Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/03/2008

Home

above the elevations that are figured into the determination of the flood fringe area. Unfortunately, these minimum requirements still allow much damage to happen in the real world. When Congress passed the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, communities were told that, if they wanted to be eligible for federal funds to reduce the cost of damages from natural hazards, they had to adopt an all-natural hazard mitigation plan. Mitigation plans can include not only actions that affect existing structures and infrastructure, but also actions that affect future structures and infrastructure (I.e., modifying zoning ordinances, building codes, and subdivision codes). Five years later, Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf Coast, prDducing one Dfthe worst natural disasters in U.S. histDry. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita left the NatiDnal FIDDd Insurance Fund rDughly $2D billiDn in debt, and the fund had tD rely on a majDr IDan frDm the u.s. Treasury. Experts called fDr a number of changes in NFIP, including raising insurance rates fDr high-risk cDastal hDmes Dr vacatiDn hDmes, requiring flDDd insurance cDverage in mDre areas tD offset IDsses in the higher-risk areas, updating Dlder flood maps, and enforcing tDugher building and land-use policies. In addition tD their flDDdplain ordi- nances, communities have had the tDDls to take actions to reduce risks from hurricanes and floods to their residents in the form of Dverlaying flDDdplain Drdinances Dn zDning ordinances, but many have failed to use their two Drdinances this way. They have IDng held the powertD reduce risks through the zoning ordinances, which derive their pDwer frDm their ability tD be used to pro- tect the residents ofthe community. If come munities had prudently used their zoning powers and.had kept residential uses DUt Df high-risk areas, the damages frDm floDds and hurricanes wDuld be far less. Now com- munities have been given additional tDDls that they can use tD reduce risks in the form of all-natural hazard mitigation plans. The mitigatiDn plan identifies the risks facing communities, which can then identify por- tiDns of their land-use regulations that shDuld be modified tD aVDid Dr reduce the risk. If these tDDls are nDt used prudently, it is pDssible that in the future the federal gDV- ernment may require even stricter laws that further limit the sCDpe of IDcalland-use cDntrols. WHAT IS All-NATURAL HAZARD MITIGATION? Hazard mitigatiDn is an action that is taken to reduce the risk tD a cDmmunity, structure, infrastructure, or individuals from the haz- ards that Dccur when the built environme.nt intersects with natural events whose inten- sity is Dver and abDve that which is nDrmally expected, such as: · Excessive amDunts Df precipitation lead- ing tD flDDding · High winds damaging or destroying struc- tures that aren't designed tD withstand such fD rces . Wildfires burning structures that have interfaced with the natural envirDnment · landslides carrying away structures or burying them because they have encroached Dn unstable areas Every cDmmunity in the U.S. should have a mitigatiDn plan. The hazards mentiDned in the previDus paragraph are just a small sam- ple Dfthe natural hazards that affect our coun- try. No community is risk-free. As nDted earlier, one of the reasons fDr a cDmmunity's existence is "to protect the life, health, and safety Df its residents." To protect life, health, and safety, a cDmmunity must understand the risks that affect its jurisdictiDn. In the mitigation plan, the com- munity must cDmplete a risk assessment for the hazards that affect the cDmmunity. For mDst, flDDding is one Df the majDr hazards. Finally, mitigatiDn plans make a CDmmu- nity's residents eligible fDr funds to reduce their risk from hazards that will Dccur in the future. Several FEMA programs fund mitiga- tiDn planning. The mitigation plan identifies the risks facing communities, which can then identify portions of their land-use regulations that should be modified to avoid or reduce the risk. ZONINGPRACTICE 3.08 151 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION I page 3