Home

Background

SAMP Boundary

Back to Floodplain Issues

Floodplan Hazards Issues—Recommended Actions

For entire document (pdf), click here.

Actions to address all of the issues outlined in this paper are described below and summarized in Table 8.

To improve the Metro Bay area’s resilience to coastal natural hazards, the following actions are suggested priorities for the SAMP.  The issues, as well as the priority actions have been vetted with the Planners of the Metro Bay cities.

Action 1: State and cities adopt more stringent building standards, flood ordinances, permitting processes, and best practices in coastal flood zones 

The following practices have been selected as potential measures to incorporate in municipal and/or SAMP policies and programs to address natural hazards issues. The cases discussed here are illustrative; there are many more examples available under each topic that may be appropriate models for the Metro Bay SAMP.

• Model flood ordinances

Several states have model ordinances that integrate all of the NFIP standards and provide both minimum standards and recommendations for increasing effectiveness beyond these minimum standards to meet state needs. Currently, Rhode Island’s flood standards are contained in the R.I. Building Code, which incorporates the International Building Code. This could be used as a foundation for a model ordinance, which then can be adapted to meet the specific needs of the Metro Bay region or the state as a whole. Florida’s model ordinance gives both counties and individual cities opportunities to move towards an integrated approach with comprehensive plans and coastal zone management. The ordinance establishes a flood development review system with construction criteria and standards in areas sensitive to flooding (Wade, 1996). Other examples include Maine’s flood model ordinance that provides guidance for individual communities (see http://mainegov-images.informe.org/spo/flood/ord/!05cdCoastalModel.pdf).  South Carolina’s model provides a county approach and acknowledges the interconnectedness of communities (see http://www.dnr.sc.gov/water/envaff/flood/img/
CoastalCountyModelOrdinance.pdf).

• Increase elevation with freeboard

Since the base flood elevation depicted on the flood maps is an estimate, 1 or 2 feet of extra protection is significant to avoiding damage. Many communities nationwide, including Pawtucket, require new or substantially improved structures built in high hazard zones to be elevated above the minimum federal requirement shown on the effective FIRM (2 feet is typical). This additional height requirement is called freeboard. Freeboard provides additional protection to structures and ensures that the owners will qualify for substantial discounts on their flood insurance premiums. Twenty-two states used freeboard standards as of 2003. It is estimated that a residential house located in a V-Zone that is elevated 2 feet above base flood elevation qualifies for a 46 percent premium discount on building coverage and a 62 percent premium discount on contents coverage. Commercial properties would receive similar discounts.

• Creating a Coastal A-zone in which buildings must be built to the V-zone standard.  Given that many coastal A-zones are subject to waves (albeit, less than 3 feet), several communities throughout the nation have adopted stricter building codes.  Many of these codes incorporate V-zone standards. This also protects communities as the sea level rises, and the V-zone moves landward, in to the A-zone.

• Maintaining historic preservation in floodplains

Collaboration is the key to developing mitigation actions for historic buildings. In looking at a recovery example from the flood-devastated historic downtown of Darlington, Wis., an interagency coalition determined appropriate actions that could meet local zoning ordinances, historic preservation requirements, and Hazard Mitigation Grant Program criteria . These included filling in basements with sand, raising the first floor to the base flood elevation, dry flood proofing the first floor with a 2-foot freeboard, raising utilities, and constructing interior floodwalls. This collaboration insured that the historic integrity was maintained while the flood damage risks were reduced.

Another collaboration in Charleston, S.C., succeeded in restoring and retrofitting a historic house damaged during Hurricane Hugo in 1989. The project design demonstrates the principles of sustainable building and resistance to natural hazard damage from wind, flood, and earthquake. The house is used to promote methods creating hazard-resistant communities and sustainable natural resources (www.113calhoun.org). In Rhode Island, a memorandum of understanding has been created between RIEMA and the State Historic Preservation Office. This provides a mechanism to incorporate mitigation measures when repairing damaged buildings (RIEMA, 2005).

• Property disclosure

Twenty-seven states require that the flood hazard be disclosed to potential buyers of property, but only 16 states say that the disclosure is implemented. California’s Natural Hazards Disclosure Law goes beyond Rhode Island's seller disclosure for identifying flood zones.  In addition to requiring the seller or seller’s agent to disclose whether the property is located in flood hazard zones California's program discloses inundation zones (areas subject to potential flooding in the event of a dam failure) among others (see http://www.south-county.org/REGuides/Disclosures.html). Numerous states also have deed disclosures as well. The deed to a building in the flood hazard area notifies the buyer that the area surrounding it will experience flooding. The deed can convey applicable restrictions such as non-conversion of enclosed areas below the elevated building.

