Loading...
Agenda 03/20/2006 W Co~r County ~'_"'bf.':~j::i~J"i''$~'i~:1I!-"'~~'t'1:'","''J,,,,,'''t:<rr'~~&-.M?''):;; '<~?,;hW:~:',,~ri:l,.,;_:;):ct'i-,'''-''::\i~1~7:'-{;':,;_!cr'.<_,.,~"'''-;. Board of County Commissioners Workshop Monday, March 20, 2006 9 a.m. -12 p.m. Boardroom, Third Floor ~ Harmon Tumer Building Collier County Government Center · Workshop Discussion for Higher Regulatory Criteria Additions to the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance · Consideration of policy options for property acquisitions under the Conservation Collier Program that will work strategically with the TOR Program and consideration of the Growth Management Plan policy that allows only private entities to generate TORs 5' -~ " '-. , . ---- "'-'",.-..,,,,-,,, AGENDA March 20, 2006 9:00 a.m. BCC/Flood Plain Management Workshop 3rd Floor Boardroom W. Harmon Turner Building Frank Halas, Chairman, District 2 Jim Coletta, Vice-Chairman, District 5 Donna Fiala, Commissioner, District 1 Tom Henning, Commissioner, District 3 Fred W. Coyle, Commissioner, District 4 NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2004-05, AS AMENDED, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 774-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE. 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Higher Regulatory Standards within the Community Rating System of the National Flood Insurance Program that are being considered for future inclusion in the County' Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance 3. Consideration of policy options for property acquisitions under the Conservation Collier Program that will work strategically with the TOR Program and consideration of the Growth Management Plan policy that allows only private entities to generate TORs 4. Adjourn INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383. .."".. ....... ./ ... \ . -==' AGENDA March 20, 2006 9:00 a.m. BCC/Flood Plain Management Workshop 3rd Floor Boardroom W. Harmon Turner Building Frank Halas, Chairman, District 2 Jim Coletta, Vice-Chairman, District 5 Donna Fiala, Commissioner, District 1 Tom Henning, Commissioner, District 3 Fred W. Coyle, Commissioner, District 4 NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2004-05, AS AMENDED, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 774-8380; Page 1 March 20, 2006 ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE. 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Higher Regulatory Standards within the Community Rating System of the National Flood Insurance Program that are being considered for future inclusion in the County' Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance 3. Consideration of policy options for property acquisitions under the Conservation Collier Program that will work strategically with the TDR Program and consideration of the Growth Management Plan policy that allows only private entities to generate TDRs 4. Adjourn Page 2 March 20, 2006 C()1E:r County "_'''<'''i/'c::,"''!:Wi'J~/!J--~~;jNi:Li,-:,:'~,f',j::-_I~~i;;:H;1'-";;/~~';~.,j(~~'i'~';""'V Board of County Commissioners Workshop Monday, March 20, 2006 9 a.m. -12 p.m. Boardroom, Third Floor ~ Harmon Turner Building Collier County Government Center AGENDA . Introductions · Workshop Discussion for Higher Regulatory Criteria Additions to the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance - Joseph Schmitt, Administrator, Community Development and Environmental Services Division and Robert Wiley, P.E., C.F.M., Principal Project Manager, Engineering Services Department · Consideration of policy options for property acquisitions under the Conservation Collier Program that will work strategically with the TDR Program and consideration of the Growth Management Plan policy that allows only private entities to generate TDRs - Alexandra Sulecki, Coordinator, Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program, Collier County Environmental Services Dept. · Communications · Adjourn EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Workshop Discussion for Higher Regulatory Criteria Additions to the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance OBJECTIVE: To present higher regulatory criteria from the Community Rating System program of the National Flood Insurance Program in a workshop format for consideration of future inclusion in the County's Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance. CONSIDERATIONS: On September 27, 2005, staff presented proposed reVlSlons to the County's flood ordinance. The revisions addressed the adoption of the new Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and the addition of some higher regulatory criteria to make the community more resistant to flooding. The Board of County Commissioners adopted an ordinance revision to include the adoption of the new FIRMs and directed staff to bring back the higher regulatory standards in a workshop after presenting them to the Collier County Planning Commission. Staff presented the higher regulatory criteria to the Development Services Advisory Committee (DSAC) on January 4, 2006 and again on February I, 2006. Staff presented the higher regulatory criteria to the Collier County Planning Commission on February 16, 2006. The following higher regulatory criteria were discussed: a. Freeboard - Require buildings within the floodplain to be protected to a level the minimum of one foot higher than the base flood elevation. Freeboard would also apply to electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, air conditioning equipment, and other service facilities and duct work. b. Foundation Protection - Require that fill and building foundations be designed to protect them from damage due to erosion, scour, and settling. This would re-establish the soil compaction testing to a specified standard for all buildings built on fill and require the fill be at or above the base flood elevation for a specified distance from the outside edge of the building. c. Lower Substantial Improvements Threshold - Use a threshold of 49% of the building's value to determine when the substantial improvement requirement takes effect. d. Cumulative Substantial Improvement - Require that all improvements or repairs are counted cumulatively over a rolling five-year period toward the substantial improvement requirement. This requirement ensures that owners do not evade flood protection measures by making many small improvements that eventually add up to a major or substantial improvement. e. Protection of Critical Facilities - Require that critical facilities, such as hospitals, fire stations, EMS stations, sheriff stations/substations, emergency evacuation centers, Emergency Operations Center, water treatment plants, pump stations and wells, wastewater treatment plants and pump stations, electrical power substations, and telephone communication centers/switching stations, be protected to at least the 500-year flood level. Executive Summary Higher Regulatory Standards Workshop 3-20-06 Page 2 of4 f. Protection of Floodplain Storage Capacity -- Maintain floodplain storage by prohibiting fill or by requiring compensatory storage. Although floodway regulations preserve flood conveyance, they allow the flood fringe to be filled in. The resulting loss of storage can have a significant effect on downstream flood heights, especially in flat areas. g. Manufactured Home Parks - Require that new and replacement manufactured homes placed in existing manufactured home parks be properly elevated to the base flood elevation (and freeboard if approved) and anchored. h. Stormwater Management Facility Inspection and Maintenance-- Requiring development to provide periodic maintenance and inspection certification of their stormwater management facilities. This helps ensure the facilities operate to design capacity and efficiency for both stormwater quantity and quality. 1. Flood Hazard Disclosure - Requirements for sellers or landlords to publicize or disclose the flood hazard on their properties. This disclosure would also be required on final subdivision plats and property boundary surveys. J. Other Higher Standards - No Floodproofing - Locally developed regulations to eliminate the option of floodproofing non-residential buildings within the floodplain and requiring elevation ofthe building's lowest floor. The Development Services Advisory Committee recommended approval of the following criteria: b. Foundation Protection c. Lower Substantial Improvements Threshold e. Protection of Critical Facilities g. Manufactured Home Parks h. Stormwater Management Facility Inspection and Maintenance 1. Flood Hazard Disclosure In their discussions on the topics, the DSAC members expressed concern about the increased cost to the building if freeboard and protection of floodplain storage capacity were put in place. The concept of cumulative substantial improvements was not favorable to them due to anticipated record keeping difficulties and feelings that the issue wasn't needed. The no floodproofing concept was opposed based upon concerns over compliance with the American Disabilities Act requirements for building access, especially in areas of high property values and tight lot lines like 5th A venue South and the Gateway Triangle. The Collier County Planning Commission recommended approval of all the requested criteria with the exception of Item J (Other Higher Standards - No Floodproofing). They also expressed concern on burdens that may be placed on property owners in complying with the access requirements of the American Disabilities Act. During their discussion, they did recommend that additional regulations be considered for periodic inspection and testing of the floodproofing methods and materials by the owners of building approved using floodproofing. The current CRS class rating for Collier County is Class 7 which provides up to a 15% discount on the premium rate for flood insurance. The County's current CRS credit point score is 1692 points. To reach a Class 6 rating and provide up to a 20% discount, the County needs to achieve Executive Summary Higher Regulatory Standards Workshop 3-20-06 Page 3 of 4 2000 CRS credit points. The recommendations of DSAC add up to 311 possible points while the recommendations of the CCPC add up to 551 points. FISCAL IMPACT: The implementation of the various higher regulatory criteria will have a fiscal impact, both positive and negative, for the building owner and a fiscal impact for the County to enforce those provisions. An estimated fiscal impact is provided for the various criteria. Freeboard - Based upon information obtained from various builders willing to participate, the typical cost for a typical 3000 square foot house would approximate $5,500. The individual owner's flood insurance premium, based upon the one foot of freeboard, would be reduced approximately 35%. Within approximately 17 years, the savings on the flood insurance premiums would recoup the cost of the freeboard. Foundation Protection - A typical cost would be approximately $1,200 for a typical house. Lower Substantial Improvements Threshold - No fiscal impact. Cumulative Substantial Improvements - No fiscal impact Protection of Critical Facilities - Since this affects certain governmental buildings, there will be added costs to future construction and reconstruction projects. Since each project will be unique, there is no cost estimate. Protection of Floodplain Storage Capacity - Assuming that the property is sufficient in size, a typical cost of approximately $1,000 would be incurred. Manufactured Home Parks - A typical cost of approximately $1,000 would be incurred. Stormwater Management Facilities Inspection and Maintenance - The owner's cost to have an engineer certify the adequacy of the stormwater management facilities will vary greatly, depending upon the age, condition, size, and complexity of the facilities. To administer a program to inspect and document compliance is estimated to cost the County approximately $330,000 annually. Flood Hazard Disclosure - The cost to the owner to provide the documentation would be negligible. Other Higher Standards -No Floodproofing - The cost to elevate and provide proper access is estimated to cost several thousands of dollars for commercial properties. However, design and implementation of proper floodproofing techniques is also expensive. Added to that cost is the loss suffered if the floodproofing is not properly installed in a timely manner before a flood event. Overall, the fiscal impact could be positive or negative, so no estimate was made. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no impact on Growth Management issues. Executive Summary Higher Regulatory Standards Workshop 3-20-06 Page 4 of 4 RECOMMENDA TION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve all of the requested higher regulatory standards for inclusion in an amendment to the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance. Staff fully understands the concerns of the CCPC for No Floodproofing and is in agreement that if this standard is not supported by the Board of County Commissioners due to access difficulties, then direction should be given to staff to develop specific criteria for the periodic testing and inspection of floodproofing materials, and these criteria should be included in the Collier County Land Development Code. PREP ARED BY: Robert C. Wiley, P .E., Principal Project Manager Engineering Services Department Workshop Discussion for Higher Regulatory Criteria Additions to the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance INTRODUCTION Collier County continues to be a rapidly developing community. In addition to new development of vacant land, there is also an increasing interest in redevelopment of the older, existing developed lands near the coast. The topography is very flat, especially in the interior portions of the County, and the coastal shelf is shallow. The Federal Emergency Management Agency has recently implemented new Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) that are based only upon a coastal surge analysis for the one-percent annual chance storm event. The County, City of Naples, South Florida Water Management District and Federal Emergency Management Agency are all working toward the development of new FIRMs that identify floodplains for both coastal surge flooding and rainfall-induced rising water flooding. This effort will produce a more realistic floodplain, and simultaneous to this effort, it is important that Collier County develop adequate regulations to produce a more flood resistant community. The existing Collier County Flood Ordinance (Ord. No. 86-28, as most recently amended on September 27,2005 to adopt the new FIRMs) needs to be amended again to bring several portions into better agreement with changes that have occurred within the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and the County's Land Development Code. Collier County is a voluntary participant in the Community Rating System of the NFIP. The Community Rating System (CRS) is a program whereby communities disseminate information, regulate land use, pro-actively enforce building codes, establish regulatory development criteria, and undertake various other specific efforts to improve the flood resistance of the community. The CRS program has established specific types of flood resistance improvement activities with specific available point scores for each activity, and each community if free to select from the list. The goal of the CRS is to score as many points as the community deems feasible. The reward for higher scores is increased discounts to the community's flood insurance policy holders. The following table illustrates the various CRS activities, the points available for each activity, and Collier County's current point score for the activities it has selected. Activity Activity Name Available Collier No. Points County Points 310 Elevation Certificates 162 56 320 Map Information 140 140 330 Outreach Projects 315 37 340 Hazard Disclosure 81 0 350 Flood Protection Information 66 0 360 Flood Protection Assistance 71 0 410 Additional Flood Data 1373 0 420 Open Space Preservation 900 387 430 Higher Regulatory Standards 2720 83 440 Flood Data Maintenance 231 48 450 Stormwater Management 670 75 510 Floodplain Management Planning 309 127 520 Acquisition and Relocation 3200 0 530 Flood Protection 2800 0 540 Drainage System Maintenance 330 250 610 Flood Warning Program 225 124 620 Levee Safety 900 0 630 Dam Safety 175 67 700 Community Growth Adjustment 150% Collier County's current CRS score is 1692 points out of a total possible CRS score of 14,668 points. The 1692 point score is sufficient to rank us as a Class 7 community and achieve a 15% discount for most of the County's flood insurance policy holders. Flood insurance policies that already have the Preferred Risk discount are only discounted an additional 5%. As can be seen on the chart above, there are several activities where Collier County does not score any CRS points. 340 Hazard Disclosure 350 Flood Protection Information 360 Flood Protection Assistance 410 Additional Flood Data 520 Acquisition and Relocation 530 Flood Protection 620 Levee Safety Some of these activities are not applicable (e.g. 620 Levee Safety) or not practical (e.g. 520 Acquisition and Relocation) in Collier County. Other activities are currently being evaluated by staff for various levels of implementation and scoring. Activities 410 through 450 receive the benefit of the 150% multiplier (Activity 700), so any point gained in these activities is really 1.5 points gained in the total score. WHAT THE CRS COORDINATOR'S MANUAL SAYS ABOUT REGULATING INCREASED RESISTANCE TO FLOOD DAMAGE THROUGH HIGHER REGULATORY STANDARDS Activity 430 (Higher Regulatory Standards) is the primary CRS activity for crediting floodplain development regulations that are more restrictive than the NFIP requirements. The basic credit criteria are explained in the CRS Coordinator's Manual. This publication expands on those explanations and provides examples of credited regulatory language and guidance on how to calculate the credit points for Activity 430. The section numbering for this publication matches the system used in the CRS Application and the CRS Coordinator's Manual. Activity 430 (Higher Regulatory Standards) has 16 elements that include additional requirements that increase the level of protection provided to floodplain development. These are the most common regulatory requirements that exceed the minimum NFIP requirements for floodplain management. Each element has an acronym that is used in the credit calculation formulae. The acronyms are a shorthand method of referring to the elements. The 16 elements are detailed in subsections "a" through "m" in Section 431 of the CRS Coordinator's Manual. a. Freeboard - (up to 100 points for each foot of freeboard requirement) Require buildings to be protected to a level higher than the base flood elevation. b. Foundation Protection - (up to 35 points) Require that fill and building foundations be designed to protect them from damage due to erosion, scour, and settling. c. Cumulative Substantial Improvement - (up to 110 points) Require that all improvements or repairs are counted cumulatively toward the substantial improvement requirement. This requirement ensures that owners do not evade flood protection measures by making many small improvements that eventually add up to a major or substantial improvement. d. Lower Substantial Improvements Threshold - (up to 90 points) Use a threshold lower than 50% of the building's value to determine when the substantial improvement requirement takes effect. e. Protection of Critical Facilities - (up to 100 points) Require that critical facilities, such as hospitals and hazardous materials storage sites, be protected from higher flood levels. f. Protection of Floodplain Storage Capacity -- (up to 80 points) Maintain floodplain storage by prohibiting fill or by requiring compensatory storage. Although floodway regulations preserve flood conveyance, they allow the flood fringe to be filled in. The resulting loss of storage can have a significant effect on downstream flood