood insurance, but for those property owners to actually get that insurance, the municipalities must conform with the Federal Regulations on Flood Plains. Mr. James Walsh 3242 South Elati -stated that some literature was circulated in that area last summer suggesting alterna- tives for flood control; he asked what the response was on this questionnaire? Mr. Wanush stated that the meeting this evening is not concerned with the surveys and questionnaires of last summer. The meeting this evening is concerned with regulations on the use of land in the flood plain; the discussions of the previous summer were concerned with "flood control", or methods to "reduce" the Little Dry Creek flood plain area. This meeting has nothing to do with what will prevent flooding on Little Dry Creek. Mr. Robert B. Wiley 3223 South Santa Fe -stated that he was concerned about the location of the flood plain as indicated on the maps. He stated that he had been in the office in an -6- attempt to determine whether or not his property was included in the flood plain. He questioned that the flood plain would actually spread out west of Santa Fe as is indicated on the maps; he noted that there are the two trestles for the railroads which would catch debris and a culvert under the highway to carry the water. Mr. Wiley made reference to the ordinance as it is proposed to be amended. Mr. Tanguma asked Mr. Wiley to limit his comments at this time to questions of Mr. Wanush or Mrs. Romans, inasmuch as Mr. Wanush must leave shortly to attend a meeting in Sheridan. Mr. Wiley stated that he would address his comments to the Commission at a later time. Mr. Homer Todd 3258 South Elati -stated that many of the people in this particular area did not realize the purpose of this meeting this evening. He asked if he understood that the purpose of the meeting was "to get an ordinance in effect so people living in the flood plain could get flood insurance?'' Mr. Wanush stated that this is the intent of the meeting. Mr. Todd asked if persons living in the flood plain area at the present time were or were not eligible for flood insurance? Mr. Wanush stated that people are eligible for flood insurance at the present time. Mr. Todd stated that he had applied for flood insurance last summer, and was told by his insurance agent that he did not qualify for the flood insurance. The agent stated that a flood plain was not established at that time. Mrs. Dutton stated that she had contacted at least six insurance agents in the City, and they were all unaware that persons in I the City were eligible for flood insurance. Mr. Yates 1074 West Dartmouth -noted that the maps he had showed the Little Dry Creek and South Platte River flood plain together; he asked if the construction of the Chatfield Dam had had any effect on the South Platte River flood plain. Mr. Wanush stated that the maps do take into consideration the Chatfield Dam. Mr. Wanush stated that if there are problems with the mapping, he would suggest that testimony be given on that matter at this time. The staff would then research the questions and attempt to resolve the problems. Mr. Maynard Jacobson 191 West Rafferty Gardens -stated that he noted that the Big Dry Creek Flood Plain has been delineated on the map. He said that recently some man con- tacted him at his home and had stated that he wanted to change the course of Big Dry Creek to allow building there. Mr. Jacobson stated that his property is in the flood plain for • Big Dry Creek, and that floods have come down that creek that have taken out his fences and some of his trees. -7- Mr. Wanush stated that the changing of a water course or a flood plain would be regulated under the proposed ordinance. Mr. Jacobson stated that he is a long time resident of the area and has seen many floods; the Littleton Independent calls him after every flood to ask his determination on how it com- pares with past floods. John Kucharsk 3428-1/2 South Bannock -asked how the flood insurance would work --would they be reimbursed for loss? Mrs. Romans stated that the flood insurance would cover damage and loss that is sustained as a result of a flood. Mr. Tanguma stated that a great deal of the coverage would depend on the type of insurance coverage they took out; it would cover personal effects only if they applied for that coverage. Mr. Kucharsk asked how to go about getting the flood insurance. Mr. Smith stated that any regular insurance agent is supposed to be able to write policies under this program. If some particular agent is not able to do so, he would suggest Mr. Kucharsk call the Federal Government or the staff for assistance. Mr. Smith stated that after the first of the year, the City Council will go over the alternatives that have been presented in the matter of flood control. Mr. Smith stated that there will be public hearings on these alternatives, and there will be publicity on these hearings. Mr. Joel B. Huston 3290 South Galapago -asked if there was a legal description of the areas that are in the Flood Plain? Mr. Huston stated that he feels