Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. National emphasis should be placed on maintaining the natural storage capacity of suitable areas <br />within all watersheds, If runoff from uplands is not addressed, downstream floodplains simply <br />continue to expand, and increased flood damage is inevitable. This goal can be approached <br />through development regulations, wise agricultural policies and practices (discussed below), <br />easements for temporary flood water storage, and preservation of natural areas. <br /> <br />Building Codes <br /> <br />The ASFPM believes that incorporation of standards for flood-resistant construction in the new <br />International Building Code and in the International Residential Code is a major step forward in <br />implementing floodplain management at the localleve!. In particular, it will help ensure that building <br />officials become involved in that part of the floodplain management process that deals with how <br />buildings are constructed, States and communities will be adopting the International Building Codes <br />and the International Residential Code over the next several years and there will be significant <br />implementation issues, Additional professionals thus will be brought into the floodplain management <br />partnership, <br /> <br />· The ASFPM recommends that extensive training and education efforts be undertaken, targeted <br />toward both code officials and floodplain managers. Both groups need to become aware that fully <br />integrating building codes and the land use requirements embodied in floodplain management <br />ordinances will produce an effective local flood loss reduction program, <br /> <br />Refining National Flood Insurance Program Development Standards <br /> <br />At the time they were developed, the National Flood Insurance Program and its regulations <br />represented a political compromise. We now know that the current regulations are not providing <br />long-term I % chance flood protection for new construction. To further prevent future flood damage <br />the following should be implemented. <br /> <br />· Consideration should be given to modifYing the National Flood Insurance Program requirements <br />so that new construction has from I to 3 feet of freeboard above today's estimated base flood <br />elevation. This would acknowledge and mitigate uncertainties, account for increased runoff <br />caused by future development, allow for the wakes of rescue boats, and provide a margin of <br />safety for wind-induced wave action on wide flooded areas, <br /> <br />· An alternative to a standard freeboard requirement would be to use some sort of confidence limit <br />in the determination of flood peak flows. Under current procedures, all statistical analysis of river <br />flows and regional analyses are done and then a 50% confidence limit is applied to the estimate, <br />That means that it is acknowledged that the estimates of I OO-year peak flows are low 50% of the <br />time and high 50% of the time, Using the 90% or 95% confidence limit instead would rationally <br />increase those estimates so that there would be fewer "surprises." Consideration should be given <br />to using a 90% confidence limit with one foot offreeboard or a 95% confidence limit with no <br />free board. <br /> <br />· A no-rise floodway with no impact on water surface and velocity should be required, so that only <br />those areas of insignificant hydraulic conveyance could be ftIled. Allowing cumulative filling of <br />the floodplain until a I-foot increase in base flood height is achieved (the current standard) causes <br /> <br />Association of State Floodplain Managers <br /> <br />-9- <br /> <br />National Flood Programs in Review 2000 <br />