heights, especially in flat areas. g. Natural and Beneficial Functions Regulations - (up to 40 points) Prohibit or regulate developments that can have an adverse impact on public health or water quality, including alterations to shoreline, channels, and banks. h. Enclosure Limits - (up to 300 points) Prohibit building enclosures below the base flood elevation. i. Other Higher Standards - (up to 50 points) Other locally developed regulations that exceed the minimum requirements of the NFIP regulations and increase the community's flood damage resistance. j. land Development Criteria - (up to 700 points) Use land development criteria and low density zoning to reduce the damage potential within the floodplain and help maintain flood storage and conveyance capacity. k. Special Hazards Regulation - (credit points vary) Require additional regulations in areas subject to special hazards. The NFIP regulations are oriented toward the more common overbank and coastal flooding. Special hazards regulations are requirements tailored to the different conditions found in the following situations: · Closed basin lakes · Ice jams · Land subsidence · Coastal dunes and beaches · Uncertain flow paths (e.g., alluvial fans and moveable bed streams) I. State-Mandated Regulatory Standards - (up to 45 points) Implementstate- mandated regulatory standards whereby all communities are required to administer a state rule or adopt state development criteria. m. Building Code - (up to 120 points) Have a Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule classification of "6" or better and/or have adopted all, or part, of the International Building Code series. n. Staffing - (up to 50 points) Have a staff member (or members) who is certified as a floodplain manager or who has received floodplain management training through the NFIP. o. Manufactured Home Parks - (up to 50 points) Require that new and replacement manufactured homes placed in existing manufactured home parks be properly elevated and anchored. p. Coastal AE Zones - (up to 650 points) Adopt construction standards for coastal AE Zones. · Mudflow hazards · Coastal erosion · Tsunamis The regulations credited in Activity 430 are related to protecting insurable buildings located in the floodplain. Communities may have other regulations related to flooding, stormwater management, or water resources protection. Many of these are credited under other CRS activities, such as those listed below. . Flood Hazard Disclosure - (up to 81 points) Requirements for developers or sellers to publicize or disclose the flood hazard on their properties are credited under Activity 340. . Additional Flood Data - (up to 1373 points) Developing base flood elevations or studying the impact of development projects on flood heights or velocities in floodplains where such data are not provided by the NFIP, establishing more restrictive f100dway mapping, "zero rise floodway," and "full urbanization hydrology" requirements are credited under Activity 410 (Additional Flood Data). . Open Space Preservation - (up to 900 points) Prohibiting new buildings in the floodway, V Zone, or other part of the floodplain is credited under Activity 420 (Open Space Preservation). A community can only receive credit for a prohibitory regulation under either Activity 420 or Activity 430, not under both. Activity 420 provides more credit points than Activity 430 does because new buildings are better protected from flooding if they are kept out of the floodplain in the first place. Therefore, most communities opt to credit prohibitory regulations under Activity 420. · Stormwater Management - (up to 670 points) Requiring new developments to provide retention or detention of their stormwater runoff to minimize the increase in flood flows due to watershed urbanization is the subject of Activity 450 (Stormwater Management). Erosion and sedimentation control regulations and implementation of appropriate "best management practices" are also covered in Activity 450 because they improve the quality of stormwater runoff and reduce siltation and the resulting loss of channel-carrying capacity. · Drainage System Maintenance - (up to 330 points) Regulations on dumping or placing debris in stream channels are credited under Activity 540 (Drainage System Maintenance). For the purposes of Activity 430, creditable regulations must be legally enforceable requirements placed on floodplain development. They do not have to be enforced by the community but they do have to be legally enforceable by a government agency. For example, state regulations or requirements from a County or regional drainage or flood control district may be credited if those entities have jurisdiction in the community. In most states, regulations are in the form of state statutes, codes or regulations, or local ordinances or by-laws. Plans, such as land use plans and comprehensive plans, are usually recommendations, not regulations. A community that submits a plan for credit under this activity must also submit its attorney's opinion that the plan has the force of law and is enforced by a regulatory office, such as a building or zoning department. Most floodplain regulations appear in a zoning ordinance, building code, or separate floodplain management ordinance or regulations. They cover construction projects throughout the community or throughout the community's floodplain. Some regulations appear in subdivision ordinances, health regulations, or other special purpose ordinances. In some cases, an ordinance, especially a subdivision ordinance, will refer to state or local policies, specifications, a design manual, or other separate document. Many local officials have said, "developers don't argue, they follow this manual because we tell them to." Unless the separate policy document is specifically adopted by reference in the ordinance, the community will have to include a statement from its legal counsel that its policies and design standards have the force of law. Similarly, some regulations state that something "may be required" or that a permit applicant "should" do something. The CRS only credits clear and explicit regulations that require specific actions or standards from a floodplain developer. Generally the word "shall" indicates such a requirement. For example, the following language WOULD NOT be credited. If, in the opinion of the building official, the soils are not suitable for construction, appropriate fill and compaction may be required. The following language WOULD be credited. The applicant shall provide a soils engineering report based on the results of one soil boring for each acre where the following soil types are present. . . Generally, statements in the purpose or objective section of an ordinance are not acceptable. The CRS credits the specific requirement, not a statement about a reason for adopting the ordinance. For example, many communities have language that says one of the objectives of the ordinance is "To prevent fraud and victimization of unwary land and home buyers." Nowhere else in the ordinance is there a reference to fraud or a specific disclosure requirement. Therefore, credit under Activity 340 (Flood Hazard Disclosure) has not been provided for that language. In some cases, state laws provide the authority for a state agency or a community to do something. Usually a state agency will implement regulations or a community will enact an ordinance pursuant to the law. It is the subsequent regulations or local ordinance that must be submitted for CRS credit, not the authorizing or enabling legislation. Sometimes a requirement is meaningless without the definition section of the ordinance or regulation. Instead of requiring buildings to be elevated 1 foot above the base flood elevation, some communities require them to be elevated above a "flood protection elevation." In these cases, the community needs to also submit the ordinance section that defines the "flood protection elevation." As with all regulatory issues, the opinion of the community's attorney or corporation counsel is most important. If language is not accepted by the ISO/CRS Specialist because it does not appear to be clear, explicit, or consistently enforceable, then the community may submit a letter on its attorney's letterhead stating that the debated item has the force of law. Ordinance language should be carefully written to support the community's goals and the purposes of its regulatory program, to sufficiently respond to the flood hazard facing the community, and to conform to state law. SPECIFIC AREAS OF HIGHER REGULATORY STANDARDS PROPOSED FOR COLLIER COUNTY A careful examination of the Flood Insurance Rate Map for Collier County readily identifies that it is not practical or feasible to remove all development from, or prohibit new development in, the floodplain. With the flat topography and shallow coastline, that would eliminate a very large percentage of development in the County. Although Activity 520 (Acquisition and Relocation) has up to 3200 points available, Collier County is not likely to meet the criteria to score points for them. But applying some higher regulatory criteria in the following areas can allow the County to apply for over 500 points while making the community more resistant to flood damage. FREEBOARD (FRB) - If eliminating development from the floodplain is not an acceptable option for the community, the next best option is to ensure that the development is constructed at an elevation higher than the anticipated flood level. Freeboard is a term for an extra margin of protection. Ordinances or codes with a freeboard requirement add height above the base flood elevation to account for · future flood fringe development, · uncertainties inherent with the methodologies, · lack of data, · waves or debris that accompany the base flood, and · floods higher than the base flood. In a floodplain management ordinance, a freeboard requirement means that new buildings will be protected to a level higher than the NFIP's base flood elevation. Including freeboard in a building's construction plans can be accomplished in several ways, depending upon the specific site characteristics, with a negligible cost increase for the level of safety provided. It is not desirable for the entire lot to be filled to the level of the freeboard as this reduces the amount of floodwater storage available. Instead, the desired result is to elevate the lowest floor of the building through the use of a raised foundation (e.g. stemwall, piers, foundation walls, etc.). An informal telephone survey of forty-four local builders obtained ten that were willing to provide information on potential costs to add one foot of freeboard. Of those ten, only one expressed opposition to freeboard while three expressed strong support or stated they were already building higher than the minimum elevation. The house sizes ranged from 2,500 to 3,500 square feet and cost estimates ranged from $2,000 to $15,000 with the average being between $5,000 and $6,000. The builders all mentioned that costs would vary depending upon the type of construction and the complexity of the building's perimeter. While freeboard has a direct consumer cost to implement, it also has a direct cost savings to the individual policy holder. Flood insurance policy premium costs for buildings within the Special Flood Hazard Area (flood zones beginning with the letter "V" or "A") are determined by the amount of coverage and the elevation of the lowest floor in relation to the base flood elevation. For Pre-FIRM buildings, the premium rate is subsidized and no floor elevation differential is mandated. For Post-FIRM buildings, the higher the lowest floor is constructed above the base flood elevation, the more discount is applied to the premium rate. Most of the discount is applied to the basic coverage amounts, which is the first $50,000 for residential buildings and the first $150,000 for non-residential buildings. Additional flood insurance coverage is available up to $250,000 for residential and $500,000 for non-residential buildings. Building at one foot of freeboard provides approximately 50% savings on the basic coverage rate. Building at two feet of freeboard provides approximately 70% savings on the basic coverage rate. Since most of the incurred flood damage is within the basic coverage amount, there is very little discount provided on the "additional coverage" rates. For a typical single family house, the flood insurance cost savings provided by one foot of freeboard would be approximately $300 per year. For CRS credit, freeboard must be applied not just to the elevation of the lowest floor or floodproofing level, but also to the level of protection provided to all components of the building. All building utilities, including ductwork, must be elevated or protected to the freeboard level and all portions of the building below the freeboard level must be constructed using materials resistant to flood damage. If the garage floor is below the freeboard level, the garage must meet the opening requirements for enclosures. Pools, pool decks, and lanai floor elevations are not required to comply with freeboard or base flood elevations since they are exterior to the building and not considered the lowest floor . In AE Zones where base flood elevations have been established, the NFIP rules require that . the lowest floor, including basements, of residential structures be elevated to or above the base flood elevation (44 CFR 60.3(c)(2)) . non-residential structures be elevated or flood proofed to or above the base flood elevation (44 CFR 60.3(c)(3)) . attached garages and all utilities (including electrical, heating, ductwork, ventilating, plumbing, and air conditioning equipment) be protected to the base flood elevation (44 CFR 60.3 (a)(3)). In coastal high hazard areas (V Zones), a community must provide that all new construction and substantial improvements are elevated on pilings and columns. This is done so that the bottom of the lowest horizontal structural member of the lowest floor (excluding the pilings or columns) is elevated to or above the base flood level. In an AO Zone the community must require that . all new construction and substantial improvements of residential structures have the lowest floor (including basement) elevated above the highest adjacent grade at least as high as the depth number specified in feet on the community's FIRM (at least two feet if no depth number is specified) (44 CFR 60.3(c)(7)); . all new construction and substantial improvements of non-residential structures have the lowest floor (including basement) elevated above the highest adjacent grade at least as high as the depth number specified in feet on the community's FIRM (at least two feet if no depth number is specified) or, together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, be completely floodproofed to that level. (44 CFR 60.3(c)(8)). The CRS freeboard credit calculations have two acronyms: FS is the number of feet of freeboard and FRS is the score for the freeboard credit. FRS is calculated with the seven formulae listed below. 1. FRS = 100 x FS. For FS of 3.0 feet or more, FRS = 300. In the case of 1 foot of freeboard, FS = 1.0 so FRS = 100 x 1.0 = 100. If the freeboard requirement is 18 inches, FS = 1.5 and FRS = 100 x 1.5 = 150. The maximum score for FRS is 300. NOTE: In A Zones the lowest floor is measured from the top of the floor. In V Zones, the elevation requirement is measured from the bottom of the lowest horizontal structural member. If the illustration to the right were for a V-Zone building, the freeboard would be measured from the bottom of the floor joist. 2. If the ordinance uses the encroached elevation, add 0.5 to FB. Detailed riverine flood studies that produce a floodway provide a flood elevation based upon the floodway encroachment. These elevations are listed in the "with floodway" column in the Floodway Data Table in the community's Flood Insurance Study. They are generally higher than the "without floodway" or "regulatory" flood elevations. For example, if the community requires that the lowest floor be at least 1 foot above this encroached or "with floodway" elevation, FB = 1.0 + 0.5 = 1.5 and FRB = 100 x 1.5 = 150. 3. For FRB credit, the SOO-year flood elevation is considered to be 1 foot higher than the base flood elevation, unless the community demonstrates that it is higher. If freeboard is based upon the SOO-year flood, add 1.0 to FB. Elevating to the SOO-year flood provides more protection than elevating to the base flood elevation. Section 431.a.S of the CRS Coordinator's Manual provides credit equivalent to 1 foot of freeboard. For example, if the community requires that buildings be elevated to the SOO-year flood level, FB = 1.0 and FRB = 100 x 1.0 = 100. Base flood and SOO-year flood elevations can be found in the community's Flood Insurance Study profiles. If the difference is greater than 1 foot, then the community should calculate the difference. For example, if the ordinance requires 1 foot of freeboard above the SOO-year flood and the profiles show that the 500- year flood averages 1.5 feet above the 1 OO-year flood, then FB = 1.0 + 1.5 = 2.5 and FRB = 100 x 2.5 = 250. 4. For FRB credit outside of V Zones, if the ordinance uses "lowest horizontal structural member" or similar language instead of "lowest floor," add 1.0 to FB. The minimum NFIP requirement outside of coastal high hazard areas (V Zones) is that the top of the lowest floor be at or above the base flood elevation. Some communities require that any beams, floor joists, or other horizontal structural members be elevated to or above the base flood elevation. Since this requirement will generally result in the top of the lowest floor being approximately 1 foot above the base flood elevation, the CRS provides credit equivalent to 1 foot of freeboard. This credit is not available in coastal high hazard areas because it is a minimum NFIP requirement in V Zones. Communities that enforce this requirement in both A and V Zones must use the impact adjustment to pro-rate the credit points. 5. A community may use the following to receive more credit in A01 , A02, and A03 Zones (a) In A01 and A02 Zones, add 2.0 to FB. (b) In A03 Zones, add 1.0 to FB. AO Zones are floodplains subject to shallow flooding. The number after "AO" is the depth of flooding expected. Waves and other problems are minimal in such areas, so a little freeboard provides a relatively larger margin of protection. Section 431.a.6 increases the freeboard credit points in such areas. In AO Zones, base flood depths are provided instead of base flood elevations in relation to mean sea level. Where depths are not provided, the NFIP regulations require new buildings to be elevated 2 feet above grade. Some communities misinterpret this requirement as 2 feet of freeboard. Elevating 2 feet above the base flood elevation is a creditable freeboard requirement. Elevating 2 feet above grade in an AO Zone where no base flood elevation is provided is a minimum requirement of the NFIP and is not eligible for credit. A community with a relatively large area of AO Zone may want to use the impact adjustment to calculate different values for FRS in different areas. For example, if the community has a 1-foot freeboard requirement, FS=1. Therefore, FRS = 100 x 1 = 100. However, if some of its floodplain is A01 Zone, you add 2 to the FS; therefore, FRS = 100 x (1 + 2) = 300. The community can receive 300 points for the area in A01 and 100 points for some the remainder of its floodplain. The impact adjustment is discussed in Section 432 of the CRS Coordinator's Manual. 