the map is ambiguous. Mrs. Romans stated that the proposed amended ordinance would apply to any flood drainageway in the city. Mr. Huston asked "what is covered on the maps?" He noted that some people might think this would apply only to a small area and do not realize that their property may be included in the flood plain. Mrs. Romans pointed out that the F.I.A. has adopted flood boundary maps on Little Dry Creek, Big Dry Creek, and the South Platte River; however, the flood plain restrictions do apply to the entire city. Mr. Huston stated that he felt the posting notification that was given was mis-leading, and that residents were under the impression they were to attend the meeting to discuss "flood control'' and not the flood plain. He suggested that this be corrected if another posting is needed. -8- Mr. Smith questioned that the proposed amended ordinance does in fact apply to the entire city. He stated that he felt it applied only to those areas that are outlined on the maps; i.e., Little Dry Creek, Big Dry Creek, and the South Platte River. Mrs. Romans pointed out that the proposed ordinance does state that the flood plain regulations do apply to any drainageway in the City whether it is mapped or not; this would cover the Harvard Gulch drainageway, for example. She stated that any application for a building permit would be reviewed to deter- mine if it is in fact in a drainageway. Mr. Smith argued that there would be major portions of the City that would be excluded from this ordinance --it does not in fact apply to the entire City. Mrs. Romans reiterated that the ordinance is very clear that all building permits will be reviewed to determine if they are in fact in drainageways. Mr.Smith asked why drainageways have not been included on the mapping? Mrs. Romans stated that drainageways have not been mapped by the F.I.A., and the City Council has not provided funds for the mapping to be done. She pointed out that the staff is using the information that is available in the Engineering Department contained in the various studies previously cited. She stated that funds for the mapping of the floodways was requested in the Capital Im- provement Program, but the request was not funded. Mr. Smith stated that if the flood plains of the drainageways are not identified and mapped, he felt the staff would be making "arbitrary decisions." Mr. Tanguma asked for statements on the text of the proposed amendment at this time. Mr. Robert Wiley stated that his concern with the proposal is on the flood plain area as depicted on the maps for the area of the South Platte River/Little Dry Creek confluence. He stated that he had discussed his concerns with Mr. Wanush, an:l was told that the City "didn't have any choice but to adopt the F.I.A. maps". Mr. Wiley stated that on Page 11 of the proposed text; pertaining to restrictions on mobile homes, his concern is with the statement: ALL COMPONENTS OF THE ANCHORING SYSTEM SHALL BE CAPABLE OF CARRYING A FORCE OF 4,800 POUNDS ••• " He stated that this statement is very ambiguous, and he does not feel that the City can adopt a statement like that --it does not indicate what the components of the anchoring system are; whether the 4800 pounds is "sheer strength" or tensil strength". He stated that he did not see how this provision could be complied with, and that it was ridiculous to adopt this when the citizens cannot comply. Mr. Wiley referred to Page 4 of the proposed definitions, and cited the definition of "Floodway". He asked that this definition be explained to him. Mr. Smith stated that he would interpret the "floodway" to be that area required for the passage of the flood waters, or the a r ea that is mapped. Mr. Wiley asked if the floodway and f ood plain applied to the same area, or to two different ar eas? e . -9- Mr. Tanguma stated that he felt the floodway would be that area the water travels without anything impeding the flow -- the channel, in other words. The flood plain would be the area water would cover that cannot be contained within the floodway. Mrs. Romans pointed out that the regulations state that no mobile homes will be permitted in l the floodway, and in fact, no new mobile home parks are permitted in the City of Englewood and those that are in existence are non-conforming. She stated that by definition, the floodway and flood plain are one and the same. Mr. Wiley questioned the need for separate definitions. Mrs. Romans stated that both terms are used in the text of the pro- posed amended ordinance. Mr. Wiley stated that if we are going to have people who will try to follow the rules as they are adopted, we must have rules and regulations that can be understood without the expense of hiring a professional engineer. Mrs. Wade asked Mr. Wiley if there was a channel within this area he has referred to at San.t a ~e and Dartmouth? Mr. Wiley stated that there is a six to ~nine foot deep channel along Dry Creek, that is probably ten to twelve foot wide. Mr. Wiley stated th~t the culvert under Santa Fe Drive drains into Little Dry Creek. Mr. Wiley stated that he did not feel this area could be classified as a flood plain "without looking at the lay of the land". Discussion ensued. 