Meeting to iron out FEMA flood plain issues with Coast Guard Museum postponed
New London — A meeting planned for Monday between planners of the National Coast Guard Museum and the Federal Emergency Management Agency about the potential for flooding at the proposed museum site has been postponed until next month.
The purpose of the meeting, scheduled to take place in Boston, is to address issues relating to the proposed location of the museum within a FEMA-designated flood hazard area.
The museum is proposed for a site downtown on the Thames River waterfront near Union Station.
Mayor Michael Passero said by phone Friday afternoon that museum stakeholders have invested all their energy and momentum to build the museum at the waterfront site.
"If it doesn't work there, I don't see them settling on any other spot in New London," Passero said.
A 2004 law requires the museum to be located in New London.
Passero said New London is "absolutely" behind the museum and the waterfront site.
"There's going to be hurdles and issues that have to be worked through. Nobody is telling us it's not going to move forward," he said.
Dennis Pinkham, spokesman for FEMA's regional office in Boston, said Friday that FEMA Regional Administrator Paul Ford and Mitigation Division Director Dean Savramis were invited to a meeting at the Coast Guard's First District Headquarters in Boston.
"Flood plain management is fundamental to reducing flood losses," he said.
Brian Thompson, director of the Office of Long Island Sound Programs at the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, said Friday that he had planned to attend the meeting mainly as an observer.
The meeting had been scheduled at the initiative of the museum planners, he said, "to clarify flood plain issues" with FEMA.
"It's an important discussion," he said. The planned meeting, he added, "wouldn't be the end of the discussion."
The proposed site is in a FEMA 100-year flood zone — meaning it has a 1 percent chance of flooding in any given year — and a portion is also in a "velocity hazard" zone that could be impacted by waves during a storm.
"There are constraints with how the building can be done," Thompson said. "It is a difficult site. But with engineering and design, a lot can be done."
Pinkham said FEMA will continue to work with DEEP, local officials and other federal agencies "regarding the design, siting and construction" of the museum.
"We will provide technical assistance to the design team to ensure that it is compliant with all flood plain management regulations and directives based on the proposed location," he said.
Thompson said DEEP has had "general conversations" with the museum planners and seen "general plans."
"We haven't seen any detailed plans at this point," he said.
DEEP permits would be required for any work impacting the coastal zone, he said.
Bob Ross, head of the state's Office of Military Affairs, said this isn't a surprise, and that the museum organizers knew there would be regulatory hurdles they would have to overcome.
Laura Maloney, a spokesman for U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., said by email Friday that "Murphy's office has been in discussion with museum officials about FEMA's environmental issues involving the site."
Murphy recently announced that the Senate Appropriations Committee, of which he is a member, passed a homeland security funding bill that included $5 million for the estimated $100 million museum project.
The $5 million would go toward interior work because federal law prohibits the Coast Guard from funding the brick-and-mortar aspects of the museum.
The National Coast Guard Museum Association, which is raising funds for the museum, is hoping for $30 million in federal support.
At last count, the museum association had received $35 million in donations and pledges. That includes a $20 million commitment from the state for a pedestrian bridge that would provide access to the museum.
No major fundraising announcements have been made since late January, when the association announced $4 million in pledges.
U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said he is "very hopeful and confident that any obstacles can be overcome."
Blumenthal said he is aware of concerns raised by state and federal agencies "but they are by no means sufficient reasons to move away from the ideal site where ground has already been broken."
If "any" federal agency is going to present a "serious obstacle" to the planned museum site, "they better come to the Connecticut delegation and we will take appropriate action," he said.
Comment threads are monitored for 48 hours after publication and then closed.