6. If the requirement for freeboard is limited to areas where there are base flood elevations, or otherwise does not apply to all new construction, then an impact adjustment must be made using Option 2 or 3 (see Sections 432.b and 432.c of the CRS Coordinator's ManuaD. If the freeboard requirement does not affect all buildings, then the Option 2 or Option 3 impact adjustment must be used. For example, many ordinances require freeboard only where a base flood elevation is provided. Others require freeboard only for elevated buildings (non- residential buildings may be flood proofed to the base flood elevation without freeboard). In these cases, the community can use Option 2 or identify and measure the areas affected for Option 3. Impact adjustments are discussed in Section 432 of the CRS Coordinator's Manual. If the community has different freeboard standards in different areas, it may use the lowest value for FRS for all areas. This may eliminate the need for an Impact Adjustment Map and separate calculations for various values of FRS. 7. If the community requires that electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air conditioning equipment and other service facilities (including ductwork) be elevated or made of flood-resistant materials above the base flood elevation, but does not require these facilities to be elevated or protected to the freeboard level, multiply FS by 0.75. If the community does not require that these facilities (including ductwork) be elevated or protected to or above the base flood elevation, there is no credit for FRS. Many communities have focused on elevating the top of the lowest floor, but have allowed utilities, especially ductwork, to hang below the floor joists and be flooded. Flooded ductwork can add thousands of dollars to a flood insurance claim. This is primarily a concern for buildings on crawlspaces. Buildings on slab foundations, on pilings, and in V Zones normally have the utility facilities waterproofed or elevated high enough. The final freeboard credit will be adjusted if utilities and ductwork are not above the freeboard elevation. The illustration below shows four examples: B Top of Floor Furnace C Top of Floor Furnace o Furnace of l'k,,!':: f,'d .Ih", I' JUT l!~ l~ ::!ilJ \ H,-;-; i ';" Adjusting freeboard credit based on the location of ductwork in a crawlspace A. No credit-floor not above freeboard level. B. No credit-floor above freeboard level but utilities and/or ductwork below base flood elevation (BFE). C. 75% credit-floor above freeboard, but utilities and ductwork are only above the BFE. D. Full credit-floor and all utilities and ductwork are above the freeboard level. Staff's recommendation is to adopt criteria requiring one (1) foot of freeboard that applies to all buildings in all flood zones, including electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, air conditioning equipment and other service facilities and duct work. This would allow Collier County to apply for up to one hundred (100) credit points. FOUNDATION PROTECTION (FDN) - Foundation Protection regulatory criteria is proposed for adoption by Collier County to further reduce the potential for buildings outside of the coastal high hazard areas to be damaged by flood related erosion, settling, or other problems to the material supporting the foundation. Collier County has adopted the 2004 Florida Building Code which states, in Section 1803.5, that where footings will bear on compacted fill material, the compacted fill shall comply with the provisions of an approved report which shall contain the following: 1. Specifications for the preparation of the site prior to placement of compacted fill material. 2. Specifications for material to be used as compacted fill. 3. Test method to be used to determine the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of the material to be used as compacted fill. 4. Maximum allowable thickness of each lift of compacted fill material. 5. Field test method for determining the in-place dry density of the compacted fill. 6. Minimum acceptable in-place dry density expressed as a percentage of the maximum dry density determined in accordance with Item 3. 7. Number and frequency of field tests required to determine compliance with Item 6. Exception: Compacted fill material less than 12 inches (305 mm) in depth need not comply with an approved report, provided it has been compacted to a minimum of 90 percent Modified Proctor in accordance with ASTM D 1557. The compaction shall be verified by a qualified inspector approved by the building official. To ensure proper compaction and provide an official regulatory standard, Collier County needs to amend the currently adopted building code to specify a minimum acceptable compaction standard, and the basis for determining achievement of that standard. To achieve CRS credit for foundation protection, the County needs to establish additional criteria requiring specific soil compaction testing methods, requiring that compacted fill extend outside the building walls before dropping below the base flood elevation, and requiring provisions to protect against erosion and potential scour. The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) regulations require that structures be elevated to or above the base flood elevation AND anchored to resist flotation, collapse, and lateral movement. In V Zones and for flood proofed buildings, an engineer or architect must certify that the structure meets the NFIP requirements. In other situations, the regulations do not provide specific guidance as to how the performance standards are met. Buildings elevated on pilings, crawlspaces, or other foundations may be damaged if the foundations are not properly designed for the soil and flood conditions of the site. Fill can erode during a flood, undermining the structure. Structural damage can also result from the settling of a building placed on improperly compacted fill or organic soils. Foundation protection (FON) credit is provided to encourage communities to require site-specific foundation construction standards. FON credit is not available in coastal high hazard areas because the minimum NFIP regulations require engineered foundations in V Zones (44 CFR 60.3(e)(4)). The NFIP regulations do not specifically require that foundations or fill be protected from erosion, scour, or settling. However, this requirement is implicit in the performance standard of Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 60.3(a)(3), which requires that the community make sure that buildings are properly designed and anchored to resist flood damage. NFIP regulations require that a building elevated on solid foundation walls have openings in the walls to allow passage of flood water to equalize hydrostatic pressure on the walls (60.4(c)(5)). Floodproofed buildings must have an engineer's certification (60.3(b)(4)). Because these regulations relate to foundations and because they require architect or engineer certificates, some communities have confused these minimum requirements with FON credit. FON credit is related to the compaction of the supporting soils and protection of the soils or supporting members from erosion, scour, settling, and related hazards that accompany floods. The maximum credit available for Foundation Protection is 35 points. This credit is not available in V Zones because foundation protection is a minimum NFIP requirement in V Zones. The CRS Foundation Protection credit calculation has the acronym FON. 1. FON = 35, if ALL new buildings must be constructed on properly designed and compacted fill (e.g. ASTM 0-698, ASTM 0-1557 or equivalent) that extends beyond the building walls before dropping below the base flood elevation and has appropriate protection from erosion and scour. The design of the fill or the fill standard must be approved by a licensed professional engineer. To receive the full 35 points, the regulations must address all new buildings on all types of foundations, (e.g., on fill, crawlspaces, piers, etc.) All new buildings must be built on either engineered fill or engineered supports. ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) Standard 0-1557 requires compaction to 95% of the maximum density obtainable using the Modified Proctor Test method. ASTM Standard 0-698 requires compaction to 95% of the maximum density obtainable using the Standard Proctor Test method. If the community has adopted an engineered standard and requires compliance with that standard, FON credit can be provided. In such cases, an engineer's certificate is not needed for each structure, although records of compaction tests, etc., would be needed for each structure. 2. FON = 20, if all new buildings built on fill must be constructed on properly designed and compacted fill (e.g. ASTM 0-1557, ASTM 0-698 or equivalent) that extends beyond the building walls before dropping below the base flood elevation and has appropriate protection from erosion and scour. This credit is for regulations that only address buildings on fill. Twenty points are provided, even though there are no special requirements for buildings on crawlspaces, piers, etc. (If the regulations require that ALL new and substantially improved buildings be built on engineered fill, then FDN = 35 under Subsection 1 above.) An engineer's certificate is not needed for each structure, although records of compaction tests, etc., would be needed for each structure. If the community has adopted an engineered standard and requires compliance with that standard, FDN credit is provided. 3. FDN = 10, if the community has adopted and enforces the soil testing and compaction requirements of the Standard, Uniform, or National Building Codes or the International Residential and Building Codes. All three national model building codes have language relating to soils, compaction of fill, and construction of footings and piles. They do not address protecting the fill from erosion, scour, and other flood hazards. The model codes' provisions are found in the following sections: · . Sections 1612 and 1803.4 and Appendix K of the International Residential Code of the International Code Council (ICC). · . Sections R401.2 and R506.2.1 of the International Building Code of the International Code Council (ICC). · . Chapter 18, "Foundations," in the Standard Building Code (1997 edition) developed by the Southern Building Code Congress International (SBCCI) (known as Chapter 18 in the 1994 and 1996 editions). · . Chapter 29, "Excavations, Foundations, and Retaining Walls," and Chapter 70, "Excavation and Grading," of the Uniform Building Code (1991 edition) of the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) (Chapters 18 and 33 in the 1994 edition). · . Chapter 18, "Foundations and Retaining Walls," of the Building Officials and Code Administrators (BOCA) National Building Code (1993 edition). Communities that have adopted these sections of these model codes are provided 10 points for Foundation Protection (FDN). In Collier County, most of the construction utilizes a compacted fill for foundation support. However, the extensive use of large amounts of fill to achieve the minimum allowable floor elevation has the negative effect of displacing potential floodwater storage. Where compacted fill is used, there is the need to ensure that it is adequately compacted and protected against scour and erosion to ensure the integrity of the building's foundation. Staff's recommendation is to adopt Foundation Protection criteria such that all new buildings built on fill must be constructed on properly designed and compacted fill (ASTM D-1557 with 95% compaction using the Modified Proctor Test method) that extends a minimum of five (5) feet beyond the building walls before dropping below the base flood elevation and has appropriate protection from erosion and scour. This would allow Collier County to apply for 20 credit points. LOWER SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENTS/DAMAGE THRESHOLD (LSI) - FEMA defines Substantial Improvements as any reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition, or other improvement to a building, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50% of the market value of the building before the start of construction of the improvement. Substantial Damage is defined as damage of any origin sustained by a building whereby the cost of restoring the building to its before-damage condition would equal or exceed 50% of the market value of the building before the damage occurred. If a building is substantially improved or damaged, the NFIP regulations require that it be treated as a new building and be elevated (non-residential buildings may be flood proofed) to or above the base flood elevation. To encourage communities and owners to bring existing non-compliant buildings into compliance with the current standards of the National Flood Insurance program, the Community Rating System offers credit points for lowering the threshold for substantial damage or substantial improvement below the 50% amount. A building is more likely to be brought up to code sooner if the threshold is lowered for improvement or repair projects. The NFIP requirement of a 50% threshold is part of the definition of "substantial improvement" in Title 44, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 59.1. The following LSI point credit scoring (up to a maximum of 90 points) is available to communities that choose to lower the substantial improvement and substantial damage threshold (use only one). 8. LSI = 90, if the regulatory threshold is less than 10%; 9. LSI =70, if the regulatory threshold is 10% to 24%; 10. LSI = 50, if the regulatory threshold is 25% to 39%; 11. LSI = 30, if the regulatory threshold is 40% to 44%; 12. LSI = 10, if the regulatory threshold is 45% to 49%; or 13. LSI = 20, if the regulatory threshold is no more than 25% of the bulk or square footage of the building's first floor. 14.lf the lower substantial improvements threshold applies to either improvements, modifications, and additions or reconstruction and repairs, but not both, the value for LSI is multiplied by 0.5. If a community lowered the threshold only for repairs and reconstruction or only for improvements, modifications, and additions, then the value for LSI is halved. Collier County is participating in the NFIP which already has a threshold defined as 50%. It is only necessary to change "50%" in the definition section of the ordinance to the desired number. The Collier County Building Department is already using a database system for checking improvements to each flood prone property. The records show the value of building additions, improvements, and repairs and the building's value and type of project. Minor modifications would need to be made to existing procedures to obtain actual cost values suitable for the NFIP's requirements instead of contractor estimates. In 2005 there were sixteen (16) buildings affected by the 50% value for substantial improvements. Staff's recommendation is to adopt regulations lowering the substantial improvements and damage threshold to 49%. This will allow Collier County to apply for 10 credit points while having a negligible impact on the community. CUMULATIVE SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENTS (CSI) - When considering Substantial Improvements or Substantial Damage, the Community Rating System offers credit points to those communities that consider the cumulative value of improvements or damage repairs to non-compliant buildings in the floodplain. Floodplain management regulations are most effective in reducing flood damage to new construction. Buildings built before adoption of the regulations are often subject to repeated flooding, repeated damage, and repeated flood insurance claims and federal disaster assistance payments. The NFIP regulations address a portion of this problem by requiring that substantially damaged and substantially improved buildings be brought up to the same standards as new buildings. However, only a small percentage of the existing buildings are substantially damaged or substantially improved and subject to these requirements. Communities can reduce flood damage by counting improvement and repair projects cumulatively so that buildings will be brought into compliance with flood protection standards sooner. Credit of up to 110 points is provided under CSI for enforcing a cumulative substantial improvement rule. Substantial improvements are treated as new construction in Title 44, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 60.3(c)(2) and (3). A single large improvement or repair project is clearly a substantial improvement no matter how many separate permits are issued. However, the NFIP regulations do not require that smaller individual improvements made over a period of years and that add up to 50% be considered a substantial improvement. Theoretically, property owners could "beat the system" by applying for a 40% improvement project one year and applying for another 40% project the next year. This element provides credit to communities that ensure that the total value of all improvements permitted over the years does not exceed the community's threshold of the value of the structure. The standard default value is 50%, but under LSI, the value may be lower. If it does, the original building must be protected according to the NFIP requirements for new buildings. The scoring allows for separate regulatory requirements for improvements and repairs. If the community requires both to be counted cumulatively, it receives the total for both criteria. It can also add the credit for a regulation which covers all additions, regardless of size. CSI Credit is the total of the following points: 1. CSI1 = one of the following: (a) 45, if the regulations require that improvements, modifications, and additions to existing buildings are counted cumulatively for at least 10 years, or (b) 25, if the regulations require that improvements, modifications, and additions to existing buildings are counted cumulatively for at least 5 years. 2. CSI2 = one of the following: (a) 45, if the regulations require that reconstruction and repairs to damaged buildings are counted cumulatively for at least 10 years, or (b) 25, if the regulations require that reconstruction and repairs to damaged buildings are counted cumulatively for at least 5 years, or (c) 20, if the community adopts regulatory language that qualifies properties for Increased Cost of Compliance insurance coverage for repetitive losses. Increased Cost of Compliance (ICC) is a relatively new provision in flood insurance policies that helps pay for bringing a substantially damaged flooded building into compliance with the local ordinance. It is possible that a building deemed substantially damaged by an ordinance that qualifies for CSI would not qualify for an ICC payment. ICC and example regulatory language are discussed separately in the later paragraphs in this section of the report. 