Item 7 - Pomerado Creek FEMA Flood Study Status Report
AGENDAREPORTS~Y IJJ~ 7-<?,r-~S-
I - -\
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: James L. Bowersox, City Mana~
-
.NITIATED BY: J'" D. 'ito', "'i,t.,t Ott, M.,.."i!t)\r ~
Mark S. Weston, Director of Engineerin Service
Javid Siminou, Senior Civil Engineer
DATE: September 26, 1995
SUBJECT: Pomerado Creek FEMA Flood Study Status Report
ABSTRACT
This status report provides the history of the Pomerado Creek FEMA flood study and
staff's recommended plan to pursue an appeal to the findings.
Pomerado Creek provides drainage for approximately 4 square miles located east and west
of Pomerado Road from Poway Creek to Pomerado Hospital. FEMA initiated the study
without a request, direction, or approval from the City of Poway.
In June of 1995, FEMA completed its study regarding Pomerado Creek and advised the City
of Poway of their intent to publish the preliminary maps and conduct a 90-day comment
and appeal period.
On September IS, 1995, the City submitted an appeal of the preliminary flood study for
Pomerado Creek.
iNVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
No C.E.Q.A. review is required for this report.
FISCAL IMPACT
Staff recommends appropriating $75,000 to perform surveying, hydraulic studies, and
cost estimates for improvements needed to contain the water within the channel if the
FEMA study is verified.
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Residential Ad Hoc Committee, Congressman Cunningham
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council direct staff to actively pursue the appeal of
the FEMA floodplain study and appropriate $75,000 to conduct surveys, technical
studies, and determine cost of improvements necessary to contain the flood waters
within the Pomerado Creek concrete channel if the FEMA study is verified.
ACTION
II
1 of 24 SEP 2 6 1995 ITEM 7 ,"
"--
AGENDA REPORT
CITY OF POW A Y
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members~ City Council
FROM: James L. Bowersox, City Man
INITIATED BY: John D. Fitch, Assistant City Manager~~
Mark S. Weston, Director of Engineer~ Service~
Javid Siminou, Senior Civil Engineer '
DATE: September 26, 1995
SUBJECT: Pomerado Creek FEMA Flood Study Status Report
BACKGROUND
This status report provides the history of the Pomerado Creek FEMA flood study
and staff's recommended plan to pursue an appeal to the findings.
In January 1992, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) initiated a
flood study for Pomerado Creek. Pomerado Creek provides drainage for
approximately 4 square miles located east and west of Pomerado Road from Poway
Creek to Pomerado Hospital. FEMA initiated the study without a request,
direction, or approval from the City of Poway. The limits of the study are
from Poway Creek to Glen Oak near Abraxas School. FEMA's flood study
contractors contacted the County flood control staff and were advised that in
1977 and 1978 the County improved the channel to contain the 100-year flood
flow. The 100-year runoff flows were developed by the County of San Diego and
approved by the Corps of Engineers. At that time the Corps of Engineers had
flood study responsibility prior to the creation of FEMA.
In June of 1993, FEMA released preliminary flood profile information; however,
no maps identifying the impact to the surrounding properties were released.
In November, 1994, preliminary floodplain maps were submitted to the City of
Poway. Staff responded to FEMA with concern about the impact to the
surrounding neighborhoods. FEMA made no response to the City's letter.
In June of 1995, FEMA completed their study regarding Pomerado Creek and
advised the City of Poway of their intent to publish the" preliminary maps and
conduct a 90-day comment and appeal period. The appeal period ended on
September 20, 1995.
On September 7, 1995, the City held a neighborhood meeting for the Powers and
Frame Road residents at which FEMA representatives presented the floodplain
mapping process, flood insurance program, and the appeal process. Residents
of the neighborhood which is impacted by the creation of a new floodplain by
FEMA were extremely upset by the lack of notice and poor responses from FEMA
representatives and City staff.
ACTION:
2 of 24 >0-
j
- -
-
Agenda Report . POMer_ Creek FEMA Flood Study Status Report
September 26, 1995
P.ge 2
After receiving the preliminary plans in June of 1995, City staff and their
engineering consultants reviewed the preliminary maps and found their
methodology and analysis to be generally acceptable. The FEMA appeal must be
based on technical and scientific data to refute the findings of FEMA. After
the September 7, 1995 meeting with FEMA, City staff reviewed the
administrative and technical record of the floodplain study and found
discrepancies between County records and FEMA analysis.
FEMA ignored the County records which demonstrated the channel had been built
to a 100-year flood flow standard and approved by the Corps of Engineers. In
addition, FEMA initiated a flood study on an area not designated as a flood
prone area. Current floodplain maps show this area deleted from any
floodplain designation based on the improvements constructed in 1977 by the
County of San Diego. City staff obtained records from the County detailing
the channel improvements constructed in 1977. The channel geometry as shown
by the County does not correspond with that used in the FEMA study. In
a dition, the City raised several technical discrepancies between the FEMA
m pping and the onsite conditions. On September IS, 1995, City staff
s bmitted an appeal of the preliminary flood study for Pomerado Creek. The
a peal letter is shown in Attachment 1. In addition, staff sent FEMA the
C unty records and copies of the appeal letters from the residents.
On September 20, 1995, City staff conducted a second neighborhood meeting to
respond to questions and concerns raised by the residents. Attachment 2 is a
list of questions and answers prepared by the City of Poway. Attachment 3 is
a list of questions prepared by the residential ad hoc committee. Staff's
responses to the questions are also included in Attachment 3.
Lastly, staff indicated to the residents that we would prepare a listing of
the properties located in the preliminary floodplain and the relationship to
this structure. This information is shown in Attachment 4.
FINDINGS
In 1977, the County of San Diego performed hydrology and hydraulics studies
demonstrating that the 100-year flood flow was contained within the Pomerado
Creek concrete channel. The Corps of Engineers and the County agreed on the
improvements. This neighborhood was eliminated from any flood prone
designation. Current FEMA analysis suggests that the 100-year flows are not
contained within the channel. The City appealed the preliminary floodplain
maps submitted by FEMA within the 90-day period. Two neighborhood meetings
were held with residents of the Powers and Frame Roads. In addition, many
meetings were held with an ad hoc committee from the neighborhood to discuss
the impact of the study on them, The City received approximately 250 appeal
letters which have been sent to FEMA along with the City's appeal letter.
3 of 24 ITEM 7 11
SEP 2 6 1995
...-
i
Agenda Report - pomerado Creek FEMA Flood Study Status Report
September 26, 1995
Page 3
Approximately 115 homes would be designated in a floodplain if this map is
finalized in its present form. City staff recommends performing a new
hydraulics study and determine if water is not contained in the channel, what
improvements would be necessary to contain the flow within the channel.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
No C.E.Q.A. review is required for this report.
