upper ohio-shade nonstructural stakeholder meetings · certified floodplain manager; licensed...
TRANSCRIPT
September 2016
UPPER OHIO-SHADE NONSTRUCTURAL STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS
FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT
USACE Huntington District USACE Nonstructural Flood Proofing Committee Federal Emergency Management Agency Region III Mid-Ohio Valley Regional Council Ohio Silver Jackets
UPPER OHIO-SHADE STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS FOR FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT
Parkersburg, Wood County, West Virginia; September 14, 2016
Ripley, Jackson County, West Virginia; September 15, 2016
Local Stakeholder Meetings; 2:00PM-3:30PM
Public Workshops / Open House; 4:00PM-7:00PM
Stakeholder meetings conducted by the Ohio Silver Jackets team including, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Huntington District, USACE National Flood Proofing Committee (NFPC), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Region III, and Mid-Ohio Valley Regional Council (MOVRC) will provide an overview of various agency programs and authorities and individual risk reduction techniques. These techniques include elevation, wet flood proofing, dry flood proofing, acquisition, relocation, and individual berms and floodwalls. These meetings will also allow for the needs of the Upper Ohio-Shade Watershed to be expressed by local stakeholders in order to identify specific needs and potential opportunities within the watershed.
Topic Time (Minutes) Presenter 1. Silver Jackets Program 15 USACE Huntington 2. USACE Programs and Authorities 15 USACE Huntington 3. Flood Risk and Nonstructural Measures 15 USACE NFPC 4. FEMA Programs and Missions 15 FEMA 5. Overview of MOVRC 15 MOVRC 6. Open Discussion with Q&A 15 All 7. Public Workshop / Open House 180 All
PRESENTER BIOGRAPHIES STEPHEN O’LEARY, AIA, CFM US Army Corps of Engineers, Huntington District
Mr. O’Leary serves as an Architect/Planner and Project Manager with the Huntington District USACE. Mr. O'Leary's duties include USACE Nonstructural Flood Risk Management SME; USACE Nonstructural Flood Proofing Committee Member; West Virginia Silver Jackets Lead, project manager/team member on the Levee Safety Policy and Procedures Team (LSPPT), developing the new Levee Safety Program Engineering Circular (EC 1110-2-6072); Course owner for the USACE Planning Associates FRM course; Served 15 years in the Planning Branch and 10 years in Engineering and Construction Division as the District's Senior Architect. The majority of his USACE Career has focused on flood risk management studies/reports, implementation of FRM projects and mitigation of flood prone structures. Certified Floodplain Manager; Licensed Architect. JOANN COMBS, CFM, MPM US Army Corps of Engineers, Huntington District Ms. Combs serves as an Economist and Project Manager with the Huntington District USACE. Ms. Combs’ duties include performing economic analysis on USACE studies; reviewing/ updating levee screening consequences; Ohio and West Virginia Silver Jackets team Co-Lead and LRH representative on the Kentucky Silver Jackets team; provide technical assistance on Floodplain Management Services requests; works with GIS and HAZUS programs; outreach for various USACE programs and authorities including Floodplain Management services, Planning Assistance to States, and Continuing Authorities Program; serves on the Special Emphasis Committee. Ms. Combs has served 8 years with the Huntington District USACE; 4 years in Project Management and 4 years in Planning Branch. Certified Floodplain Manager; Masters in Project Management. ASHLEY STEPHENS, CFM US Army Corps of Engineers, Huntington District Ms. Stephens serves as a Community Planner with the Huntington District USACE. Ms. Stephens’ duties include Ohio Silver Jackets Co-Lead, Lead Planner on Continuing Authorities Program projects, and preparing documentation for assessment of environmental impacts in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. Ms. Stephens has served 7 years in the Planning Branch and is a Certified Floodplain Manager. Ms. Stephens obtained her Masters of Science in Geography.
MATTHEW MCCULLOUGH Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region III Matt McCullough is a Community Planner with FEMA Region III; where he has worked in Mitigation’s Risk Analysis Branch since 2010. He has technically assisted and approved multiple Local and State Hazard Mitigation Plan’s throughout Region III. He gained his first hazard mitigation planning field experience during the Severe Storms, Flooding, Landslides and Mudslides of WV-DR 1696. He has also assisted in the RiskMAP process during Discovery and Action Collection. FRED RADER Community Development Director, Mid-Ohio Valley Regional Council Fred has been with the Mid-Ohio Valley Regional Council since 1983 and has been Community Development Director for over twenty years. He has a Bachelor’s Degree (1981) and a Master’s Degree (1982) from Marshall University in Huntington, WV.