3. CSI3 =20, if the regulations require that any addition to a building be protected from damage from the base flood. This third approach, worth 20 points, makes every addition, regardless of size, a substantial improvement. Additions within the footprint of the original building would have to be on a floor above the base flood elevation. Additions outside that footprint would have to be elevated (or, for non-residential structures, flood proofed) above the base flood elevation. CSI = CSI1 + CSI2 + CSI3 Increased Cost of Compliance On June 1, 1997, the NFIP began offering "Increased Cost of Compliance" (ICC) coverage for buildings covered under the Standard Flood Insurance Policy (SFIP). ICC coverage provides for the payment of a claim to help pay for the cost to comply with community floodplain management ordinances after a flood event in which a building has been declared substantially damaged or repetitively damaged. When an insured building is damaged by a flood and the community declares the building to be substantially or repetitively damaged, ICC will help pay for the cost to elevate, floodproof, demolish, or relocate the building up to a maximum of $20,000. This coverage is in addition to the building coverage for the repair of actual physical damage from flood under the SFIP. An ICC claim can be filed whether or not a community has received a Presidential disaster declaration. The following conditions must be met for a substantially damaged building to be eligible for an ICC claim: A building is eligible for an ICC claim payment if it is in a Special Flood Hazard Area and if the community determines it has been damaged by a flood whereby the cost of restoring the building to its before-damaged condition would equal or exceed 50% of the market value of the building before the damage occurred, as determined by the community. All NFIP communities must have, at a minimum, a substantial damage provision in their floodplain management ordinance in accordance with the NFIP criteria. By statute, an ICC claim can only be paid upon a substantial damage determination based on the NFIP's 50% damage criteria. An ICC claim will not be paid if the damage is less than 50% of the market value, even if the local ordinance declares the building substantially damaged. Communities receiving LSI credit for lower substantial improvement thresholds need to be aware that there may be times when their higher regulatory standard will not trigger an ICC claim payment for their residents. The following conditions must be met for a repetitively damaged building to be eligible for an ICe claim payment: A building is eligible for an ICC claim payment if it is in a Special Flood Hazard Area, is a repetitive loss structure, and is subject to a community floodplain management ordinance. Two conditions must be met for an ICC claim to be paid under the SFIP for a repetitive loss structure: 1. The state or community must have adopted and be currently enforcing a repetitive loss provision or a cumulative substantial damage provision requiring action by the property owner to comply with the community's floodplain management ordinance; and 2. The building must have a history ofNFIP claim payments that satisfies the statute's definition of "repetitive loss structure." A repetitive loss structure means "a building covered by a contract for flood insurance that has incurred flood-related damage on two occasions during a lO-year period ending on the date of the event for which a second claim is made, in which the cost of repairing the flood damage, on the average, equaled or exceeded 25% of the market value of the building at the time of each such flood event." Note that this statutory ICC definition is not the same as the CRS definition of a repetitive loss property. The date on which the first loss occurred, even if the loss occurred before June 1, 1997, is immaterial to eligibility for an ICC claim payment, as long as the state or community enforced a repetitive loss or cumulative substantial damage requirement on the building and the insured building satisfies the definition of the "repetitive loss structure" defined above. Communities receiving CSI credit for a cumulative substantial improvement regulation must be aware that there may be instances in which the community's criteria may require compliance with its floodplain management ordinance, but the building may not qualify for an '.~- . Ice claim payment (e.g., if a building is damaged three times, with each flood averaging 20% damage). Below are two options for ordinance language that is consistent with the definition of "repetitive loss structure" under the NFIP. The language would receive 20 points under eSI-fewer points than the more restrictive language of eSIl(a) and (b) above. Option 1: A. Adopt the Following Definition: "Repetitive Loss" means flood-related damage sustained by a structure on two separate occasions during a 10-year period for which the cost of repairs at the time of each such flood event, on the average, equals or exceeds 25% of the market value ofthe structure before the damage occurred. B. And modify the "substantial improvement" definition as follows: "Substantial improvement" means any reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition, or other improvement ofa structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50% of the market value of the structure before the "start of construction" of the improvement. This term includes structures that have incurred "repetitive loss" or "substantial damage," regardless of the actual repair work performed. Option 2: Modify the "substantial damage" definition as follows: "Substantial damage" means damage of any origin sustained by a structure whereby the cost of restoring the structure to its before-damage condition would equal or exceed 50% of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred. Substantial damage also means flood-related damage sustained by a structure on two separate occasions during a 10-year period for which the cost of repairs at the time of each such flood event, on the average, equals or exceeds 25% of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred. NOTE: An ICC claim payment is ONLY made for flood-related damage. The substantial damage part of the definition must still include "damage of any origin" to be compliant with the minimum NFIP floodplain management regulations. If a community chooses to implement Cumulative Substantial Improvements, the permit office must demonstrate that it has a system for keeping track of improvements to each property within the floodplain. If a permit is applied for, the office must routinely check its files for past improvements, additions, and repairs and calculate the cumulative effect of the proposed project. The records must show the value of building additions, improvements, and repairs and the building's value. The community should not rely solely on the applicant's estimate of the cost, especially if permit fees or tax assessments are based on the estimated cost. Double check the cost based on the building department's knowledge of area construction costs or standard formulae based on square footage or type of project. Each time someone applies for a permit in the SFHA, the building's records must be checked. The percentage of the cost of the project for which a permit is being requested plus the cost of all projects constructed since the cumulative substantial improvement requirement went into effect must be compared to the building's value. If all the projects add up to 50% (or a lower value if the LSI is some number less than 50%) or more of the building's value, then the project applied for is considered a substantial improvement, and the building is subject to the community's regulations for new construction. One of the greatest difficulties in enforcing CSI is keeping track of improvements over time. The system used to enforce this and the other credited elements is reviewed by the ISO/CRS Specialist during the verification visit. Some communities throw out permit records one year after the certificate of occupancy is issued. Others file them in a basement and cannot get to them readily. Collier County utilizes a computer-based system to record all building permits tied to the property address and the Property Appraiser's folio number. The community needs to maintain permit records by parcel number or address, so that the history of improvements to a particular structure is checked before the next permit is issued. For example, at the time of permit application, the address could be checked in a computer-based tracking system to see what previous permits had been issued. Full credit of 45 points requires a system that will keep track of improvements for at least 10 years. Lesser credit of 25 points is provided if records are accessible for at least five years. Staff's recommendation is to adopt a 5-year cumulative substantial improvement/damage requirement, include a definition for repetitive loss, and modify the definitions of substantial improvement and substantial damage to allow homeowners with flood insurance to be able to better utilize the provisions of their ICC policy coverage and make their buildings more resistant to flood damage. This would allow Collier County to apply for 70 credit points. PROTECTION OF CRITICAL FACILITIES (PCF) - During and immediately following a flood event, certain types of facilities must be fully functional to provide for the health, safety and welfare of the public. The list includes, but is not limited to: . Those structures or facilities that produce, use, or store highly volatile, flammable, explosive, toxic, and/or water-reactive materials; . Hospitals, nursing homes, and housing likely to contain occupants who may not be sufficiently mobile to avoid death or injury during a flood; . Police stations, fire stations, vehicle and equipment storage facilities, and emergency operations centers that are needed for flood response activities before, during, and after a flood; and . Public and private utility facilities that are vital to maintaining or restoring normal services to flooded areas before, during, and after a flood. The recommended list of critical facilities for Collier County includes the following: ~ Fire stations ~ Sheriff department stations/substations ~ Emergency Medical Service stations ~ Collier County Emergency Operations Center ~ Emergency evacuation centers ~ Water treatment plants, pump stations, and wells ~ Wastewater treatment plants and pump stations ~ Electric power substations ~ Telephone communication centers/switching stations ~ Hospitals A higher level of protection for critical facilities serves several purposes: it reduces damage to vital public facilities, it reduces pollution of flood waters by hazardous materials, and it ensures that the facilities will be operable during most flood emergencies. Therefore, the CRS provides credit for regulations that protect critical facilities from the 500-year flood. On Collier County's FIRMs, the 500-year floodplain is shown as a Shaded Zone X. Ordinance language can simply specify the types of facilities that are prohibited from or protected within the A, V, and Shaded X zones. shaded X Zone. Flood Insurance Study profiles for riverine systems should provide 500-year flood elevations. The NFIP regulations do not have any provisions for critical facilities other than that all buildings must be protected from damage by the 1 DO-year flood. However, guidelines for implementing federal Executive Order 11988 set the 500-year flood as the standard for protecting "critical actions." This is the source of the CRS credit criteria. The score for PCF, up to a maximum of 100 credit points, is based on how critical facilities are protected from the 500-year flood. There are three options: 1. PCF = 100, if new critical facilities are prohibited from the 500-year floodplain; 2. PCF = 75, if new and substantially improved critical facilities are required to be protected from damage and loss of access as a result of the SOO-year flood or the flood of record, whichever is higher; 3. PCF = 50, if new and substantially improved critical facilities must be protected to the SOO-year flood level. If an ordinance prohibits or regulates critical facilities in only part of the SOO-year floodplain, such as in the 100-year floodplain, floodway, or V Zone, then the credit points are adjusted through the impact adjustment. Note that credit is provided only if there is regulatory language that addresses protection of critical facilities. The fact that there are currently no critical facilities in the regulated floodplain may indicate community policy, but adopted regulations are required for PCF credit. The costs to implement the protection of critical facilities will greatly vary depending on the site, type of facility, new or modifications to existing facilities, degree of access improvement, and various other factors. However, the increased assurance that these critical facilities will be functional during critical times of flooding is of tremendous benefit to the public. Protecting critical facilities to the SOO-year storm level rouahlv equates to providing protection for one additional foot of flooding depth. Staff's recommendation is to adopt requirements that new and substantially improved critical facilities must be protected to the SOO-year flood level. This will allow Collier County to apply for 50 credit points. PROTECTION OF FLOODPLAIN STORAGE CAPACITY (PSC) - Collier County's floodplain is very broad due to the low, flat topography and being adjacent to the Gulf of Mexico. Flooding can occur from both coastal surge and inland rising water (rainfall). Proper flooding analyses must consider coastal surge and rising water flooding both together and separately to account for the types of storm events that can occur. Although a building built on fill and elevated above the base flood elevation meets the NFIP regulations, filling a substantial portion of the floodplain reduces storage for flood water and tends to increase peak flows downstream. Prohibiting fill, or requiring that if fill is placed in the floodplain, an equal volume of storage be made available, will reduce this problem. The basic NFIP requirement in riverine situations is that new development must not restrict conveyance of flood waters. A floodway is adopted to identify the area needed to convey the base flood and that area is kept free of obstructions, [Title 44 Code of Federal Regulations, Sections 60.3(c)(10) and (d)(2) and (3)]. The balance of the riverine floodplain, the fringe, may be filled or otherwise developed. Although the NFIP requirement has an important impact on future flood heights, it does not account for the loss of floodplain storage caused by allowing the fringe to be filled. Storage is especially important in flat areas with wide fringes. Much of the slow-moving flood water is held in the fringe during a flood. Filling or construction of a levee that removes the storage capacity of the fringe means more water will be sent downstream, resulting in increased flood heights. On the other hand, in many places, building on fill is the safest form of floodplain construction, so communities should not summarily enact an ordinance just for CRS credit. '.,~ " 4""'~'" , L ~'>>;C>'.>.'.-: ~::~~:(.:::~:.::.::::::~~).::~:~:::):~::~:S:~~.<~.;~ . ~ . . .~,... ~ " ~ ~ ~ (:Il(lS'!i-SECTlfJN HL'W Illustration of a possible compensatory storage requirement. If fill is placed in the floodplain, an equal amount must be removed from the same elevation within the same approximate area of the drainage basin to provide "a hydraulically equivalent volume of excavation." ('~nt-~i-..>..;oll:f~ 'sk"lr:af't !::JtC.l.'...:.'ttQl", Floodplain storage capacity can be preserved in two ways. The first is to simply prohibit fill, the major cause for loss of storage. Prohibiting fill will also prevent most floodplain development and will help preserve the natural and beneficial functions of the floodplain. The other method is to require compensatory storage, i.e., the developer must compensate for each cubic foot of fill, building, or other item that is displacing flood water. Generally, this is done by removing an equal volume of fill from the lot, usually at the same elevation to maintain the same hydraulic conditions. The credit for PSC is based on which approach is used. 1. 80, where regulations prohibit fill within floodplains or flood fringes, including construction of buildings on fill; OR 2. 70, where regulations require that new developments provide compensatory storage at hydraulically equivalent sites. Credit is not provided for protection of storage capacity in floodways only. In Collier County, the regulations of the South Florida Water Management District already require development activities to address floodplain encroachment. However, not all development activities require the owner to obtain a South Florida Water Management District Environmental Resource Permit. A notable exception is for single family homes in existing platted subdivisions (e.g. Golden Gate Estates). The placement of large fill pads within the floodplain will have the negative effect of displacing existing floodwater storage which will shift the floodwater to other locations and/or increase depths of flooding. To avoid this impact, compensatory floodplain storage should be required within close proximity in the same drainage basin to the encroachment. To achieve this, a hydraulically equivalent volume of excavation taken from below the base flood elevation, but above the wet season water table elevation, would be constructed, with the provision to drain freely to the nearest publicly maintained watercourse (e.g. swale, canal, etc.) Protection of floodplain storage capacity by creating compensatory storage has several areas of impact to both the individual home owner and the overall community. The goal would be to encourage construction that reduced the size of the fill pad. Primarily there is the cost impact to the owner that must be individually addressed based upon the size and location of the home site. If the lot is small or located primarily in a wetland area, there may not be sufficient land outside of the house foundation to provide room for the compensatory floodwater storage. In these cases, the owner would need to provide the compensatory storage on a nearby lot that would be able to receive floodwater at the same time and elevation as the building lot. The owner would probably be able to use the fill material excavated from the compensatory storage site as part of the building fill pad. A builder may be able to use a single location to provide compensatory storage for several nearby building sites. By connecting the compensatory storage areas to the nearby swale or canal, there is additional storage capacity to receive stormwater from storm events smaller than the 1 % annual chance storm, and these sites could also provide additional water quality treatment. Because the bottom elevation would have to be located at or above the established wet season water table, there should not be extended periods of time for standing water to exacerbate a mosquito problem. Staff's recommendation is that all development using fill material within the Special Flood Hazard Area (flood zones beginning with the letter "V" or "A") be required to provide compensatory floodplain storage at hydraulically equivalent sites in close proximity to the placed fill. This will allow Collier County to apply for 70 credit points. MANUFACTURED HOME PARK CRITERIA (MHP) - The National Flood Insurance Program recognizes that existing manufactured home parks often create special circumstances for consideration by local communities. An "existing manufactured home park or subdivision" is a park or subdivision that was established before the adoption of floodplain management regulations by the community. For Collier County, that date is September 14, 1979. The minimum criteria of the NFIP allow communities to site manufactured homes in existing manufactured home parks or subdivisions so the lowest floor is three feet above grade. In some cases this results in manufactured homes elevated above the base flood elevation, but where flooding is more than three feet deep, it exposes them to substantial damage. This element credits regulations that do not differentiate between manufactured homes and conventional "stick built" buildings or between existing and new manufactured home parks and subdivisions - all must be elevated above the base flood elevation (plus the community's freeboard). This credit is limited to those communities that have existing manufactured home parks where the base flood is more than three feet deep. In other words, the credit is only for those communities where these regulations will have an impact. The NFIP regulations (44 CFR 60.3(c)(12)) allow communities to site manufactured homes in existing manufactured home parks or subdivisions on reinforced piers or other foundation elements that are not less than 36 inches above grade. Manufactured housing located OUTSIDE of existing parks or subdivisions must be elevated above the base flood elevation. The MHP credit provided to qualified communities is straightforward. MHP = 50, if regulations require that new and replacement manufactured homes placed in existing manufactured home parks or subdivisions be properly anchored and elevated to or above the base flood elevation plus any required freeboard. Credit is provided for not havinQ an exemption for existing manufactured home parks or subdivisions. In other words, the community's ordinance makes no mention of manufactured home parks or subdivisions, and all manufactured homes, no matter where they are located, must meet the same elevation requirements as conventional housing. Such ordinance language was a requirement of the NFIP before 1989. When communities were given the option of the 3-foot standard, many kept the higher standard and did not revise their regulations. The creditable language is also included in the new International Building Code Series. Therefore, it is possible that a community's current ordinance already has the language that is credited by this element. Collier County's current flood ordinance includes the 3-foot minimum height standard, and allows the replacement of a manufactured home in an existing manufactured home park at the same elevation as the old structure. The proposed higher regulatory standard would require all manufactured homes, plus any utilities, air conditioning, duct work, etc., to comply with the minimum floor elevation at the base flood elevation plus freeboard, if approved. The only additional cost for implementation of this Manufactured Home Park criteria would be for additional pier and entrance step heights. The only owners affected by this criteria would be in existing manufactured home (mobile home) park that were established prior to September 14, 1979, the date of the first Flood Insurance Rate Map for Collier County. This criteria basically eliminates the current loophole that allows a manufactured home in an existing manufactured home park to be replaced with a new manufactured home as the same low floor elevation that makes it susceptible to flooding. Staff's recommendation is for the adoption of additional Manufactured Home Park criteria to require that new and replacement manufactured homes placed in existing manufactured home parks or subdivisions be properly anchored and elevated to or above the base flood elevation plus any required freeboard. This will allow Collier County to apply for 50 credit points. