1. Risk MAP Early Demonstration Projects in Region II 2011 Association of State Floodplain Managers May 17, 2011 Louisville, KY

2. 2 Overview FEMA Region II was asked to develop potential demonstration projects to better field test proposed Risk MAP datasets and products  Three projects were identified in New York: Broome County Depth Grid and HAZUS-MH Development/Area of Mitigation Interest Great Lakes Discovery Process Development Mohawk River Depth and Velocity Grid Development and Comparison  One project was identified in New Jersey: Passaic River Basin Areas of Mitigation Interest

3. 3 Flood Risk Datasets and Products Changes Since Last FIRM Data Areas of Mitigation Interest Flood Risk Report Flood Risk Map Ad-Hoc Flood Risk Analyses Flood Risk Database Flood Risk Assessment Data Flood Depth & Analysis Grids

4. 4 Mitigation Planning is Key Hazard Mitigation Planning is part of the overall planning for any community – Comprehensive, economic development, infrastructure, mitigation and emergency planning are all facets of the same process. Flood Reduction Initiate Plan Identify Hazards Adopt Plan Develop Action Plans Assess Risks Implement Plan Update Plan Create Mitigation Strategy Hazard Mitigation Planning Cycle

5. Broome County, NY

6. 6 Why A Project in Broome County?  New Hydrology indicated an upward trend in flood discharge  Increased flow created potential issues due to levee deaccreditation  New Risk Mapping Assessment and Planning (Risk MAP) products provide communities additional tools for planning  Broome County had the basic requirements, a strong Geographic Information System (GIS) and data

7. 7 Broome County HAZUS-MH Study

8. 8 Field Data Acquisition -Enhanced  First floor elevation  Building Type – residential, commercial, critical facilities  Basement or not Enhanced HAZUS Level 2

9. 9 Depth Grid Analysis

10. 10 Example Area of Mitigation Interest  Robinson St. was initially identified as the sole source for flooding of a large area  The area was of interest to the City of Binghamton as a potential economic development site

11. 11 Example: Area of Mitigation Interest

12. 12 Example: Area of Mitigation Interest

13. 13  Flood Control Structures at the Underpasses  Property Protection Measures  Site Specific Structural Protection  Flood Insurance  Combinations of above methods  No Action Example: Area of Mitigation Interest

14. 14 Mohawk River  Study area including: Village of Fonda and Village of Fort Plain located within Montgomery County, New York.  State, local, and tribal officials can use the summary information provided in a Flood Risk Report, in conjunction with the data in the Flood Risk Database, to: Update  Local hazard mitigation plans  Community comprehensive plans  Emergency operations and response plans Develop hazard mitigation projects Communicate flood risk Guide modifications of development standards

15. 15 Mohawk River Village of Fort Plain Project Area

16. 16 Mohawk River Village of Fort Plain  Hydrodynamic and hydrostatic forces computed for apartment building  Hydrodynamic and hydrostatic forces computed for the fire/police station

17. 17 Mohawk River Village of Fort Plain  Velocity vectors and magnitudes computed for Apartment building  Velocity vectors and magnitudes computed for Fire / Police station

18. 18 Mohawk River Village of Fort Plain

19. Passaic River Basin Areas of Mitigation Interest Early Demonstration Project (New Jersey)

20. 20 Project Scope Early Demonstration Project - Combines a detailed Analysis of one Area of Mitigation Interest (AoMI) with Mitigation Planning Technical Assistance

21. 21 Mitigation Planning Technical Assistance  Purpose Ensure all Risk MAP projects receive sufficient technical assistance to enable the community, and thus FEMA, to meet the goals of Risk MAP

22. 22 Scope Overview  Present current information and recommendations for mitigating high- risk floodprone structures  Includes Repetitive Loss and Severe Repetitive Loss Properties in: Fairfield Little Falls Lincoln Park Pequannock Pompton Lake  Uses National Flood Mitigation Data Collection Tool (National Tool) Collects property-specific data for floodprone properties Validates and stores detailed risk information for structures  Develop appropriate mitigation recommendations at both the community mitigation planning level as well as at the structural or project specific level

23. 23 Task 1 – Preliminary Data Collection, Prioritization, and Kick Off Meeting  Data Collection Claims history and policy information Property characteristics  Value  Standardized address Flood Insurance Rate Map Information Mitigation actions taken Topographic data Geo-coded property locations (X and Y coordinates)  Prioritization based budget All SRL, RL with $50k or more, clustering Total of 650 structures

24. 24 Task 2 – Site Visits for Validation, Collection of Field Data and Photographs  4 Inspectors for approximately 11 days  650-700 properties  Collecting GPS Coordinates Foundation type Condition Photographs Mitigation observed Other

25. 25 Task 2 – Site Visits for Validation, Collection of Field Data and Photographs (cont.)  Post Field Data Collection Township Data Collection Elevation certificates for elevated structures Building demo permits for mitigated structures Other information needed to fill gaps

26. 26 Task 3 – Develop Specific Recommendations for Mitigation  Evaluate standard mitigation options for each property validated in the National Tool using FEMA 551  Generate worksheets and rank mitigation measures for each property  Considers drainage improvements, barriers, wet and dry-floodproofing, elevation, relocation, and acquisition  Considers relative cost, human intervention, and annual maintenance  Consider project type as it relates typically to NEPA compliance  Deliverable – community specific report listing properties by community with maps – explanation of how options were evaluated – recommendations for cost-effective mitigation

27. 27 Task 4 – Develop community-level recommendations for mitigation plan updates or improvements  Obtain and review most recent plans  Consult NJ State Hazard Mitigation Plan  Develop community level planning recommendations addressing how the communities could use the project information to improve their plans and to obtain HMA grant assistance

28. 28 Areas of Mitigation Interest Mitigation Planning Linkages Risk Assessment ProductMitigation Planning Requirement Areas of Interest 44 CFR Part 201(d)(3), revise plans to reflect changes 44 CFR Part 201.6(c)(2)(i), profiling hazards 44 CFR Part 201.6(c)(2), risk assessment 44 CFR Part 201.6(c)(3), developing mitigation strategies There are several required areas for mitigation plans for which Areas or Mitigation Interest might be helpful:

29. 29 Desired Outcome  Communities will use the instructional report to conduct similar research for remaining properties  Communities will use the data to:  Update their mitigation plans Hazard Profiles Quantitative Risk Assessment Mitigation Strategy Development  Prioritize projects  Develop project applications  Take action to reduce losses!!!

30. 30 EDP Lessons Learned  It sounds repetitive but close, direct, and constant communication with communities and stakeholders is paramount for the success of Risk MAP projects. It helps in stakeholder understanding Risk MAP vision.  The products were overall, very well received by communities It creates trust and a sense of partnership  The stakeholders can better understand and accept the limitations of the program as much as the benefits.  The communities are planning on using the data in a variety of ways It opens the vaults of knowledge and information from communities to contractors  The stakeholder's knowledge of the local areas and specialized datasets were CRITICAL for producing the products.

31. 31 Questions? Alan Springett – FEMA Region II (212) 680-8557 Jean Huang – Dewberry (703) 849-0264 Scott Choquette – Dewberry (860) 508-4261