SNEAPA 2013 Friday f1 10_30_after the storm

Learning from St. Bernard Parish SNEAPA - After the Storm: The Planner’s Role for the Next One

Donald J. Poland, AICPDon Poland Consultingwww.donaldpoland.com

Outside the Levee Wall

After the Storm: St. Bernard Parish










What we Plan for - Risk Management and Emergency Planning•We calculate and try to measure risk and exposure to risk:

• Hazard x Exposure x Vulnerability = Risk

•We plan for emergency response:• Preparedness and Evacuation• First Response• Search and Rescue and Recovery

•We provide government aid and support in the aftermath for:• Loss• Clean-up• Planning• Redevelopment

•We DON’T plan for• After the disaster – What to do and how to do it?• How to redevelop – What areas should or should not be rebuilt? • Capacity and management – How do we manage recovery?• We don’t plan for the everyday – How do we manage the everydayness of recovery?



The Challenge of Planning for Recovery

•How do you tell people they can’t rebuild?

•How do you plan and do what is ‘right’ when there is an overwhelming rush to normalcy

• We must, we will rebuild!!!

•How do you manage government when every record, document, survey, map, and permit has been destroyed?

•What do you do when the community has infrastructure to support a population of 65,000 and you are now 35,000?

•How do you navigate and manage the red tap, strings, and conditions of Federal and State aid?

•When is recovery complete? How do we measure for our return to normalcy?


Lessons I Have Learned

•Rush to normalcy out weighs rational thought and long term planning.

•The ‘little and simple things’ of everyday government is magnified and intensified—doing your job can become challenging?

•We need to plan for ‘after the disaster.’• What are our threats and what are the

potential impacts of those threats?• How might those threats impact us—

change our future? [Flood zones, Hurricanes, Tornados, etc.]

• What systems (policies, procedures, protocols) do we need to have in place to manage the outcomes of those threats?

• What are possible alternative futures and how do we plan for these futures?

Southern New England American Planning Association

After the Storm: The Planner’s Role for the Next One

Thank You!

Don Poland Consulting

www.donaldpoland.com

Michael Dietz, Ph.D.CT NEMO

University of Connecticut

SNEAPA Conference Panel10/18/13

It’s Not Just About Temperature: Stormwater

Management in a Changing Climate

Precipitation Regime Changing

o Research shows higher annual totals, and more high-intensity events in the Northeast

Rhode Island-Spring 2010

Annual precipitation in CT

Source: Miller, et al. 2003. Precipitation in Connecticut. Report No. 38. Institute of Water Resources, University of Connecticut.

Sediment plume from Irene

Storm Frequency Analysis100 year flood? 500 year storm?

oProbability of occurrence of a given precipitation event• Based on magnitude and duration of a rainfall event e.g., “the 100-year, 24 hour storm is 8.1 inches”

Question

Uses of storm frequency valueso Engineering design of culverts, storm drainage• TP-40 values (1961)

Effects of Using Outdated TP-40 Values

o Due to changes in precipitation intensity and frequency, older return period estimates are inaccurate• This can lead to undersized stormwater

infrastructure

o Researchers at Cornell have updated these valueshttp://precip.eas.cornell.edu/

http://precip.eas.cornell.edu/

Storrs, CT Precip. Values (24 hr)

RI TP-40(in)

Updated values (in)

1 2.5 2.67

5 4.0 3.95

10 4.5 4.66

25 5.5 5.79

50 6.0 6.84

100 7.0 8.07

What Can You Do Now?

o Keep track of problem areas

o Digitize if possible

o Make sure that new infrastructure is sized properly

o Use Low Impact Development where possible

LID tools

Bioretention/rain gardens

Permeable pavements

Vegetated roofs

THANKS!

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

POST-DISASTER PLANNING

IN MILFORD, CT

After the Storm:THE PLANNER’S ROLE FOR THE NEXT ONE

Emmeline Harrigan, AICP, CFM Assistant City PlannerFloodplain ManagerMilford, CT

New Haven

Year-Round Flooding Potential:Fall Hurricanes

Winter Nor’eastersSpring Storms/Up stream Melt

Summer Thunderstorms & Flash Floods

MILFORD FLOOD FACTS

4,000 Flood zone properties

2,943 flood insurance policies in Milford

$2,935,266 premiums

$631,836,200 insurance in force

2,596 claims paid since 1978

$62,151,650 in closed paid losses

510 Repetitive Loss Properties

42 Severe Repetitive Loss Properties

Storm Irene – August 28, 2011

540+ Structures Damaged

50 Substantially Damaged

$23M in insurance claims

Storm Sandy – October 29, 2012

1,000 Structures Damaged – from basement heating systems to full structural collapse