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY INSPECTION (PUB) - New developments, exclusive of single family homes on individual lots, are required to provide stormwater management facilities to collect, treat, and gradually release stormwater runoff in a manner that is not detrimental to the existing community. These stormwater facilities are designed by engineers and constructed to certain minimum dimensions. However, there are no mandatory long term requirements for drainage system maintenance to ensure that the stormwater facilities continue to function as designed. When human-made or natural debris is allowed to accumulate, it can create a dam in a channel or fill needed storage areas. Although a properly maintained channel can carry runoff from most small storms, a blocked or dammed channel can cause more frequent overbank flooding, unexpected erosion, and sedimentation. Similarly, a lack of maintenance can result in detention or retention basins being filled with sediment or debris. If these basins are already full of sediment or debris, they cannot store water and flooding can result because the drainage system cannot do its job. One of the objectives of the Community Rating System (CRS) is to encourage and recognize programs that prevent flooding caused by blockages or reduction in storage resulting from accumulations of debris. While much of the impact associated with inadequate maintenance of stormwater management facilities addresses the potential for flooding, equally important, but not as readily observed is the maintenance of the system's ability to provide water quality treatment. Shallow grassed swales, vegetated lake slopes, and properly functioning discharge structures are all portions of what is often called a "treatment train" type of system. Each component performs a portion of the overall treatment to remove pollutants from the stormwater, as well as regulate the rate of discharge and percolation. If the community wants credit for public maintenance of new stormwater management facilities (PUB), and credit for channel and basin debris removal (COR) it must establish and implement procedures that meet the following requirements. Many communities already have programs and procedures for inspecting and clearing streams, ditches, and other channels; inspecting and cleaning retention or detention basins; cleaning storm sewers; stabilizing stream banks; and reconstructing channels. A community requesting COR credit for its program must submit documentation describing its drainage system maintenance procedures. Five items must be included in this documentation: 1. Who is responsible for the various aspects of the maintenance program, 2. The area covered by the program, 3. Inspection procedures, 4. Maintenance procedures, and 5. Records. These written procedures are essential to CRS credit. Each community will have a different approach to human-made ditches, natural watercourses, drainage ways on public vs. private property, etc. To verify whether the drainage system is being properly maintained, there must be locally prepared procedures. Verification is really a job of seeing that the local procedures are being followed. 1. Who is Responsible: The documentation submitted must identify what person or office is responsible for inspections, maintenance, and record keeping. In most cases, the drainage system is inspected and maintained by the community's public works department or a similar agency. What counts for the CRS is not who does the work but whether it is being done. Although the CRS community must provide the needed documentation, some or all of the actual work could be implemented by other responsible parties, such as . Flood control or drainage districts; . County, state, or federal agencies; . Private companies or engineering firms; and . Property owners associations. In many communities in Florida, for example, the multi-county water management district maintains large canals and the community is responsible for the remaining, smaller ditches and streams. In many cases, property owners associations, shopping centers, and other owners of large tracts of private property are responsible for maintenance of their own retention or detention basins. The CRS can provide credit for this arrangement only if . the community has an inspection program AND the authority to order the owner to perform needed maintenance, OR . the association or other owner is required to submit periodic inspection reports signed by a licensed professional engineer. In both cases, the community (or other public agency) must be willing to assume the ultimate responsibility for maintenance. If the private property owner does not perform the needed maintenance, the community must show that the job will get done according to its inspection and maintenance schedule. No credit is provided for projects that depend on unsecured outside funding, such as a special appropriation from the state legislature or approval of a Corps of Engineers' clearing and snagging project. Secured outside funding, such as projects financed by an annual state distribution of gasoline tax receipts, is acceptable. 2. Area Covered by the Program: The community must define its "drainage system," preferably on a map. For the purposes of this activity, the drainage system consists of "all natural and human-made watercourses, conduits, and storage basins that must be maintained in order to prevent flood damage to buildings from smaller, more frequent storms." In determining whether a waterway or facility is part of the drainage system for CRS purposes, ask "will buildings be damaged if it is not kept clear?" Facilities covered: The determination of a community's drainage system is based on what facilities need to be maintained in order to prevent damage to buildings. In some communities, it will be open channels and ditches. In a flat community, especially one protected by a levee, maintaining storm sewers, sewer inlets, canals, and pump stations may be vital to prevent flooding. In some areas of a community, roadside ditches are important conveyors of surface water and must be kept cleaned. In urbanizing watersheds, storage basins may be vital to preventing small storms from flooding buildings. The drainage system must include watercourses identified on the community's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) as well as important watercourses not in the floodplain (in B, C, or X Zones). In fact, the CRS is particularly concerned with flood insurance claims paid on properties that are NOT in the floodplain. Most of these claims are due to inadequately sized or maintained drainage facilities. The community should consider the sites of flood insurance claims and disaster assistance when defining the facilities covered. In communities with repetitive losses, the drainage system MUST cover those areas having repetitive loss properties where the cause of the losses was due to local drainage problems or smaller, more frequent storms. Facilities not covered: Certain areas do not need to be included in the drainage system maintenance program. Although the following parts of a drainage system should be maintained, they are not necessary for CRS credit. . Drainage facilities in undeveloped areas. For CRS credit, a community only needs to maintain those facilities where debris blockages would result in flooded buildings. Therefore, agricultural areas, parks, and areas with less than one building per acre do not need to be covered by the drainage maintenance program. . Channels that will not inundate buildings during a flood, such as deeply incised ravines. . Natural storage areas. Lakes, ponds, marshes, and wetlands can usually absorb debris without significantly affecting their storage capacities. Because of their natural resource benefits, the CRS encourages communities to maintain their appearance and prevent dumping into them. But the CRS does not advocate maintenance activities that disturb wetlands and other natural areas. . Irrigation canals. These do not need to be included unless they are specifically designed to be part of the community's drainage system or they intercept drainage ways during high flows, either intentionally or accidentally. Private property: In many areas of the country, property lines run to the middle of a stream or ditch. Often owners are legally responsible for maintenance of a channel or storage basin on their property. This condition does not exempt the watercourse or facility from the community's "drainage system" if obstructions and debris would cause flood damage to buildings. A community must have the legal authority to inspect the channels and basins that it identifies as part of its drainage system. A community without the authority to enter properties to inspect all channels and basins may demonstrate that it has adequate visibility from public property to see them all. On the other hand, a program that only inspects bridges and culverts will not be recognized for credit. A community must also have the authority to remove debris. This means that it is authorized either to enter the properties to perform maintenance or to order the owner to perform the maintenance. If there are areas where the community does not have these authorities, then the CRS credit points are adjusted to reflect how much of the drainage system it inspects and maintains. It is important to note that this activity is verified in the field. An ISO/CRS Specialist will check a sample of stream segments and basins in the areas maintained by the community. If the field check shows that maintenance is not being performed according to the written procedures, the credit points will be adjusted. Citations issued to private property owners are not considered maintenance unless they are enforced and bring results. Single lots: The community's "drainage system" does not have to include facilities that only drain one lot. In order to draw the line between public and private maintenance responsibility, the community may exempt landscaping swales, low ground along property lines, or small drainage ways from its program. However, facilities that are needed to drain several lots, such as a ditch that runs through several private properties, could be considered part of the drainage system. Altered watercourses: There is no CRS credit for maintaining altered watercourses, because such maintenance is a minimum requirement of the NFIP. In fact, failure to maintain such watercourses may result in a revision to the community's FIRM. The CRS provides credit for activities that are "above and beyond" the minimum requirements of the NFIP. If a stream is altered after the community's FIRM is published, the NFIP requires the community to ensure that the channel's carrying capacity is not adversely altered. This is required in 44 CFR 60.3(b)(7) of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA's) NFIP regulations and in most communities' floodplain management ordinances. 3. Inspection Procedures: Periodic inspections of channels and basins in developed areas are needed in every community to prevent the accumulation of debris deposited by storms, dumping, or natural processes. For CDR credit, inspections must be conducted . At least once each year, . After each storm that could adversely impact the drainage system, and . In response to citizen's complaints. . In addition, action must be taken after an inspection identifies the need for maintenance or cleaning. These should be considered minimums. Local conditions may well warrant more frequent regular inspections. The CRS will not provide credit for a program that only makes inspections when a complaint is filed. Although the program also must respond to complaints, regular inspections are vital. Often complaints are filed after the problem causes a flood. The objective of drainage system maintenance is to prevent such problems. It should be noted that CRS Activity 330 (Outreach Projects) encourages communities to advise their residents on how to submit complaints, especially if they see illegal dumping. Additional credit is provided if the community "identifies specific problem sites that are inspected and maintained differently or more frequently than other parts of the drainage system." Problem sites can be channel constrictions, culverts that catch debris more than others, undersized culverts, facilities near schools or other source of vandalism, etc. The written procedures must list these sites (or show them on a map) and describe how they are treated differently, usually through more frequent inspections. 4. Maintenance Procedures: A regular maintenance program in conjunction with inspections can prevent big problems. Typical problems found in open channels include trash, shopping carts, tires, plastic containers, branches, and logjams. Typical storage basin problems include clogged inlets and outlets, basin sedimentation, and broken pumps. When found early, they can often be removed or corrected with minimal equipment and expense. A public works crew or contractor, usually without heavy equipment, normally carries out the maintenance work for the basic CRS credit. The objective is to remove debris that has accumulated, such as shopping carts and other debris. For this CRS credit, the community's program must clearly describe what can and cannot be removed. Simply stating that "all debris will be removed" may not be correct for all areas. In natural drainage ways, federal and state laws may prevent some types of debris from being removed or maintenance from being performed. This section of the procedures should clearly describe any such limitations. Classifying streams is one way to define what can and cannot be done for different types of drainage ways. Bank erosion: The CRS does not credit activities dealing with bank erosion unless they are part of an annual capital improvements program. Although houses or bridges may be threatened by the erosion, the erosion usually does not cause a serious obstruction to flood flows. Similarly, bridge and culvert maintenance are only considered if their condition obstructs the flow of water. State permits: If the community has the right to enter all affected properties to perform maintenance, there should be no legal problems. In some cases, a state permit may be required. Usually a state permit is needed only for major projects, such as channel widening or bank stabilization or for projects in naturally sensitive areas, such as endangered species habitat. If a permit is needed for routine maintenance and debris removal, a general permit can often be obtained for a period of years and that specifies what work can be done. The community's program needs to identify the instances in which a state permit is needed. Stream Classification A community's drainage system maintenance procedures must identify what is considered a problem and what happens when a problem is found. This may require classifying streams and storage basins as natural and human-made and treating them differently. Natural Channel H,uman-Made Ditch A drainage maintenance program should not treat natural channels and human- made ditches the same. The natural channel has a wider area in which to flow. Trees and small log or debris jams can be accommodated by minor diversions of flow without causing any problems. In fact, vegetation and minor obstructions that cause riffles and pools are desired in many natural streams because they improve habitat and water quality. However, large collections of debris that accumulate at a bridge can cause a major obstruction and should be removed. A human-made drainage ditch or canal is designed to use less area to carry more water. These channels need more attention because there is no room to carry overflows caused by blockages. They are not intended to have trees or other vegetation growing in them. In human-made ditches, too much vegetation is considered "debris." Therefore, if an inspection finds trees and brush growing in the channel, they have to be removed. Regular mowing and grubbing ensures that these channels do their job. Another problem in natural streams is vegetation. Too much vegetation, especially weedy (often non-native) plants, can choke a stream while too little vegetation can lead to serious erosion. Maintenance procedures need to be tailored to each stream. They may include plant removal, replanting, tree trimming, or mowmg. In short, drainage system maintenance programs need to take into account the habitat, recreational uses, and flood control facets of the stream. The community with a multi-objective approach to its river corridors will best be able to handle the competing interests and get the best results from its stream maintenance efforts. 