Smith and Mast offer assurances that change will not weaken county regulations
Before the Sarasota County Commission this week unanimously approved a change in the County Code regarding the use of breakaway walls in the county’s most vulnerable flood zones, Commissioners Mark Smith and Teresa Mast sought to reassure the public that the amendment would in no way weaken the county’s regulations.
As The Sarasota News Leader has reported, during public outreach last year related to the pending new Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps — which took effect on March 27 of this year — county staff met with representatives of the local chapter of the American Institute of Architects (AIA), who requested the removal of “breakaway wall area restrictions” so the walls “could fully enclose the area below the lowest horizontal structural member supporting the Lowest Floor [of a building] in V, VE and V1-30 flood zones.”
“Currently,” an Oct. 22 county staff memo noted, “Code allows for no greater than 299 [square feet] of breakaway wall enclosure …”
FEMA says the VE and V1-30 zones are those in coastal areas “with a 1% or greater chance of flooding and an additional hazard associated with storm waves. These areas have a 26% chance of flooding over the life of a 30‐year mortgage. Base flood elevations derived from detailed analyses are shown at selected intervals within these zones.”
Flood zone V, which also is in coastal areas, has a 1% or greater chance of flooding and an additional hazard associated with storm waves, as well, FEMA notes, along with a 26% chance of flooding over the life of a 30‐year mortgage. However, the agency adds, “No base flood elevations are shown within these zones.”
During a Dec. 18 public hearing, Commissioner Smith, a long-time Siesta Key architect, said, “I’d like to reassure the board and the citizens out there that we’re not weakening our codes. Breakaway walls,” he added, “are still required.”
He did note that the walls “withstand wind, but water, such as storm surge, does knock them down.”
The walls protect residential structures, Smith continued, in “taking the force of the storm.”
What the amendment to the County Code was designed to do, he explained, was to allow breakaway walls and not require the use of lattice work, which the Code has stipulated.
The language in the amendment would comply with the minimum Florida Building Code requirements, the Oct. 22 county staff memo pointed out.
“We’re not endangering folks,” Smith stressed during the Dec. 18 agenda item. “As an architect,” he added, he believes “this is a good idea.”
Mast said she wanted to reiterate those comments.
“I think it also should be noted,” she continued,” that during some of our most recent, troubling storms, those homes and businesses that are under our very arduous Code actually withstood [those hurricanes] the best.”
Anyone who had visited areas of the county shoreline after the storms, Mast pointed out, would have seen evidence of that.
However, she was quick to note, she did not “want to belittle anybody’s damage at all.”
Mast emphasized, “Our codes … really are meant to keep all our residents and businesses safe. This is not going to weaken us in any way.”
The Oct. 22 county staff memo did caution that the amendment to Section 54-516(4) of the County Code could end up affecting the amount of discount that county residents receive on federal flood insurance policies, as the News Leaderreported.
The current discount is 25%. The staff memo said that staff has been working to provide residents a 40% discount.
Commissioner Ron Cutsinger made the motion to find the proposed amendment consistent with policies in the county’s Comprehensive Plan, which guides growth in the community. Mast seconded that motion, which passed 5-0.
Cutsinger also made the motion to approve the amendment, which Mast seconded as well.
Before the votes, Matt Osterhoudt, director of the county’s Planning and Development Services Department, told the commissioners that staff had received correspondence about the agenda item since the agenda was published last week. He provided copies of those emails to the clerks to the board who were handling the meeting that day, so the correspondence would be part of the official record.
Two of the four writers expressed opposition to any board action that might make result in a decrease in the 25% federal flood insurance discount that residents receive.
The other two focused on concerns that the amendment could result in more danger to residents during storm events, especially in the wake of the hurricanes that county residents dealt with this year.
