Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Figure 1-2. The Community Rating System <br /> <br />N FIP communities that use the Community Rating System (CRS) receive a reduction of floodplain insurance <br />premiums for actions they have taken to reduce flood losses. As of May 1997, 910 communities, <br />representing 60 percent of the NFIP policy base, are now participating in CRS. CRS communities are given <br />credit points for 18 activities in four categories: Public Information, Mapping and Regulations, Flood Damage <br />Reduction, and Flood Preparedness. The greater the number of creditable action taken, the larger the reduction in <br />floodplain insurance premiums for residents. Credit points are based upon how well an activity implements the goals <br />of CRS. Activities that relate to subdivisions for which communities may receive credit points include floodplain <br />management planning, open space dedication, and acquisition and relocation of floodprone properties. Communities <br />should be aware of these types of creditable activities when designing subdivisions in floodplains. <br />CRS guidance materials stress that the floodplain managment planning process is far more valuable than the plan <br />document that results from it. Planning is viewed as a crucial means for overcoming the problem of conflicting goals <br />and actions by various local government departments and by the public that may hinder flood loss reduction. There <br />are seven recommended steps in the CRS planning process. <br /> <br />Coordination with Other Agencies, There needs to be a <br />review of government agencies whose activities may <br />affect floodplain management efforts or that could <br />support such efforts. The state NFlP coordinator, FEMA <br />regional hazard mitigation officer, and regional <br />planning agencies staff will be helpful in this regard. <br /> <br />Action Plan, This plan must include a schedule and budget <br />for all activities that will be taken to reduce flood losses. <br />CRS materials recommend that each community develop <br />its own criteria for selecting which activities are <br />appropriate to its needs and that are fiscally reasonable. <br /> <br />Public Input. The participating local government must <br />docwnent how residents, affected businesses and <br />organizations, and local officials will be involved in the <br />floodplain management planning process. CRS <br />recommends a task force of community representatives. <br /> <br />Adoption and Implementation. The plan must be officially <br />adopted by the local legislative body to receive CRS <br />credit. A planning department staff person should be <br />assigned responsibility for coordinating the <br />implementation of actions listed in the plan. <br /> <br />Problem Identification. The local govenunent should <br />obtain data describing water sources, depth of flooding, <br />repetitive loss areas, special hazards and other <br />information from FEMA regional offices and other <br />federal and state agencies. <br /> <br />Flood Hazard Area Inventory. CRS credits are given for <br />an inventory that addresses flood prone buildings, <br />damage projections, development trends, <br />development constraints (including zoning and <br />subdivision regulations), critical community facilities <br />(i.e., hospitals, water treatment plants), and <br />floodprone areas that provide natural and beneficial <br />floodplain functions (e.g., flood storage areas and <br />wildlife habitats). <br /> <br />Review of Possible Activities, The local government <br />needs to review all existing and proposed activities <br />that can prevent or reduce flood losses. It must also <br />review activities that can protect the natural <br />functions of the floodplain, induding storm water <br />quality management, wetlands protection, and open <br />space conservation. <br /> <br />to reduce future flood losses could be undermined or <br />nullified by the careless building of others. Unless the <br />community as a whole implements a program for <br />floodplain management through the adoption and <br />enforcement of floodplain management regulations, the <br />potential for loss cannot be reduced sufficiently to affect <br />disaster relief costs. Insurance rates also would reflect <br />the probable higher losses that would result without <br />local enforcement of floodplain management <br />regulations. <br />FEMA relies on several resources in implementing <br />NFIP. At the request of FEMA, each governor has <br />designated an agency of state or territorial government <br />to coordinate that state's or territory's NFIP activities. In <br />addition, these state agencies often assist a community <br />in developing and adopting necessary floodplain <br />management measures. FEMA currently distributes <br />funds to 47 states to provide technical assistance to <br />communities. Another source of technical assistance <br /> <br />and a facilitator of local community involvement in <br />NFIP is the FEMA regional office. FEMA has <br />established 10 regional offices throughout the United <br />States. Regional staff work directly with all NFIP- <br />participating communities to provide guidance and <br />assistance in implementing NFIP and resolving local <br />floodplain management issues. <br />NFIP regulations are intended to prevent the loss of <br />life and property as well as economic and social <br />hardships that result from flooding. There is clear <br />evidence that these goals have been achieved in areas <br />where structures and other development activities are <br />in compliance with the community's floodplain <br />management ordinance. According to FEMA, since <br />1978, buildings constructed according to NFIP <br />standards have sustained 77 percent fewer losses than <br />buildings constructed prior to the regulations being put <br />in place. In addition, FEMA estimates that NFIP <br />regulations that require structures in the lOO-year <br /> <br />5 <br />