5. Records: A maintenance program needs records. Typically, these include · Complaint or inquiry forms for recording reports of problems, · Inspection forms that show everything that was checked, · Work orders that task an office to clear debris or correct a problem, and · Maintenance records that show the work that was done. In some cases, one or two simple forms can cover all needs. A "Drainage Problem Report" form can show both the maintenance action needed and what was done. These forms need to be included with the procedures that are submitted for CRS credit. It is important to note that the CRS credit points are not based on the cost of the program, the source of funding, the amount of debris removed, or similar administrative issues. What counts is that the community inspects and maintains its drainage system on a regular basis or when needed. There are two levels of credit for Channel and Basin Debris Removal (COR): · Up to 200 points are provided for having and implementing procedures that cover the five items previously discussed. · An additional credit of up to 50 points is provided if the community's program identifies specific problem sites that are inspected and maintained differently or more frequently than other parts of the drainage system. Most communities provide the same drainage maintenance service to all residents and therefore their programs cover the entire community. However, there may be cases in which a community can only inspect and maintain part of its drainage system (e.g., only those watercourses on public property). The impact adjustment modifies the credit points to reflect how much of the community's developed areas are covered by its drainage maintenance program. Full CRS credit is provided if the community inspects and maintains all parts of the drainage system in developed areas. There is no set definition of "developed areas." At a minimum it includes subdivisions with lots of 1 acre or smaller. It does not need to include farms, forests, parks, or preserves unless obstructions in those areas will result in flooding of built-up areas. The community only needs to demonstrate that there are no buildings threatened in areas not covered. For example, full credit is provided to a county that maintains the drainage system in built-up areas, even though it does not look after every ditch in its rural areas or in parks or preserves. Indian reservations, lands owned by the state or another community, and federal land, such as national parks and military reservations, are generally beyond a community's jurisdiction. These may be excluded from the drainage system maintenance program. There are cases where drainage maintenance programs do not cover all developed areas. For example, a community may not have the legal authority to send inspectors or maintenance crews onto some properties. Some communities are just starting formal maintenance programs and are phasing in streams for regular inspections after major obstructions have been removed or after rights-of-way have been obtained. In some areas, state or federal regulations may prevent disturbing the habitat of an endangered species. If the community cannot provide inspections and maintenance in all developed areas, the CRS credit points must be adjusted to reflect the impact of the program. This is the "impact adjustment," which is done by multiplying the credit points for CDR by the percentage of the community covered. Collier County already receives CDR credit points for Channel and Basin Debris Removal in the County's secondary canal systems and roadside drainage. However, there are no PUB credit points received for requiring the owners and operators of private stormwater management systems to inspect, maintain, and report to the County. A high percentage of drainage and flooding complaints called in to the County come from residents within private development stormwater management systems. Usually the problem comes from the stormwater management facilities not being maintained, or in many instances, they have been rendered totally non-functional. For those developments that have stormwater management systems permitted by the South Florida Water Management District, there are no requirements for maintenance, only recommendations. If a permitted stormwater management system fails, and the South Florida Water Management District is notified, they will send out someone from their compliance section to examine the situation and determine if a violation needing correction has occurred. However, there is no pro-active enforcement, only reactive. The establishment of minimum maintenance, inspection, and reporting requirements for the owners and operators of private stormwater management systems is a pro-active program that not only reduces flooding potential, but helps ensure that the intended water quality treatment is occurring. The program proposed for implementation in Collier County includes the following points. (1) Periodic inspection and maintenance of stormwater facilities is essential to ensure their adequacy to function properly and provide the level of flood protection as originally designed and constructed. The training and experience of the individuals performing the inspection and maintenance is important to ensure proper recognition and understanding of problems that may be encountered. (2) The owners or responsible entities of all new stormwater management facilities (Le. those developments with a start of construction date occurring after the effective date of this Ordinance) are responsible to perform at least an annual maintenance of the development's complete stormwater management system and have a licensed Florida professional engineer, knowledgeable with stormwater management design and regulations, perform an annual inspection and certify that the maintenance has been done. Maintenance activity will remove all large objects that could obstruct or hinder flow capacity, and remove all sediment accumulations when they have accumulated to reduce the water quality and/or quantity capacities by more than 20%. (3) The owners or responsible entities of all existing stormwater management facilities (Le. those developments with a start of construction date occurring before the effective date of this Ordinance) are responsible to perform at least a bi-annual (every other year) maintenance of the development's complete stormwater management system and have a licensed Florida professional engineer knowledgeable with stormwater management design and regulations perform an annual inspection and certify that the maintenance has been done. Maintenance activity will remove all large objects that could obstruct or hinder flow capacity, and remove all sediment accumulations when they have accumulated to reduce the water quality and/or quantity capacities by more than 20%. · For all development south of the centerline of Golden Gate Parkway [including the extension of an imaginary alignment due east of the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway/Collier Blvd. (CR-951)], the initial maintenance and inspection certification are due October 1, 2006. · For all development north of the centerline of Golden Gate Parkway [including the extension of an imaginary alignment due east of the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway/Collier Blvd. (CR-951)], the initial maintenance and inspection certification are due October 1,2007. (4) The certified stormwater management facility maintenance and inspection report will include, at a minimum, · a name, location and description of the development, · name of the owner or responsible entity, · any local, State of Florida, or Federal permit number (if applicable), · a drawing showing the location of the stormwater management facilities, · details as necessary to identify the existing facility components, cross sections, profiles, shapes, etc. of swales, ditches, pipes, lakes, control structures, or other components of the approved facilities, · an explanation of the condition of the facilities (e.g. observed sediment accumulations, rusting pipes, cracked concrete, etc.), · an explanation of the specific efforts undertaken to perform the inspection, and · the engineer's signed and sealed certification in accordance with Chapter 471, Florida Statutes and Chapter 61G-15, Florida Administrative Code. . If no physical changes have been made to the development's stormwater management facilities since the last certified maintenance and inspection report, clearly understood references to the location and physical descriptions of the applicable facilities can be made by the engineer in subsequent certified reports up to a maximum of (ten)10 years. (5) The certified stormwater management facility maintenance and inspection report will be submitted to the Floodplain Administrator in a format acceptable to him. Establishing a program for the inspection and maintenance of the private stormwater management systems will necessitate the identification and/or establishment of a County department responsible to oversee this inspection and certification program, along with sufficient staffing and funding. A cost estimate has been developed to staff a program to oversee the inspection and certification of the public and private stormwater management facilities. It is estimated that within two years of the startup of that program there would be a need for a program manager, a secretary, a GIS technician, and two engineering inspectors, along with the necessary facilities and equipment. A rough annual budget estimate would be in the order of $120,000 for the first year, and $330,000 for following years. The County Manager would determine funding for this program as the decision is made on where this program would be placed within the organizational structure of the County Manager's agency. Since this program will focus on the proper operation and maintenance of stormwater management systems, there may be an opportunity for the County to request that some funding be provided by the South Florida Water Management District. The costs incurred by the owners and operators of the private stormwater management facilities will vary greatly depending on the size, complexity, age, condition, and availability of copies of permits and construction plans. The major cost will be incurred for the first year's inspection report. After that, the systems should be relatively easy and inexpensive to maintain and inspect since there will be an annual or semi-annual reporting requirement and an interest in keeping the systems maintained. Much of the reporting can be included in the PUD monitoring program. However, there are PUDs that have fulfilled all of their commitments and no longer have to file the annual report. There are also many stormwater management systems for projects that are not within PUDs. Some developments may have disbanded the home owner association. Each situation will require individual attention, and it is anticipated that several years will pass before the County will be able to verify a high percentage of compliance. However, through perseverance, the County should anticipate reductions in flooding and improvements in water quality. Staff's recommendation is for the adoption of Stormwater Management Facilities Inspection and Maintenance regulations. This will allow Collier County to apply for up to 110 credit points. DISCLOSURE OF FLOOD HAZARD (DFH) - One very important aspect of a floodplain management program is making information available to the public. The public outreach program to residents and property owners can take on various formats (e.g. newsletters, paid notices/advertisements, web sites, public meetings/events, etc.) In Collier County, there is a very strong real estate industry catering to many people moving to southwest Florida for the first time. Establishing a program to disclose information on properties that are located within the Special Flood Hazard Area (flood zones beginning with the letter "V" or "A") can have a very effective, and positive, impact on the community. Most prospective buyers do not take the time (or know how) to investigate whether a property is subject to a flood hazard. In many cases a property may not be near a stream or shoreline, past flooding may have been minor, or there may be no history of flooding since the area was developed. As a result, many people are caught by surprise when their properties are flooded. One of the best times to advise someone of a flood hazard is at the time they are considering the purchase of property. Current federal law requires only that a lender advise a person of the flood hazard 10 days before closing on the loan. This could be well after the buyer has put down earnest money, has lost interest in other properties, and has become committed to purchasing a property without knowing all the facts. In many states a buyer has recourse under consumer protection laws. CRS Credit is provided if a community's real estate agents advise prospective floodplain occupants about the flood hazard and the flood insurance purchase requirement. This activity should encourage the purchase of flood insurance and implementation of flood protection measures, prevent victimization of unwary buyers, and encourage appropriate use of vacant land. The objective of this activity is to prevent all the troubles that can arise from failing to advise potential purchasers of a flood hazard. Such a program can protect the real estate agents and sellers from lawsuits. In many cases, it will prevent unwise development of vacant land. The maximum credit available for Disclosure of the Flood Hazard is 81 points as described below. A. Disclosure by Real Estate Agents by either of the two requirements 1. DFH = 46, if real estate agents notify those interested in purchasing properties located in the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) about the flood hazard and the flood insurance purchase requirement. The notice must clearly state whether the property is in the floodplain and, if so, that flood insurance is required. The community must submit examples of the disclosure notices used by local real estate agencies. OR 2. DFH = 20, if a state law requires real estate agents to advise people whether a property is located in a Special Flood Hazard Area. Credit for disclosure of the flood hazard (DFH) relies on real estate agents to inform a potential purchaser whether a property is in an SFHA. Under the first option (46 points), there is no requirement for a statutory or other legal mandate that real estate agents disclose the hazard in order to obtain credit for DFH. This credit is based on the documentation that real estate agents are disclosing the hazard, not on why they are doing it. Real estate agents may request that the community make determinations of properties being advertised for sale. However, no credit is provided if prospective buyers are sent to the community to find out about a property's potential flood risk. Credit for DFH is entirely based on the real estate agents' informing people whether a property is in an SFHA, regardless of whether they were asked. A law or policy to disclose hazard information only after an inquiry is made does not earn credit. Credit for DFH cannot be based on real estate agents' using a seller's statement or certificate. Even though the sellers have not experienced a flood while they owned the property, the information that is required is notification of whether the property is in an SFHA. The best way to implement this activity is with a written notification to potential purchasers. This provides the purchaser with the correct information and provides documentation for the real estate agent and the ISO/CRS Specialist. If the notice says a property is in the SFHA, it must also tell the inquirer that federal law requires the purchase of flood insurance as a condition of a federally backed mortgage. The notice may simply say, "Flood Insurance Required," in which case the notation that the property is in the SFHA is not needed. A property notice that is difficult for the prospective buyer to interpret, such as "FP: Y/N," or a general statement on all properties, such as "Flood insurance may be required," or "Flood Zone," is not acceptable. The form must clearly state, "Flood insurance is required." The credit criteria for the second option for DFH credit (20 points) are not as extensive as for the first option, provided there is a state law requiring the disclosure. Credit can be provided if there is a Multiple Listing Service notice, a seller's disclosure form, or other written notification. However, the disclosure must state whether the property is in a floodplain, not whether the seller has experienced a flood. For this 20-point credit, there is no requirement to explain the flood insurance purchase requirement. B. Other Disclosure Requirements (ODR) has a maximum credit of 15 points. ODR = 5, for each other disclosure method required by law. If two other methods are required, OOR = 10. Credit can only be applied for up to three other disclosure methods, including but not limited to: 1. Requiring all sellers to disclose in order to cover those cases where a real estate agent is not involved. 2. Requiring real estate agents and sellers to advise potential purchasers whether "to the best of their knowledge and belief' the property has ever been flooded. 3. Requiring landlords to advise potential renters about the flood hazard. 4. Requiring final recorded subdivision plats to display the flood hazard area. 5. Requiring individual lot surveys to show the flood hazard area. 6. Requiring titles or deed records to show zoning or building permit conditions related to floodplain or drainage regulations, such as a notice about the substantial improvement or substantial damage requirement for floodplain properties. 7. Requiring signs posted in subdivisions to advise visitors of the flood hazard. 8. Requiring deeds to show the lot or building elevation in relation to sea level and the base or historical flood elevation. 9. Requiring a seller to disclose if the property is subject to a flood-related special hazard. A community may apply for credit under one of these additional approaches, even if it does not have a real estate agent notification program. These approaches do not have to be local requirements. In many cases, these disclosure methods are required by state law. This list is not meant to be all-inclusive. The objective of the OOR credit is to provide information to people before they are committed to owning or occupying a property with a flood hazard. Because these approaches do not affect as many people while they are actually looking for a property (as agent disclosure does), fewer credit points are provided. Furthermore, because they are difficult to verify in the field, these approaches must be based on a law or other explicit legal mandate. Requirements for identifying the floodplain or flood elevations on preliminary plats or permit applications are not disclosure requirements and are not credited. OOR credit is based on a legal requirement to disclose the flood hazard on a record or notice that will be seen by potential purchasers or occupants of a property. C. Real Estate agents' Brochure (REB) has a maximum credit of 10 points that are available if real estate agents are providing brochures or handouts that advise potential buyers to investigate the flood hazard for a property. This credit is available even if the community does not receive credit for Disclosure of the Flood Hazard under Section 341.a. An example of such a brochure is shown in Figure 340-1, and modifying this sample to create a locally tailored brochure describing the community's flood hazard would be very useful. Sellers, in particular, may appreciate as complete a description as possible, especially if the flooding is shallow and slow-moving and retrofitting or other protective measures are appropriate and inexpensive. Purchasers of vacant land should be well aware of factors such as the depth, velocity, and warning time of the base flood. D. Disclosure of Other Hazards (DOH) has a maximum credit of 10 points if the notification to prospective buyers discussed above also includes disclosure of other flood-related hazards, such as erosion, subsidence, or wetlands. The credit for DOH is only available if the community also receives credit for DFH. The total credit calculation for providing thorough floodplain information noticing to potential purchasers is the sum of DFH + ODR + REB + DOH. Staff's recommendation is that mandatory floodplain disclosure requirements be established in Collier County to inform and protect property purchasers. It is recommended that the following disclosure requirements be implemented. 