MOUNTAIN VIEW COUNTY - Officials with Mountain View County will be seeking legal advice regarding proposed updates to the municipality’s floodway and flood fringe policies and regulations before proceeding with public engagement.
During a recent, regularly-scheduled council meeting, council carried the following motion: “Council direct administration to make edits requested by council and return the item with legal review prior to determining public engagement.”
Jeff Holmes, chief administrative officer, said the matter could be brought back before council in March.
Following the release of the provincial Upper Red Deer River Flood Study, administration has proposed a number of updates to the county’s municipal development plan (MDP) and land use bylaw (LUB).
One of the proposed updates to the MDP states that, “For use other than residential, the application shall demonstrate that for the special use that a developable area shall be located completely outside of the floodway of the 1 in 100-year design flood, as determined by a provincial study or a flood risk assessment prepared by the application to the satisfaction of the approving authority.
“In addition, the application shall provide for a private driveway and approach to establish access to a developed county road allowance, which must also be completely outside of the floodway of the 1 in 100-year design flood of a provincial study or a flood risk assessment prepared by the applicant to the satisfaction of the approving authority.”
Another proposed addition to the MDP states that, “To determine if a flood risk assessment is required, administration shall consider the mapping of hazard lands, topography and natural features of the subject lands, aerial photographs, historical information and site visits.”
A proposed update to the LUB would be a definition of high hazard flood fringe meaning “areas with the flood fringe with deeper or faster moving water than the rest of the flood fringe. High hazard flood fringe areas may be ore prevalent in communities with updated flood hazard maps, but they are included in flood hazard maps from all newer flood studies.”
As well, protected flood fringe would be defined as meaning “areas that could be flooded if dedicated flood berms fail or do not work as designed during the 1:100 design flood. These areas are not expected to be flooded but reflect areas of residual risk.”
Another proposed addition to the LUB states that, “covered desks and decks, accessor buildings (gazebos) that do not meet the district regulations on legal existing parcels as of (date of bylaw approval) or parcels to be created by registration of a subdivision plan for which conditional approval has been given prior to (date of bylaw approval) that is zone recreational and identified in the floodway.”
In a briefing note to council, administration said, in part, that, “A local insurance company confirmed there is no blanket response to insurance coverage for properties in the floodway of provincial maps and that all insurance companies base overland water and sewer back up coverages based on their postal code, location and individual risk location.
“To limit liability, administration recommends that development in the floodway can develop to the flood fringe standard shall provide proof of insurability prior to the issuance of a development permit.”
The LUB defines floodway as the “portion of the flood hazard area where flows are deepest, fastest, and most destructive. The floodway typically incudes the main channel of a stream and a portion of the adjacent overbook area.”
The complete proposed updated municipal development plan and land use bylaw is available for viewing on the county’s website.
