BRW I | All Presentations

8/13/2019 BRW I | All Presentations

1/100

JOSEVILLALOBOS

PANEL

ONE


2/100

Worldwide Approaches to Living With Water


3/100


4/100


5/100

JOSERAYNAL

PANEL

ONE


6/100


7/100


8/100


9/100


10/100


11/100

CRAIGCOLTEN

PANEL

ONE


12/100

Resilience as a

Process:

Govenor McKeithenpromised he would

establish proceduresthat will . . . make arepeat of this disasterimpossible.


13/100

Place Based:

Flooding from

Hurricane Betsy 1965

US Army Corps of Engineers


14/100

Place Based: Hurricane Protection LeveesTo reduce future flooding.

New Orleans Times Picayune

1965


15/100

Social Memory:Local evacuationto schools.

New Orleans Public Library


16/100RESPOND: Improve government coordination

d l


17/100

RebuildLower 9th

RedevelopCarrollton Ave.

RenewCanal Street

Recovery:Recovery part ofplanning process.


18/100

CHRISPULASKI

PANEL

ONE


19/100

Troublein Sportsmans Paradise?www.vanishingparadise.org


20/100

MARKDAVIS

PANEL

ONE


21/100


22/100

RICHARDCAMPANELLA

PANEL

TWO


23/100

BASJONKMAN

PANEL

TWO


24/100

Building resilience and flood risk

management

Dr. Bas Jonkman


25/100

National Water plan on safety

New flood defencepolicy -> new safety

standards, based on:

Individual risk Societal risk Cost Benefit

Analysis

Consider different

layers of protection:


26/100


27/100

Build 50,000 newhomes in the deep

polder

Increase inconsequences

Consequencereduction considered:

Mounds Super levees

So far: not feasible due

Almere case


28/100

Existinglevee

800 newhomes


29/100

Scheveningen / The Hague

case

Different options

considered:

- buildingresilience

- Moving the seadefence forward


30/100

Scheveningen / The Hague

case


31/100

Closing remarks

Need to find a balance between differentlayers of protection

High level of protection: difficult to justifybuilding resilience behind the levees

Trend: investigate combinations of floodprotection and spatial development (on the

levees): delta dikes


32/100

Flood threats in the NetherlandsRainfall floods

Failure of local flood defences

Failure of primary flood defences

Flooding of unembanked areas


33/100

DONBLANCHER

PANEL

THREE


34/100

Don Blancher

Sustainable Ecosystem Restoration,

LLC&

GroundworkNOLA


35/100


36/100


37/100

Krasney & Tidball, 2009


38/100

Krasney & Tidball, 2009


39/100


40/100

AMANDAMOORE

PANELTHREE


41/100

!"#$ &'()*)+,-

",)+(./0(1

!"#$ & +


42/100

!"#$ &'()*)+,-

",)+(./0(1


43/100

ELIZABETHENGLISH

PANELFOUR


44/100

For over 30 years, amphibious houses

at Raccourci Old River have been

rising and falling reliably with the levelof flooding of the Mississippi River.

Dry in September . . . The same house . . . Floating in February


45/100


Average cost of buoyancy

system is around $5,000.


46/100

Buoyant foundations are not new!



47/100

So why fight floodwater

when you can float on it?


48/100

Section drawing of a

shotgun house with abuoyant foundationinstalled, showingbuoyancy blocksunder the house andvertical guidance

poles that telescopeout of the ground

Figure Created by Stuart Broussard

How it works


49/100

Figure Created by Stuart Broussard

House ontraditionalmasonry piers

Houseelevatedto 8 feet

House witha BuoyantFoundation

Comparison of 3 Conditions


50/100


51/100


52/100


53/100


54/100

WHICH WOULD YOU CHOOSE?

Completed buoyant foundation


55/100

Completed buoyant foundation

Aerial view


56/100

Aerial view

Moving the sandbags to tilt the house


57/100

Moving the sandbags to tilt the house

Let's be sure this never happens again


58/100

Flooded shotgun house, New Orleans, 8 Sept 2005 photo by E. C.English

Let s be sure this never happens again


59/100


60/100

www.buoyantfoundation.org


61/100

PRITHULAPROSUN

PANELFOUR


62/100


63/100


64/100


65/100

YARROWETHEREDGE

PANELFIVE


66/100

Yarrow Etheredge

Best National Practices

Implemented Locally


67/100


68/100


69/100


70/100


71/100


72/100


73/100


74/100


75/100


76/100


77/100


78/100


79/100


80/100


81/100


82/100


83/100


84/100


85/100


86/100


87/100


88/100


89/100


90/100


91/100


92/100

BILLCOULBOURNE

PANELSIX


93/100

ATC Past


94/100

ATC Past Several are landmark documents that

have changed engineering practice

ATC-3: Basis for seismic design

provisions of UBC

ATC-20: Post-EQ safetyevaluation

FEMA 154 (ATC-21): Rapidvisual screening

ATC Past


95/100

ATC Past

ATC-14 Evaluating the SeismicResistance of Existing Buildings (1987)

Superseded three times FEMA 178, FEMA 310, ASCE 31

ATC Present


96/100

ATC Present

Extremely active in earthquake fieldAdditional emphasis:

High wind design Flood design issues

Documents, books, training

ATC Present Wind


97/100

ATC Present - Wind

0510

ATC Present Flood


98/100

ATC Present - FloodA Report on the Real

Risk of Flooding

A Pre-standard for

Determining Flood RiskBased on Vulnerabilityand Consequences

?????

Applied Technology Council


99/100

MIKEHUNNICUTT

PANELSIX

Process for Flood Mapping


100/100

pp gFlood Mapping Project Phases

DataAcquisition

andEngineering

Analysis

DFIRMProduction

PreliminaryDFIRM

PostPreliminaryProcessing

ProjectScoping

(Three phases)

CommunityCoordination& Mapping

NeedsAssessment

90 D30 D 6 M thV iV i

Appeal &ProtestPeriod

Letter ofFinal

Determination

Effective

DFIRM

CommunityConsultationOfficers (CCO)

Meeting& Public

Open House

Preliminary

DFIRM

Appeals

Resolved

CommunityAdopts

Map

FEMA DFIRM Post Preliminary Process