1. Disclosure by real estate agents (DFH = 46 points) 2. Other Disclosure Requirements (ODR = 15 points) a. Requiring all sellers to disclose in order to cover those cases where a real estate agent is not involved. b. Requiring real estate agents and sellers to advise potential purchasers whether "to the best of their knowledge and belief' the property has ever been flooded. c. Requiring landlords to advise potential renters about the flood hazard. d. Requiring final recorded subdivision plats to display the flood hazard area. e. Requiring individual lot surveys to show the flood hazard area. 3. Real Estate agents' Brochure (REB = 10 points) to advise potential buyers to investigate the flood hazard for a property. Recognizing the importance that this would have to the real estate industry, staff contacted and met with representatives of the Naples Area Board of Realtors and the Marco Island Association of Realtors. Their input and support for this disclosure requirement was greatly appreciated as they also recognize the need to ensure that their customers are well informed about such a vital issue. The cost per property to implement this notification requirement is negligible. Generic sample disclosure documents can be made available on the County's web page and the flood map information is already available on the County's web page at www.colliergov.net. Flood Hazard: Cbeck: Before Yon Bn}' Flooding aud omer sur:.u:,e dramage problems caD 0::= well al\'aj' from a ri..,-U, lake, ox ocean. If ytm're lookmg at a. propert}', it'.. a ~ood idea to check out the possibleflooa hazard be:!'ol\! you buy, Here's why: The force of moving wata' or t\'a':es c;m destro~r a building, Slow-mo,-ing floo.awaten em kno::k peopleofftneir :!'eeter float a car, E1'lm standing water = float;! building; colt;;;p,e basement Vi'aU" or 'buckle a CtmeI\!te tioOO', Vl ater-soaked contents, ;;uch as cZlp.eting, clothing, upholstered mrnitu:r<e, and mattresses, may hal,e to be mrown away after a flood. Some items, .such as photogl'apus and heirlooms, may ne',a' be Iestol\!d to their o::igic.aZ condition, Floodwater.:. are Dot clean: floo.as ::,a1'1Y mud, :farm chemicah, Ioad oil, ;mdother noxious .:.ubstancesthat cause health :i:.azards. Theunpact of a flcod-deaning up, making l"E!pairs, and the personallo:;;ses-cancause gl'eat stress to )'aU, your family, and your:5nances, Floodplain RegabtioDs: Y OUI ccmumnity regwa!~ constrw::tion and denlopDl"-Ut m the floodplain, to ensm'e that buildings will be pI-otected from flood d.ama~e, Filling and ~imililJ; projects areprohibi!tedm certain area~. Homes sub.unrially damaged by me, flood, 01 auy other cause tu,ffit beele.....ated to or aoove the flood level when they are repaired. Check for the Flood HazaI'd: Befme you ~omtu,it yourself to bu)'ing pl'Operty, do the foUowmg: Ask the local building" :ronmg" or engineeIillg aepartmeut if the property is in a floodplain; if" it has eVl!!l beell flooded; what ilieflcod depth, ve1ocity, andw:unmg time are: if it is subject to any other hazards; and what build.ing or zon:::g re,gutaiio~ are in effect. Ask the real estate agent if the plOpeli)" is i.u a t1oodpbin, if:i has eve: beu flooded, and If it is subjed to ;my other hazaI'<B, suc.b :!s S!!Vi'er backup or subsideuce, ,ilw.l: the seHer and ilie neighbors if the property is in a &odplaiLt, how long the)' have lived there, if the pl'opeIty hac. e1,,& been flooded, and, ifi! is- subjec1 te any ether hazaI.;b, flood Protection: A building can bi! pIotected :l'roml:lJ.{\::;t ilood hazards, sometimil''s at .. relan"el}' low cost, New buildings and additiom can be elented aboY!! flood leyeh_ Existillg building;; czn be pIotectecl from:.!:.al)';)w ilooav.'aters by regnding, bMms, or flood'.valls. There are otheI' :retm:5tting tl!,clmiques ilia: can proted a building from S".:nface or subsurl'..ce water, Flood In..arane!!: E,omeo....-uel's inmraucl! U$ually does not:inc..'lude coverage:foI;! flood, One oftne bestpl'otectiol1 muzmes for ;3 building with a flood pIoblem is Narioc.aZ Flood m:iUIilil1rcl!, which lZ pmcliased through. auy pl'operty in.:mran::e agent. If'the building i"located in a fl,oodplaiD., flood U:lzurance will be required by I1lOst mortgagi! lm.aers (zee other "ide), A.k aD. in;urance aglmt how much a flood insurance policy would co~t. [NOH:: The other =ide of tM; fJJ.'liIl' is the .:;arnll as Figup's 32Q-2,J Figure 340-1. Sample real estate agents' brochnre. Flood Insurance NFlP: This community participater. in the National Flood InsuI'ance Program (N'"FIP)_ The NFIP makes federally backed flood insurance available for all buildings. whether they are ina floodplain or not_ Fleod insurance cevers direct losses caur.ed by surface floodillg, including a river flowing over its banks, a lake or ocean storm, and lecal drainage problems_ The NFIP insurer. buildings, including mobile homes_ with t\.':o types of coverage: structural alld centents, Structural coverage is for the walls, floers, insulatien, furnace, and ether items permanently attached to the structure_ Contents coverage may be purchased separately provided the contents are in an insurable building_ Mandator" Pmchase Reauirement: The mandatory purchase requil-ement applier. to all forms 'Of federal or federally related financial ar.sistance for buildings located in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)_ This requirement affeers loans and grants for the purchase, construction, repair, or improvement of any publicly or privately owned building in the SFHA, including machinery, equipment, fixturer., and furnishings contained in such buildings, Financial assistance programs affected include loans and grants from agencies such as the Department of Veterans Affairs, FaIDlers Home Administration, Federal Housing Administration, Small Businer.s Administration, alld Federal EmeIgency Management Agency, The requirement also applies to secured mortgage loans from financial inr.titutionr., such as cOIl1Il1erciallenders, sayings and loan associations, savings banks, and credit unions that are regulated, supervi!.ed or insured by Federal agencies such as the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Office of Thrift Supen,ision_ It also applies to all mortgage loans purchased by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac in the secondary mortgage market. HOiv it \Vorks: Before a per!>on can receive a loan or other financial assistance from oue of the a,ffected agencies or lenders. there must be a check to see if the building is in a Special Floed Hazard Area (SFHA)_ The SFHA is the base (IOO-year) floodplain mapped on a Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIR.l\of)_ It is shown as one or more zoner. that begin with the letter "A'- or "V_'" Copies of the FIRM: are available for revie\..' in most local government building or planning departments_ Many lenders and insurance agents also have copies, It is the agency's or the lender's responsibility to check the FIRM: to determine if the building is in an SFH..I\, although many cOIl1Il1tmities provide assistance_ If the building is in a SFH.6", the agency or lender is requu-ed by law to require the recipient to purchar.e a flood insurance policy on the building_ The requirement is for stmctural coverage equal to the amount of the loan (or other financial assistance) or the maximum amount available, whichever is less_ The maximum amount available for a single-family hou!.e is $250,000_ The mandatory purchase requiIement does not affect loans or financial asr.istance for items that az-e not covered by a flood insurance policy, such as vehicles, business expenses, landscaping, and vacant lots_ It does not affect loanr. for buildingr. that are not in the SFHA, even though a portion of the lot may be floodprone, \Vhile not mandated by law, a lender may require a flood insurance policy as a condition of a loan for a property in any zone on a Flood Insurance Rate Map_ Figure 320-2. Handout on mandator)- purchase of flood insurance. City of Ploodville Building Departm,ent City Hall Date: RE~ Flood Insurance Rate Map Information TO 1'/HOII{ IT M.~y CONCERN: The property located at: kno~~ as [legal description if needed] located on the city's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). is provided: , also has been The following infornlation Floodville's community number: 123456 The property is locat,ed on panel number: Suffix: The date of the FIRM index: May 15, 1980. The property is located in FIRM zone: The main building on the property: is located in a Special Flood Hazard Area. The base flood elevation at the property is~ ,NGVD. Federal law requires that a flood insurance policy be obtained as a condition of a federally-backed mortgage or loan that is secured by the building. It is up to the lender to dete~~ine whether flood insurance is required for a property. Flood insurance is available in Floodville. More information on flood insurance is attached. is not located in a Special Flood Hazard Area. However, the property may still be subject to local drainage problems or other unmapped flood hazard. Flood insurance is available and may be obtained at non-floodplain rates. A flood insurance policy may be required by a lender, A decision about the building's exact location cannot be made on the FIRM. A copy of the FIRM is attached for your information. NOTE: This information is based on the Flood Insurance Rate Map for the City. This letter does not imply that the referenced property will or will not be free from flooding or damage. A property not in a Special Flood Hazard Area, may be damaged by a flood greater than that predicted on the FIP.M or from a local drainage problem not shown on the map, This letter does not create liability on the part of the City, or any officer or employee thereof, for any damage that results from reliance on this information. Building Official Figure 320-1. Floodville's map information l'ecOl'd. OTHER HIGHER STANDARDS (OHS) - This category is established so that communities are able to develop special criteria suitable for their jurisdiction that provide additional resistance to flood damage. Under current requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), only residential buildings are required to be elevated above the base flood elevation. Non- residential buildings can be floodproofed up to the base flood elevation. Floodproofing can be accomplished by various methods, but a common method is to incorporate impermeable walls with flood panels that can be installed across door and window openings. The building must be designed to withstand the hydrostatic and buoyancy forces of the base flood, along with an internal dewatering system to collect and discharge seepage. Collier County is an area of relatively high rates of commercial real estate turnover, new owners may not understand the details involved in properly implementing flood proofing techniques incorporated into their building. Also, given the general apathy to flooding in all but the most frequently flooded areas of the County, there may be no training or readily available equipment provided to current building occupants. With those considerations in mind, the County has the ability to require non-residential buildings to be elevated to or above the base flood elevation the same as a residential building. There may be certain non-residential buildings (e.g. car wash) where the building is basically open to the weather and constructed of water resistant materials that would not be subject to damage from flooding, provided that all electrical, mechanical, and other enclosed spaces were constructed at or above the base flood elevation. Since criteria within the Other Higher Standards (OHS) are specific and unique to each community, officials within the National Flood Insurance Program will evaluate their effectiveness in preventing or reducing flood damage and assign credit points. A typical value for requiring non-residential buildings to be elevated to or above the base flood elevation and not allowing flood proofing is 10 credit points. Staff's recommendation is that floodproofing of new, substantially damaged, or substantially improved non-residential buildings be prohibited, with only specific exceptions (if any) being identified in the regulations. CONCLUSION Staff is recommending that Collier County undertake improved efforts to make the community more flood resistant, and the residents and property owners aware of the potential for flooding. These efforts will not only address health, safety and welfare concerns of the community, but have the potential to increase the community's credit point score in the Community Rating System of the National Flood Insurance Program. Increasing the point score to established thresholds provides increased discounts to flood insurance policy holders within the community. In the case of freeboard, this provides a reduced flood insurance premium to the individual property owner, depending upon the amount of freeboard for the building. With that goal in mind, the following regulations are recommended for implementation within unincorporated Collier Cou nty. 1. Freeboard - (up to 100 points for each foot of freeboard requirement) Require buildings to be protected to a level higher than the base flood elevation. 2. Foundation Protection - (20 points) Require that fill and building foundations be designed to protect them from damage due to erosion, scour, and settling. 3. Lower Substantial Improvements - (10 points) Use a threshold of 49% of the building's value to determine when the substantial improvement requirement takes effect. 4. Cumulative Substantial Improvements - (70 points) improvements or repairs are counted cumulatively over a 5-year period toward the substantial improvement requirement, and definitions to implement Increased Cost of Compliance flood insurance coverage are established. 5. Protection of Critical Facilities - (up to 50 points) Require that new and substantially improved critical facilities be protected up to the 500-year flood level. 6. Protection of Floodplain Storage Capacity -- (70 points) Maintain floodplain storage by requiring compensatory storage 7. Manufactured Home Parks - (50 points) Require that new and replacement manufactured homes placed in existing manufactured home parks be properly elevated to or above the base flood elevation and anchored. 8. Stormwater Management Facility Inspection - (up to 110 points) Require annual certification of new stormwater management facilities and semi-annual certification of existing stormwater management facilities for all public and private systems. 9. Flood Hazard Disclosure - (up to 71 points) Requirements for developers or sellers to or disclose the flood hazard on their properties 10. Other Higher Standards - (approximately 10 points) Require new, substantially damaged, or substantially improved non-residential buildings to be constructed at or above the base flood elevation and eliminate the option for floodproofing. Implementation of these recommendations has the potential to increase Collier County's Community Rating System score by 561 points which would change our class rating to a Class 6 community and provide up to 20% discounts to the flood insurance policy holders. 3-20-06 Higher Regulatory Standards Workshop Discussion Higher Regulatory Standards Discussion Collier County Board of County Commissioners Workshop Meeting March 20, 2006 Two Main Objectives for Today 1. Discussion of some of the Higher Regulatory Standards of the Community Rating System 2. Gain support of the Board of County Commissioners for making Collier County a more flood resistant community Community Rating System Participation . Collier County is a participant in the Community Rating System (CRS) of the National Flood Insurance Program . Participation in the CRS allows County property owners the ability to receive flood insurance premium discounts based upon the County's level of effort. 1 3-20-06 Higher Regulatory Standards Workshop Discussion Community Rating System Participation . Credit points are awarded to the County based upon which CRS activities are implemented. . There are 18 CRS activity categories with a total of 14.668 points available. . The County's current point score is 1692. Activity Activity Name Available Collier County No, Points Point. 310 Elev.tion Certificates 162 56 320 Map Information 140 140 330 OUtreach Project. 315 37 340 Hazard DisclosUf'"e 81 0 350 Fh)od Protection Infannalion .. 0 300 Flood Protection Assistanctl 71 0 410 Additional Flood DlIta 1373 0 420 Open Space Pr...rvation 900 307 430 Higher Reg....tory Standards 2720 83 440 Flood Data Maintenance 231 48 450 Stormwater MaNlgemenl 670 7$ 510 Floodplain Management Planning 309 127 520 Acquisition and Retocation 3200 0 530 Flood Protection 2800 0 540 Drainage System Maintenance 330 250 610 Rood Warning Program 225 124 620 Levee Safety 900 0 630 Dam &lfaly 175 67 700 Community Growth Adjustment 150-/. Community Rating System Participation . Staff is working to improve the scoring in several of the CRS activity categories . Activity categories with lots of room for increased scoring 340 (Hazard Disclosure) . 430 (Higher Regulatory Standards) . 450 (Stormwater Management) . All series 400 activity category scores are multiplied by the Community Growth Adjustment Factor of 150%. 2 3-20-06 Higher Regulatory Standards Workshop Discussion Higher Regulatory Standards are Applicable in SFHA Requested Higher Regulatory Standards . Freeboard . Foundation Protection . Lower Substantial Improvements Threshold . Cumulative Substantial Improvements . Protection of Critical Facilities . Protection of Floodplain Storage Capacity . Manufactured Home Parks . Stormwater Management Facilities Inspection and Maintenance . Flood Hazard Disclosure Other Higher Standards - No Floodproofing Freeboard . Add one foot of elevation requirement to the Base Flood Elevation shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Serves as a factor of safety and reduces flood insurance premiums . Freeboard would be applied to the lowest floor elevation, including basement, electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, air conditioning equipment, and other service facilities, including duct work. 3 3-20-06 Higher Regulatory Standards Workshop Discussion Freeboard Example BFE FU_~ Du-..nt n... lhrauvh .w.. Top" no,::;-!:':'". __ alFJ:; BFE Freeboard (cont.) . Potential CRS Credit: UP to 100 points . Freeboard is for the structure, not the entire property . Typical cost (from surveyed builders) for an average 3000 s.f. house would be in the range of $5,500. . This equates to $1.83 per s.f. so assume $2.00 for discussion purposes Freeboard (cont.) . For a $200,000 house, the flood insurance premium would be about $645, but if one foot of freeboard was provided, the cost would be about $415. . That amounts to over 35% cost reduction for flood insurance each year. . The savings pays for the freeboard in less than the life of the mortgage. 4 3-20-06 Higher Regulatory Standards Workshop Discussion Freeboard (cont.) . A category 3 hurricane impact zone (according to the SLOSH models) can exceed the depth and area of coverage identified in the FEMA flood maps. . The damage from one major flooding event can easily amount to $25,000 to $100,000 per building that is flooded. . A building above the flood level is usable for returning occupants. . OSAC did not recommend approval. . CCPC recommended approval. Foundation Protection Specifies that all new buildings built on fill must be constructed on properly designed and compacted fill (ASTM 0.698 or equivalent) that extends beyond the building walls before dropping below the base flood elevation. . County determines how far to extend the fill out from the building foundation. . Potential CRS Credit: UP to 20 points . Typical cost for a house would be < $1,200. . This protects against erosion, scour, and settling. . OSAC and CCPC recommended approval. Lower Substantial Improvements Threshold . The standard NFIP threshold for substantial improvements construction or substantial damage repair for a non-compliant structure is 50% of the value of the structure before the improvement or damage occurrecr.- . When the threshold is met or exceeded, the structure must be brought into compliance with the current FIRM (including any freeboard). 5 3-20-06 Higher Regulatory Standards Workshop Discussion Lower Substantial Improvements Threshold (cont.) . This proposal is to lower the threshold to 49%. . Has a 2% potential owner impact. . No additional costs for new construction. . Potential CRS Credit: 10 points . DSAC and CCPC recommended approval. Cumulative Substantial Improvements . Considers the sum total of all improvements, modifications, additions, reconstruction and damage repairs over the previous 5 years in calculating compliance with the substantial improvements threshold . Allows property owners to gain the benefit of their flood insurance policy's Increased Cost of Compliance coverage to protect against future flooding damage Cumulative Substantial Improvements (cont.) . No additional cost for new construction . Potential CRS Credit: UP to 70 points . DSAC did not recommend approval. . CCPC recommended approval. 