1
US Army Corps of Engineers
BUILDING STRONG®
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Silver Jackets Program
Presented By:JoAnn Combs, CFM, MPMAshley Stephens, CFM
BUILDING STRONG®
Silver Jackets Program Program Description
► Collaborative interagency approach to flood risk management and hazard mitigation
Program Objectives► Integrate hazard planning and mitigation with emergency
response and recovery
► Leverage resources and information among state and federal agencies
► Define interagency communication and roles
► Improve public outreach in risk management
Example Activities► HAZUS Analysis
► Flood mapping update
► Nonstructural Workshops
► Multimedia Products
2
2
BUILDING STRONG®
Program Overview State-led Interagency approach to sharing knowledge, leveraging
resources, and collaboratively reducing flood risk► Develop cohesive solutions for effectively managing the floodplain
► Focus hazard planning and mitigation on state priorities
► Enhance response and recovery efforts following natural disasters
► Follow life-cycle risk management
► Watershed perspectives
Various Federal, State, and local Agency Involvement (Examples)► EMA, DNR, USGS, NWS/NOAA, FEMA, NRCS, Regional Planning Councils,
Local Conservancy Districts, Many Others
Combines available agency resources► Funding
► Programs
► Technical expertise
Huntington District is the Lead for Ohio and
West Virginia► Pittsburgh and Baltimore Districts provide
support to West Virginia
Website: http://silverjackets.nfrmp.us/
3
BUILDING STRONG®
Types of Efforts / Funding
USACE participation funded through its National Flood Risk Management Program
►Nonstructural • Flood Warning System• Floodplain Mapping• Flood Emergency Preparedness Plans• Evacuation Plans
►Levee Safety Risk Communication• Workshops with communities explaining risk with local
USACE levees• Meetings with local officials to discuss levee risk
4
3
BUILDING STRONG®
Silver Jackets Ohio Program
Ohio was the first state to establish a Silver Jackets team by signing a charter in 2005
Top Three Priorities ► Support the State Hazard Mitigation
Plan objectives and updates► Flood Risk Awareness Efforts► Implementation of projects funded
through the Silver Jackets initiative
Program Status► Program has supported seven
interagency projects within Ohio since 2011 – providing over $550K in Federal funds and leveraging over $700K in in-kind contributions
BUILDING STRONG®
Silver Jackets West Virginia Program
West Virginia Silver Jackets team was established by signing a charter in 2013
Key Goals► Assist in identifying actions to reduce
the threat, vulnerability, and consequences of flooding
► Foster leveraging of available resources and information among agencies
► Develop regional flood risk reduction strategies
Program Status► Program has supported two interagency
projects within West Virginia since 2014 – providing $230K in Federal funds and leveraging over $160K in in-kind contributions
4
BUILDING STRONG®
Example Completed Silver Jackets Interagency
Projects
7
BUILDING STRONG®
Flood Inundation Warning System Ohio and Lower Muskingum Rivers, City of Marietta, and Washington and Morgan Counties
Flood Inundation Warning System► Reduces flood risk by providing
flood inundation maps ► Allows for early flood warning ► Accurately predict where flooding
will occur Partners
► U.S. Geological Survey (Project Lead)
► National Weather Service► U.S. Army Corps of Engineers► Muskingum Watershed
Conservancy District► Ohio Department of Natural
Resources► Ohio Emergency Management
Agency► Housing and Urban Development► City of Marietta► Washington and Morgan County
Commissioners► Local flood mitigation committee► RFG Associates, Inc.
