FEMA Region III Hazard Mitigation Planning “Coffee Break” Webinars

Are you interested in learning more about what goes into a Hazard Mitigation Plan – or how to make it better? Welcome to Region III’s new one-hour “Coffee Break” webinars that focus on a specific planning topic and highlight some of the best practices the Region has seen in its six-state jurisdiction. Offered every other month, these interactive webinars allow planners and their partners – including emergency managers, floodplain managers, GIS technicians, government officials, and contractors – an opportunity to discuss trends and tools that help reduce risk in their communities. Interest in the webinars has been strong with over 128 people (some of which were planning teams) signed up to participate in the first Coffee Break in May. Continuing education credits are available for Certified Floodplain Managers. Click here to register for our September 28th Coffee Break. 

Upcoming Coffee Break Webinars:

• September 28, 2017: Effective Public Engagement
  
• November 20, 2017: Developing Effective FEMA Mitigation Planning Grants
  
• January 10, 2018: Developing Natural Hazard Mitigation Strategies

Interested in signing up or learning more? Please contact Community Planning Lead, Mari Radford at [email protected] or click here to register. 

West Virginia June 2016 Flooding: One Year Later

On June 23, 2016, a series of thunderstorms produced record-breaking rainfall throughout West Virginia. Rainfall accumulations of up to 10 inches fell over a 12-hour period in some areas, causing widespread flooding. This storm event and the subsequent flooding were among the most severe in the state’s history, with many creeks and rivers reaching their record- or near-record high water marks. Twenty-three people lost their lives, thousands of homes were destroyed, power outages were widespread, and critical public and private infrastructure was impacted. One year later, FEMA revisits the impacts of the “thousand-year flood” as well as the response and recovery efforts that followed.

In the wake of the severe storms, floods, landslides, and mudslides, which lasted through June 29, West Virginia Governor Earl Ray Tomblin declared a state of emergency in 44 of the state’s 55 counties, and President Barack Obama declared a major disaster declaration for 12 of those counties. Some 400 members of the West Virginia National Guard and other search and rescue teams deployed throughout the impacted communities. The American Red Cross opened 13 shelters, and FEMA coordinated with the state to open Disaster Recovery Centers (DRCs) in Clay, Greenbrier, Kanawha, Monroe, Nicholas, and Webster counties. Within approximately one month of the storm, the DRCs reported over 6,500 visitors. Based on the state’s estimates in its Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Action Plan, housing repair and replacement costs alone could exceed $300 million. Damage to public facilities that provide essential services was also significant, with wastewater treatment plants and educational facilities among the most affected. Floodwaters damaged 67 schools across the state, with FEMA designating five schools as substantially damaged. The West Virginia Department of Transportation reported an estimated $56 million in damage to the state highway system: 1,300 different locations along state roadways were submerged and 123 bridges were damaged. Federal disaster assistance funds for flood survivors were distributed in the form of public assistance grants to local governments and non-profit organizations, low-interest disaster loans from the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA), and claims paid by the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). As of June 2017, FEMA had approved 4,950 individual assistance applications, totaling over $42 million, and approved over $100 million in public assistance grants. Additionally, 977 NFIP claims totaling $32.8 million were paid for building damages across the 12 counties. Many other federal, state, and local resources, as well as private donations, supported recovery efforts throughout the state.

FEMA has been on the ground supporting the state and its communities as they recover from this historic disaster. In addition to working with the state to operate DRCs in the impacted areas, FEMA supported communities in their recovery efforts in a variety of other ways. FEMA Region III Floodplain Management and Insurance (FPM&I) staff visited over 3,000 structures in the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), conducted over 1,400 Substantial Damage estimates, and disseminated the results of these assessments to local floodplain management and permitting officials. FEMA supported local officials, specifically local floodplain managers, on the use and availability of best available floodplain mapping data. The West Virginia NFIP Coordinator identified Clay and Webster counties as priority areas for this outreach based on damages from the event, historical flooding, and the number of NFIP policies in force. The Region also provided post-disaster coordination and technical support to local community officials by conducting Disaster Recovery Visits to impacted communities and distributing post-flood recovery checklists to local community floodplain managers.