6 3-20-06 Higher Regulatory Standards Workshop Discussion Protection of Critical Facilities . The purpose of protecting critical facilities is to provide greater assurance that these facilities will be able to function during and immediately following times of flooding. . Requires protection up to the 0.2 percent chance (SOO-year) flooding event, or one foot above the Base Flood Elevation, whichever is higher Protection of Critical Facilities (cont.) Critical facilities include: Fire stations Sheriff stations/substations EMS stations Collier County Emergency Operations Center Emergency evacuation centers Hospitals Water treatment plants, pump stations, wells Wastewater treatment plants and pump stations Electrical power substations Telephone communications centers/switching stations Protection of Critical Facilities (cont.) Within the Special Flood Hazard Area there are approximately: 26 schools 14 fire/EMS stations 6 law enforcement stations 2 hospitals Collier County Emergency Operations Center . Basically amounts to raising 1 foot in elev. . Potential CRS Credit: UD to 50 Doints . DSAC and CCPC recommended approval. 7 3-20-06 Higher Regulatory Standards Workshop Discussion Protection of Floodplain Storage Capacity . The placement of fill, especially in areas outside of planned developments with designed stonnwater management systems, reduces the volume of existing storage for rainfall runoff. . That can have substantial impacts to older existing buildings and overland drainage patterns as vacant land is filled. . This regulation would require the provision of compensating storage similar to what is already required for some larger developments. Protection of Floodplain Storage Capacity (cont.) . A piecemeal, individual approach is not generally recommended, but could be utilized. . Works like an impact fee to address each property's individual impact to the floodplain. . Typical cost < $1000 . Potential CRS Credit: UP to 70 points DSAC did not recommend approval. CCPC recommended approval. Protection of Floodplain Storage Capacity (cont.) . This is especially important in Golden Gate Estates as it continues toward build-out and existing floodplain storage on vacant lots disappears. . The Picayune Strand Restoration Project (SGGE Restoration) has a maximum allowable pumpage rate for the proposed pump stations. 8 3-20-06 Higher Regulatory Standards Workshop Discussion Manufactured Home Parks . Current regulations in Collier County allow manufactured homes in existing manufactured home parks to be installed at elevations that may be below the base flood elevation. . This requirement would eliminate that provision and would require all manufactured homes to meet the base flood elevations (plus freeboard). Manufactured Home Parks (cant.) . There are approx. 50 existing mobile home parks in Collier County that may be affected. . Most elevation increases would be 1 to 2 feet, with only a few in the 3 to 4 foot range. Typical cost to comply < $1000 Potential CRS Credit: UP to 50 points DSAC and CCPC recommended approval. Stormwater Management Facilities Inspection and Maintenance . There is a long history of lack of maintenance of stormwater management facilities in Collier County. . Proper maintenance reduces the potential for flooding and allows the designed stormwater management systems to provide water quality treatment. These functions are joint objectives of the National Flood Insurance Program and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting program of EPA. 9 3-20-06 Higher Regulatory Standards Workshop Discussion Stormwater Management Facilities Inspection and Maintenance . Much of this effort could be included in the County's PUD Monitoring Report. . Non-PUD developments would have to take on this added responsibility. . Additional County staff would need to be added to administer the program. . The information collected would be utilized toward existing NPDES compliance requirements for mapping drainage systems. Stormwater Management Facilities Inspection and Maintenance (cont.) . One of the greatest benefits is to ensure that stormwater systems function as designed and permitted. Costs will vary greatly, depending upon the size, complexity, age, condition, and availability of reliable construction plans for each development. Assume $3,000 and up for initial year, with reductions in later years. County program staffing costs are estimated at approx. $330,000 annually. Potential CRS Credit: UD to 110 Doints DSAC and CCPC recommended approval. Flood Hazard Disclosure . This requirement will provide important flood zone or historical flooding information to potential buyers and renters of real property before contracts are signed. . This eliminates the potential "surprise" factor to the buyer when the lending institution notifies them just before loan closing that flood insurance is required. 10 3-20-06 Higher Regulatory Standards Workshop Discussion Flood Hazard Disclosure (cont.) . The County Property Appraiser recorded approx. 20,000 sales transactions in 2005. . This applies to all sellers or landlords. . The accuracy of the infonnation is the responsibility of the seller or landlord. . County staff is currently providing flood zone infonnation to interested parties. Flood Hazard Disclosure (cont.) . For sales and rentals, uses a simple disclosure form ;.-::.::~ --,....--... .' ri_'___'_ -..-...--.-.....-.-....--.- .._...__._.w____,.__._ ~_.....- ..-.--.--.- ----'- -----~.._.- ==-.~~=-::;.~:.:...-"'"""';~~ ----...----.-.- ------..-...... -"'.-'-- - -."""- ---.-------- --.,..----.-. ---...----..---.. __H_~'._ _U.._ -.--.---..----- ..._...._~--,-- --""---- ==.-=.:::-=---==-:.::.."== . _w.____.__. __,___ =-'="'...l:;........::~ .":<~ ~.~;;;:.:.-:t,:~ ---....-...---.-..-..-... _"____,,,_ri__'.... ",...'"_ ---....---.----- =-'::';:;:-::~''o:''..='''.::::'''...::t..:.''::''Q; -----.--.....-...-..-- -. ..---.--.-.--.-.--,,- ---.....-.-..---...-...-- -..' ~ .-.. - ..... ...-...--.. -- - ..- -----...----...,..- - ..--,,-..,.--...--..-.,- ,,--..---......---.-....- .---..---.- ._~__'_~_'_. __ R___8." :::::::".:.::::::::r.:.-:-.::::"-.,::....--_... "8. ........._..__.-_~ -, ----..-.....-............. --.--..----..-..- ~1k~~_~..b?.J:€:~~f.4::1: =.15:::.:-==-""':'..".:'==-.:--...... ~":.:.:::.::.;:.::.::.:....::;:....:l:..::.':~'O:.::...~.. _________....0...... ----~~ ==--=---::.-::....:=:;'-=-:.-=.':"~::=:=.. --...--....-------- --, ,- - _..._...'''-'''-'-~ -..,.....-.--------'- --.......--.-... ____.....-..__...........-,_..__..8 Flood Hazard Disclosure (cont.) Includes showing the flood hazard areas on final recorded subdivision plats and individual lot surveys. Includes real estate agents distributing a brochure advising potential buyers to investigate the flood hazard for a property. . Supported by both the Naples Area Board of Realtors and ti1eliilarco Island Association of Realtors . Potential CRS Credit: UP to 71 points . DSAC and CCPC recommended approval. 11 3-20-06 Higher Regulatory Standards Workshop Discussion t er Higher tan ar s: Require Elevating Instead of Floodproofing . Applies to non-residential buildings within the SFHA . Would have listed exemptions (e.g. car wash bays) . Avoids flooded businesses from improperly installed or defective equipment . Eliminates annual employee training and trial runs to install floodproofing equipment . Potential CRS Credit: UP to 10 points . DSAC and CCPC did not recommend approval. In Summary . Staff recommends approval of all the reauested Hiaher Re3ulatorv criteria to not only provide a more floo resistant community, but increase the CRS credit score and advance the County to the next CRS community class for a 20% reduction in flood insurance premiums. . Staff requests the Board of County Commissioner's approval and support of the requested Higher Regulatory criteria for inclusion in the County's Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance. Recap of Higher Regulatory Standards .. Freeboard - UP to 100 points .. Foundation Protection - UP to 20 points .. Lower Substantial Improvements Threshold -1.!!..I!2!ill!> .. Cumulative Substantial Improvements .- UP to 70 points .. Protection of Critical Facilities - UP to 50 points .. Protection of Floodplain Storage Capacity - UP to 70 points .. Manufactured Home Parks - UP to 50 points .. Stormwater Management Facilities Inspection and Maintenance - UP to 110 Dolnts .. Flood Hazard Disclosure - UP to 71 points OHS - No Floodprooflng UP to 10 points Total possible reauested points - 561 paints . DsAC's recommendations - 311 points :,;. cepe's recommendations 551 points 12 3-20-06 Higher Regulatory Standards Workshop Discussion Il&- . (. [J fiI , ED - --.' ': , ," ~;,. Discussion and Questions? 13 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Consideration of policy options for property acquisitions under the Conservation Collier Program that will work strategically with the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program and consideration of the Growth Management Plan policy that allows only private entities to generate TDR Credits. OBJECTIVE: To consider and discuss policy options for two issues concerning the Conservation Collier Program and the TDR Program. · Development of policy options for Conservation Collier acquisitions that will work strategically with the Conservation Collier Program · Consideration of Growth Management Plan (GMP) policy changes that would allow properties owned by public entities to generate TDR Credits. CONSIDERATIONS: Policy options for Conservation Collier Program acquisitions The Conservation Collier Program has identified broad Target Protection Areas that generally satisfy the initial screening criteria and meet the goals of Conservation Collier. One of these Target Protection Areas is land designated as "Sending Lands" in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD). At the same time that Conservation Collier's Target Protection Areas were being developed, the TDR program was being implemented in the RFMUD. Under this program, lands designated as "Sending Lands" were assigned development rights credits that could be separated from the bundle of property rights associated with a property and sold. Once TDR Credits are removed from a property, a permanent conservation easement is recorded for that property. During development of the Conservation Collier Program, concerns arose regarding how land acquisition would impact the TDR Program. It was determined through the Conservation Collier Ordinance (Ordinance No. 2002-63) that acquisition by Conservation Collier would permanently extinguish all development rights except those strictly compatible with the purposes and goals of Conservation Collier (Section 15.7). In functional terms, this meant that Conservation Collier would not acquire TDR Credits or become a holder or seller of development rights. At the regular meeting of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners on January 25, 2005, Commissioners had discussion regarding Conservation Collier buying lands with TDR Credits attached and at that meeting instructed staff and the Committee to consider how to remove TDR Credits before purchasing lands for conservation. The Commissioners, while not making a formal motion and decision on how the program should deal with the TDR program, gave clear direction that they want TDR Credits to be severed before a purchase and indicated they would be willing to approve any formal changes to that effect. The following concerns regarding development of a program policy concerning TDRs were identified by the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Committee (CCLAAC) at a March 2005 meeting: 1 1. Conservation Collier should avoid extinguishing TDR Credits, which could negatively affect the overall supply of credits. 2. Removal of TDR Credits from potential acquisitions would save a substantial amount of money. 3. Requiring removal of TDR Credits may discourage some smaller landowners from participating if they see it as too complicated. The CCLAAC again discussed this topic at its January 17, 2006 meeting, making several recommendations which are provided below. Public comments included the suggestion that owners should be required to remove the Base and Early Entry bonus TDR Credits (first and second TDR Credits), but a policy is needed in regard to the Restoration and Management TDR Credits and Conveyance TDR Credits (third and fourth TDR Credits). Consideration of the current restriction on severance of TDR Credits from publicly owned land This issue arose in a November 29, 2005 Board of County Commissioners meeting during the discussion of the purchase of the Section 24 School Board property. At that meeting, the BCC discussed the possibility of allowing publicly owned land to generate TDR Credits. The Growth Management Plan, Future Land Use Element (FLUE), Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD), Sending Lands, allows owners of private property in designated Sending Lands to transfer density to Receiving Lands. No such allowance is made for publicly owned land. The primary purpose of the TDR process, as stated in the FLUE, is to: "establish an equitable method of protecting and conserving the most significant areas of habitat for listed species, while allowing property owners of such lands to recoup lost value and development potential through an economically viable process of transferring such rights to other more suitable lands." There are several considerations involved in opening up the TDR program to publicly owned land through a Comprehensive Plan Amendment process. These include market factors, density issues and perception issues. The County estimates that there are approximately 41,500 acres of Sending Land in total. Of these, roughly half are privately held and roughly half are in the public domain. Of the privately owned lands, between 18,000 and 20,000 acres would be eligible for Base TDR Credit severance, after adjusting for existing development and existing conservation easements. A new right to sever TDR Credits from all publicly held lands could potentially double the supply of Base TDR Credits in the marketplace. The effect on total TDR Credits, including Bonus TDR Credits, would depend on how those issues are addressed. A large increase in available TDR Credits could reasonably be expected to result in a significant reduction in their market price. As discussed by Dr. Nicholas, Collier County's TDR program consultant, during consideration of the TDR Bonus amendments in 2004 and 2005, adding additional sending areas 2 "would address the need for an economically feasible price, but would be totally counter to the desires of sending area property owners." Overall achievable density in the RFMU Receiving Lands could be significantly increased by extending TDR rights to publicly held lands. Based on the relative proportion of publicly held lands to privately held lands, the impact to density in the RFMUD might be commensurate, although limited by allowable density. Based on the potential TDR Credits associated with a public lands program, the build-out population could be impacted by a like percentage, adjusting for a cap in density in village and non-village scenarios. The associated impacts on public facilities and infrastructure as well as the character of the Rural Fringe and County as a whole should be considered. Changes to the program will necessarily affect public perception. For example, during public comment at various times during program adoption, fears were raised that the TDR program was really a means for the government to "take" private lands. As a result, careful consideration was given to ensure that the TDR program would be voluntary, available only to willing participants in the private sector. In addition, assurances were made by Commissioners during the 2005 RFMUD amendments that the TDR program would not be altered again anytime soon. These assurances were appropriately designed to allow the process to work without the chilling effect that would result from anticipated further revisions to the program. FISCAL IMPACT: Policy options for Conservation Collier Program acquisitions The most recent property offering with TDR Credits attached was a 5-acre parcel. A 2005 estimate for this parcel prepared by the County's Real Estate Services Department placed its value at $81,000, prior to severance of TDR Credits. If TDR Credits are hypothetically worth $32,000, severing the first of 2 TDR Credits on this 5 acre parcel would save the program approximately 75% on the purchase price. Consideration of TDR Credits and publicly owned land The fiscal ramifications in extending TDR Credits to publicly owned lands are numerous but difficult to quantify. On a micro-economic level, the effect of a significant increase in TDR Credits in the marketplace will likely reduce their market price, in effect reducing the overall value of privately held Sending Lands. The commensurate reduction in assessed value would result in the collection of less overall property tax for these undeveloped parcels. Should this presumed decrease in the value of Sending Lands property and TDR Credits result in inadequate compensation to Owners of Sending Lands, it is presumed that Bert Harris Act or other "takings" claims would be filed against the County. On a macro-economic level, the increase in available TDRs in Receiving Lands will result in a greater overall density, resulting in a greater demand for public infrastructure and services in those areas, with associated public cost. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Growth management impacts would likely be minimal for Conservation Collier acquisitions. Three properties with TDR Credits attached have been offered as potential acquisitions. One 3 parcel was 20 acres, one 10 acres and the other 5 acres, with the combined potential to generate 28 TDR Credits (including the bonus program). The release of this many TDR Credits would not have a significant effect on overall growth management issues in Collier County. None of these parcels was recommended for the A-list and only one was recommended for the B-list by the CCLAAC. The allowance of TDR Credits from publicly held lands would require a Growth Management Plan amendment (and subsequent Land Development Code amendments). LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: Fashioning such an amendment would not be easy because of the requirement, as currently applied to privately held land, that "TDR Credits shall not be generated from Sending Lands where a conservation easement or other development restriction prohibits residential development". There is a considerable legal hurdle in the evaluation of whether, in the absence of a recorded conservation easement, County and State owned lands, held in various capacities and for various purposes, allow residential development. RECOMMENDATION: Policy options for Conservation Collier Program acquisitions Recommendations made by the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee at its January 17,2006 meeting are as follows: I. Amend the Conservation Collier Ordinance (2002-63) to remove "Sending Lands" as a Target Protection Area, instead waiting to see if those lands will be donated to a public entity for preservation under the TDR bonus program. This is currently part of the draft changes to Ordinance 2002-63 under review by the CCLAAC. 2. Staff should develop language changes to the Purchase Policy to require the removal of the first 2 TDR Credits (base and early entry TDR Credits) from a parcel prior to purchase and to have the appraisals reflect the property value without TDR Credits. 3. Changes can be developed to the scoring matrix to reflect TDR status, giving added points to properties where they can be removed. This may provide incentive for owners to remove as many TDR Credits as possible. Consideration of TDR Credits and publicly owned land For reasons cited within "Considerations," staff recommends no change in the Growth Management Plan to allow TDR Credit severance from publicly owned Sending Lands. Prepared by: Alexandra J. Sulecki, Sr. Environmental Specialist, Environmental Services Department; and Kris Van Lengen, Senior Planner, Comprehensive Planning Department 4