'Mr. Smith noted that the 1965 flood covered the area outlined by the Corps of Engineers in their study of the South Platte River. Mr. Wiley countered that the 1965 flood in this area came from the South Platte River, and not from Little Dry Creek. The Chatfield Dam has since been constructed, and should change the flood plain on the South Platte River. Mr. Dwight Yates asked if the flood plains of the Little Dry Creek and the South Platte River could be indicated separately. He stated that his property would be affected more by the South Platte River flood plain than that of Little Dry Creek. He noted that a map issued by the Urban Drainage shows Little Dry Creek floods just back of the tressles and does not show the Little Dry Creek flooding down to the confluence with the Platte River. He agreed with Mr. Wiley that the construction of the Chatfield Dam should have greatly reduced the flood plain of the South Platte River. Discussion ensued. Mrs. Romans stated that this particular map by the F.I.A. shows the flood hazard boundary covering both the South Platte River and Little Dry Creek. Mr. Yates stated he felt the flood plains for the Platte River and Little Dry Creek should be shown separately. Mrs. Romans stated that this can be dis- cussed with the F.I.A. to determine if they will prepare separate maps. Mr. Maynard Jacobson stated that in 1933, there was a flood on Big Dry Creek that took out the Broadway bridge and went -10- through his property. Mr. Jacobson stated that he had a great deal of information on the flooding of Big Dry Creek, and he would be happy to leave his address and phone number so that the staff could contact him at a later date rather than going into all the information this evening. He stated that the flooding on Big Dry Creek is a serious problem; he again mentioned that a man recently contacted him about changing Big Dry Creek to enable construction in this area. Mrs. Romans stated that if construction does take place in a flood plain, the developer must take steps to flood proof the structure. Mrs. Wade asked Mr. Jacobson if the map of the flood plain along Big Dry Creek was accurate? Mr. Jacobson stated that it appears accurate to him. Mr. Leadabrand 3281 South Galapago -questioned the accuracy of the mapping of the flood plain on Little Dry Creek. He noted that to the south of his property across Floyd Avenue is the access to the lower level of the shopping center. He pointed out that this map does not indicate a flooding possibility in the lower level parking area and on the lower floors of Cinderella City. Mr. Leadabrand stated that he has lived at this address since 1959, and has seen some very heavy rains where the water backs up into this area. He noted that Little Dry Creek was boxed during the construction of Cinderella City, but the box cannot carry all the water that flows through this area. Mr. Leadabrand noted that the underground parking area and the lower floors of the shopping center are all lower elevation than the blocks north of Floyd Avenue that are designated as flood plain on the map. Mr. Leadabrand noted that at the time of the 1965 flood, persons living in this area were evacuated as a precaution. Discussion ensued on the method of mapping an area such as this where the underground parking and lower levels would be subject to flooding. A recess of the meeting was called at 8:30 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 8:50 P.M. with the following attendance: Present: Absent: Parker, Smith, Tanguma, Williams, Draper OWens, Pierson, Wade, Lathrop Mr. Tanguma asked for further comment from the floor. Douglas Gore 4645 Norfolk Way Aurora, Colorado -stated that he is the Flood Insurance specialist with the Federal Insurance Administration. He stated that he was available to answer any questions that the Commission or members of the audience might have of him. -11- Mr. Smith made reference to Mr. Wiley's concerns regarding flood proofing of mobile home units, and the "components of the anchoring system." He asked if this is defined anywhere in the Federal regulations? Mr. Gore stated that these regu- lations apply to the entire country. Mrs. Wade entered the meeting and took her place with the Com- mission. Mr. Gore stated that the Federal regulations allow each juris- diction to set their own standards, and noted that the City of Englewood is in the process of developing specific require- ments for anchoring mobile homes in the proposed Mobile Home Ordinance. He stated that his office has been supplied a copy of the proposed ordinance, and is in the process of reviewing them to determine if the proposed standards would comply with the Federal regulations. Mr. Smith noted that several members of the audience had ex- pressed concern .about getting the flood insurance. They have contacted insurance agents and have been informed that they are not eligible for flood insurance. He asked if there was a