Save for Title Page
Major Declared Disasters for Flooding
Download 4.32 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- 4.4.4 Mitigation Actions in the Past Five Years
- Figure 16: Martin Coulee
- Table 47: NFIP Participating Communities in Valley County
- Table 48: Schedules and Milestones
- Table 49: Building Exposure by Occupancy Type for the Study Region
- Table 50: Building Exposure by Occupancy Type for the Scenario
- Figure 17: Valley County 100 Year Flood Map
- 4.4.7 Relationship to Other Hazards
4.4.3 Major Declared Disasters for FloodingAccording to data was provided by the Valley County Disaster Emergency Services Coordinator there have been three FEMA disasters declared in the last five years. One was in 2011 which affected 35 sites in Valley County and the damage cost was $1,158,044. Another FEMA disaster was in 2013, which affected 15 sites in Valley County with a total damage cost of $270,437. The most recent FEMA disaster was in 2014, which affected 65 sites in Valley County and the damage cost was $2,887,448. 4.4.4 Mitigation Actions in the Past Five YearsOf the FEMA disasters previously detailed, there were a total of $4,315,930 in damage cost. As a result of the flooding damages and disaster declarations, Valley County has had three bridges replaced. The bridges that were replaced were the Cutacross Bridge which cost $421,000, the Skylark Bridge which cost $400,000 and the Canal Bridge which cost $752,820. There was also one bridge extension completed on the Whately Bridge, which cost $447,652. Two culverts were also built. The culverts were the Billingsley Road Culvert and the Liberty Road Culvert. The rest of the FEMA disaster fundingspent on smaller culverts, gravel, fill material, signing, water pumping, equipment use, and labor for the county. With regards to the flooding on Martin Coulee Road, Valley County has recommended retrieval of the 48 loads of gravel lying in the waterway which acted on more than one occasions like a dam. Water pools and rises on both sides of the Billman approach as well as submerging upstream fences, corrals and livestock shelters. A mitigation strategy to approach and prevent further problems is to proactively replace this approach with a low water vented crossing. It was also recommended that existing drainage pathways are kept open. Figure 16: Martin Coulee
Mitigation actions for flooding from 2008 Valley County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan stated the overall goal for mitigating flooding was to reduce the impacts of flooding by the following three objectives: improving drainage and structural flood barriers, improving the local understanding of the flood hazards, and protecting structures and infrastructure from flood damage. National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP): While several of the mitigation strategies include elements of the NFIP, the county and jurisdictions’ participation in the program is considered an action in and of itself. Thus, the following narrative describes the county’s participating jurisdictions’ involvement and future commitment to the program. The following communities in Valley County participate in the National Flood Insurance Program according to the FEMA Community Status Book Report for Montana. Table 47: NFIP Participating Communities in Valley County
The NFIP is a federal program created by Congress to mitigate future flood losses nationwide through sound, community-enforced building, and zoning ordinances and to provide access to affordable, federally-backed flood insurance protection for property owners. NFIP is designed to provide an insurance alternative to disaster assistance to meet the escalating costs of repairing damage to buildings and their contents caused by floods. Participation in the NFIP is based on an agreement between local communities and the federal government whichstipulates if a community will adopt and enforce a floodplain management ordinance to reduce future flood risks to new construction in Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs), the federal government will make flood insurance available within the community as a financial protection against flood losses. In 1968, Congress created the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in response to the rising cost of taxpayer-funded disaster relief for flood victims and the increasing amount of damage caused by floods. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) manages the NFIP and oversees the floodplain management and mapping components of the program. Nearly 20,000 communities across the United States and its territories participate in the NFIP by adopting and enforcing floodplain management ordinances to reduce future flood damage. In exchange for enforcing these ordinances the NFIP makes federally backed flood insurance available to homeowners, renters, and business owners in these communities. Many communities in Montana are protected from flood hazards by levees and dikes. With the production of new Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRMs) through FEMA’s Map Modernization Program, communities must demonstrate they can meet federal regulations by having their levees certified by a registered professional engineer or federal agency with responsibility for levee design. Without a new certification, the DFIRMs would show that no levee exists. The lack of levee factored in the flooding calculations increases the estimated height and amounts of flooding for an area and results in the costs of insurance available to homeowners to higher. Some Valley County property complain this has also caused a decrease in property values. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which built many of the levees, has quit completing levee certifications and many flood districts have been unable to hire outside engineers to certify levees because of funding shortfalls. Glasgow-Cherry Creek Left Bank and Milk River and Cherry Creek Levee Systems The city of Glasgow is the non-federal levee sponsor of the Glasgow-Cherry Creek Left Bank and Milk River and Cherry Creek Levee Systems. A System Wide Infrastructure Framework (SWIF) Plan was created which covers the list of deficiencies in the levees for the Glasgow-Milk River and Cherry Creek Levee Systems. This project is expected to be completed by October 2025. In 2011, the Glasgow-Milk River and Cherry Creek levee systems were rated “Unacceptable” and became inactive and no longer eligible for rehabilitation assistance in the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Public Law 84-99 Rehabilitation and Inspection Program. Upon submitting a letter requesting temporary eligibility, the city of Glasgow established a Levee Committee consisting of citizen community members, city personnel, and elected city officials to assist the City in developing a comprehensive SWIF plan. The following table shows the schedules and milestones that will be used to monitor progress and to determine continued eligibility for P.L. 84-99 rehabilitation assistance while the SWIF is being implemented. This information was provided in the December 2015 SWIF for Glasgow-Cherry Creek Left Bank and Milk River and Cherry Creek Levee Systems. Table 48: Schedules and Milestones
