New FEMA rules’s first public appearance

P&Z Home, 10 Meadowbank


So far as I know, this is the first applicant to appear before the P&Z on a matter relating to the new flood levels.

CPP 10 Meadowbank Road LLC wants to raise and remodel a home at 10 Meadowbank Road to make it conform to current and future flood elevation standards as required by Federal Emergency Management Agency. The 2,235 square-foot home would increase to 4,409 square feet, according to a planning department staff report. The applicant wants to fill around the home to elevate the first floor. But the town’s engineering division suggested placing the house on piers or creating a crawl space with no fill, a suggestion the homeowner disagrees with.

Not sure how this will affect the streetscape on Meadowbank but the P&Z’s decision may provide insight into how it intends to handle this issue. This is surely only the first of many such applications to come.


Filed under Uncategorized

36 responses to “New FEMA rules’s first public appearance

  1. Check out the hocus pocus regulations P&Z blurted onto GT today….
    Pretty sure it was written by your loyal follower in Djibouti.

  2. Legal Notice publication in classified section….will try to email you it…

  3. Anonymous

    I, too, was just going to write and tell you to see. Its in the Classified section, full page. Bring your magnifying glass because its impossible to read, otherwise. I guess this is called “public disclosure.”

  4. Pinzgauer

    So what about Grade Plane and Greenspace regulations, just to name two conflicts? And since everything is above ground, everything counts against FAR, right?

  5. I am the owner of 10 Meadowbank and have been calling on support from low lying residents to attend tonight’s meeting and support the use of fill. in many ways we are a test case and if the public does not come out and argue then we have no one to blame but ourselves. we do have a neighbor( not on meadowbank) who is opposing fill so it won’t just be one way traffic. see you at 7

    • Mickster

      You also own # 6 Meadowbank and are developing several properties in the area. Why should homeowners support developers who have no interest in the area beyond profits?

      • Ah, how about because a buyer for a client’s home should be welcomed, rather than spurned? Because filling is a better tactic than raising the house on pilings, which will endanger those neighbors’ own homes when the water surges under those pilings and hits their’s unabated?
        I realize that we realtors are angles of the Lord and devote our time selling houses not to earn our daily bread but solely because we want to help our fellow man, but in Greenwich, at least, we try not to use “profit” as an epithet – so many of our clients pursue profit themselves that we risk offending them with our dreams of a socialized utopia.

        • Mickster

          Agreed, I shouldn’t whip him over his pursuit of profit – its at the base of our capitalist society.
          However, I suffered with water problems for years after your fishing buddy developed a home beside me. I has no recourse. The fill and drainage system was all approved. He made his money and was gone.
          I don’t know enough about the merits of fill versus pilings, I’ll leave that to the likes of the excellent Tony D’Andrea whose business it is to know these things.

        • Mickster

          Update: Developer now says “Tony D’Andrea believes that fill has no effect”. That’s good enough for me! Fill Er up!

      • Anonymous

        Did you see 6 Meadowbank before it was renovated?. It was a blight on the street, as is number 10. I happen to own and live in a house in the Shorelands so my interests are aligned with the numerous people who have favorably responded to the call to challenge no fill legislation. My wife and I have lived here for 16 years, and with my colleagues I will be opening a dog grooming business in the village as well as several other ventures that will enhance residents’ quality of life so I most definitely am committed to the area. As I have said in numerous emails to those soon to be affected by the new flood map, I do not expect them to come out and support 10 Meadowbank per say but the ruling on this will seriously affect the aesthetics and value of numerous houses close to the water.

        • Relax, Anon, the ol’ Mickster was just indulging in a bit of Irish humor, surely. After all, and didn’t he jist sell his own house to a developer for a wee profit? Sure en begonia, Erin go blah, and all that.

  6. gazbo-

    What happened with your application at Wetlands last night? What position did R.V.D’Andrea Inc take with regard to filling?

    Filling in a coastal stillwater (AE) is the best solution to high water tidal events. In Rye this is strongly endorsed, and is part of the FEMA method. FEMA calls this modification LOMC-F (Letter of Map Change by Fill.)

