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

1. Learning from St. Bernard Parish
SNEAPA - After the Storm: The Planner’s Role
for the Next One
Donald J. Poland, AICP
Don Poland Consulting
www.donaldpoland.com

2. After the Storm: St. Bernard Parish
Outside the Levee Wall

3. After the Storm: St. Bernard Parish

4. After the Storm: St. Bernard Parish

5. After the Storm: St. Bernard Parish

6. After the Storm: St. Bernard Parish

7. After the Storm: St. Bernard Parish

8. After the Storm: St. Bernard Parish

9. After the Storm: St. Bernard Parish

10. After the Storm: St. Bernard Parish

11. 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?

12. After the Storm: St. Bernard Parish

13. After the Storm: St. Bernard Parish
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?

14. After the Storm: St. Bernard Parish
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?

15. 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

16. It’s Not Just About
Temperature: Stormwater
Management in a Changing
Climate
Michael Dietz, Ph.D.
CT NEMO
University of Connecticut
SNEAPA Conference Panel
10/18/13

17. Precipitation Regime
Changing
o Research shows higher annual totals, and more highintensity events in the Northeast
Rhode Island-Spring 2010

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

19. Sediment plume from Irene

20. Storm Frequency Analysis
100 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”

21. Question

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

23. Effects of Using Outdated TP40 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 values
http://precip.eas.cornell.edu/

24. 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

25. 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

26. LID tools
Bioretention/rain gardens
Permeable pavements
Vegetated roofs

27. THANKS!
Michael.dietz@uconn.edu

28. After the Storm:
THE PLANNER’S ROLE FOR THE NEXT ONE
POST-DISASTER PLANNING
IN MILFORD, CT
Emmeline Harrigan, AICP, CFM
Assistant City Planner
Floodplain Manager
Milford, CT

29. Year-Round Flooding Potential:
Fall Hurricanes
Winter Nor’easters
Spring Storms/Up stream Melt
Summer Thunderstorms &
Flash Floods
New Haven

30. 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

31. Storm Irene – August 28, 2011
540+
Structures
Damaged
50
Substantially
Damaged
$23M in
insurance
claims

32. Storm Sandy – October 29, 2012
1,000 Structures
Damaged – from
basement heating
systems to full
structural collapse
200+
Substantially
Damaged
Total $$ damages
still unknown

33. 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

34. 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!

35. Vulnerability and Repetitive Loss
Identify
Areas and
Neighborhoods
Identify if
Public
Infrastructure
Projects Play a
Role

36. 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)

37. Coastal Resiliency – Planning for the Future
Re-investment, Retreat or a Combination?

38. Re-investment : Elevate & Reconstruct
Facts:
Size: 480 SF
Appraised Value:
$155-160 K
Elevation Cost:
$65-70 K
Site Grade: 3.5
Tax Revenue:
$2,800
New FFE: 12+

39. Milford Point/Cedar Beach

40. 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.

41. 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

42. SEA LEVEL RISE

43. 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

44. 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, CT
www.ocean-coastal.com
45
October 2013

45. Discussion Topics:
Design criteria and best
practices for waterfront
structures
Role of regulatory agencies
in facilitating best practices
46
October 2013

46. Residential Property
Greenwich, CT
After Sandy
• New home sufficiently
elevated per FEMA
FIRM map – sustained
little to no damage.
• Scour and
undermining of
concrete seawall
• Timber pier destroyed
47
October 2013

47. Residential Property
Greenwich, CT
Apparent seawall structure deficiencies:
• Lack of footing
• No drainage allowances
• No steel reinforcement
48
October 2013

48. Residential Property
Greenwich, CT
Apparent pier structure deficiencies:
• Overall lack of initial design criteria
• Deck elevation too low
• All timber elements
• Undersized hardware
• Piles not embedded deep enough
49
October 2013

49. Residential Property
Greenwich, CT
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
50
October 2013

50. Residential Property
Greenwich, CT
51
October 2013

51. Residential Property
Greenwich, CT
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
52
October 2013

52. Residential Property
Greenwich, CT
53
October 2013

53. Yacht Club Property
Darien, CT
After Irene
54
October 2013

54. Yacht Club Property
Darien, CT
After Reconstruction
55
October 2013

55. Yacht Club Property
Darien, CT
After Sandy
56
October 2013

56. Beach Club Property
Rye, NY
After Sandy
57
October 2013

57. Beach Club Property
Rye, NY
58
October 2013

58. Beach Club Property
Rye, NY
59
October 2013

59. Role of Regulatory Agencies for Future Storm Resiliency
• 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…
60
October 2013

60. Role of Regulatory Agencies for Future Storm Resiliency
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?
61
October 2013

61. Role of Regulatory Agencies for Future Storm Resiliency
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.
62
October 2013