FISCAL IMPACT
Staff recommends appropriating $75,000 to perform surveying, hydraulic
studies, and cost estimates for improvements needed to contain the water
within the channel if the FEMA study is verified.
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Residential Ad Hoc Committee, Congressman Cunningham
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council direct staff to actively pursue the
appeal of the FEMA floodplain study and appropriate $75,000 to conduct
surveys, technical studies, and determine cost of improvements necessary to
contain the flood waters within the Pomerado Creek concrete channel if FEMA
study is verified.
JLB:JDF:MSW:JS:mh
Attachments:
1. Appeal Letter to FEMA
2. Questions and Answers Prepared by City Staff
3. Questions and Answers Prepared by Ad Hoc Committee
4. List of properties
4 of 24
SEP 2 6 1995 ITEM 7 I'"
...--
I,
r=-:ITY OF POW A V-
DON HIGGINSO~( \I.yor
SUSAN CALLERY, DePUIY Mayor
BOB E.\lERY, Councllmember
MICKEY CAFAG!'A. Councilmember
BE1TY REXFORD. Councilmembc:r
I September 18, 1995
Mr, Michael K, Buckley, p, E.
Chief Hazard Identification Branch Mitigation Directorate
Federal Emergency Management Agency
500 "C" Street S,W,
Washington, D. C, 20472
Subject: Appeal of the Flood Mapping Study for Pomerado Creek, Poway, California
Dear Mr. Buckley:
The City of Poway formally appeals the Base Flood Elevations (BFEl and the preparation of a flood study
on Pomerado Creek, Poway, California currently proposed by FEMA. The City had no reason to believe
that Pomerado Creek was in a flood prone area, Our understanding is that generally FEMA will study
flood prone areas upon request by the local officials in order to designate a floodplain area. FEMA has
had no formal contact from the City Council on this matter. The City of Poway has not requested this
study and does not support any findings relative to the creation of a new floodplain along Pomerado
Creek,
Past efforts by the County of San Diego and the Corp of Engineers in 1977 and 1978 resulted in
Pomerado Creek being eliminated from a previously prepared Corp of Engineers flood prone area map, In
1977 the County of San Diego and the Corp of Engineers resolved discrepancies in the hydrology for the
Pomerado Creek basin, Five different hydrology studies had been prepared prior to 1977. The County of
San Diego resolved any disputes regarding the hydrology and the Corp of Engineers accepted their "
analysis, The hydrology estimated in 1977 is the same as FEMA used in 1993, The City agrees the"
hydrology study prepared in 1 977, as accepted by the Corp of Engineers, is reasonable for the basin,
The County of San Diego Flood Control District staff have indicated to the City of Poway (Exhibit" A")
that they constructed the improvements required for the approved hydrology. The Corp of Engineers
eliminated the Pomerado Creek area as a flood prone area, All correspondence, reports, and records
should be in FEMA's files, clearly designating the Pomerado Creek area as not being a flood prone area,
July 7,1977 and August 19,1985 flood maps issued for Poway deleted Pomerado Creek as a,flood
area, The concrete channel has the capacity to carry the 1 CO-year flood flow,
All of these actions occurred before the City of Poway obtained control of the Rood Control District
facilities in 1985, FEMA should have all of the relevant correspondence and reports from the County.
The City has no reason to request a restudy of the area. The City has not requested a restudy of
Pomerado Creek, Further, this area is no longer a flood prone area, FEMA should not have prepared the
flood study which is now in dispute,
ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD REVIEW
The City of Poway has reviewed the interactions of City staff and FEMA beginning in 1992. We strongly
believe the City was mislead regarding the requirements to perform any floodplain mapping on Pomerado
Creek. On January 31, 1992, Mr, Ray Lenaburg from FEMA met with a Senior Civil Engineer in the
Engineering Services Department along with Rick Bettis of Ensign & Buckley, a FEMA study contractor,
The notes of that meeting which are attached (Attachment #1) indicate that Ray Lenaburg told the City I
they were going to perform a flood study on Pomerado Creek and he set the limits of the study. FEMA
did not acknowledge the long-term history between the County and the Corp of Engineers regarding
mapping of Pomerado Creek, In addition, FEMA did not discuss the improvements that had been made
~ 5 of 24 PO ATTACHMENT 1 Drive ~
. (6~~p74S-6600, 695-1400
1;- 26 1995 ITEM 7.1'"
\;;;. .....-
,
Mr. Mich..l Bucklev, P .E.
September 18. 1995
Page 2
by the County. Staff was lead to believe that FEMA had the authority to come into the jurisdiction and
map the area without debate. FEMA made the decision to study on their own without receiving a
request. direction, or approval by the City of Poway. This decision was made even in light of the past
history that showed that the area was not flood prone and the agreement that was reached with the
County of San Diego in 1978 which showed that the channel could handle the estimated flows.
On February 1, 1992. Rick Bettis of Ensign &: Buckley, study contractor for FEMA, contacted Joe Hill at
the County and he stated, as noted by Mr, Bettis IAttachment #2) that this area was no longer in a flood
prone area and was a waste of time for FEMA to study the area.
On April 6, 1992. Rick Bettis of Ensign &: Buckley, stated in a letter to Michael Baker, Review Engineer
for FEMA IAttachment #31. "As can be seen from the FIRM, no flood hazard boundaries are shown.... "
"As directed by Ray Lenaburg, this is to request a review of FEMA records and determine what data is
available..." "If this stream has been determined by FEMA not to be flood hazard, I believe Ray intends
to cancel our assignment. "
A decision to study Pomerado Creek without a history of flooding or being flood prone was made
unilaterally by FEMA. The City of Poway did not receive any copies of this correspondence until June of
1995. The City did not get the FEMA records. It appears FEMA staff made an arbitrary determination to
study Pomerado Creek even though it was not shown as a flood prone area and that the County study
had shown that the area was not flood prone.
On June 9, 1992, FEMA and Ensign &: Buckley agreed on study scope and a time and cost without
conferring or advising the City of Poway IAttachment #4). FEMA ignored statements presented by Joe
Hill, County of San Diego, regarding the elimination of this area as a flood prone area. On June 11,
1993, one year later, the City of Poway received a draft summary report which included several incorrect
statements ,
Paraaraoh 1.3. "On January 31.1992. FEMA contends that an initial consultation and coordination
meeting was held with representatives of the City of Poway, Department of Public Works, FEMA, and
study contractor, The stream to be studied and the limits of the study were identified at the meeting."