specific insurance agent that should be contacted? Mr. Gore stated that the National Flood Insurers Association trains agents to write flood insurance policies. He suggested that persons interested in flood insurance contact CNA Insurance Company, 759-1500, for more information on which agents are trained to write these policies. Mr. Gore stated that CNA reviews every policy written in the State of Colorado, and could give the interested person a list of agents qualified to write the flood insurance policy. Mr. Smith asked about the discrepancies in mapping that have been pointed out, such as the flooding of the lower level of Cinderella City. He stated that this must be passed by the Commission at this meeting to meet the February 1, 1978, dead- line imposed by the Federal Government. He asked if it would be possible to get a time extension from the FIA? Mr. Gore pointed out that "these maps have been with you for some time --several years, in fact." What has happened since the hearings on the initial Flood Plain Ordinance is that other studies have been completed on the South Platte River, Little Dry Creek, Big Dry Creek, and possibly on other drainageways, that have more up-to-date information than the FIA has had available to it in the mapping process. Mr. Gore stated that if these recent studies are submitted to the FIA, the maps will be brought up-to-date. Mr. Parker stated that he felt accurate mapping is very important to the property owner in a matter such as this. Mrs. Wade noted there had been considerable discussion on the flood plain as mapped for Little Dry Creek and South Platte River; she noted that with the construction of Chatfield Dam -12- some check and balance is leveled on the flood potential of the Platte River. However, Bear Creek has not yet been con- trolled by a dam, and this creek does drain into the South Platte River. She questioned that the flood plain as mapped should be changed until such time as Bear Creek is controlled. Mr. Draper asked if the Federal Government regulates the premiums for Flood Insurance. Mr. Gore stated that subsidiza:l rates are available in communities in the Flood Insurance Pro- gram. Mr. Gore discussed the method used to determine the rate charged. Williams moved: Wade seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #28-77 be closed. AYES: Draper, Parker, Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Williams NAYS: None ABSENT: Lathrop, Owens, Pierson The motion carried. Mr. Williams asked if this matter was not recommended by the Commission this evening, what would it do to the time element? He noted that the Commission has been given a very short time to consider this, and he did not feel it was fair to ask the Commission to make a decision on things without an opportunity to study the matter. Mrs. Romans pointed out that the amendments to the Ordinance must be passed and the maps must be adopted by February 1, 1978, if the City is to retain its eligibility for flood insurance. Mr. Williams stated that he questioned that some of the con- cerns expressed by the audience this evening have been adequately answered. Mrs. Romans pointed out that some of ·the concerns dealt with the Flood Hazard Boundary Map, and the regulations provide a means of working with the Flood Plain Administrator on the mapping disputes, or a property owner may appeal to the Board of Adjustment for relief from the regulations. Mr. Smith reiterated his question of whether a time extension could be obtained? Mr. Gore stated that he felt it would be difficult to do, but if it was needed he would attempt to get the time extension. Mr. Gore stated that notices were mailed to jurisdictions November 1st, giving jurisdictions three months in which to comply with the new regulations. He acknowledged that there was a mix-up in the mail for the Englewood and Sheridan offices, and that possibly a time extension, if obtained, would not exceed two weeks. Mr. Draper asked what would happen to the 38 property owners who have obtained the flood insurance if this proposed amend- ment and maps are not approved? Mr. Gore stated that their . policy could not be renewed, but would remain in effect until the time for renewal. Mr. Gore stated that amendment of e . ·e -13- existing ordinances was expected to be completed in three months time, and new ordinances were expected to be drafted and approved within six months. Mrs. Wade noted that there have been very few changes in the wording on the proposed ordinance from what is in effect today. It does not appear there are any major changes in the intent or basic procedure. She questioned if the extension would actually be needed. Mr. Williams stated that he had reserva- tions on the mobile home provisions. He did not feel the gentleman's concerns were satisfied. Mrs. Romans stated that the proposed Mobile Home Park Ordinance is very specific as to wind security requirements, and that Mr. Gore has been sent a copy of this ordinance to determine if it does meet the Federal Insurance Administration Regulations relative to tie downs for