8
5
BUILDING STRONG®
NWS Stage Predictions Internet Application
USGS Streamgage Modeling and Mapping
Components of a Flood Warning System
9
BUILDING STRONG®
Flood Inundation Warning System Ohio and Lower Muskingum Rivers Continued
Objectives► Improve public information and
early earning systems
► Support efforts to enhance the early flood warning system along the Muskingum River
► Support efforts to implement an early flood warning system along Duck Creek
► Improve flooding emergency response systems
Outcomes► Predict the date and time for the
crest of the flood and generate Flood Inundation Mapping
► Input data into new Washington County ALERT System
10
6
BUILDING STRONG®
NWS Flood Inundation Mapping Water Alert http://maps.waterdata.usgs.gov/mapper/wateral
ert/
USGS Report
http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2014/5195/
USGS Flood Inundation Mapping
http://wimcloud.usgs.gov/apps/FIM/FloodInundationMapper.html
Additional Information
11
http://water.weather.gov/ahps2/index.php
BUILDING STRONG®
Flood of 1913 – Ohio Silver Jackets Public Awareness Campaign
Year-long flood awareness campaign
100th anniversary of the Great Ohio Flood
Campaign Focus ►Flood Safety
►Preparedness
►Mitigation
12
7
BUILDING STRONG®
Flood of 1913 Team Activities Silver Jackets participation and
press event at OSU Weather Symposium
Presented at ASFPM Conference Articles in Silver Jackets Newsletter Twitter, Facebook, and business
cards with QR codes Website Flood awareness brochurehttp://ema.ohio.gov/Documents/SilverJackets/Silver%20Jackets%201913%20Flood%20brochure.pdf
Press releases by multiple agencies 1913 Flood Miami Conservancy
District (MCD) Facebook page U.S. Geologic Survey 1913 Flood
videoMCD Facebook Page
13
BUILDING STRONG®
HAZUS Level 1 Analysis In 2008, Silver Jackets
conducted the analysis in support of the Statewide Hazard Mitigation Plan
Uses the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s HAZUS program and methodology to calculate damages to structures in the Special Flood Hazard Area
Analysis was conducted on 47 counties
Level 3 Floodplain
specific data
Level 2 Combination of local
and default flood hazard, building, and
damage data
Level 1 Default flood hazard, inventory,
and damage information
14
8
BUILDING STRONG®
Example CurrentSilver Jackets Interagency
Projects
15
BUILDING STRONG®
HAZUS Level 2 Analysis FEMA’s HAZUS program and
methodology to calculate damages to structures in the Special Flood Hazard Area
Level 2 analysis for 25 counties ► Flood analysis for the 25- and
100-year frequency based on a four square mile drainage area
► Created depth grids
► User Defined Facilities (UDF)• Ohio Emergency
Management Agency worked with counties to gather tax parcel information required for UDF process
Level 3 Floodplain
specific data
Level 2 Combination of local
and default flood hazard, building, and
damage data
Level 1 Default flood hazard, inventory,
and damage information
16
9
BUILDING STRONG®
Loss Avoidance Study The study will assess the
performance of implemented mitigation projects in Findlay and Ottawa
Ohio Emergency Management Agency (Partner) has completed Phase 1 Initial Project Selection and has collected required data components
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Buffalo District is currently working on► Phase 2 – Physical Parameter
Analysis
► Phase 3 – Loss Estimation Analysis
17
BUILDING STRONG®
Marion County Floodplain Mapping
Conducting a flood study along the Scioto River through Marion County as current maps are unverified
Completed ► Bridge/Culvert Information – provided by Ohio Department of
Transportation and Marion County
► Generated inundation limits and floodway profile
► Incorporated USGS model of La Rue into study
► Ohio Emergency Management Agency worked with Marion County Commissioners and the key Villages of La Rue, Prospect, and Green Camp to sign a resolution to adopt the results of this study as best available data until a physical map revision is completed by FEMA
18
10
BUILDING STRONG®
Mahoning County Nonstructural Flood Risk Management Meeting
The Mahoning River is a tributary to Beaver River which runs into the Upper Ohio River
Background► Chronic Flooding, siltation, and standing
flood risks at multiple sites in Poland Township located in Mahoning County, Ohio
Purpose ► Present Federal and state programs that
may be of assistance to Mahoning County► Create brochure and media product
Meeting held August 16, 2016 in Lowellville, Ohio► Led by Pittsburgh District ► Ohio EMA, ODNR, NWS, and other
partners presented
Product ► Create video from digitally recorded
meeting to share with other Ohio municipalities that experience similar flood risks
Mahoning County Meeting
19
BUILDING STRONG®
Multimedia Outreach Project will develop videos for distribution to
bring flood risk awareness to the general public, as well as, local officials regarding flood risk management, and the positive impacts of nonstructural mitigation
