Upper Joachim Creek Public Survey on Potential Flood Risk Reduction

Similar documents
Chapter 6 - Floodplains

ADVISORY BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONS (ABFEs)

City of St. Augustine. Floodplain Management Higher Standards Information

Action Items for Flood Risk Management on Wildcat Creek Interagency success with floodplain management plans and flood forecast inundation maps

Floodplain Development Permit Application

Appendix P Non-Structural

Flood Risk Management and Nonstructural Flood Risk Adaptive Measures

Community Rating System. National Flood Insurance Program

Floodplain Management Annual Conference Atlanta, Georgia April 2017

ASFPM Partnerships for Statewide Mitigation Actions. Alicia Williams GIS and HMP Section Manager, Amec Foster Wheeler June 2016

National Institute of Building Sciences

Requirements for Mapping Levees Complying with Section of the NFIP Regulations

National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) for Real Estate Professionals

a) Ensure public safety through reducing the threats to life and personal injury.

Flooding Part One: BE Informed. Department of Planning & Development

Article 23-6 FLOODPLAIN DISTRICT

DES MOINES CITY OF TWO RIVERS. Flooding Risk & Impact to Development

Floodplain Development Permit Application

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTION ABOUT FLOODPLAINS Michigan Department of Environmental Quality

HENRY COUNTY, OHIO SPECIAL PURPOSE FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION REGULATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND PURPOSES... 2

California Building Code and the NFIP. John Ingargiola, Senior Engineer FEMA Building Science Branch

Wetzel County Floodplain Ordinance

Justification for Floodplain Regulatory Standards in Illinois

Reconstruction Implications

NONSTRUCTURAL FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT FOR LYCOMING COUNTY LYCOMING COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

WOOD COUNTY, WV FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE TABLE OF CONTENTS

University Drive Flood Risk Management Project Phase I 58 th Ave S to 500 S of 64 th Ave S City of Fargo Project FM-15-C1

TOWN OF KENT, CT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION

Dealing With Unnumbered A Zones in Maine Floodplain Management

History of Floodplain Management in Ascension Parish

Appendix B. A Comparison of the Minimum NFIP Requirements and the CRS

CHAPTER 160 FLOOD PLAIN REGULATIONS

CHAPTER 15: FLOODPLAIN OVERLAY DISTRICT "FP"

Floodplain Management 101. Mississippi Emergency Management Agency Floodplain Management Bureau

Appendix D - Floodplain Documents

Interagency Nonstructural Flood Risk Management Workshop. Carey Johnson Kentucky Division of Water

Walter Road Jefferson Parish Repetitive Loss Area Analysis

CHAPTER 7 DRY FLOODPROOFING

FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION RULES

WHEREAS, the base flood elevation set forth within Ordinance No. 351 was intended in all instances to be 18 inches and not two feet ; and,

Chapter 415 FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT

ATTACHMENT 1. Amendments to Chapter 18.20, Definitions Area of shallow flooding Area of special flood hazard

Delaware River Basin Commission s Role in Flood Loss Reduction Efforts

ORDINANCE NO. ALLAMAKEE COUNTY FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT REGULATION

OTTAWA COUNTY FLOODPLAIN DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION

IN THE LITTLE APPLE A PRESENTATION FOR THE 2017 ASFPM ANNUAL CONFERENCE IN KANSAS CITY, MO, MANAGING FLOOD RISK IN THE HEARTLAND

SKOKOMISH RESERVATION FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION ORDINANCE TABLE OF CONTENTS

Oak Island 1999 Hurricane Floyd

Mill Creek Floodplain Proposed Bylaw Frequently Asked Questions

Article 11: Floodplain Management

FLOOD PLAIN DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE

CHAPTER 4. REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

BERKELEY COUNTY FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE

UPSHUR COUNTY FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE

MOKAN CRS Users Group Activity 310, Elevation Certificates Packet

Floodplain Management Assessment

BUYOUTS/RELOCATION/FLOODPROOFING: REGULATORY PROGRAMS AND EXPERIENCE IN OTHER COMMUNITIES

Pre-Development Floodplain Application

Repetitive Loss Area Revisit # 6 Walter Road Area Jefferson Parish

REGION X FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION ORDINANCE WASHINGTON MODEL (REVISED 5/13/2004)

Chehalis River Basin Repetitive Flood Loss Strategy

Vocabulary of Flood Risk Management Terms

Mistakes on Elevation Certificates

THE FLOOD HAZARD AREA Valda Opara New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection June 8, 2012

CHAPTER 8 FLOOD PREVENTION AND PROTECTION*

Chapter 5 Floodplain Management

AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 50: FLOODPLAIN DEVELOPMENT

SECTION 9: MAPS AND DATA

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

RIO ARRIBA COUNTY FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION ORDINANCE

Situation: the need for non-structural flood risk reduction measures

ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN

17.13 FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION ORDINANCE. Article I. Statutory Authorization, Findings of Fact, Purpose, and Methods

ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT AND FLOOD MITIGATION

Introduction to the National Flood Insurance Program: A Guide for Coastal Property Owners MAINE BEACHES CONFERENCE 2017

