COM 0176.066 2006-2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

levels in new construction automatically- The long term result will be more homes that are, inaccessible or, if accessible, made so with increased unnecessary costs. Developer; of'r r ~ i subdivisions are also worried about the added cost to construction that this bill may c:a~ts ~ . development within Zone X will not be able to apply for an exemption under the Fair Hou ;i ~.r!? Act due to site impracticability. New construction required to comply with the Fair Housin;'.:h c t, which requires an accessible route to the ground floor unit entrances and units accessed h}~ elevator, will have added costs to provide additional grading or ramps to create those acre<_s l;l s routes since the bill requires the homes to be raised 12 to 24 inches above grade dependin;=_ r r i t e zonirtg of the property. There will be additional cost to developers to either get a sun ey do ~ : • ensure the property is not within a flood prone area or to provide ramps to new consvuction required to comply with the Fair Housing Act. Development in designated "flood plains or zones" in Bi11 51 can apply the site imprctica'r:~. i exemption because they are in a zone with an established base flood level. However, tt Ei.il I almost any parcel of land not in a special "flood plain" appears to be designated as icae ' '!.c burden of proof to show that a parcel of land is not prone to flooding will be placed c, ~ thz property owner or developer. However, no base flood level has been determined for these z~:. ce;:, so it will be difficult to impossible to show that the property is not within a flood zone ~c-ith: n base flood level. The standards for construction being imposed on Zone X appear to b~ extr ct ne given the fact that the chance of flooding is one percent in one hundred years and less dean cn percent in a five hundred yeaz span. F)rMA defines the `base flood' as the "flood having., a car e percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. This is the regulatory erurdan', also referred to as the 100 yeaz flood". The `base flood level' or `base flood elevation' is the "computed elevation to which floodwater is anticipated to rise during the base flood°'. The bill specifically precludes a variance based upon disability status when, in fad, it should allow a variance based upon disability status. An elimination of the option of a variance due disability may run afoul of Title Il of the ADA that requires state and local governmen. cncir e s n r make `reasonable mod cations to policies, practices and procedures (which would inchtde cu . ordinance) when the modifications are necessary to avoid discrimination on the basis of disability " (CFR §35.130(b)(7). Persons with disabilities who purchase or build a home will I e paying a higher cost than the general public to add ramps and or elevators to their homes as variance will not be granted for reasons relating to a disability. For example, if a perso 7 regr,c s s a variance to build his oz her home at grade to provide an accessible entry or zero step entn: d e I variance would not be granted as the bill states "the owner can construct a ramp or eleveto~ to meet flood requirements". The bill also has many ambiguities with respect to definition of flood hazard as well as Lrnc:l c II categories, and the applicability to alterafions. There is also no clear rationale for the one fso; , two foot requirement. j I STAFF RECOMMENDATION: ~ Staff recommends the Board submit testimony in opposition to Bill 151, as written, will the' above cotnments as well as a detailed analysis. This Bill moves in the opposite direction as'.4f~i u County, which is looking to create more visitable standards for new housing developrre~;CS.:~ c a `.f further recommends that if amendments are made to the bill that DCAB re visit the Bill to ensu -e that all the concerns aze met.