In fact, based on meeting notes and City staff's racollection, FEMA told them they were going to study
Pamerado Creek, Engineering staff did not request the study and explained to FEMA they thought they
were wasting their time studying the creek. City staff was not told that the scope of the study could and
should have been challenged at that time.
Paraaraoh 2,3, "Principal Flood Problems. There are no reported significant flood problems in the study
area,-
City of Poway strongly agrees with this statement.
Paraaraoh 7,0. "...Original 1973 FIS was superseded due to change conditions,"
City agrees that the 1973 Carp of Engineers FlS no longer is applicable due to the improvements made by
the County of San Diego, FEMA should not have studied Pomerado Creek, In the June 1 1, 1993 report,
FEMA included lists of water elevation tables and flood profiles but no plan view map showing the impact
to the neighborhood, In June of 1993, City staff had no way to determine the impact to the
neighborhood and at this time were unaware of the extent of the flood mapping limits.
6 of 24 SEP 2 6 1995 ITEM
7..i....
.--
"- -
Mr, Michlel K. BuckllV. P,E.
- September 18. 1995
Peg. 3
On November 3, 1994. City received the "Preliminary Rood Insurance Study" IFIS) and "Rood Insurance
Rate Map" IFIRM) for the San Diego County and incorporated areas. This report included all County
maps, including Poway updates. The plan view showing the extent of the floodplain area were first
shown in this report, On December 6, 1994. staff sent a review letter to FEMA which included concerns
about the extent of the floodplain mapping on Pomerado Creek, City of Poway received no response to
our comment letter from FEMA until we received a notice of publication of the new floodplain in early
June of 1995,
TECHNICAL REVIEW
The City of Poway appeals the technical preparation of the report on the following items:
1. The Manning "n" for natural channels downstream from the Pomerado
Road box culvert are too high. They should be based on clean, maintained
channel with "n" values ranging from 0.030 to 0.040 rather than values
indicated in the report of 0,050 to 0.070.
2. The Manning "n" used in cross section plots consistently shows 0.015 for
the concrete channel. They should all be reduced to 0,012. We appeal
the HEC II model runs as presented based on this significant discrepancy,
3. It appears FEMA is applying their 3-foot levy freeboard criteria to an
engineered concrete channel wall which is inappropriate. The levy criteria
should not be used in the analysis. Station-by-station analysis will support
calculations which increase capacity.
4. Manning "n" values used in cross sectional stations 4180 to 9421
consistently show high values ranging from 0.019 to 0.037. City of
Poway appeals these values and should be replaced with 0.012. The
channel is a smooth walled concrete channel. Annual minor maintenance
will maintain a "n" of 0.012.
5. We dispute the use of high "n" values (of 0,10) where hOUSllS are shown
in the overbank area as part of the cross section and reducing the cross
sectional area. There should not be a reduction shown in the cross
sectional area when using a high "n" value,
6. Calculations performed by the City confirm the capacity of the channel as
constructed by the County meets the 100-year design flow standards.
(Note: Exhibit" A").
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Further, we do not agree with the findings that the preparation of this flood study has no significant
economic impact to the community. We request that an environmental impact study, according to NEPA
guidelines, be prepared to investigate the impacts associated with this proposed floodplain designation.
-
7 of 24
SEP 2 6 1995 ITEM 7 . .'
..~-
I
Mr. Mic:hael K. Buc:klev. P .E.
September lB. 1995
Page 4
SUMMARY
We strongly Question the accuracy of the study,
Before we can appropriately appeal FEMA's analysis, we request all correspondence and analysis in
FEMA's files from 1973 to 1986 relative to the settlement between the County of San Diego and the
Corp of Engineers regarding Pomerado Creek, We request that no final maps be prepared until the City of
Poway has the opportunity to analyze all previous information and prepare our own analysis to determine
the accuracy of the analysis prepared by FEMA. County records clearly show the improvements meet
Corp of Engineers requirements for flood protection,
Attached are appeal letters (Exhibit "B") we have received from the residents of Poway and a copy of a
letter from Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham from the district, Further, we will be receiving more
appeal letters as indicated in several recent meetings with the residents. We support the residents'
claims that appeal of the floodplain study is justified and the City supports the residents' claims that this
is an inappropriate mapping effort and potentially flawed analysis.
We request a meeting be held between FEMA staff and the City Manager of the City of Poway to discuss
this issue. Further, we request that our appeal be evaluated by FEMA staff not previously associated
with this project.
The City of Poway has reviewed the record of FEMA' s activities on the performance of a flood study on
Pomerado Creek, FEMA made a unilateral decision to study Pomerado Creek in light of the historicai fact
that the County of San Diego, through their improvement efforts, eliminated the designated flood prone
area along Pomerado Creek. This fact was substantiated with the development of the original Flood
Insurance Rate Maps for the City of Poway by deleting Pomerado Creek. In addition, County staff concur
in communications with FEMA and their consultants that studying Pomerado Creek was inappropriate.
The County has demonstrated that the channel has the capacity to carry the 100-year flood flow. We
feel we have been mislead regarding the requirements to perform a flood study effort on Pomerado
Creek, We firmly believe FEMA has exceeded its congressional authority, Further, we find the flood
study is technically flawed. City of Poway expects all floodplain mapping efforts on Pomerado Creek to
cease, We reQuest a complete written response to our appeal issues.
Sincerely,
~~~
Don Higginson
Mayor
xc: Jack Eldridge, FEMA Region 1
Rav Lenaburg, FEMA Region 1
Attachments 1 thru 4
Exhibits" A" and "B"
~\WJll61\Jen..ta~.lun
8 of 24
SEP 2 6 1995 ITEM 7 l'1
,
"
- -
POMERADO CREEK FEMA FLOOD STUDY
SEPTEMBER 20, 1995
Answers'to Questions From Neighborhood:
1. Q. Will the City be appealing the FEMA flood study?
A. The City filed a lengthy appeal to FEMA on September IS, 1995 and
will actively pursue the appeal. We questioned some of the technical
findings as well as FEMA's decision to study this creek. The City
incorporated all the appeal letters from the neighborhood in the
appeal.
2. Q. Who initiated the study?
A. FEMA initiated the flood study in 1992 and set the limits to be
studied. The City did not request the study. Staff believed FEMA
has authority to perform such studies. The City received the results
in November, 1994.
3. Q. What design standards did the County use in the improvements (road
crossings and concrete channel liner) constructed in 1977/7S?
A. The County documents represent that they designed the channel for the
100-year flood flow and that the flow was contained in the channel.
The flows that the County used in 1977 are the same that FEMA used in '
1993. The Corps of Engineers accepted the County's work and deleted
this area as a flood prone area.
