Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />May 9, 2019 <br />Page 4 of 6 <br />Williams stated that required flood insurance was pretty cheap. If a resident were <br />outside a floodplain and wanted insurance, it was possible but very expensive. She <br />added that there was a cap to the insurance amount. <br />Howe asked what the benefits were for shrinking the floodplain map instead of thinking <br />worst -case scenario. <br />Zuccaro replied that staff and the consultants thought it was a much more accurate <br />map. Those who were previously mandated to get flood insurance may no longer be <br />mandated to do so and, conversely, people who were added to the floodplain would <br />have better information about the danger to their homes and get flood insurance. <br />Moline added that the City had made a positive change to the floodplain by removing <br />the downtown area from the 100-year floodplain and he congratulated the town for <br />doing that work. <br />Zuccaro noted that the downtown work had been completed in 2018. He added that if a <br />homeowner were on the edge of the floodplain, he or she could survey the finished floor <br />of the property and have an engineer certify that the floor was out of the floodplain and <br />therefore not be required to pay insurance. He noted that there were few structures <br />according to the new map and that City engineers were looking into options to removing <br />the few structures that were left in the floodplain now. <br />Williams asked about the floodplain southwest of South Boulder Road and 96' Street. <br />Zuccaro replied that there was a waterway at that location. <br />Ritchie added that another area in the floodplain, the baseball field, was designed with <br />water storage capacity. <br />Zuccaro noted that the insurance requirement was only for properties with a federally - <br />backed loan. <br />Williams asked how the structures in the floodplain went from 200 structures down to 60 <br />and then to approximately 24. <br />Ritchie stated that along the Coal Creek Corridor a high number of properties were <br />being removed, in addition to the mitigation work downtown from 2018. <br />Williams asked if the change to the Coal Creek Corridor was due to urban drainage. <br />Zuccaro replied that that was due to the new map alone. <br />Howe asked about the update to the penalty provisions. <br />Zuccaro replied that the penalties themselves were not changing. Colorado Water <br />Conservation Board, an agent of FEMA, reviewed the ordinance and asked for a <br />reference to the penalty provisions in the floodplain chapter. <br />