West Virginia communities, with support from a variety of partners, have been committed to bouncing back stronger than before and rebuilding with the goal of becoming more resilient. With support from the West Virginia Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster and Mennonite Disaster Services, residents of Clendenin in Kanawha County rebuilt homes in their community, 10 of which were reconstructed and elevated above the floodplain to avoid damage from future flood events. Throughout the impacted areas, other homeowners and communities are also rebuilding with the goal of keeping structures above the floodplain. FEMA has also encouraged mitigation by hosting meetings with the state to discuss the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and educating residents and local officials about types of mitigation techniques. Mitigation measures are also being considered in efforts to repair and rebuild the state’s damaged schools. One year later, most students are back in their schools; however, recovery efforts continue in Clay, Kanawha, and Nicholas counties. Plans to rebuild schools in these communities are considering how to best keep the school facilities, as well as students and faculty, out of harm’s way. FPM&I provided general technical assistance to the West Virginia Schools Task Force to support this effort.

Community engagement and education about floodplain management and insurance has been another success story to rise out of West Virginia’s recovery from the June 2016 floods. The state and FEMA developed an educational brochure, titled Floodplain and Floodway: What’s the Difference and Why Does it Matter? This publication outlines the difference between the floodplain, floodway, and flood fringe and describes the importance of these designations in simple terminology. It also includes information about mitigation measures as well as a link to the West Virginia Flood Tool, which residents and business owners can use to identify whether their property is located within the SFHA. These brochures became a very popular job aid for community officials and were utilized at events ranging from local community meetings to county fair exhibits. FEMA also provided targeted outreach on the NFIP at DRCs, as well as to local officials and insurance agents. Engaging local insurance agents and floodplain managers in the discussion and having both parties in the same room was a valuable educational and relationship-building process for everyone. FEMA also worked with communities to respond to flood insurance inquiries and coordinated with local officials and citizens to help them better understand the claims process.

Partnerships and sharing resources have been crucial to recovery efforts in West Virginia. As described in our Fall 2016 Resilience Report spotlight article with Barbara Miller from Jefferson County’s Homeland Security and Emergency Management Department, emergency management departments throughout the state are often very small. As a result, local departments developed a way to coordinate emergency response and recovery efforts through the West Virginia Emergency Manager’s Council and the West Virginia Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management. Emergency managers who are not affected by a disaster can voluntarily deploy to help affected communities. As discussed in the spotlight article, Barbara deployed to Greenbrier County following the June 2016 flooding and served as the Public Information Officer, supported community meetings, and worked with the long-term recovery group. West Virginia’s approach to supporting emergency management departments in times of need is a model that other states should look to when preparing for future disasters.

FEMA continues to work closely with the state, the West Virginia Schools Task Force, and other partners to support recovery efforts. Future issues of the Resilience Report will keep you updated on recovery, rebuilding, and mitigation efforts in the Mountain State.

Image above depicts recovery efforts in Clendenin, WV. Image courtesy of Steve Zumwalt/FEMA.

PennDOT’s Extreme Weather Vulnerability Study

In 2016, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) initiated a study to better understand the impacts of extreme weather events on the Commonwealth and identify ways to improve the resiliency of Pennsylvania’s transportation system. To accomplish this, the Phase 1 Extreme Weather Vulnerability Study employed five steps:

Stakeholder Engagement: Outreach efforts for the study targeted staff from PennDOT’s Central Office as well as its 11 district offices. PennDOT staff identified weather events that were the highest concern for design and maintenance personnel, 450 vulnerable locations throughout the Commonwealth, and strategies to better address flooding and its impacts on infrastructure.

Historic Flooding Assessment: A combination of input from stakeholders, data from PennDOT’s Road Conditions Reporting System, and data from the National Oceanic Atmospheric and Administration were used to identify areas in the state with the highest flood vulnerability. 

Forecast Flooding Assessment: This component of the study involved evaluating potential flooding impacts on state-owned roadways and bridges based on the 1-percent-annual-chance flood and climate model projections for the state.

Risk Assessment: PennDOT also assessed its risk with respect to historic and future flooding vulnerabilities within the state. This analysis was used to better understand the potential consequences and costs of extreme weather events and determine priority locations throughout the Commonwealth for additional study. 