Ohio Silver Jackets team is currently developing storyboards for videos
Once completed videos will be distributed and placed on partner websites, YouTube, and social media
20
11
BUILDING STRONG®
WV Levee Outreach
West Virginia and FEMA have proposed an effort to certify all levees within the State► This project focuses on levees
inspected by the Corps and have available inspection reports
Several workshops will be held across the state to:► Inform local stakeholders about their
levee(s)
► Promote flood risk management and awareness
► Educate stakeholders on each agencies various programs and authorities
► Identify future Silver Jackets opportunities
21
BUILDING STRONG®
Upper Ohio-Shade Regional Nonstructural Workshop
FEMA’s Discovery process not deployed for this watershed
Nonstructural workshops will be held in Ohio and West Virginia to achieve flood risk reduction and awareness
► Overview of flood risk
► Benefits of proper floodplain management
► Education about effective nonstructural measures
► Mitigation
Upper Ohio-Shade Watershed
Upcoming Ohio WorkshopsSeptember 12, 2016Meigs County Public Library, Pomeroy, Ohio Local Stakeholder Presentations: 2:00pm to 3:30pmPublic Workshop Session: 4:00pm to 7:00pm
September 13, 2016Marietta Public Library, Marietta, OhioLocal Stakeholder Presentations: 2:00pm to 3:30pmPublic Workshop Session: 4:00pm to 7:00pm
22
12
BUILDING STRONG®
USACE Silver Jackets Contact Information
Lead District for Ohio
HUNTINGTON DISTRICT
Ashley Stephens
JoAnn Combs
Lead District for West Virginia
HUNTINGTON DISTRICT
Steve O’Leary
Joe Trimboli
23
USACE Silver Jackets Website:http://silverjackets.nfrmp.us/
1
US Army Corps of Engineers
BUILDING STRONG®
USACE Programs and Authorities
Presented by:JoAnn Combs, CFM, MPMAshley Stephens, CFM
September 2016
BUILDING STRONG®
USACE Missions Navigation
Flood Risk Management
Ecosystem Restoration
Regulatory
Recreation
Emergency Management
International and Interagency Support
Water Supply
2
2
BUILDING STRONG®
Getting Started Authorization – Permission to undertake a study
or project► Water Resource Development Act (WRDA) ► Study Resolution► Special Authorizations
Appropriation – Funding to conduct an authorized study or project► President’s Annual Budget► Energy & Water Development Appropriations Act► Continuing Resolution Act (CRA)► Work Plans
3
BUILDING STRONG®
Feasibility
24 – 36 months
Preconstruction, Engineering &
Design
12 – 24 months
Construction
Varies with Complexity
Operation & Maintenance by
Sponsor
Life of Project
Civil Works Timeline
4
3
BUILDING STRONG®
What will be accomplished?• Execute Feasibility Cost Share Agreement (FCSA)• Develop Project Management Plan (PMP)• Employ six step planning process • Obtain public input for project formulation• Formulate and evaluate alternative measures• Perform preliminary design• Conduct environmental analyses• Identify and recommend tentatively selected plan (TSP)• Determine necessary real estate acquisitions and utility relocations• Develop baseline cost estimate and detailed schedule• Conduct external peer review• Produce a Feasibility Report
Cost• Varies with project complexity (Up to $3M without waiver)• 50% Federal, 50% sponsor cost share• Entire non-Federal share can be in-kind services
Feasibility Phase (24-36 months)
5
BUILDING STRONG®
SMART Feasibility Study Process
6
SpecificMeasurableAttainableRisk-InformedTimely
4
BUILDING STRONG®
Pre-Construction, Engineering, and Design (12-24 months)
What will be accomplished?• Execute Design Agreement• Complete detailed studies and designs needed for plans and
specifications• Prepare plans and specifications for the first construction contract• Produce Design Documentation Report (DDR)• Develop Project Partnership Agreement (PPA)
Cost• Varies with project complexity• Non-Federal cost share is determined by program and project
purpose• Entire non-Federal share can be in-kind services
7
BUILDING STRONG®
Construction (Varies)
What will be accomplished?• Execute Project Partnership Agreement (PPA)• Acquire real estate and complete relocations (if applicable)• Initiate and complete first construction contract• Continue design and preparation of plans and specifications for
subsequent contracts• Complete all construction activities• Develop Operations & Maintenance manual
Cost• Varies with project complexity• Non-Federal cost share is determined by program and project
purpose
8
5
BUILDING STRONG®
Operation and Maintenance (Life of Project)
9
What will be accomplished?• Operate and maintain newly constructed project
including any repair, rehabilitation, or replacement
Cost• Varies with project complexity• 100% non-Federal
BUILDING STRONG®
Other Programs and Authorities
10
6
BUILDING STRONG®
Continuing Authorities Program (CAP)Authorities Section 14, 1946 FCA, as amended
► Emergency streambank protection
Section 107, 1960 Rivers & Harbors Act, as amended► Small navigation projects