flood protection. Mr. Draper questioned the amount of "credance" that could be given to the testimony presented this evening. He pointed out that all those persons who spoke expressed concerns about the proposed regulations or mapping, and did not speak in favor of the proposed amendments or mapping. He pointed out that there are only 38 property owners who have obtained flood insurance policies, and all property owners will be bound by the proposed ordinance and mapping. He stated that it seemed to him that if the Commission takes these facts into consideration, they would not be overly influenced by the comments of the staff. Mrs. Romans pointed out that these are not new regulations; they are in effect today. The purpose of the hearing is to consider the amendments to the existing regulations which t~e Federal Government 3ays must be adopted to continue the eligibility for flood insurance. Mrs. Romans stated that there are many times when the Commission seems to base their decisions on the number of people present in the audience in favor of or against a matter rather than on the overall merits of the individual case. Mrs. Romans stated that she feels the Planning Commission must listen to the people and act in the best interest of the people, but they must also consider other information made available to them pertaining to specific cases. Mr. Williams stated that he agreed with Mrs. Romans statement 100%. Discussion ensued. Smith moved: Wade seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council the attached proposed amendments to the Compre- hensive Zoning Ordinance, §22.4B, Flood Plain, and §22.8, Definitions; the Commission also recommends adoption of the Flood Hazard Boundary Map, H 01-04, and Flood Insurance Rate Map, I 01-04, which were considered by the City Planning and Zoning Commission at Public Hearing on December 27, 1977. -14- Mr. Smith stated that outside of the section pertaining to the mobile homes, he saw no major problems with the proposed amended ordinance. He stated that he did not agree that a floodway and a flood plain are the same thing. He stated that he felt that the Planning Commission should reconsider portions of this at a later date in an effort to clarify some of the provisions. He stated that he would hate to see people deprived of the right to obtain flood insurance if this is not approved, but he hated to make a hasty decision. He asked that the matter be referred back to the Commission for their further study and consideration. Mr. Smith stated he also wanted to see some publicity on the availability of flood insurance for those persons living in flood plain areas. Further discussion on the floodway vs. the flood plain ensued. Mr. Gore stated that the flood plain is the entire area that would be inundated by a 100-year flood; in the middle of the "flood plain" is a stream course, or floodway. Further dis- cussion ensued. Mr. Draper asked if the flood insurance is available to every property owner in the City? Mr. Gore stated that it is; the rates are lower for those property owners outside of the flood plain. Mr. Gore pointed out that for property owners within the flood plain, they must have flood insurance before they can obtain a loan on that property. He added that communities that do not participate in the program cannot get disaster relief in the event of a disaster. The vote on the motion was called: AYES: Parker, Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Williams, Draper NAYS: None ABSENT: Lathrop, Owens, Pier8o n The motion carried. Mrs. Romans stated that the staff appreciated the cooperation shown them by Mr. Gore in the preparation of the proposed amend- ments for the Hearing. The Commission also expressed their appreciation to Mr. Gore for his attendance at the meeting this evening. Mr. Williams moved: The meeting be adjourned. The motion was seconded and carried. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M. Gertrude G. Welty ~ecording Secr~tary I / . I /:/ :...---, ·,,,,. ~ / ,..-,._; ,' ... ---..<r -r --I MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: December 27, 1977 SUBJECT: Proposed Amendment of Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Adoption of the Flood Hazard Boundary Map, H 01-04, and Flood Insurance Rate Map I 01-04. RECOMMENDATION: Smith moved: Wade seconded : The Planning Commission recommend to City Council the attached proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, §22.4B, Flood Plain, and §22.8, Definitions; the Commission also recommends adoption of the Flood Hazard Boundary Map H 01-04, and Flood Insurance Rate Map I 01-04, which were considered by the City Planning and Zoning Commission at Public H~aring on December 27, 1977. AYES: Parker, Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Williams, Draper NAYS: None ABSENT: Lathrop, Owens, Pierson The motion carried. By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission. . - / . :.--.. -; ,.- \.. / fj t L t: (' t'-1 ;·- Gertrude G. Welty ·Recording Secretar y .~ ~--·--"· '//t ...... ) ,,,., . : ~ <."' r . ··I'