§ 38-107. Action plan.

Based on the foregoing evaluation, the city proposes to implement an action plan consisting of the activities identified below, along with a summary of how these activities will be carried out. Many of these action items are contingent upon the development, approval and implementation of a stormwater utility fee. This funding vehicle will likely be considered by the city council during the coming year.

(1)

Upgrade floodplain regulations affecting new development. Floodplain management regulations will be revised to require minimum finish floor elevations to be set at one foot above the 100-year water surface elevation based on fully developed watershed conditions, or two-feet above the regulatory floodplain elevation based on existing conditions. This item is contingent upon either including the necessary analysis in a drainage master plan, or finding access to the necessary data from outside sources such as the Corps of Engineers.

In addition, the floodplain management regulations will be revised to require new developments to provide detention on all lots that are larger than three acres. These developments will be required to limit stormwater runoff from the site to predevelopment levels. Surface detention in parking lots will be permitted, subject to safety limitations on the allowable depth of ponding.

(2)

Develop a public education program. The public works department will begin to prepare educational materials for publication in the Proud and Progressive newsletter at least two times each year. These materials will encourage citizens to obtain floodplain insurance, will show citizens how to determine whether or not they are in the floodplain, how to respond to potential flooding conditions, and will provide other flood-related information of value to citizens. In addition, the official city website will have floodplain and flood insurance related links added. Because the newsletter is already published, the only cost is that cost necessary to prepare educational articles for the newsletter and web site. This could be done by city staff (at the expense of other activities) or by an outside consultant. Given the availability of information from FEMA, the time and/or cost should be minimal.

(3)

Structural improvements. By far the most important of the structural improvements currently being considered is the Little Fossil Creek project proposed by the Corps of Engineers. Now that the voters have passed the bond election, the Corps will proceed with the necessary study, right-of-way acquisition and construction plans.

Even with the construction of the improvements authorized by the approval of the bond election, other structural improvements are likely to be needed. There are at least two alternatives for determining what improvements are needed and what priority they have. The most comprehensive means, which will likely prove to be the most cost-effective in the long run, is to develop a drainage master plan. This plan will include an evaluation of existing drainage facilities, an assessment of needed improvements, determination of construction cost, and a determination of priority of the proposed improvements. Potential drainage improvement projects can be prioritized in a relatively objective manner, providing the city council and staff with a powerful tool for selecting improvement projects to be constructed. However, the initial cost of preparation of a drainage master plan can be very expensive. This is because it is necessary to inventory all existing drainage facilities, analyze these facilities, identify deficiencies, and evaluate possible improvements. It is entirely possible that the cost for developing a drainage master plan could be as high as $200,000.00 to $300,000.00. Preparation of a drainage master plan is probably contingent on implementation of a stormwater utility fee.

Identifying and prioritizing the needed drainage projects can also be accomplished in a less systematic way by simply responding to drainage problems observed by staff and citizens. This procedure is inherently reactive and unfocused, and has the potential to put the public works staff in a difficult position from time to time. However, due to funding and/or staffing limitations, many communities deal with drainage problems in exactly this manner. It is unlikely that any significant cost could be attributed to this means of identifying drainage problems. Clearly, though, staff and council must be willing to address drainage problems on an individual basis, often with unhappy citizens.

(4)

Expand drainage maintenance program. Expansion of the existing drainage maintenance program could entail hiring of additional staff, and possibly acquisition of additional equipment, depending on the level of maintenance to be provided. However, it is highly unlikely that a crew could be dedicated to drainage maintenance. An alternative would be to use existing street department staff to provide some limited drainage maintenance, or to contract out such work from time to time. The most effective drainage maintenance would likely involve clearing of debris caught at bridges and culverts, and possibly occasional dredging of silt and sediment in streams and channels.

Minimal equipment would be needed for such a crew. This equipment would probably consist of chainsaws, a backhoe and trailer, and a dump truck. Generally speaking, this work would require a three-man crew. However, rather than hiring additional workers and purchasing or leasing equipment, this additional maintenance could be handled by existing staff on an as-needed basis, or be work that is dedicated for two or three days a month during dry weather. While using existing staff would not entail additional cost (assuming the necessary equipment is already available), it must be considered that this work will take the place of work that staff is now doing. In other words, while the additional expense to expand the drainage maintenance program may be kept quite low, there may be a corresponding sacrifice to existing services.

In either case, significant expansion of the drainage maintenance program is contingent upon implementation of a stormwater utility fee.

(5)

Purchase high-risk properties. Several properties are candidates for purchase in Haltom City, as described in the evaluation of potential remedies section of this report. A total of 133 lots in the Skyline Mobile Home Park are within the 100-year floodplain, of which 27 are in the regulatory floodway. All of these, but particularly those in the floodway, should be considered likely candidates for buyout. This mobile home park is primarily a rental property community rather than individually owned lots. As a result, it is difficult to determine an appraised value for the lots from the Tarrant Appraisal District (TAD) records. However, one of the lots listed on the TAD website as individually owned has an appraised land value of approximately $0.70 per square foot. Using average lot sizes of approximately 4,500 square feet, the value of this lot is approximately $3,200.00. If the lots could be purchase for the estimated appraised value, the purchase cost would be $426,000.00. However, additional costs will include appraisals, relocation assistance, closing costs, and other costs in accordance with federal acquisition regulations. In addition, because the lots are rental property, it may be necessary to offer more than the appraised value in order to address loss of rental income.

In addition to specific lots in the Skyline Mobile Home Park, consideration will be given to acquisition of several repetitive loss structures in the city. As discussed previously, some of the structures experiencing repetitive losses may be addressed by eliminating the cause of the losses, through structural improvements or other means. However, several of these properties may be candidates for buyout.

Upon approval by the Texas Water Development Board and FEMA of this flood mitigation plan, application may be made for a project grant under the flood mitigation assistance program. An approved FMP is one condition of eligibility for a project grant. Similar to the planning grant used to finance development of this FMP, the project grant is used primarily to finance acquisition of NFIP-insured structures. When approved, the project grant provides 75 percent of the project cost, and the local community contributes the remaining 25 percent of the project cost. Upon approval of this FMP, the city will immediately begin preparation of the project grant application for acquisition of properties as identified above.

(6)

Participate in the FEMA community rating system program. Contingent upon the implementation of a stormwater utility fee, the city will begin efforts to qualify for the community rating system (CRS) program. Several of the other action items described herein will earn points necessary for CRS qualification, such as increasing the level of drainage maintenance, establishing fully developed conditions water surface elevations for use in regulating minimum finish floor elevations. A preliminary evaluation indicates that the necessary points for CRS qualification may well be within reach with implementation of the action items described above. However, implementing the stormwater utility fee may be the key to funding such actions, and in turn, to reaching the necessary points for CRS participation.

(7)

Funding considerations. It is clear from the preceding discussion that many of the proposed action items are contingent upon implementation of a stormwater utility fee.

In the absence of this or another similar source of funding, it is likely that the possible action items that may be implemented will be limited to the following: 1) revising the subdivision regulations to require detention as described above; 2) carrying out a public education program; and 3) proceeding with an application for a project grant for buyout of high risk properties.

(Ord. No. O-2002-017-16, § 1, Exh. A, 5-13-02)