Appeal Summary | Appeal Letter | Back
Second Appeal Summary
PA ID# 087-00000; Santa Cruz County
DSR ID# DSR 27263; Amesti Road
Citation: FEMA-1203-DR-CA, Santa Cruz County, Amesti Road, Damage Survey Report (DSR) 27263Cross-reference:
Time Limitations, LandslidesSummary:
Landslides damaged Amesti Road in Santa Cruz County (Applicant). DSR 27263 was written in June 1998 to repair Amesti Road at an estimated cost of $469,949 with stabilization as a condition of the grant prior to obligation. The Applicant requested a time extension and revised funding for a total of $1,210,550 in December 2002. FEMA denied the request and on October 21, 2003, the Applicant submitted its first appeal. It stated that it had been waiting for an answer regarding whether it risked Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funding if Amesti Road were realigned through a Geological Hazard Abatement District. The Regional Administrator denied the first appeal on July 30, 2007, stating that the landslides had damaged the road in two disasters, though no money was ever obligated to restore the road because it remained unstable. In cases when a site is found to be unstable due to an identified, pre-existing condition, the Applicant is responsible for stabilizing the site. Once the site has been stabilized, the cost to restore the facility at the original site is eligible. For this facility, the Applicant never completed work to stabilize the site. The Applicant submitted its second appeal on November 14, 2007, requesting funding to restore the roadway in its historic location at an estimated cost of $8,000,000. It did not include additional documentation, but stated that the road was necessary due to localized congestion and the need for emergency access to residential areas. It stated that it had considered a number of options other than restoring the road in its historic location; however, none of the alternatives were considered practical. The Applicant did not include information to indicate how the $8,000,000 estimate was derived, nor indicate that work to stabilize the site had been completed. Issues:
1. Did the Applicant provide justification to warrant a time extension?
2. Is stabilization of the site is complete? Findings:
2. No. Rationale:
44 CFR §206.204(d)(2); Response and Recovery Directorate Policy No. 4511.300 A, EX, dated November 30, 1995, Landslide Policy Relating to Public Facilities
, renumbered Response and Recovery Policy 9524.2 (August 17, 1999).