4. Q. What impact has development had on the flood study?
A. In 1977, the County and Corps of Engineers agreed on a 100-year flood
flow anticipating future development. The flood flows used in 1977
are the same as the 1993 flood study. Recent development was
anticipated in the 1977 analysis.
5. Q. What affect does the senior housing project on Brookview have on the
flood study?
A. When this project is built, the channel will be constructed to
improve flow in the channel and handle the 100-year flood flow. The
housing sites will be constructed one foot above the 100-year flood
elevation.
6. Q. Why does the FEMA study show flooding on Powers and the County design
keeps all the flow in the channel?
A. The City staff and consultants will conduct their own review of the
channel. The road crossings may be causing a constriction to the
flood flow causing a rise in the upstream water surface thus showing
part of the water leaving the channel. The City will study what
improvements, if any, are necessary to satisfy FEMA that the channel
9 of 24 ATTACHMENT 2 SEP 2 6 1995 ITEM 7 1.-.'
-_.- -
Pomerado Creek FEMA Flood Study
, Answers to Questions From Neighborhood
September 20, 1995
Page 2
performs as designed. Once the City completes this analysis, we will
hold another neighborhood meeting.
"0
7. Q. How does the maintenance of the channel affect the flood study?
A. The study assumes the channel is a maintained concrete lined channel.
The City maintains the channel each year before the winter storms.
The City will be maintaining this channel in the next few weeks under
the annual program.
8. Q. How does this study affect my home mortgage?
A. We have been told by several lending institutions if a flood plain is
designated that refinancing, home equity loans or new loans, for
homes in the floodplain will require the home owner to purchase flood
insurance.
9. Q, Why weren't the residents notified earlier?
A. Staff should have notified residents in June when FEMA published the
notification of the flood study. FEMA documents emphasized that
appeals of this study had to be based on scientific and technical
information. We reviewed the summary report and their study looked
technically correct. We then scheduled a neighborhood meeting with
FEMA staff so that FEMA could explain their study. The earliest we
could get FEMA staff in Poway was September 7,
10. Q. What will the City do next?
A. The City is committed to challenge the findings of the flood study
through FEMA's appeal process. We will conduct our independent
hydraulic analysis of the channel, determine what constrictions, if
any, result in the water leaving the channel, and estimate what
improvements will correct the problem and to contain the water in the
channel.
10 of 24
SEP 2 6 1995 ITeM 7 ; 1>1
- -
- ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS PREPARED BY THE
RESIDENTIAL AD HOC COMMI'ITEE
1. How and why did the remapping of Pomerado Creek happen?
ANSWER: In 1992 a FEMA staff member initiated the study and set the limits of
the study without request, direction, or approval from the City of Poway.
2. When did the study start and when were the results of the FEMA study known?
ANSWER: FEMA initiated the study in January 1992 and the results of the study
which presented the impact to the neighborhood were released in November
1994. The preliminary maps were released by public notification in June of 1995.
3. Didn't the City have an obligation to notify the residents that the study was going
on and the findings of the study prior to the August/September 1995 notice?
ANSWER: FEMA does not conduct public meetings. As has been stated in the
public meetings, City staff could have notified the residents prior to the appeal
period; however, there was no statutory obligation to hold a public hearing.
Council has directed staff to assure the neighborhood is fully briefed on this issue.
4. Why did the FEMA study only go as far north as Glen Oak?
ANSWER: FEMA staff members set the limits of the study.
5. To what level of detail did BSI and the City review the FEMA flood study
results?
ANSWER: City staff and their consultants review the summary reports and the
out from the computer analysis. City staff did not have the County improvement
records and Corps of Engineers correspondence.
6, Was the channel upgraded to the 100-year flood level when improvements were
by San Diego County in 1978?
ANSWER: County records suggest that the channel was constructed to a 100-year
flood level; however, a survey performed by the City on September 20, 1995,
found discrepancies between the County design elevations and the FEMA flood
study data.
7. We have heard that there was a plan at one time to build a flood detention basin
in the fields north of Abraxas School. Why was this not built?
ANSWER: In 1977, the County chose to build the channel to handle the lOa-year
flood flow thereby deleting the need for constructing a detention basin.
11 of 24 ATTACHMENT 3 SEP 2 6 1995 ITEM 7 . !
Questions & Answers
Page 2
8. Is the flood control channel, as it exists now in 1995 with all of the development
that has gone on in Poway and Carmel Mountain Ranch, still adequate to .handle
the l00-year flood?
ANSWER: The estimated master plan flood flows in 1977 are the same flood
flows used by FEMA in 1993 based on current and anticipated development. City
staff will verify the flood flows used in the study.
9. What are the "corrections" reco=ended by FEMA to bring the channel up to
the 100-year flood capacity?
ANSWER: FEMA makes no estimate of the corrections needed to contain all of
the water within the flood channel.
10. How will being in a floodplain affect my property value if my house is on a low
pad or a high pad?
ANSWER: The City of Poway has no information on how the floodplain
designation affects property values.
11. Will FHA or V A lenders finance homes in a designated floodplain?
ANSWER: The City of Poway's understanding is that loans can be issued on
properties in a floodplain provided the buyer purchases flood insurance.
12, How will the redesignation affect existing home loans?
ANSWER: The City of Poway has been told by lending institutions that for
refinance loans, equity loans, or new loans, most lending institutions will require
flood insurance.
13. Is the City appealing the redesignation? How will you know if FEMA received
the appeal?
ANSWER: The City is appealing the redesignation on administrative and
technical issues. The City sent the appeal Certified Mail and has received the
receipt. Staff has contacted Michael Baker, the review engineers, and has let
them know verbally that an appeal has been sent.
12 of 24
SEP 2 6 1995 ITEM 7 ~
- -
!
-
Questions & Answers
Page 3 I
I
,
14. When the appeal is filed, does the redesignation process stop or will the
floodplain map be published before the appeal process is completed?
ANSWER: All appeals will be reviewed and resolved before the floodplain map
is published. The City of Poway will be advised of the appeal resolution and
residents will be advised as soon as we receive information regarding the appeal.
15. If the appeal takes an extended of time, what are our legal obligations to disclose
the alleged floodplain situation if we are going to sell our homes?
ANSWER: Disclosure requirements are set by real estate law. The City of Poway
cannot give an opinion on what a property owner needs to disclose.
16. How long do you expect the appeal to take?
ANSWER: The appeal could take from two months to a year.
17. How soon after the results of the appeal are known will the City notify the
residents?
ANSWER: We will notify the residents immediately upon receipt of the appeal
resolution letter.
18. If the City loses the appeal, what further action will the City take?
ANSWER: City staff is recommending the City conduct its own independent
analysis of the capacity of the channel. If the channel has capacity problems, we
will identify what improvements can be made to contain all the water in the
channel. City staff is recommending we proceed with this immediately.