Section 205, 1948 FCA, as amended► Flood damage reduction
Section 206, WRDA 1996, as amended► Aquatic ecosystem restoration
Section 208, 1954 FCA, as amended► Snagging and clearing for flood control
Section 1135, WRDA 1986, as amended► Ecosystem restoration at Federal projects
Cost Share Study Phase
► Initial $100K full Federal
► 50% / 50% after initial $100K
Construction Phase► 65% Federal, 35% Sponsor
Section 14 Examples
11
Section 206 Examples
Section 205 Example
BUILDING STRONG®
Planning Assistance to States (PAS) andFloodplain Management Services (FPMS)
Planning Assistance to States (PAS –Section 22)► Technical assistance to support state
comprehensive water and related land resource development plans
► Studies are planning level of detail and do not include detailed design for project construction
► Cost Share (50% Federal, 50% Sponsor)
Floodplain Management Services (FPMS)► Information, technical planning assistance,
and guidance in identifying the magnitude and extent of flood hazards and planning appropriate use of the floodplains
► Cost Share (100% Federal)
12
PAS Example
FPMS Example
7
BUILDING STRONG®
Section 729 Watershed Planning
Watershed planning is a collaborative process of developing a holistic plan for addressing watershed needs► Flood risk reduction
► Aquatic ecosystem restoration
► Stormwater management solutions
► Sedimentation and water quality improvements
► Clean water and sanitary sewer (environmental infrastructure)
► Recreation opportunities
► Emergency preparedness plans
Example Section 729 ProjectMuskingum Basin and Nimishillen Creek
13
BUILDING STRONG®
Section 729 Watershed Planning
Nimishillen Creek Watershed Final Watershed Assessment Great success thanks to our
engaged stakeholders
Resulted in a Watershed Management Plan for sustainability of the watershed
Some outcomes being implemented:► Installation of additional rain/stream
gages
► Hydrologic and hydraulic modeling update
► Consolidation of floodplain management duties
Muskingum River Basin
Final Watershed Assessment Initial stakeholder meetings in June 2016
Inventory problems, opportunities, and needs within the Basin► Continued focused outreach to local
stakeholders
► Form technical working and advisory groups
Establish baseline condition
Develop and prioritize strategies for addressing needs throughout the Basin
14
8
BUILDING STRONG®
WV Environmental Infrastructure
Section 340 – Southern WV Section 571 – Central WV
► Huntington District manages both of these programs in WV
Design and/or construction assistance to non-Federal interests for carrying out water-related environmental infrastructure and resource protection and development projects► Wastewater treatment and related
facilities► Combined sewer overflow► Water supply, storage, treatment and
related facilities► Surface water resource protection
and development
15
BUILDING STRONG®
USACE District Contact Information
16
BALTIMORE DISTRICT
HUNTINGTON DISTRICT
PITTSBURGH DISTRICT
Amy GuiseChief, Planning Division
(410) [email protected]
Rebecca Albert Acting Chief, Planning Branch
(304) [email protected]
Ryan FisherChief, Plan Formulation and Economics
Section(412) 395-7588
1
US Army Corps of Engineers
BUILDING STRONG®
Flood Risk, Nonstructural Measures, The National Flood Proofing Committee (NFPC)
Presented by:Stephen O’Leary, AIA, CFMUSACE Huntington District / NFPC
September 2016
BUILDING STRONG®
Flood Risk Risk = f [(Probability of Flooding) x (Consequences)]
(Probability of Flooding) is the frequency of flooding or how often does flooding occur in a particular location. Reduce the frequency of flooding and risk is reduced.
(Consequences) are the potential damages and life loss associated with flooding. The structures (critical, residential, commercial, public, and industrial), land use (agricultural, urban, public) , and infrastructure (highways, roads, rail, utilities) make up the potentially damageable assets. Reduce the consequences of flooding and risk is reduced.
Note: If critical facilities become inoperative during a flood event the area of impact extends beyond the area of flooding (i.e. electrical service, communications, water and wastewater, etc).
2
2
BUILDING STRONG®
Nonstructural Flood Risk Management Definition
Nonstructural flood risk management can be categorized as a set of physical or nonphysical measures utilized for mitigating loss of life as well as existing and future flood damages.
The physical measures adapt to the natural characteristics of the floodplain without adversely affecting or changing those natural flood characteristics. These measures are generally compliant with the NFIP and cause no adverse affects to the floodplain, flood stages, velocities, or the environment.
Because of their ability to adapt to flood risk, these measures may also be referred to as Flood Risk Adaptive Measures and can be incorporated into existing or new structures to mitigate for potential future flood damages and life loss.