Strategies: The final step of this phase of the study was to identify strategies to improve the resiliency of the Commonwealth’s transportation system.

The next phase of the study will more thoroughly assess each recommended strategy, identify lead parties and support staff, and begin implementing the study’s recommendations. Several of these recommendations include developing vulnerability mapping and data report products for department and planning partner use, integrating the results of the study with other department initiatives and requirements, and supporting other resiliency planning efforts throughout the state.

A copy of the report can be downloaded here. To view a story map that highlights the analyses and mapping tools used in the study, please click here. Stay tuned for updates about future phases of PennDOT’s Extreme Weather Vulnerability Study, as well as outcomes from the project. 

Spotlight: Gloucester County, Virginia
 

Located at the southern tip of Virginia’s Middle Peninsula along the lower Chesapeake Bay is Gloucester County. With over 296 miles of waterways, the county has become very involved with the Community Rating System (CRS) program. The county joined the program in 1995 and recently achieved the rank of a class 6 community. While the success of the county’s CRS Program has relied on the combined efforts of various county departments, we had a chance to speak with two key players from the county that helped advance this initiative – Paul Koll, Building Official, and Garrey Curry, Deputy County Administrator.

Q: Paul, could you tell us about your role and responsibilities as the Gloucester County Building Official?

Paul: As the Building Official for Gloucester County, I oversee and am involved with activities of the Building Inspections Department, including permitting, inspections, and helping contractors and citizens navigate our floodplain ordinance and the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code. I also serve as the county’s CRS Coordinator.

Garrey: Paul is also a Certified Floodplain Manager (CFM), and his expertise has been an asset to the department and our county.

Q: Could you tell us about how the county became involved with the CRS program?

Paul: The county has been participating in CRS since before I joined the county as the Building Official in 2004. At that point, Gloucester County was already a class 9 community. I had previously been working as the building official for another jurisdiction before coming to Gloucester County and had experience with floodplain management. I was asked by our director at the time to see what I could do to advance the county’s CRS program. Our CRS program has really been a success here because we have support and involvement from several departments within the county, as well as other stakeholders and members of our community. It’s a large program that needs many people to effectively run it. The County Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator’s Office has always given the program the support that it has needed, too. This board and administration, as well as those that came before them, have seen the value of the CRS program since it brings a benefit to our citizens, particularly those with property in the floodplain.

Q: How has the county’s CRS program grown over the years?

Garrey: As our CRS program has continued to expand over the years, the number of departments involved has also continued to grow. Initially CRS was an initiative of the Building Inspection Department, but it has since evolved to include our Departments of Emergency Management, Planning and Zoning, Environmental Programs, Parks and Recreation, Community Engagement, and Information Technology. We have also had citizen volunteers from our Floodplain Management Committee help advance this program. A key component of moving from class 7 to class 6 was developing our Program for Public Information (PPI), which the Floodplain Management Committee took the lead on.

Q: What other hazard mitigation initiatives has the county been involved with?

Paul: The county has a Hazard Mitigation Management Team, which was formed by the County Administrator and involves staff and officials from several departments. This team is involved with overseeing and managing hazard mitigation grant activities in the county, including elevation and acquisition projects. The county has completed over 70 elevation projects and over 30 acquisition projects to date. We are also very involved with the Coastal Virginia CRS Workgroup, which meets bi-monthly in Newport News. Much of what we discuss is related to CRS and floodplain management, but we also share information related to hazard mitigation.

Garrey: We have a number of offshoots from our CRS program, too, and the county employs a multi-faceted approach to mitigation. Building our CRS program, promoting flood insurance, and elevating homes are all ways to be more resilient. Our Emergency Manager is also involved with updates to the Middle Peninsula Hazard Mitigation Plan, which enables us to identify hazards and opportunities and use this information to pursue a variety of grant programs.

Q: Could you tell us a bit about Gloucester County’s Disaster Preparedness Guide?

Paul: The Disaster Preparedness Guide includes tips and key information about emergency preparedness, flood hazards, flood insurance, mitigation, emergency communications, and disaster recovery. We currently mail this guide to all homeowners in the county. Before developing this guide, we included information on these topics in other county mailings and publications, but our Department of Community Engagement led the effort to create a stand-alone publication. This publication is also distributed at schools, public libraries, and other community buildings.