2011 FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

Skagit County Flood Insurance Study Update. Ryan Ike, CFM FEMA Region 10

Flood Insurance for Local Officials and Floodplain Managers. What Every Community Official Needs to Know About Flood Insurance

NFIP: October 2016 Updates and Community Decision Impacts on Individual Rates

CITIZEN POTAWATOMI NATION PUBLIC CONSERVATION AND ENVIROMENTAL PROTECTION ACT TITLE 35

Kentucky Division of Water Permitting Floodplain Overview and Considerations

JAXGIS FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping -- Frequently Asked Questions

FLOOD INSURANCE. Introduction

FINAL TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM AWD FLOWS THROUGH FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION AREA July 16, 2012

National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) San Francisco Port Commission. October 23, 2007

Maryland Model Floodplain Management Ordinance (May, 2014) MODEL NOTES

FLOODPLAIN DEVELOPMENT VARIANCE APPLICATION PACKET

UPDATE ON DALLAS FLOODWAY

Chapter 113 FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL

FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION REGULATION ARTICLE I STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION, FINDINGS OF FACT, PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES

ORDINANCE # FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION ORDINANCE STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION, FINDINGS OF FACT, PURPOSE AND METHODS

Local Flood Proofing Programs

TOWN OF TUNBRIDGE FLOOD HAZARD AREA ORDINANCE March 18, UPDATE June 17, 2014

FLOOD HAZARD AREA REGULATION TOWN OF GLOVER, VERMONT. Adopted by the Glover Board of Selectmen on June 27, 1991

Michigan Department of Environmental Quality 525 West Allegan Street Lansing, MI (517)

DuPage County East Branch DuPage River Resiliency Project. Benefit Cost Analysis

NFIP Overview Elevation Certificate Flood Insurance Rate Maps. By: Maureen O Shea, AICP, CFM State NFIP Coordinator

TOWN OF BLOOMFIELD FLOOD HAZARD AREA ZONING BYLAW

Role of Disaster Insurance in Improving Resilience: An Expert Meeting The Resilient America Roundtable

Transcription:

Upper Joachim Creek Public Survey on Potential Flood Risk Reduction This survey is intended to help the interagency planning committee to receive public feedback on specific flood risk reduction techniques, and develop a cost effective approach for identifying and prioritizing mitigation activities. The survey will also provide public feedback that will help local officials in making decisions about future floodplain management considerations. We are requesting your address location to understand if you live, manage or own a home or business in an Upper Joachim flood hazard area. Understanding the structure type and proximity of your address to other survey respondents helps the committee to develop individual or collective solutions that can lead to flood risk reduction strategies regionally and in your community. 1. Please provide your address. 2. Are you concerned about past or potential future flooding at this address location? *If you answered yes to this question, please answer questions 3, 4, and 5. 3. What type of structure is located at the address location provided above? 4. What type of building foundation does this structure have? 5. What was the estimated flood depth on the structure during the worst case flood? 6. Please select the tool (or tools) that you are most interested in to reduce flood risk in the planning area. Relocation of the Building Fill Basement with Main Floor Addition Elevating the Building Dry Flood Proofing Wet Flood Proofing Flood Warning Berm Around Building Floodwall Around Building Buyout of Property Other (Such as Floodplain Regulation or Flood Insurance please indicate in comment section below)

7. Do you have any other ideas (besides those listed question 6) to reduce flood risk in the planning area? 8. Would you support stricter regulatory standards in the floodplain to achieve a higher level of safety and flood risk reduction? 9. If you answered yes to question 8, please select the regulatory standard or standards that you may support. Prohibit new development in all or parts of the floodplain (i.e. areas exceeding certain flood depths and/or velocities). Zoning the floodplain for low-density uses (i.e. minimum lot sizes of one acre or larger) Adopting a standard that new construction allows less than a one-foot rise in the floodway. Freeboard Requirements; (new buildings to be elevated higher than the base (100-year) flood level to provide a margin of safety against extraordinary or unknown risks). Compensatory storage to offset loss of flood storage capacity. Protection of critical facilities (such as hospitals, nursing homes, senior housing, emergency services, public and private utility facilities designed to greater level of protection). Off channel setbacks (such as a specified distance from top of a river or creek channel bank). Watershed-specific stormwater management regulations (such as post-project runoff is no worse than pre-project runoff). 10. Would you support preservation of natural areas in the floodplain? 11. If you answered yes to question 10, identify all of those natural area services or values that mean most to you? Contain unique or scenic natural resources Accessible to Neighborhoods Connected to Tourist Areas or Other Parks Connectivity to Existing and Planned Trail Systems 12. Do you have any other comments or questions you would like the floodplain management plan to answer? Please send all completed surveys by Wednesday, 28 March 2018 to the address below: ATTN: Matt Jones U.S. Army Corps of Engineers St. Louis District 1222 Spruce St. St. Louis, MO 63103 Matthew.A.Jones@usace.army.mil