19. The City offered special loans to residents of this area for improvements to their
property. If the City knew that there was a flood control problem shouldn't that
money have been spent to upgrade the flood control channel instead?
ANSWER: Drainage funds are a different source of funds than the
Redevelopment Residential Rehabilitation Loan Program. The two issues are not
connected.
-
13 of 24
SEP 2 6 1995 rTEM 7 .....
QuestioDS & Answers
Page 4
20. Assuming that we do have a flooding problem, how many future flood control
projects does Poway have planned, and can the list be reprioritized so that our
channel may be taken care of first?
ANSWER: Staff is reco=ending to Council that this project be high priority and
the study conducted immediately. Improvement projects, if needed, will be
presented to Council after more information is developed.
21. When is the City going to clean flood control channel? What priority is our
channel in the City maintenance schedule?
ANSWER: The City will clean flood control channel before the winter rains. The
priority to clean this channel is balanced with priorities to clean all the flood
control channels before winter.
22. Why are the drain pipes that empty into the flood control channel near 13732
Powers and Frame Roads concrete enclosed?
ANSWER: During the County review it was determined that this area is a low
point in the neighborhood and the water from the channel would flow into the
street if these pipes were closed off and flows redirected 10 another location.
23, Why is there water running in the channel now during the summer when there
hasn't been in past years?
ANSWER: Water in the channel has flowed every year. Urbanization of the
basin increases the low water flows, which is occurring throughout the City.
14 of 24
SEP 2 6 1995 ITEM 7 I~'
- ~ -
Parcel In Building In
~ APN Flood Plain Flood Plain Name Address Phone No.
- 314-252-01 Yes No Constance Shultz aka Shill 14227 Powers Road
2 314-252-16 Yes No Sandra Wall 14221 Powers Road
3 314-252-15 Yes No Ruhen Davila & Debra Oakes-Aquila 14215 Powers Road
4 314-252-14 Yes No David & Diane Schafer 14209 Powers Road
5 314-252-13 Yes No !.enh N. Born 14203 Powers Road
6 314-252-12 Yes No Mary M. Nuttall 14177 Powers Road
7 314-252-11 Yes No Michael & Kathy Alexander 14171 Powers Road
8 314-252-10 Yes No Don L. Nieto Jr. 14165 Powers Road
9 314-252-02 Yes No Dwight & Ruth Dickerhoff 14228 Frame Road
10 314-252-03 Yes No KeMeth & Deborah Thompson 14222 Frame Road
11 314-252-04 Yes No Alfred & BOMie Holthus 14216 Frame Road
12 314-252-05 Yes No Christopher & Jackie Woolley 14210 Frame Road
13 314-252-06 Yes No Sidney & Marcia Fenter 14204 Frame Road
14 314-252-07 Yes No Samuel G. Beighley 14172 Frame Road
15 314-252-08 Yes No Arbeiter Family Trust 14166 Frame Road
16 314-252-09 Yes No Melvin & Carol Mayhew 14160 Frame Road
MAP 282- ill2.
Parcel In Building In
~ APN Flood Plain Flood Plain Name Address Phone No,
1 317-152-10 Yes Yes DeMis W. Jurgensen Family Trust Oak Knoll Road
2 317-152-02 Yes No Turning Point United Pentecostal Church 12269 Oak Knoll Road
DRAFT
"-
ATTACHMENT 4
15 of 24 SfP 2 6 1995
ITEM 7 " ..
.--
I
~
Parcel In Building In
& Af.l::i Flood Plain Flood Plain ~ Address Phone No.
1 314-252-01 Yes No Constance Shultz aka Shill 14227 Powers Road
2 314-252-16 Yes No Sandra Wall 14221 Powers Road
3 314-252-15 Yes No Ruben Davila & Debra Oakes-Aquila 14215 Powers Road
4 314-252-14 Yes No David & Diane Schafer 14209 Powers Road
5 314-252-13 Yes No Lenh N, Born 14203 Powers Road
6 314-252-12 Yes No Mary M. Nuttall 14177 Powers Road
7 314-252-11 Yes No Michael & Kathy Alexander 14171 Powers Road
8 314-252-10 Yes No Don L. Nieto Jr. 14165 Powers Road
9 314-252-02 Yes No Dwight & Ruth Dickerhoff 14228 Frame Road
10 314-252-03 Yes No Kenneth & Deborah Thompson 14222 Frame Road
11 314-252-04 Yes No Alfred & Bonnie Holthus 14216 Frame Road
12 314-252-05 Yes No Christopher & Jackie Woolley 14210 Frame Road
13 314-252-06 Yes No Sidney & Marcia Fenter 14204 Frame Road
14 314-252-07 Yes No Samuel G. Beighley 14172 Frame Road
15 314-252-08 Yes No Arbeiter Family Trust 14166 Frame Road
16 314-252-09 Yes No Melvin & Carol Mayhew 14160 Frame Road
DRAFT
SEP 2 6 1995 ITEM 7 l<t
16 of 24
- -
MAP 290-174~
-
Parcel In Building In
No. APN Flood Plain Flood Plain ~ Address Phone No.
I 314-072-01 Yes No Richard J. Hunt 14159 Powers Road
2 314-072-14 Yes No Wendell Gayman 141S3 Powers Road
3 314-072-13 Yes No Alba C. Campbell 14147 Powers Road
4 314-072-12 Yes No Newton D. Crawford 14141 Powers Road
5 314-072-11 Yes No David F, Ozeroff 14135 Powers Road
6 314-072-10 Yes No Kennedy Boardman 14129 Powers Road
7 314-072-09 Yes No Kong M. Cheung 14123 Powers Road
8 314-082-01 Yes Ves Robert A. Paulsen 14117 Powers Road
9 314-082-05 Ves Yes Richard E. Huber 14111 Powers Road
10 314-082-04 Ves Ves Louis J. Tooch 14105 Powers Road
11 314-072-02 Ves No Laurel F. Owen 14154 Frame Road
12 314-072-03 Ves No Richard D. Roland 14148 Frame Road
13 314-072-04 Ves No William Martin 14142 Frame Road ....
14 314-072-05 Yes No Robert W. Masters 14136 Frame Road u..