Garrey: Our Department of Information Technology has also been instrumental with disseminating this information by posting it on the county website and running it on our local channel 48. Using all of these approaches has helped get the word out about the guide.

Q: What is the most important takeaway you could share with other communities from your success with the CRS program and hazard mitigation?

Garrey: It would be challenging for a single person or department to run a CRS or floodplain management program effectively. Getting deep-seeded interest and involvement from various departments and other stakeholders is key to success.

Paul: I agree that pulling together as many folks and resources as you can is crucial. Some of these may be outside of the county, too. FEMA and the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation have been instrumental and more than willing to assist us. We have also been stepping out regionally to help adjoining jurisdictions that are interested in CRS and mitigation.

Note: This interview has been edited.  

Image above depicts Gloucester's Beaverdam Park. Image courtesy of Gloucester County.

Best Practice: DC Department of Energy and Environment’s RiverSmart Rebate Program

Impervious surfaces, such as concrete and asphalt, seal soil surfaces and prevent stormwater from being absorbed back into the ground. This can have a variety of negative impacts, including increased pollutant runoff and flash flooding. As a result, communities across the Region have been promoting and implementing green stormwater infrastructure techniques to allow stormwater to soak back into the ground. Two popular techniques are implementing permeable pavers and replacing impervious services with vegetation, a process known as revegetation. These techniques are commonly used for patios, driveways, and parking lots. While permeable pavers are often more expensive than conventional paving, they typically have a longer life expectancy and provide the other benefits discussed.

The District of Columbia Department of Energy and Environment (DOEE) has created an incentive through its RiverSmart Rebates Program for homeowners to remove impervious surfaces from their property and replace them with permeable pavers and vegetation, as well as trees and rain gardens. This initiative is one of several components of DOEE’s RiverSmart program, which aims to reduce stormwater runoff that harms the District’s waterways and the Chesapeake Bay. The Permeable Surfaces Rebate Program offers rebates issued as a direct reimbursement to homeowners at the following rates:

• $10.00 per square foot for impervious surfaces replaced with permeable pavers
  
• $5.00 per square foot for impervious surfaces replaced with vegetation
  

Homeowners in the District must replace or remove an existing impervious surface, such as a driveway, patio, or parking area, to be eligible for rebates through this program. Similarly, DOEE has a Rain Garden Rebate Program that provides homeowners $3.00 per square foot for impervious surfaces treated with rain gardens, up to a total maximum rebate of $2,200, as well as a Tree Rebate Program that provides $50 to $100 to offset the cost of planting a tree on residential and commercial properties.

While the emphasis of these programs is to reduce pollution and stormwater runoff, minimizing impervious surfaces helps makes communities more resistant to the impacts of flash flooding. Other communities should look at DOEE’s program as a best practice and identify ways they can encourage residents and property owners to increase permeable surfaces. 

2017 ASFPM and APA National Conference Highlights

Since the last issue of the Resilience Report, there have been two major national conferences with messages about risk and resiliency at the forefront of discussions. From April 30 to May 5, over 1,200 participants attended the Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM) Conference, “Flood Risk Management in the Heartland,” in Kansas City, Missouri. This conference featured many presentations and training sessions about floodplain management, hazard mitigation, and emergency response and recovery. From May 6 to May 9, over 6,300 people attended the American Planning Association (APA) National Planning Conference in New York City. This four-day event featured panel discussions, presentations, and workshops on a wide variety of planning topics, ranging from mitigation to municipal finance and pedestrian safety. To provide a quick snapshot of how resiliency was highlighted at these two conferences, below is a list of several key sessions from each conference. To learn more about the sessions at the ASFPM conference, please click the link below to view the conference program. To learn more about each session at the APA National Conference, please click on the name of the session.

