CHAPTER III-1

MODEL FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCES
Draft (07/08)

INTRODUCTION

Floodplains and their associated stream, wetland, and shoreline areas are among the State’s greatest assets, because of the multiple benefits related to environmental quality, natural resource management, and recreational opportunity.  Floodplains are generally best able to provide these benefits if kept in a natural condition.  Alterations to floodplains have resulted in increased flood hazards, reduced water quality, loss of habitat and recreational opportunities and poor aesthetics within communities.  Wherever possible, the natural characteristics of floodplains and their associated water bodies should be preserved.

Participants in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) are required to adopt and enforce a Floodplain Management Ordinance that meets or exceeds the minimum NFIP standards.  The Indiana Model Ordinance for Flood Hazard Areas includes these minimum federal regulations, state floodplain regulations regarding development in SFHA, as well as optional, more restrictive provisions that individual communities may adopt.  In the Maumee River Basin there are 14 NFIP communities.  

Since 1977, the Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM) has been involved in floodplain management, flood hazard mitigation, flood preparedness, and flood warning and recovery.  Today the ASFPM is the premier voice in floodplain management practice and policy throughout the nation. 

The MRBC “Model Ordinance for Flood Hazard Areas” developed as part of this Master Plan update, exceeds the minimum federal requirements required by the NFIP and includes the most recent advances in floodplain management and model language made available by the ASFPM.

1995 MASTER PLAN REVISITED

The 1995 MRBC Master Plan called for the adoption of a uniform model flood hazard areas ordinance by all communities in the Basin.  At that time, some communities had adopted the IDNR model ordinance as an independent ordinance and others integrated it into their zoning or land development ordinances.  While both methods are adequate to meet the individual community needs and accepted by FEMA and IDNR, MRBC was concerned that some of the clarity and cohesiveness intended of the IDNR model ordinance may have been lost.  MRBC believed that in order to address the frequency and extent of flooding within the Basin, each of the 14 NFIP communities would need to adopt a uniform ordinance with consistent and equitable regulations.

A “Model Ordinance for Flood Hazard Areas within the Maumee River Basin” was developed and included in the 1995 Master Plan.  This ordinance enhanced the IDNR model ordinance to provide additional definitions related to regulatory and technical terminology and to clarify ordinance provisions regarding performance and administrative requirements.  The model ordinance was modified to include a Maumee River Basin specific requirement of compensatory storage, on a one-to-one basis, for the replacement of floodplain storage lost due to fill or other development in the floodway fringe.

MRBC ACCOMPLISHMENTS

The compensatory storage language drafted as part of the 1995 “Model Ordinance for Flood Hazard Areas within the Maumee River Basin” has been well received.  In 2005 IDNR incorporated compensatory storage language, as an option, into their updated model ordinance.  Ten of the 14 NFIP communities in the Basin have adopted the compensatory storage language recommended by the MRBC.  The following is a list of the 10 communities as well as links to their local ordinance:

• Fort Wayne’s Land Usage Ordinance (2003)
• Allen County’s Zoning Ordinance (2005) (includes floodplain management requirements for the Town of Grabill, Town of Huntertown, Town of Monroeville, and City of Woodburn)
• Town of Altona’s Zoning Ordinance (2006)
• City of Auburn’s Zoning Ordinance (2006)
• City of Butler’s Zoning Ordinance (2006)
• Town of Leo-Cedarville Zoning Ordinance
• City of New Haven Zoning Ordinance
• Town of St. Joe’s Zoning Ordinance (2006)
• Town of Waterloo’s Zoning Ordinance (2006)
• Steuben County’s Zoning Ordinance (2006)
• Town of Hamilton’s Zoning Ordinance (2006)
• Noble County’s Zoning Ordinance (2007)

2008 MASTER PLAN ENHANCEMENTS

This Master Plan update provided an opportunity for MRBC to revisit IDNR’s “Model Ordinance for Flood Hazard Areas” and determine based on advances in floodplain management, if changes are needed for the NFIP communities in the Maumee River Basin.  The following highlights the changes made in the 2008 MRBC Model Ordinance for Flood Hazard Areas.  A copy of this ordinance can also be found in Appendix A.

Article 2: Definitions – includes new, updated and improved definitions for: Benchmark, Conditional Letter of Map Amendment (CLOMA), Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR), Earthen fill, Floodplain Administrator, Floodplain development permit, Flood Protection Grade (FPG), Floodproofing (dry floodproofing), Lowest floor, Lowest level, Lowest referenced flood elevation, Minimum finished floor elevation, Permanent structure, Retrofitting, Structure, Substantial damage, and X zone.

Article 3: General Provisions

• Section B (3) clarifies that regulatory flood elevations, floodway, and fringe limits shall be according to the best available data as approved by IDNR
• Section D added optional compliance language to regulate structures within 1000 feet of SFHA or behind levees
• Section F (1) clarifies elevations from flood profiles and addition of must be used to delineate floodplain or the best available topographic data

• Section B (1) indicates that NAVD 88 is preferred as the vertical control datum but NGVD 29 may be used as an option
• Section C (12) and (13) requires (previously optional) Non-compliance/Stop Work Orders and Revocation of Permits language

Article 5: Provisions for Flood Hazard Reduction

• Section A (5) adds language to ensure all outdoor electrical meter installed at least 2 feet about BFE
• Section A (11) adds language prohibiting the storage of harmful hazardous materials in the SFHA
• Section A (12) requires (previously optional) compensatory storage language and adds new language that excavation shall occur on same property as authorized fill and excavation area may not be refilled
• Section B (1) changes the substantial improvement value to 40% of the market value of the structure and requires (previously optional) reconstruction or repairs to repetitive loss structure
• Section B (2) and (3) adds option to determine FPG based on future conditions hydrology
• Section B (4) requires (previously optional) the Certificate of Occupancy to be held until a copy of the legally recorded deed restriction prohibiting conversion of the area below the lowest floor has been presented
• Section B (5) changes to Modified Proctor Test method
• Section C (5) and (6) adds option to minimize and/or limit density of development in the floodplain and ensure safe access into/out of floodplain
• Section D revised language to only allow construction of new critical facilities outside of 0.20% Annual Chance Event floodplain
• Section E clarifies permitted and prohibited uses in the floodway (based on Fort Wayne and Allen County)
• Section I adds option to regulate structures within 1000 feet of SFHA or behind levee

Article 6: Variance Procedures

• Section E (2) removes option to record construction below base flood elevation on the title of the affected parcel of land

RECOMMENDATIONS

The MRBC should:

1. Utilize ASFPM’s Building Public Support for Floodplain Management: A Catalog of Good Practices to increase awareness and support for better floodplain management.
2. Work with the individual Floodplain Administrators from each of the 14 NFIP communities to adopt a unified floodplain ordinance.  Special emphasis should be given to DeKalb County, Adams County, City of Decatur, and City of Garrett since they do not have compensatory storage language in their current ordinance.
3. Monitor the status and degree of enforcement of federal, state and local ordinances by various communities within the basin, especially with regards to accounting for cumulative impacts and ensuring no adverse impacts as a result of new development.
4. Utilize IDNR’s Local Floodplain Permitting Procedures (Step-by-Step Guide and Flowchart).
5. Continue to provide technical and financial assistance to the NFIP communities that adopt model language.