15 314-072-06 Yes No Jean-Pierre Sepe 14130 Frame Road <(
-
Il 14-072-07 Ves No Mari V. Bray 14124 Frame Road ~
17 314-072-08 Ves No Derrick R. Williams 14118 Frame Road C
18 314-082-02 Ves No David V. Collom 14112 Frame Road
19 314-082-03 Ves No Joseph A. Cavalier 14106 Frame Road
20 314-081-01 Ves No William J. K1ansnic 14116 Powers Road
21 314-081-02 Ves No Sharon W, Stanfield 14110 Powers Road
22 314-081-03 Yes No Timothy & Susan Deehan 14104 Powers Road
23 314-086-01 Yes No Delores J. Schoos 14048 Powers Road
24 314-086-02 Ves No Sal vador F emandez 14042 Powers Road
2S 314-086-03 Ves No Candace R. Meyer 14036 Powers Road
26 314-086-04 Ves No Margarito & Julia Yanez 14030 Powers Road
27 314-086-05 Ves No Thomas p, Farrell 14024 Powers Road
28 314-121-13 Yes No Patrick A, Riley 14018 Powers Road
29 314-121-12 Yes No The Olesen Family 14012 Powers Road
30 314-121-11 Yes No Edward Halpin Jr. 14006 Powers Road
31 314-121-10 Yes No Frederick W. Myers 14000 Powers Road
32 __314-121-09 Ves No Don G. & Joanne White 13956 Powers Road
3c JI4-121-08 Yes No Arthur A. Walsh 13950 Powers Road
34 314-121-07 Ves No Scott & Kim Kuntze 13944 Powers Road
35 314-121-01 Yes No Thomas J. Kowalski 13938 Powers Road
36 314-121-02 Ves No Eric R. & Linda Kobaly 13932 Powers Road
SEP 2 6 1995 ITEM 7 ..
17 of 24
Mlp 290-1749
Page 2
Parcel In Building In
& APN Flood Plain Flood Plain Name Add ress Phone No.
37 314-121-03 Yes No Hu C. & Mary Anderson 13926 Powers Road
38 314-121-04 Yes No Ricky J. Standly 13920 Powers Road
39 314-121-05 Yes No The Dickerhoff Family 13914 Powers Road
40 314-121-06 Yes No Laverne G. Redding 13908 Powers Road
41 314-156-03 Yes No Richard J. Petty 13902 Powers Road
42 314-085-01 Yes Yes Gary C. Chiles 14049 Powers Road
43 314-085-10 Yes Yes Melba Schuster 14043 Powers Road
44 314-085-09 Ves Yes Peter S. & Pansy Tong 14037 Powers Road
45 314-085-08 Ves Ves Dannie H, & Jane Allen 14031 Powers Road
46 314-085-07 Ves Ves R.E. & Betty Huber 14025 Powers Road
47 314-122-19 Ves Ves John & Michelle Head 14019 Powers Road
48 314-122-18 Ves Ves Earl H. Gompper 14013 Powers Road
49 314-122-17 Yes Ves George L. Seago 14007 Powers Road I-
50 314-122-16 Ves Ves Reynaldo F, Sebastian 1400 1 Powers Road U.
<(
51 314-122-15 Ves Ves Janet Gorder 13957 Powers Road
52 314-122-14 Ves Ves Mary A. Waller 13951 Powers Road c::
C
53 314-122-13 Ves Yes Daniel P. Nelson 13945 Powers Road
54 314-122-01 Yes Yes George Haughelstine Jr, 13939 Powers Road
55 314-122-12 Yes Ves Wesley M, Vnund 13933 Powers Road
56 314-122-11 Yes Yes Luther J. Pendleton 13927 Powers Road
57 314-122-10 Ves Ves Phillip C. Scott 13921 Powers Road
58 314-122-09 Yes Yes Bruce C, Walker 13915 Powers Road
59 314-122-08 Ves Ves William Sweeting 13909 Powers Road
60 314-156-01 Ves Yes Don & Winifred Baum 13903 Powers Road
61 3 14-085-02 Yes No Richard E. Kennedy 14050 Frame Road
62 314-085-03 Ves No Patrick Busceni 14044 Frame Road
63 314-085-04 Yes No Daniel S" Samudio 14038 Frame Road
64 314-085-05 Ves No Gloria H. Ginese 14032 Frame Road
65 314-085-06 Ves No Charles W. Lord 14027 Frame Road
66 314-122-20 Yes No Donald B. Hennessy 14020 Frame Road
67 314-122-21 Ves No Edward R. Profancik 14014 Frame Road
68 314-122-22 Ves No Daniel R, Planz 14008 Frame Road
69 314-122-23 Ves No John A, Finnell 14002 Frame Road
70 314-122-24 Ves No Gregory M. & Lynn Salo 13958 Frame Road
71 314-122-25 Ves No Jeffrey L. Ottosen 13952 Frame Raod
18 of 24
SEP 2 6 1995 ITEM 7 rl
-
fVIlp 290-1749
Page 3
-
Parcel In Building In
1:!2. APN Flood Plain Flood Plain Name Address Phone No.
n 314-122-26 Yes No Raymond J, Smith 13946 Frame Road
73 314-122-<l2 Yes No Margaret M. Calhoun 13940 Frame Road
74 314-122-<l3 Yes No Lura K. Shelton 13934 Frame Road
75 314-122-04 Yes No Charles J. Brettell 13928 Frame Road
76 314-122-<l5 Yes No The Duns Family 13922 Frame Road
77 314-122-06 Yes No Janet C, Knowles 13916 Frame Road
78 314-122-<l7 Yes No Hai L. Nguyen 13910 Frame Road
79 314-156-<l2 Yes No Greg Azlin 13904 Frame Road
80 314-155-<l1 Yes No Edmund T. Scott 13848 Powers Road
81 314-155-<l2 Yes No D.M, Stokes 13842 Powers Road
82 314-155-03 Yes No Anna Vega 13 836 Powers Road
83 314-155-04 Yes No John K, & Diane Terry 13830 Powers Road
84 314-155-05 Yes No Allen Burgess 13824 Powers Road
85 314-155-06 Yes No John H. Harger 13818 Powers Road I-
86 314-155-07 Yes Yes Paul Diaz Jr. 13812 Powers Road U.