ASFPM 2017 Conference

• Hurricane Awareness
  
• Building Codes and Standards: Recent Changes and FEMA Policies
  
• Social Media for Disaster Response and Recovery
  
• Floodproofing: Not as Cut and Dry as You Think
  
• FEMA Benefit-Cost Analysis and Climate Change: Current Guidance
  
• Risk MAP: Through the Eyes of the Community
  
• Using CHARM to Engage the Public in Community Flood Planning & Management
  
• Effective Hazard Mitigation Planning: A Practical Approach
  
  

APA National Planning Conference 2017

• A Risk-based Approach to Reshaping Coastal Development
  
• Federal Planning Division Training Workshop
  
• Resilient Cities: Going from 100 to 10,000
  
• Trajectory for Livable and Sustainable Regions
  
• Innovative, Neighborhood-Scale Strategies to Build Resilience
  
• Planning for Resilience
  
• NOAA’s Regional Coastal Resilience Grant Program
  
• Rebuilding Public Housing Post-Disaster
  
• Advances in Resilience Planning: Coastal NJ
  
• Plan Integration for Resilience Scorecard
  
• East / West: Resiliency Planning Coast-to-Coast
  
• Adaptive Resilience Measures: Retail and Industry
  
• Advancing Resilience through Community Planning
  

It is becoming more commonplace to see mitigation, resilience, and related issues at the forefront of planning and floodplain management conferences and trainings. FEMA Region III will continue to report on highlights from these major events.

The Value of Partnerships: Resilient Nation Partnership Network and Maryland Resiliency Partnership 

The Resilient Nation Partnership Network (RNPN) was founded in November 2015 as part of the FEMA Risk Management Directorate’s (RMD) Community Engagement and Risk Communication efforts. The RNPN was created to change the conversation about resilience by providing an open platform for external organizations. Prior to the RNPN’s founding, FEMA’s RMD community often interacted only with traditional stakeholders in resilience. The RNPN brings new voices to the table and fosters dialogue and thought leadership among unique entities and organizations.
To date, the RNPN includes more than 150 partners representing a diversity of industries, missions, communities, and expertise, yet bound by a shared commitment to building stronger, more resilient communities. The partners represent the fields of conservation, academia, emergency management, public policy, law enforcement, floodplain management, infrastructure, and insurance, to name a few. The following are among RNPN’s partner organizations:

• The World Bank
  
• The Nature Conservancy
  
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
  
• Pew Charitable Trust
  
• Swiss Re
  
• International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC)
  
• Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA)
  
• Association of State Floodplain Managers Conference (ASFPM)
  
• American Institute of Architects (AIA)
  
• Institute for Business and Home Safety (IBHS)
  
• Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
  
• Columbia University
  

This year, the RNPN welcomed the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST), Flood Forum USA, AIR Worldwide, the American Geoscience Institute, and Smart Home America. 

How the RNPN Communicates
The RNPN fosters ongoing dialogue between FEMA and its partners through several communication channels, large and small:

• “The Resilient Nation Roundup” – The RNPN’s monthly digital newsletter highlights partner news, events, and products. It keeps stakeholders informed of resiliency efforts occurring across industries at the national and regional levels. 
  
• Quarterly calls – These calls provide partners and external thought leaders with the opportunity to discuss an organizational project or initiative in further detail. Quarterly calls are a valuable platform to showcase work that affects resilience, and they often lead to follow-up conversations among partners to identify potential areas of collaboration. The spring quarterly call, held in May, featured speakers from AIR Worldwide, Mississippi River Cities and Towns Initiative, and FEMA’s Cooperating Technical Partners Program. Partners were also introduced to FEMA’s new virtual reality technology, IMMERSED, through an online demonstration of the experience and various scenes.
  
• The RNPN collaboration page – Hosted on Crowdbase, the page is an exclusive space for FEMA and its partners to share timely news and events, ask questions and request feedback, and unlock specific areas of expertise within the RNPN.
  
• The Annual Forum – The RNPN’s cornerstone event convenes partners and stakeholders and provides them with a platform for open dialogue, thought leadership, and idea exchange. The 2016 Annual Forum featured keynote speaker Amy Chester, Managing Director of Rebuild by Design, as well as “Resilience Talks” on urban resilience and behavioral science from The World Bank and Ogilvy Public Relations. A panel addressing “The Future of Resilience” featured a social anthropologist and leaders from The Nature Conservancy, Swiss Re, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and RMD. FEMA also gave presentations on two recent initiatives: Customer Experience for Communities, and Flood Economics – a web tool showcasing the return on investment for mitigation actions (developed in partnership with The Economist Intelligence Unit). This tool was highlighted in the Winter 2017 issue of the Resilience Report. The third Annual Forum will be held in October 2017.
  