200+ Substantially Damaged

Total $$ damages still unknown

Long Term Recovery

From July 2012 to October 2013:

•New construction: 26

•IRENE repair (elevate): 2

•SANDY new: 3

•SANDY repair (elevate): 26

•Residential alteration (elevate): 1

Summary:

New construction is 29;

Elevate is 29

Only 25% of substantially damaged structures

Step 1: Hazard Mitigation Planning

•Required if Community applies for any Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds

•Every 5 years

•Milford’s “Update” increased from 30 pages to 144 pages with 100 pages of Appendices

•Extensive new FEMA guidelines for vulnerability assessments and potential property loss analysis

•Start early – approx. 2.5 years including public outreach and state and FEMA Region I review time

• HIRE A CONSULTANT!

Vulnerability and Repetitive Loss

Identify Areas and Neighborhoods

Identify if Public

InfrastructureProjects Play a

Role

Step 2: Be Prepared to Target Funding

Elevations (some reconstruction allowed): Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (FEMA) Severe Repetitive Loss (FEMA) Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary of Interior/Historic Preservation Funds

Acquisitions (with an established local policy): Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (FEMA) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS)

Public Mitigation Projects (culverts, drainage, etc.) Hazard Mitigation Grants (FEMA) US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)

Coastal Resiliency – Planning for the Future

Re-investment, Retreat or a Combination?

Re-investment : Elevate & Reconstruct

Facts:Size: 480 SFAppraised Value:$155-160 KElevation Cost:

$65-70 KSite Grade: 3.5Tax Revenue:$2,800New FFE: 12+

Milford Point/Cedar Beach

New Neighborhoods/Different Quality of Life

Demographic shifts due to increased costs

Urban aesthetic – no more quaint beach cottages

Increased height= limited access/ability to age in place

Check height limits with local FD.

Focused Retreat/Open Space Purchases

“Houses in the Swamp” Beneficial Natural Function/More Flood Storage Protecting Tidal Marshlands and Habitat Lessen Infrastructure Expansion Burden Prevent Future Jurisdiction/Ownership Issues

SEA LEVEL RISE

Planning a Combined or Phased Approach

Understand Long Term Municipal Costs

Understand Political Dynamic

Engage discussion about open space and ecology protection

Hire a Third party facilitator

SNEAPA - After the Storm: The Planner’s Role for the Next One

Design of Shoreline Protection and Waterfront Structures

Azure Dee Sleicher, P.E.Ocean and Coastal Consultants, Inc.Trumbull, CTwww.ocean-coastal.com

October 201345

Discussion Topics:

Design criteria and best practices for waterfront structures

Role of regulatory agencies in facilitating best practices

October 201346

Residential PropertyGreenwich, CT

October 2013 47

After Sandy

• New home sufficiently elevated per FEMA FIRM map – sustained little to no damage.

• Scour and undermining of concrete seawall

• Timber pier destroyed


October 2013 48

Apparent seawall structure deficiencies:• Lack of footing • No drainage allowances• No steel reinforcement


October 2013 49

Apparent pier structure deficiencies:• Overall lack of initial design criteria• Deck elevation too low • All timber elements• Undersized hardware• Piles not embedded deep enough


October 2013 50

Seawall design improvements:•Design for "100-year" storm wave loads•Foundation below expected depth of scour or pinned to rock•Incorporated weep holes and crushed stone behind wall for drainage


October 2013 51


October 2013 52

Pier design improvements•Design for "100-year" storm wave loads & uplift•Increased top of deck elevation•Steel piles and framing•Grated decking to reduce wave pressures


October 2013 53

Yacht Club PropertyDarien, CT

October 2013 54

After Irene


October 2013 55

After Reconstruction


October 2013 56

After Sandy

Beach Club PropertyRye, NY

October 2013 57

After Sandy


October 2013 58


October 2013 59

Role of Regulatory Agencies for Future Storm Resiliency

October 2013 60

• General Permits and Emergency Authorizations

• In-kind/in-place replacement of damaged shoreline protection structures

• Minimal/no reporting or after-the-fact permitting

• Allowed owners to quickly rebuild

BUT…


October 2013 61

Was this the best idea?

•No engineering/future design criteria required

•No increase in seawall height/protection allowed

Will these structures just fail again during the next Sandy event?


October 2013 62

Take away message… •We need to urge regulators to require waterfront structures to be designed by professionals to meet engineering and material standards as well as account for sea level rise and effects of climate change.•There is a lot of guidance available for development of wave criteria, loads and design of waterfront structures but very few agencies require certification as part of the permitting process.

Real Estate

SNEAPA 2013 Friday f1 10_30_after the storm