3
BUILDING STRONG®
Nonstructural Flood Risk Adaptive Measures
The most common physical FRAM measures implemented for flood damage and life loss reduction are:
Acquisition Relocation Elevation
Dry Flood Proofing Wet Flood Proofing Basement Removal
Nonphysical measures can be considered separately or as a combination of floodplain management and planning functions. Representative nonphysical measures are:
Floodplain Mapping Land Use Flood Insurance
Evacuation Plans Flood Warning Zoning
Operational Changes Floodplain Management Plans
4
3
BUILDING STRONG®
Acquisition and Demolition
Acquire the structure(s) as well as the land
Demolish structure(s) or sell and remove
5
BUILDING STRONG®
Elevation
Elevation is one of the most common and effective methods used to prevent flooding of living space
Recommend design and construction by reputable/qualified professionals and contractors
Not permitted in regulatory floodway
Acceptable in A Zones
6
4
BUILDING STRONG®
Dry Floodproofing
• Flood depths of 3 feet or less
• Structurally sound buildings
• New construction
• Retrofitting existing buildings
• No basement or crawl space
7
BUILDING STRONG®
Wet Floodproofing
City of Sacramento Fire Station 43 (Natomas, CA)
Town Hall (Prestonsburg, KY)Church (Grundy, VA)
8
5
BUILDING STRONG®
RelocationIndividual Relocations Redevelopment Site Relocation
9
BUILDING STRONG®
Berms, Walls, and Barriers
*Not FEMA Accredited
10
6
BUILDING STRONG®
Assessing the Situation Flood Characteristics
► Flood depth, Flood velocity, Flood duration, Rate of rise, Debris/Ice flows, Wave action, Floodway, Other
Site Characteristics► Location, Soil type, Topography, Site size,
Urban/Rural, Other
Building/Structure Characteristics► Type of construction, Foundation, Condition of the
building, Lower levels (Basement), Historical Significance, Other
Other Considerations► Building Occupancy, Building Codes, Zoning
Ordinances and Local Restrictions, Other Agencies (Local / State / Federal), Aesthetics, Public Heath/Safety/Welfare, Other
11
BUILDING STRONG®
Flood Damage Reduction Matrix
12
7
BUILDING STRONG®
USACE National Nonstructural Flood Proofing Committee (NFPC)
The National Nonstructural Flood Proofing Committee (NFPC) functions under the general direction of the Chief, Planning Community of Practice, Directorate of Civil Works, HQUSACE. The objectives of the NFPC are to:
Promote the development and use of all nonstructural flood risk reduction measures.
Risk expertise on all aspects of nonstructural flood risk reduction and associated opportunities.
Disseminate nonstructural flood reduction information.
Partner with Planning Centers of Expertise in all aspects of nonstructural flood risk reduction and associated opportunities.
Provide leadership in all aspects of floodplain management.
http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/ProjectPlanning/nfpc.aspx
14
BUILDING STRONG®
NFPC Activities
• Support for Field Assessments, Plan Formulation, and Project Review
• Nonstructural and Floodplain Management Training
• Publications of Nonstructural Mitigation Measures
• Collaboration with ASFPM and FM Approvals on National Flood
Barrier Testing and Certification Program
• Collaboration with FEMA on Technical Bulletin Revisions
• NFPC Web Site
• Inventory of USACE Nonstructural Flood Risk Management Activities
• nServo – Nonstructural mitigation costing tool
16
8
BUILDING STRONG®
Questions?