- <C
8 Jl7-041-01 Yes Yes Judith L. Duffy 13806 Powers Road
88 317-041-02 Yes Yes Michelle L. Poucher-Sharp 13800 Powers Road ~
89 317-041-03 Yes Yes The Arvidson Family 13756 Powers Road C
90 317-041-04 Yes Yes Franklin G, Smith 13750 Powers Road
91 317-041-05 Yes Yes Robert W. Caldwell 13744 Powers Road
92 317-041-06 Yes Yes Jean & Anna OcoMor 13738 Powers Road
...~
93 317-041-07 Yes Yes Michael J. Batherson 13.732 Powers Road
94 317-041-09 Yes Yes Juan J. Gallardo 13726 Powers Road
95 317-041-10 Yes Yes Paul W. Daneker 13720 Powers Road
96 317-041-11 Yes Yes Alvin L. & Ona Feaster 13714 Powers Road
97 317-041-12 Yes No Eugene H. Blakeney 13708 Powers Road
98 317-041-13 Yes No The Harmon Family 13704 Powers Road
99 317-041-14 Yes No The Rucker Family 13662 Powers Road
100 317-041-15 Yes No Enrico A. & Mary Miclat 13654 Powers Road
101 317-041-16 Yes No Adolfo R. Bajado 13642 Powers Road
102 317-060-40 Yes No The Hughes Family 13630 Powers Road
103 _ 317-060-03 Yes No Robert G uevarra 13624 Powers Road
10. 317-060-04 Yes No Leroy & Barbara Post 13618 Powers Road
105 317-060-05 Yes No Melvin F. & Mary Brown 13612 Powers Road
106 314-154-01 Yes Yes Gary A. Smith 13849 Powers Road
107 314-154-14 Yes Yes Scott L. Smith 13843 Powers Road
19 of 24 SEP 2 6 lS9S ITEM 7 ,.,
Mlp 290-1749
Page 4
Parcel In Building In
& ~ Flood Plain Flood Plain Name Address Phone No,
108 314-154-13 Yes Yes Goorge T. Rosselle 13837 Powers Road
109 314-154-12 Yes Yes Raymond L. Williams 13831 Powers Road
110 314-154-11 Yes Yes Souhel & Najat Housban 13825 Powers Road
111 314-154-10 Yes Yes L.J. Bartlelt 13819 Powers Road
112 314-154-09 Yes Yes Mark D. & Debra Handy 13813 Powers Road
113 317-042-01 Yes Yes Jean M. Bennett 13807 Powers Road
114 317-042-16 Yes Yes John J, Wheelock 13801 Powers Road
115 317-042-15 Yes Yes Richard Erbacher 13757 Powers Road
116 317-042-14 Yes Yes The Becker Family 1375 I Powers Road
117 317-042-13 Yes Yes Wendell Gayman 13745 Powers Road
118 317-042-12 Yes Yes John A. Campbell 13739 Powers Road
119 317-042-11 Yes Yes Alfred J. Felton 13733 Powers Road
120 317-042-20 Yes Yes The Bevill Family 13727 Powers Road
121 317-042-21 Yes Yes Gerald B. Spellman 13721 Powers Road
122 317-042-22 Yes Yes Frederick A, Krause 13715 Powers Road
123 317-042-23 Yes Yes Hilarion V. Espe 13709 Powers Road I-
124 317-042-24 Yes Yes Inter V. Vitrano 13701 Powers Road u..
125 317-042-25 Yes Yes Timothy J. Kennedy 13667 Powers Road <C
126 317-042-26 Yes Yes David W. Miller 13655 Powers Road ~
127 317-042-27 Yes Yes Brigido R. & Ruth Babida 13643 Powers Road C
128 317-060-41 Yes Yes Jack A. Darnell 13631 Powers Road
129 317-060-28 Yes Yes Brian F, Burney 13625 Powers Road
130 317-060-27 Yes Yes Harry E. & Carin Ozmun 13619 Powers Road
131 317-060-26 Yes Yes Randy J. Livingood 13613 Powers Road
132 314-154-02 Yes No John C. Montgomery 13850 Frame Road
133 314-154-03 Yes No Richard & Anna Case 13844 Frame Road
134 314-154-04 Yes No Robin M, Mueller 13838 Frame Road
135 314-154-05 Yes No James J. Quiring 13832 Frame Road
136 314-154-06 Yes No Bruce C. Colkitt 13826 Frame Road
137 314-154-07 Yes No Robert H, Bowser 13820 Frame Road
138 314-154-08 Yes No Robert Johnson 13814 Frame Road
139 317-042-02 Yes No Robin L. Onley 13 808 Frame Road
140 317-042-03 Yes No Lawrence J. Zangari 13802 Frame Road
141 317-042-04 Yes No Audrey L. Martin 13758 Frame Road
142 317-042-05 Yes No C.A. Musgrove 13752 Frame Road
20 of 24
SEP 2 6 1995 ITEM 7 ...
- --
Mlp 290-1749
Page 5
-
Parcel In Building In
& ~ Flood Plain Flood Plain ~ Address Phone No.
143 317-C42-06 Yes No Raymond Breen 13746 Frame Road
144 317-C42-07 Yes No Michael Brohoski 13740 Frame Road
145 317-C42-18 Yes No Stanley & Kari Pelol.a 13734 Frame Road
146 317-C42-19 Yes No Nathaniel K, Lew 13728 Frame Road
147 317-C42-34 Yes No Harold E. Scofield 13722 Frame Road
148 317-C42-33 Yes No Linda D. Hodge 13716 Frame Road
149 317-042-32 Yes No Scott B. Kelsey 13710 Frame Road
150 317-042-31 Yes No Lee T. & Betty Winn 13702 Frame Road
151 317-042-30 Yes No Nonnito M. Castillo 13668 Frame Road
152 317-042-29 Yes No David W. Boles 13656 Frame Road
153 317-042-28 Yes No Dennis C. & Jane Masur 13644 Frame Road
154 317-060-42 Yes No Leroy A. Jordan 13632 Frame Road
155 317-060-13 Yes No David G. Sanborn 13626 Frame Raod
156 317-060-14 Yes Yes David G, Bentley 13620 Frame Road
157 317-060-15 Yes Yes Michael T. Despirito 13614 Frame Road
-
DRAFT
21 of 24
SEP 2 6 1995 ITEM 7 ..
a_-
I
<
~
Parcel In Building In
& APN Flood Plain Flood Plain ~ Address Phone No.
1 317-060-06 Yes No Lew A. Steinly 13606 Powers Road
2 317-060-07 Yes No Elsie A. Pavlu 13532 Powers Road
3 317-060-08 Yes No Jose H. & Irma Anaya 13526 Powers Road
4 317-060-09 Yes Yes David B. Greaney 13520 Powers Road
5 317-060-10 Yes Yes Michael J. HarriDgton 13514 Powers Road
6 317-071-01 Yes Yes Nona C. Sturdy 13508 Powers Road
7 317-071-02 Yes Yes James & Rose M, Baylor 13502 Powers Road
8 317-060-25 Yes Yes Corey B, Flohs 13607 Powers Road
9 317-060-24 Yes Yes Leo A, Weeks 13533 Powers Road
10 317-060-23 Yes Yes James & Rose Baylor 13502 Powers Road
11 317-060-22 Yes Yes Laura R. Jones 13521 Powers Road
12 317-060-21 Yes Yes Solomon Hose 13515 Powers Road
13 317-072-01 Yes Yes Thomas W. Crosby 13509 Powers Road
14 317-072-04 Yes Yes Kenneth K. Ford 13503 Powers Road t-
IS 317-060-16 Yes Yes James A. Zito 13608 Frame Road LL.
