2017-03-15 KCDP Minutes Final - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Member Ogin questioned the delineation of a floodway crossing property in Kailua Village that had not been previously designated as such, where there was no known flooding in modern times, and where there was no flooding on that site while nearby areas to the north were severely flooded in 2015. Mr. De Marco explained that the s a 1% chance of a flooding event at that inundation level, and thus means that \[as merely a measure of probability\] there could be several flood events of that extent in a particular 100 year period or there could be none in that same 100 year period. He website provides day by day rainfall reports if a particular heavy rainfall date is being sought. Member Tyler expressed concerns regarding the omission of a floodway known to him in the urban area along the Mamalahoa Hwy. between Honalo and Kealakekua, particularly because it is a floodway well-known to three recent, successive Councilmembers for that political district. Mr. De Marco said that no known or recent County-sanctioned flood study has been done for that particular section of Kona. He noted that the South Kona Flood Study, covering a sub-region of Kona running south from the Konawaena school complex, was done in recent years due to a public demand for such covering the South Kona area, but excluded high elevations due to the expense of detail image mapping of those remote areas. Mr. Tyler asked if the County Council was involved, for comment or for their endorsement, in the federal review of the Preliminary FIRMs; Mr. De Marco said no, but that the Executive Branch, through the Dept. of Public Works, does have to approve the draft maps before they are forwarded to FEMA for incorporation into the proposed map revisions (Preliminary FIRMs). He also explained that in addition to the publication of the map revisions in the newspaper, when a flood study is done by the County, this County also mails out notice to all owners of property directly affected by the proposed map changes, even though property owner notification is an optional requirement of FEMA when a LOMR is being requested. FEMA flood maps, as being a flood area (or not being in a flood area)? De Marco said any owner, or the government for government properties, can file a request for a map revision via online instructions and forms. He explained that both the recent North and South Kona flood studies were done at community request. He also explained that the current FIRM update is the result of a nationwide effort, at the direction of Congress, and is directly related to national flood insurance rates and their application to particular floodplain types. Member Kimura asked if FIRMs will be made available as a Geographic Information System (GIS) layer. Mr. De Marco intimated that this will be provided to the Planning Dept. once the DFIRMs becomes Final. She then asked whether the Preliminary maps are being used for regulatory purposes already; Mr. De Marco said yes, because FEMA requires the County whether officially sanctioned or not. In response to a question later allowed from a member of the public, Ken Melrose, in the course of discussions of Agenda Item No. 2 (below), that question being in regard to the or relocation of a previously approved (by LOMR) floodway designation in South Kona (Flood Study-Watercourses 1 and 2), Mr. DeMarco explained that that particular floodway was restudied as part of the South Kona Flood Study by the Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) and the ACE study results were incorporated into the Preliminary DFIRM; as a result, the previous privately- initiated LOMR was superseded by the information provided from the current ACE study. Mr. Melrose replied stating his belief that it was unjust of the County to modify previously designated floodways without consulting with affected landowners and physically inspecting the designated floodways. Chair DeFranco said that one of the purposes of Page 3 of 9