My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2012/01/25 Council Agenda Packet
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2012
>
2012/01/25 Council Agenda Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2017 11:01:49 AM
Creation date
5/8/2017 11:01:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Agenda Packet
Date
1/25/2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
147
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
1 "that the alteration avoids habitat functional changes, or that the proponent has mitigated" for such <br /> 2 changes. FEMA must ensure that mitigation occurs for indirect effects that could occur later in <br /> 3 time. Id. Additional RPA components include: prioritizing mapping activities based on the <br /> 4 presence of salmon; ensuring more accurate mapping through on-the-ground data,and greater <br /> 5 consideration of"future conditions,"e.g., future development, climate change, and other conditions <br /> 6 that affect future flood risk.4 <br /> 7 RPA#3 (Minimum Criteria): RPA#3 calls for multiple changes to FEMA's minimum <br /> 8 development criteria. Id. at 219. Under this RPA element,NMFS describes a two tier structure <br /> 9 under which a core"protected area"alongside rivers is protected from any adverse effects,and <br /> 10 development in the remainder of the floodplain must comply with a number of detailed standards <br /> 11 intended to minimize habitat degradation. Id. at 153-58 &222-26. FEMA was directed to ensure <br /> 12 that all participating NFIP communities implement these standards on a phased three-year schedule <br /> 13 with Tier 1 jurisdictions complying first. Most of the RPA#3 criteria were drawn from FEMA's <br /> 14 own voluntary guidance"designed to safeguard aquatic habitat conditions for fish." Id. at 168. <br /> 15 Prior to full implementation of these changes,NMFS directed FEMA to keep track of new <br /> 16 floodplain development permits so that their effects could be mitigated. Id. at 155. <br /> 17 RPA#4(Community Rating System): This RPA directs FEMA in considerable detail to <br /> 18 change the CRS to increase points for salmon-friendly measures and decrease points for measures <br /> 19 that reduce flood risk but harm habitat(i.e., structural features like levees). Id. at 158-59. <br /> 20 RPA#5 (Levee vegetation and construction): To avoid habitat-related harm associated with <br /> 21 levees,RPA#5 calls for four specific changes within one year. Id. at 160-62. A)FEMA is <br /> 22 prohibited from recognizing levees that are certified by the Corps unless FEMA demonstrates that it <br /> 23 will not adversely affect species; B)FEMA is required to revise its procedures so that levee owners <br /> 24 that opt out of the Corps' funding program and maintain vegetation remain eligible for emergency <br /> 25 4 The FEMA BiOp documents how climate change"has the potential to profoundly alter aquatic habitat" <br /> 26 and"make recovery targets... more difficult to achieve." BiOp at 143. <br /> 27 Earthjustice <br /> PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY 705 Second Ave.,Suite 203 <br /> Seattle, 98104 <br /> 28 INJUNCTION (Case No. 2:11-cv-02044-RSM) -7- <br /> (206)343-3-734040 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.