• Property acquisition

Property acquisition has been called “not only the most effective protection measure available, (but) also a way to convert a problem area into a community asset and obtain environmental benefits” (ASFPM, 2003). Rhode Island communities have used property acquisition to mitigate future impact to private and public infrastructure, most notably along the south shore following the hurricanes of 1938 and 1955. In a more urban setting of Portland, Ore., the Johnson Creek Willing Seller Land Acquisition Program has developed a consortium of agencies to help move people and property out of flood zones and minimize repetitive losses. Acquired land is used to increase flood storage capacity (specifically in a riverine area), restore wetlands, create passive recreational activities and improve habitats (ASFPM, 2002). Since 1997, over 50 households have been moved out of flood-prone neighborhoods, and 61 properties, totaling more than 100 acres, have been purchased (see http://www.jcwc.org/actionPlan/ch1.htm). This program has leveraged funds from the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, HUD Community Development Block Grants, the Portland Capital Improvement Program, and regional bonds. 

• Public education

South Carolina’s Charleston County has worked to reach several different audiences, incorporating a hazard curriculum into schools for teaching community risk assessment methodology, conducting a hazards expo, sponsoring awards at the County Science Fair, and educating third grade students about hazard preparations. The county provides flood information in tax bills and has a speakers’ bureau willing to address flood and other hazard-related topics. This education program provided all county communities with CRS credit, reducing flood insurance policy rates.

For homeowners and businesses, North Carolina has developed a series of fact sheets that describe technical and programmatic issues that are otherwise difficult to understand (see www.ncfloodmaps.com/pubdocs/
coastal_flood_insurance_facts.pdf). Fact sheets include “Saving Money in the Wake of Changing Flood Maps: A Quick Reference for Flood Insurance Policy Holders” and “Flood Insurance Facts for Coastal Homeowners.”

• Site design

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coastal Services Center analyzed three alternatives to coastal development in Georgia based on economic, social, and environmental criteria. This could provide a template for the Metro Bay to look at regional development benefits and costs related to different types and designs of development in flood zones and adjacent areas (see www.csc.noaa.gov/alternatives/).

• Map changes

North Carolina has prepared fact sheets to educate residents about the updates and modernization of the FIRM flood insurance maps. These can be adapted for the Metro Bay, as appropriate. The letter of map change fact sheet (see www.ncfloodmaps.com/pubdocs/revalidation.pdf) highlights the process for obtaining map changes from FEMA. The grandfathering fact sheet (see www.ncfloodmaps.com/pubdocs/grandfathering_letter.pdf) provides homeowners with an understanding of the difference in regulations and insurance rates between the old and new maps. The fact sheet also helps homeowners determine whether they may benefit by continuing to use the old FIRM maps for their flood insurance rates through the grandfathering clause.

Action 2: State and municipal officials work with researchers to accurately map what will happen in the event of hurricanes and floods to guide decision-makers and the public in siting and designing new developments or remodeling

• Conduct a sensitivity analysis of existing floodplain maps to determine whether new modeling is needed
• Develop a wind and flood model for the area (incorporating current land-use/land cover information) to establish likely scenarios of future floodplain conditions
• Conduct a build-out analysis for the entire coastal floodplain in the SAMP to determine the financial implications of disasters and inform future development and response needs
• Identify funding sources to acquire land elevation data, which will serve multiple purposes in floodplain and natural resources management

Action 3: Government officials and university specialists better educate coastal developers, engineers, small businesses, banks, and home owners on the best ways to safeguard lives and property against coastal hazards

• Educate developers, local officials, and property owners of the processes and costs associated with requesting flood zone map changes in exchange for building revetments or seawalls to protect properties in the high-flood zones
• Educate business owners on how to prepare their businesses for natural disasters by using toolkits such as the IBHS Open for Business program

 
Action 4: State agencies work with local and state government officials to coordinate all aspects of floodplain management across the Metro Bay region

• Facilitate a workshop or discussion targeting post-disaster recovery and redevelopment.
• Develop fact sheets for CRMC, municipalities, and developers on the process and costs for changing property in the floodplain from V to A zones
• Offer regular training courses for local building officials, developers, and consultants on floodplain standards, good building practices, building code updates, and post-disaster response
• Coordinate disaster response for evacuation, debris cleanup, drop-off sites, and the ferry system to deliver emergency supplies or people across the rivers
• Provide joint training courses and/or outreach materials on coastal dynamics, debris removal, and evacuation planning for citizens and boaters
• Establish marine debris removal plan for post-hazard cleanup. This should include the identification of disposal sites with options for separating and recycling mass amounts of debris.  The plan should include a shared agreement between marinas, the port industry, and cities to stockpile debris in parks or other open coastal areas for removal. 
• Develop a regional proposal for pre-disaster mitigation grants and flood mitigation assistance
• Coordinate efforts to exchange information and increase Community Rating System ranking for Metro Bay communities 

Contact: Metro Bay SAMP Project Manager Jennifer McCann | mccann@crc.uri.edu | (401) 874-6127