Nonstructural Flood Risk Management Measures Nonstructural flood risk management measures are proven methods and techniques for reducing flood risk and flood damages incurred within floodplains. Thousands of structures across the nation are subject to reduced risk and damages or no risk and no damage due to implementation of nonstructural measures. Besides being very effective for both short and long term flood risk and flood damage reduction, nonstructural measures can be very cost effective when compared to structural measures. A particular advantage of nonstructural measures when compared to structural measures is the ability of nonstructural measures to be sustainable over the long term with minimal costs for operation, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, and replacement. The following nonstructural measures represent techniques commonly utilized in reducing flood risk and the damages associated with flooding. These measures vary from removing an entire structure from the floodplain to insuring a structure which is permanently located within the floodplain. The costs associated with implementing a measure are often determined to be variable, where reduction of flood damages is proportional to the cost of the measure (i.e. removal of a structure from the floodplain will eliminate all future damages associated with flooding). Nonstructural Measures Elevation This nonstructural technique lifts an existing structure to an elevation which is at least equal to or greater than the 1% annual chance flood elevation. In many elevation scenarios, the cost of elevating a structure an extra foot or two is less expensive than the first foot, due to the cost incurred for mobilizing equipment. Elevation can be performed using fill material, on extended foundation walls, on piers, post, piles and columns. Elevation is also a very successful technique for slab on grade structures. Fill Basement with Main Floor Addition This nonstructural technique consists of filling in the existing basement without elevating the remainder of the structure. This could occur if the structure s first floor was located above the base flood elevation or above the design elevation, whichever is higher. With this measure, placing an addition on to the side of the structure could compensate for the lost basement space to the owner. If the addition could not be done because of limited space within the lot or because the owner did not want it, compensation for the lost basement space would be in order to the owner. This measure would only be applicable where the design flood depth is relatively small and the first floor elevation is already located above the design depth. Relocation This nonstructural technique requires physically moving the at-risk structure and buying the land upon which the structure is located. It makes most sense when structures can be relocated from a high flood hazard area to an area that is located completely out of the floodplain.

Acquisition This nonstructural technique consists of buying the structure and the land. The structure is either demolished or is sold to others and relocated to a site external to the floodplain.. Development sites, if needed, can be part of a proposed project in order to provide locations where displaced people can build new homes within an established community. Wet Floodproofing This nonstructural technique is applicable as either a stand-alone measure or as a measure combined with other measures such as elevation. As a stand-alone measure, all construction materials and finishing materials need to be water resistant and all utilities must be elevated above the design flood elevation. Wet floodproofing is quite applicable to commercial and industrial structures when combined with a flood warning and flood preparedness plan. This measure is generally not applicable to large flood depths and high velocity flows. Dry Floodproofing This nonstructural technique consists of waterproofing the structure. This can be done to residential homes as well as commercial and industrial structures. This measure achieves flood risk reduction but it is not recognized by the NFIP for any flood insurance premium rate reduction if applied to a residential structure. Based laboratory tests, a conventional built structure can generally only be dry flood proofed up to 3-feet in elevation. A structural analysis of the wall strength would be required if it was desired to achieve higher protection. A sump pump and perhaps French drain system should be installed as part of the measure. Closure panels are used at openings. This concept does not work with basements nor does it work with crawl spaces. For buildings with basements and/or crawlspaces, the only way that dry floodproofing could be considered to work is for the first floor to be made impermeable to the passage of floodwater. Berms and Floodwalls This nonstructural technique is applicable on a small-scale basis. As nonstructural measures, berms and floodwalls should be constructed to no higher than 6 feet above grade and should not be considered for certification through the NFIP, meaning that flood insurance and floodplain management requirements of the NFIP are still applicable in areas were these berms or floodwalls are constructed. These nonstructural measures are intended to reduce the frequency of flooding but not eliminate floodplain management and flood insurance requirements. These measures can be placed around a single structure or a small group of structures. Since the application of these measures is considered nonstructural in nature, they should not raise the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood. Flood Warning System This nonstructural technique relies upon stream gage, rain gages, and hydrologic computer modeling to determine the impacts of flooding for areas of potential flood risk. A flood warning system, when properly installed and calibrated, is able to identify the amount of time available for residents to implement emergency measures to protect valuables or to evacuate the area during serious flood events. Flood Emergency Preparedness Plans Local governments, through collaboration with USACE, FEMA and other interested federal partners, are encouraged to develop and maintain a Flood Emergency Preparedness Plan (FEPP) that identifies flood hazards, risks and vulnerabilities, identifies and prioritizes mitigation actions, and encourages the development of local mitigation. The FEPP should incorporate the community s response to flooding, location of evacuation centers, primary evacuation routes, and post flood recovery processes.

Land Use Regulations Land use regulations within a designated floodplain are effective tools in reducing flood risk and flood damage. The basics principles of these tools are based nationally in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) which requires minimum standards of floodplain regulation for those communities that participate in the NFIP. For example, land use regulations may identify where development can and cannot occur, or to what elevation structures should locate their lowest habitable floor to. Communication of Nonstructural Flood Risk Reduction Through the development and use of educational tools such as presentations, workshops, hand-outs, and pamphlets, nonstructural flood risk reduction measures may be communicated to government entities and floodplain occupants in an effort to reduce future flood risks and damages.