|
<br />Wednesday, May 20 10:30 - I 1:45 AM: Track I - Mitigation Plimning II- Moderator: Andrew Lee
<br />
<br />WHERE EGRETS WADE
<br />Paul Osman and Vincent Parisi
<br />
<br />Illinois has one of the largest inland systems of rivers, lakes, and streams in the entire nation. While a blessing to the state's natural
<br />resources, it also creates another more dubious distinction making illinois one of the nation's most flood-prone states, Flood damages in
<br />the state now exceed $300 million every year, Since the great flood of 1993, there have been six successive federally declared flood disasters
<br />in Illinois, At the request of flood ravaged commWlities across the state, IDNR/OWR, the Illinois Emergency Management Agency, the
<br />Department of Commerce and Community Affairs, and FEMA have worked together and made great strides towards reducing the degree
<br />offlood damage in Illinois, Using a "multi-objective management" or "M-O-M" nearly 2,500 flooded structures have been removed from
<br />the state's floodplain areas to create open spaces, Egrets and great blue herons now calmly wade along the shorelines, wood ducks fly among
<br />the cottonwoods, and red tail hawks alld turkey Vultures on~e aRain ride the air waves alonR the bluffs above open floodplains,
<br />
<br />COMMON FLOOD MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES AND TIlEIR CHALLENGES
<br />Lynn Mayo and Dale Lehman
<br />
<br />As the Hazard Mitigation Technical Assistance Contractor to FEMA, Woodward-Clyde has provided technical assistance for Hazard
<br />Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) applications for flood mitigation projects located nationwide, The HMGP application requires that
<br />different mitigation alternatives be considered. Additionally, an Envirorunental Assessment is typically required for these projects because
<br />they involve federal fimding. The Envirorunental Assessment also requires an analysis of different mitigation alternatives, This paper will
<br />discuss the mitigation alternatives that are often proposed in HMGP grant applications and Envirorunental Assessments and the COmmon
<br />challenges for each type of mitigation alternative,
<br />
<br />Common mitigation alternatives that will be discussed include acquisition, flood proofing. elevation, levee construction, channel/culvert
<br />modification, pond construction and combinations of the above, Some of the common challenges with the alternatives include commWlity
<br />acceptance, detennination of substanti,~ly damaged structures, effectiveness, cost, floodway encroachments, cultural and natural resource
<br />impacts, benefit-cost ratio, upstream and downstream impacts, and alternative funding sources, Each of the mitigation alternatives will be
<br />discussed and case study examples of the challenges that have been encountered with each type of alternative will be provided, ,These
<br />examples will be taken from alternative analyses conducted for more than 20 projects located throuRhout the country.
<br />
<br />WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN AND DEMONSTRATION FOR TIlE CITY OF MADISON
<br />Donna Yowell
<br />
<br />The City of Madison is dedicated to improving 'quality of life.' A critical issue that effects every citizen of Madison is storm water
<br />lllllDagemenl As our city develops from a small farm commWlity to one of the fastest growing commWlities in Mississippi, the city is facing
<br />flooding and drainage problems, design problems, erosion and sediment, and water quality issues, as well as the degradation of natural
<br />resources, including wildlife habitats, green canopies, open spaces and riparian buffers, Utilizing the NFIP's CRS as a model for adopting
<br />higher regulatory standards and practi':es in flood plain management, we are integrating storm water management, erosion and sediment
<br />control, and non-point source into a fluid and interactive process for land-use management and urban development practices. A model storm
<br />water management project, financed parlly with state and federal flood mitigation funds, is currently underway and will allow the city to set
<br />aside flood fiinge while proceeding with an extremely low density development in a very responsible manner, Phase two of this project will
<br />fimd the acquisition of several homes located partly in high velocity drainage areas, The project is providing a rethinking of government
<br />roles in urban conservation plus ftmctional demonstrations such as a dty detention basin with vegetative stream bank stabilizers, constructed
<br />wetlands, reforested stream banks with walking trails and education sites. The uti1ization of state-of-the-art computer programs will
<br />detennine I) storm water control through retention/detention areas; 2) base flood elevations; and 3) placement of storm water retarding
<br />structures. Policy and plans have been put into effect to implement practices ensuring holistic and sustainable development in the City, Our
<br />presentation will include infonnation on how the project was developed, elements that have been the most effective; funding; developing
<br />partnerships; identifying available resources; new ways agencies can be effective in city planning; results of the last three years of effort;
<br />remaining activities; review of techni"al data/GIS overlays and ultimately, the projected future impact. We will include an overview of
<br />effective ordinances which have been developed as a result of these issues,
<br />
|