15
1
USACE Upper-Ohio ShadeWatershed WorkshopFEMA REGION IIISeptember 14-15th
1
Overview
▸ Basics of Discovery
▸ Goal of Data Development
▸ Planning for Risk
▸ Actionable Outcomes
2
2
Purpose of Discovery:Information Sharing
▸ Share your concerns about flood risk
▸ Share any additional flood data you may have• Areas of recent or proposed development near floodplains or areas of
historical flooding
• Areas of historical flooding or flooding not shown on map
• Possible areas of mitigation interest
• Risk communication needs
▸ Share your thoughts on which FEMA flood risk products or mitigation projects you would like in your community
3
Discovery: Engagement & Collaboration
▸ Cooperating Technical Partnership
▸ GIS capabilities
▸ Public/private partnerships
▸ Education and outreach• Strategic communication plan
development
• Information materials development and dissemination
• Media relations
• Training
• Website and social media links
Community Engagement
Assessment
Building Relationships
Communication
3
4
Discovery: Data Collection and Collaboration
▸ Process of data mining, collection, and analysis
▸ Investigating current and potential flood risk, and existing mitigation projects, within a watershed
▸ Data gathered and analyzed before meeting includes:
• Boundaries: Watershed and Jurisdiction• CRS Participation• Comprehensive Plan Summary• Dams• Declared Disasters• Effective Floodplains: Special Flood
Hazard Areas• Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grants• Identified Mitigation Actions• Individual Assistance• Letters of Map Change
• Levee Inventory• Mitigation Plan Status and Summary• NFIP Participation• Population• Public Assistance• Stream Data• Stream Gages • Study Needs: FEMA• Topography• Total Exposure in Floodplain• Transportation: Roads and Railroads
5
Information We Need from You
▸ Completed Discovery data questionnaire, with GIS contact
▸ Areas of Concern• Areas of recent or planned development
• Areas of high growth or other significant land changes
▸ Areas of historical flooding and other flood risks
▸ Mitigation projects that address flood risks
▸ Your ideas about other ways to increase your community’s resilience to flooding
4
6
Reducing Risk in Communities
7
Risk Communication
▸ Federal/State/Local goals:• To reduce risk to life and property and ensure safer, sustainable
communities
• To effectively communicate risk and increase public awareness, leading citizens to make informed decisions regarding their risk
• To have an open dialogue throughout the Discovery process
▸ Key factors contributing to successful achievement of these goals:• Whole Community engagement and exchange of flood risk information
• Effective collaboration through partnerships
• Strategic communication plan development
• Local understanding and implementation of mitigation action and strategies
5
8
What Are We Building Towards?
RESILIENCY
9
What is Resilience?
(rəˈzilyəns/)noun1. The ability of a substance or
object to spring back into shape; elasticity.
2. The capacity to recover quickly from difficulties; toughness.
A resilient community:
▸ Prepares for, withstands, and rapidly recovers from disruptions
▸ Adapts to changing conditions and environments
▸ Withstands the economic and social impacts of hazards
▸ Protects what is important to the community
6
10
What is the Path to Resilience?
Know Your Risk
▸ Understand the hazard risk equation
▸ Communicate risk to property owners and the general public
▸ Understand the stresses risks can put on: • Residents
• Community
• Infrastructure
• Economy
Reduce Your Risk
▸ Data, tools, and resources
▸ State Mitigation Plan
▸ Other planning efforts
▸ Disaster declarations
▸ Online resources
▸ Technical assistance
▸ Studies and reports
Reduce Your Risk
Insure Your Risk
Know Your Risk
11
Resilient and Sustainable Communities
▸ Sustainability• “Meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
• Traditional indicators of sustainability are social, economic, and environmental health
▸ Resilient and Sustainable Communities Take Action to Reduce Risk and Mitigate Hazards• By mitigating against the risks posed by natural
hazards, and reducing vulnerability to them
• Sustainable communities minimize exposure of people and property to natural disasters; sustainable communities are disaster-resilient communities
7
12
PlanningReducing Risk in Communities
13
Hazard Mitigation
Hazard Mitigation: Hazard mitigation is the effort to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters
▸ Occurs before, during, and after disasters and serves to break the cycle of damage and repair
▸ Long-term risk reduction
▸ Essential part of community resilience
8
14
Hazard Mitigation
Hazard Mitigation: Hazard mitigation is the effort to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters
▸ Occurs before, during, and after disasters and serves to break the cycle of damage and repair
▸ Long-term risk reduction
▸ Essential part of community resilience
15
Planning Cycle and Key Planning Factors
ENGAGE
ENHANCE
INTEGRATE
IMPLEMENT
Ensure all participants
adopt the plan
Start conducting
annual meetings
and tracking actionsStart the
process to secure
funding for the plan update
Begin planning process, determine the planning lead
(or consultant) and convene planning
team
Finalize risk and vulnerability
assessment, develop mitigation
strategies, and finish writing the
plan
9
16
Building a Mitigation Planning Routine
Incorporation of enhancements into the day-to-day responsibilities
▸ How can the planning components become a part of the normal operating functions of a community?
▸ Make risk reduction part of the normal functions of the community
17
Connecting Planning and Mitigation
▸ Plan integration is a process where communities look critically at their existing planning framework and align hazard mitigation principles with other local planning mechanisms• Transportation planning
• Comprehensive planning
▸ This two-way exchange of information supports community-wide risk reduction, both before and after disasters occur
▸ Supports a holistic approach to building resiliency
10
18
Resiliency Opportunities in Planning
▸ Define risk and vulnerabilities
▸ Identify priorities that cross multiple interests
▸ Prioritize critical infrastructure
▸ Creative incentives to promote use of resilience measures
▸ Use a collaborative regional governance structure
▸ Public-Private Partnerships
▸ Encourage flexibility and adaptive management
▸ Consider a combination and blend of measures to customize solutions
19
Identifying and Advancing Action
Reducing Risk in Communities
11
20
What is a Hazard Mitigation Action?