<(
16 317-060-17 Yes No Kayoko Larmour 13534 Frame Road
17 317-060-18 Yes No Erlinda C. Miller 13528 Frame Road ~
C
18 317-060-19 Yes No John L. Kalena 13522 Frame Road
19 317-060-20 Yes No Albert T. Russell 13516 Frame Road
20 317-072-02 Yes No Nels 0, & Darlene Toft 13510 Frame Road
21 317-072-03 Yes No Rufino C, Vargas 13504 Frame Road
22 317-075-01 Yes Yes Luther J. Pendleton 13436 Powers Road
23 317-075-02 Yes Yes Celestino O. Menguita 13430 Powers Road
24 317-075-03 Yes Yes The Huckleberry Family 13424 Powers Road
25 317-075-04 Yes Yes Lauren L. King 13418 Powers Road
26 317-075-05 Yes Yes Julia Mansfield 13412 Powers Road
27 317-075-06 Yes Yes Keith L. Nelson 13406 Powers Road
28 317-081-01 Yes Yes Julio G, Ponce 13338 Powers Road
29 317-081-02 Yes Yes Isae Alvarado 13332 Powers Road
30 317-081-03 Yes Yes Ronnie E. Farr 13326 Powers Road
31 317-081-04 Yes Yes Vichit Tilakamonkul 13320 Powers Road
32 317-081-05 Yes Yes Jeffrey W. Swartz 13314 Powers Road
33 317-081-06 Yes Yes Lawrence M. Filadelfia 13308 Powers Road
34 317-081-07 Yes Yes Ruth Burtchett 13302 Powers Road
35 317-074-01 Yes Yes Donald E. Kepner 13437 Powers Road
36 317-074-12 Yes Yes George T, Freelen 13431 Powers Road
22 of 24 SEP 2 6 1995 ITEM 7 \.,
- -
Map 286-1749
Pase 2
-
Parcel In Building In
~ APN Flood Plain Flood Plain ~ Address Phone No.
37 317-074-11 Yes Yes John C. Marsh 13425 Powers Road
38 317-074-10 Yes Yes Paul & Anne Harvey 13419 Powers Road
39 317-074-09 Yes Yes Rufus E, Cook 13413 Powers Road
40 317-074-08 Yes Yes Paul & Linda Wynhamer 13407 Powers Road
41 317-082-01 Yes Yc:s Edwin L. Nelson 13339 Powers Road
42 317-082-14 Yes Yes Terry L. Johnson 13333 Powers Road
43 317-082-13 Yes Yes Salvador Fernandez 13327 Powers Road
44 317-082-12 Yes Yes Oscar & Rachel Rocha 13321 Powers Road
45 317-082-11 Yes Yes Robert A, Romero 13315 Powers Road
46 317-082-10 Yes Yes Peter Wong 13309 Powers Road
47 317-082-09 Yes Yes Jose U, Navarro 13303 Powers Road
48 317-074-02 Yes No Richard Szewczyk 13438 Frame Road
49 317-074-03 Yes No Madeline M, Raymond 13432 Frame Road
50 317-074-04 Yes No Joseph M. Schwartz 13426 Frame Road .....
51 317-074-05 Yes No Matthew E. Groves 13420 Frame Road u..
.."_. <(
5: 317-074-06 Yes No Christopher J. Woolley 13426 Frame Road
53 317-074-07 Yes No Larry M. Harrison 13408 Frame Rnad ~
54 317-082-02 Yes No Roby L. Ramon 13340 Frame Road C
55 317-082-03 Yes No Charles G. & Sue Yarber 13334 Frame Road
56 317-082-04 Yes No Charles G. & Sue Yarber 13328 Frame Road
57 317-082-05 Yes No Jesse A. Miranda 13322 Frame Road
58 317-082-06 Yes No James E. Faaborg 13316 Frame Road
59 317-082-07 Yes No William H. Faaborg 13310 Frame Road
60 317-082-08 Yes No Kim O. Ngo 13304 Frame Road
61 317-531-01 Yes Yes Sidney S. Williams 13270 Powers Court
62 317-531-02 Yes Yes John A. Gonzales 13264 Powers Court
63 317-531-03 Yes Yes Brian D, Vonderahe 13258 Powers Court
64 317-531-04 Yes Yes Annando G. Diaz 13254 Powers Court
65 317-531-05 Yes Yes Athena M, Baldwin 13250 Powers Court
66 317-531-06 Yes Yes The Cakllrera Family 13246 Powers Court
67 317-531-07 Yes Yes Alan E, Biennan 13244 Powers Court
68 317-531-08 Yes Yes Richard M. Manis 13242 Powers Road
-"
6c 317-531-26 Yes Yes Walter H. Chamhers 12404 Robinson Blvd.
70 317-531-15 Yes Yes Michael J. Horan 13271 Powers Court
71 317-531-14 Yes Yes Thomas G. Mclaughlin 13265 Powers Court
23 of 24
SEP 2 6 1QQ1; IIEM 7 "
Map 286-1749
Page 3
Parcel In Building In
No. Am Flood Plain Flood Plain Name Address Phone No.
n 317-531-13 Yes Yes Raul & Dominga Marquez 13257 Powers Court
73 317-531-12 Yes Yes Scott B. Berlin 13255 Powers Court
74 317-531-11 Yes Yes Susan A, Dunlap 13249 Powers Court
75 317-531-10 Yes Yes Edward p, Hentz 13247 Powers Court
76 317-531-09 Yes Yes Robert E, Thomas 13241 Powers Court
77 317-151-59 Yes No 1mad F. Habba 12213-45 Poway Road
78 317-151-47 Yes No Tom E. Dixon 12305-07 Poway Road
79 317-151-51 Yes No Poway Investment Co. 12309-13 Poway Road
80 317-151-61 Yes No James M. & S. Piva Oak Knoll Road
81 317-151-62 Yes No Animal Keeper. Inc. 12280 Oak Knoll Road
82 317-152-10 Yes No Dennis Wa. Jurgensen Oak Knoll Road
83 317-152-11 Yes Yes Timothy G. Thornbury 12237 Oak Knoll Road
84 317-520-31 Yes No Pomerado Road Baptist Church 13230 Pomerodo Road
85 317-521-03 Yes No Poway Redevelopment Agency Pomerodo Road
86 317-521-04 Yes No Poway Redevelopment Agency Pomerodo Road
DRAFT
24 of 24 ~~~ 2 6 1995 ITEM 7 ...