Due to the likelihood of future flooding and the impact of past floods, flooding remains a critical focus of this iteration of the mitigation plan update. Beyond carrying the most pertinent actions from the previous plan several cities and the county included several long term and short term projects. 4.4.5 VulnerabilityThere is high degree of vulnerability from flooding currently existing in Valley County. Structures and populations which lie within the floodplain are at an increased risk of damage or loss of property because of flooding.The following outline vulnerabilities within Valley County. The December 2015 System Wide Infrastructure Framework (SWIF) plan for the City of Glasgow Cherry Creek Left Bank and Milk River Left Bank Levee System stated encroachment issues have been an ongoing problem for many years in Valley County. The Glasgow-Cherry Creek Left Bank and Milk River Left Bankare comprised of 2.32 miles of levee, zero feet of the floodwall, twoenclosures, and three pumping locations which were initially constructed in 1928. The leveed area reduces flood risk to approximately 561 buildings and economic activities valued at $183 million, including a fertilizer plant, beverage distributing warehouses, a hospital, the Valley County Courthouse, Valley County Detention Center, the Glasgow City Hall, the water treatment plant and maintenance facilities, the US Post Office, Social Security and VA services facilities, an assisted living and senior living apartment complex, Nemont Communications, grain elevators, a feed plant, and a commercial recycling plant. Some 870 persons are at direct risk impacts during daytime and approximately 930 are at direct risk during the evenings and at night. The total community however would be impacted if the services and retail provided by Glasgow were to be flooded. Hazus-MH Flood Event Report Scenario for Valley County Hazus is a regional multi-hazard loss estimation model that was developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS). The primary purpose of Hazus is to provide a methodology and software application to develop multi-hazard losses at a regional scale. These loss estimates would be used primarily by local, state and regional officials to plan and stimulate efforts to reduce risks from multi-hazards and to prepare for emergency response and recovery. A Hazus-MH flood event report was created on March 7, 2016, for Valley County. This version of Hazus utilized 2010 Census Data. The contents of this event report are detailed below. Description of Valley County The geographical size of the region is 5,062 square miles and contains 2,255 census blocks. The region contains over 3,000 households and has a total population of 7,369 people. There are an estimated 4,565 buildings in the region with a total building replacement value (excluding contents) of 1,024 million dollars (2010 dollars). Approximately 90.30% of the buildings (and 78.09% of the building value) are associated with residential housing. General Building Stock Hazus estimates that there are 4,565 buildings in the region which have an aggregate total replacement value of 1,024 million (2010 dollars). Table 49 and Table 50 present the relative distribution of the value with respect to the general occupancies by study region and scenario respectively. Table 49: Building Exposure by Occupancy Type for the Study Region
Table 50: Building Exposure by Occupancy Type for the Scenario
Essential Facility Inventory For essential facilities, there is one hospital in the region with a total bed capacity of 25 beds. There are 18 schools, three fire stations, one police station and no emergency operation centers. General Building Stock Damage Hazus estimates that about nine buildings will be at least moderately damaged. This is over 75% of the total number of buildings in the scenario. There are an estimated 1 buildings that will be completely destroyed. Of the buildings that are estimated to be damaged, they are all residential. Essential Facility Damage Before the flood analyzed in this scenario, the region had 25 hospital beds available for use. On the day of the scenario flood event, the model estimates that 25 hospital beds are available in the region. Of the expected damage to essential facilities, none of the essential facilities were estimated to have any damage or loss of use. Shelter Requirements Hazus additionally estimates the number of households that are expected to be displaced from their homes and require temporary public shelter due to the flood and the associated potential evacuation. The model estimates 66 households will be displaced due to the flood. Displacement includes households evacuated from within or very near to the inundated area. Of these, 25 people (out of a total population of 7,369) are estimated to seek temporary lodging in public shelters Economic Loss The total estimated economic loss for the flood scenario is $ 8.59 million. The building losses are broken into two categories: direct building losses and business interruption losses. The direct building losses are the estimated costs to repair or replace the damage caused to the building and its contents. The business interruption losses are the losses associated with the inability to operate a business because of the damage sustained during the flood. Business interruption losses also include the temporary living expenses for those people displaced from their homes because of the flood. The total building-related losses were 8.56 million dollars. 0% of the estimated losses were related to the business interruption of the region. The residential occupancies made up 53.51% of the total loss. Figure 17: Valley County 100 Year Flood Map
4.4.6 Flood and Climate ChangeAccording to the 2014 National Climate Assessment, changing extremes in precipitation are projected across all seasons, including higher likelihoods of both increasing heavy rain and snow events and more intense droughts. Winter and spring precipitation and very heavy precipitation events are both projected to increase in the northern portions of the area, leading to increased runoff and flooding that will reduce water quality and erode soils. Increased snowfall, rapid spring warming, and intense rainfall can combine to produce devastating floods. Long range climate models show the frequency and severity of these heavy rainfall events will increase. 4.4.7 Relationship to Other HazardsFlooding is related to various other hazards such as severe storms because severe and/or slow moving thunderstorms and spring snow melt can contribute to flooding and under the right conditions can cause flash flooding. Flooding can also be related to dam failure because flood events have the potential to compromise the structural integrity of dams, which could lead to more severe flood events. Flooding can also be related to infectious disease because wastewater spills are a possible consequence of flooding. In addition, hazardous material releases can be related because people can leave materials near rivers which can impact the water supply. Download 4.32 Mb. Share with your friends:
|