▸ Any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to human life and property from hazards
▸ Communities sustain action by building the capacity, knowledge, and understanding necessary to successfully advance action
21
Why Engage in Mitigation Planning and Action Advancement?
▸ Creates safer communities by reducing loss of life and damage to property and the environment
▸ Minimizes post-disaster disruption, allowing communities to recover more quickly
▸ Allows communities to respond and adapt to changing conditions
▸ Generates secondary economic, environmental, and public health benefits
▸ Empowers individuals to act as agents of change in their communities
▸ Lessens financial impacts on individuals, communities, and society as a whole
12
22
Implementing Action:Mitigation Grant Programs
▸ Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM)• Funds cost-effective, comprehensive mitigation activities that reduce
injuries, loss of life, and property damage
▸ Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA)• Provides funding to assist states and communities in implementing
measures to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of flood damage to buildings, manufactured homes, and other structures insured under the NFIP
▸ Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)• Available after a major disaster declaration – the amount of funding is
15% of the total federal assistance provided by FEMA for disaster recovery under the major disaster declaration
23
Resources
▸ FEMA: www.fema.gov
▸ Floodsmart, the official site of the NFIP: www.floodsmart.gov
▸ Map Service Center: https://msc.fema.gov/portal
▸ NFIP Reform: www.fema.gov/flood-insurance-reform
13
24
Contact Information
▸ FEMA Region III• Matt McCullough, FEMA Region III Community Planner
25
1
UPPER OHIO – SHADEWATERSHED MEETING
SEPTEMBER 2016
FRED RADER,COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
MID-OHIO VALLEY REGIONAL COUNCIL
www.movrc.org
WHAT IS MOVRC?
• ONE OF 11 REGIONAL COUNCILS COVERING ALL 55 COUNTIES IN WV
• MOVRC INCLUDES EIGHT COUNTIES AND 22 MUNICIPALITIES
• BOARD IS COMPRISED OF A COUNTY COMMISSIONER FROM EACH COUNTY, THE MAYOR OF
EACH CITY OR TOWN, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REPRESENTATIVES AND PRIVATE
SECTOR MEMBERS
• PROVIDE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS – SUCH AS
REGIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
2
WV REGIONAL COUNCILS
HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
• IDENTIFY RISKS FROM NATURAL HAZARDS
• ESTIMATE EXTENT OF RISK AND PRIORITIES FOR ACTION
• IDENTIFY MITIGATION MEASURES THAT WILL LESSEN HARM FROM FUTURE EVENTS
3
214
311
177
230
258
221
178
349
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Calhoun
Jackson
Pleasants
Ritchie
Roane
Tyler
Wirt
Wood
Total NCDC Events Recorded in the Mid-Ohio Valley 1950-September 2015
County Total Events Property Damage Average Yearly Property Damage
Calhoun 31 $3,319,029.83 $174,685.78
Jackson 42 $3,748,078.52 $197,267.29
Pleasants 19 $2,783,038.93 $146,475.73
Ritchie 27 $4,494,817.51 $236,569.34
Roane 39 $16,356,529.43 $860,869.97
Tyler 39 $4,076,290.44 $214,541.60
Wirt 16 $3,454,125.55 $181,796.08
Wood 32 $11,843,683.20 $623,351.75
Summary Statistics for Flooding by County (adjusted for inflation)
4
MITIGATION MEASURES
• ENHANCED FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCES AND CONSISTENT ENFORCEMENT ARE FIRST LEVEL
MITIGATION MEASURES – SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
• HISTORICALLY ACQUISITION AND DEMOLITION: HAPPY VALLEY, REEDY, CALHOUN COUNTY
• STATE HAS RECENTLY ADDED “COMPLIANT” RECONSTRUCTION AS AN ELIGIBLE ACTIVITY
CONCLUSION
• FLOODING IS A SIGNIFICANT RISK IN THE MID-OHIO VALLEY AND THIS WATERSHED
• SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PRACTICES REDUCE ADDING TO THE RISK
• MID-OHIO VALLEY REGIONAL COUNCIL IS HERE TO HELP WITH APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING
ASSISTANCE FOR RISK REDUCTION ACTIVITIES