The RNPN in 2017
In the second half of 2017, the RNPN is taking a closer look at its partners at the regional, state, and local levels. Reaching and activating local affiliates and chapters is a critical aspect of the Network, and the RNPN is working to develop a nationwide strategy to disseminate messages and resources at the ground level.

To achieve this, the RNPN team has begun reaching out to affiliates of partner organizations to introduce them to the RNPN; connecting national partners and resources to FEMA Regional staff and support; and identifying new partnership opportunities in each FEMA Region.

The Value of Partnerships
Partnerships can serve a key role in advancing FEMA’s missions and initiatives. In today’s kinetic environment of competing messages and sources, repetition is key. A message delivered more than once, and by more than one source, has a greater chance of cutting through the “clutter.” Many individuals also rely on recommendations or word-of-mouth advice from family members, friends, co-workers, and the local media. Local partners sharing a resilience message similar to FEMA’s can be that trusted voice.

Strategic partnerships can also enhance FEMA’s community engagement efforts and help build the kind of relationships that positively affect Risk MAP goals. Partnerships are key to communicating mutual interests, such as building a community’s safety and resilience, and protecting its residents’ life, property, and financial health. Building partnerships demonstrates FEMA’s ongoing commitment to the community, enhances the accuracy of the mapping process, and helps FEMA keep community issues in mind throughout the Risk MAP lifecycle.

For more information on the RNPN, please contact Sarah Devaney-Ice at [email protected] or Ashley Siegle at [email protected].

Partnership in Region III
Region III is home to several partnerships that aim to create communities that are more resilient. Maryland’s Resiliency Partnership, a collaboration of public and private partners throughout the state, helps leverage funding, personnel, and projects to support the integration of hazard mitigation, floodplain management, and coastal and climate resiliency. The Resiliency Partnership consists of:

• Maryland Environmental Service
  
• Maryland Department of the Environment
  
• Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
  
• Maryland Transit Administration
  
• Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development
  
• Maryland Department of Information Technology
  
• Maryland Insurance Administration
  
• Maryland Department of Transportation
  
• Maryland Historical Trust
  
• Maryland Emergency Management Agency (MEMA)
  
• Maryland Association of Floodplain and Stormwater Managers
  
  

This partnership evolved as a result of key personnel from multiple state agencies spending time with each other at meetings and while serving on committees, many of which were related to mitigation and adaptation after Hurricane Sandy. During the initial stages of this informal partnership, these agencies supported each other by sharing data and resources, which enabled several agencies to undertake vulnerability assessments and other studies related to enhancing the long-term resiliency of the state. For example, MEMA shared floodplain maps, depth grids, and other data with the Maryland State Highway Administration (SHA), which allowed them to conduct a vulnerability assessment for all state roads and bridges. The Maryland DNR also used this data to conduct a coastal resiliency assessment, which was highlighted in the Winter 2017 issue of the Resilience Report.

One of the next phases of this partnership was jointly pursuing grant opportunities. MEMA and DNR collaborated to obtain grant funding from NOAA to conduct flood mitigation plans and analyses in the state’s small coastal communities. These studies enabled the state and these communities to identify priority properties for elevation and buy-out projects. The state then utilized this analysis to support funding requests from FEMA to acquire or elevate targeted properties.

The partnerships created throughout this process contributed to making the 2016 Maryland State Hazard Mitigation Plan Update the strongest to date, as resiliency leads from relevant state agencies and departments participated and assisted with building out the state’s mitigation strategy for the next five years. This Resiliency Partnership has now been formalized and has its own website.

Partnerships are key to spreading the message about building stronger, more resilient communities, as well as taking actions to become more resilient. This theme is prevalent throughout Region III, and the FEMA will continue reporting on successful examples of partnerships in future issues of the Resilience Report.

Image above depicts RNPN's 2016 Annual Forum.