    • Anonymous

      Thanks for asking Earth Image. We got through Wetlands which was not a major surprise as we have no wetlands on our actual property, the house we are renovating and adding to will be 1000 feet below that permitted by FAR (admittedly would have required a variance due to set backs), and Staff were in favor in their preview comments. Tony made a point of bringing up fill and how it has no effect and will take that stance again at tonights meeting. Wetlands effectively handed the ball to P&Z so here we go…

  7. Pointing out once again we need a Plan not an ever increasing make work Tome. Landowners and neighbors should be the only people that count, by vote. FEMA lines could have been brought up upon issuance in 2010 not as a reaction (opposite of planning) to a storm predicted since 1927…..
    Good luck tonight landowner, sorry I can’t brain slum it but god luck to you !
    I support your concept …..

  8. firsttimebuyer

    I thought that part of the new regs were that homes needed to be on stilts allowing water to flow underneath the home? I hope zi am wrong and that you prevail Gazbo.

    • Anonymous

      believe there are explicit requirements against use of fill in VE zones. But not in AE zones. (pls reply if this is incorrect)

      • firsttimebuyer

        thanks Anonymous. By the way, WHY(!!!!) have we not seen a comprehensive review of the new regulations and the questions they raise, in our esteemed local newspaper, the Greenwich Times?

  9. Anonymous

    of course D’andrea says fill has not effect. after all he’s been hired by the developer to come to that conclusion. can he explain how the adjacent neighbors will not be affected once their own properties sit several feet lower than the newly filled property. water still runs downhill…right?

    • Well Mike Finkbeiner has no axe to grind and commented earlier this morning:

      Filling in a coastal stillwater (AE) is the best solution to high water tidal events. In Rye this is strongly endorsed, and is part of the FEMA method. FEMA calls this modification LOMC-F (Letter of Map Change by Fill.)

  10. Fred2

    I can see it now, import garbage from NYC, create a new landfill and raise the entire neighborhood by 20ft, cap it off with dirt and some trees, lift up the houses…

    A thing of beauty.

  11. Anonymous

    exactly, filling and lifting all the homes on a particular street would be beneficial. but still not seeing how allowing fill on certain lots has no effect on those who maintain their existing elevations.

  12. Anonymous

    What ever happened to the whole Grade Plane issue. Did the town ever adopt any of those recommendations?

  13. FEMA zones

    Has the VE zone designation been abandoned?
    If you can fill AE, can you fill VE?

  14. Anonymous

    Classic Email from P&Z today:
    “Hello All — I’m writing to our frequent applicants regarding submittals of CAM applications in the coming months. Review times of CAM’s have increased due to an increase in application submittals over the last year, in addition to the required engineering review of most new projects based on the revised Drainage Manual. In addition to this, Katie Deluca, who has reviewed 95% of CAM submittals, will be out on maternity leave for a while. In light of this, we are anticipating longer review times in the coming months and therefore are requesting that when you submit CAM’s, please submit a time extension at the same time. This will help avoid lapses in deadlines. Based on State Statutes, if a CAM application deadline lapses (65 days after receipt of application, with an additional 65 days of extension possible), the CAM can be considered denied, so it is in the applicant’s best interest not to have the deadline lapse. Thank you and you can contact me with any questions. In Katie’s absence, Marek and Pat will be reviewing CAM’s. A sample blank CAM extension form is attached below.”

    New rules are enacted, regulation becomes more stringent and the town is completely unprepared to do their job….

  15. Anon

    10 Meadowbank was approved. Fill and all.

  16. George W. Crossman

    If fill is such a bad idea will we be removing the fill where the gatehouse sits on Todd’s Point? There use to be an inlet to the cove. What about that part of the point that walkers and joggers like so much at the Southeast end? There’s a lot of fill from I-95 construction and there is even asphalt that has been there so long it’s been rounded by the waves. I think asphalt is now considered hazardous waste. How about Canal St in Stamford? Say good bye to Rubino’s and everything on the East side of the street. All fill.