Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />the age of tbe huilding. Data collected during the site inspection were used to determine the huilding <br />class and type. <br /> <br />Depth-Damage Relationship, One of the essential relationships used in the BC Module to determine the <br />henefits is how flood depth will cause damage to a structure and its contents. These depth-damage relation- <br />ships list the percentage of the structural or content value that will he destroyed hy a certain flood depth. The <br />depth-damage relationships built into the BC Module are based on FHH Flood Insurance repetitive loss data <br />for a variety of structure types, such as a one-story stmcture \lith no basement. <br /> <br />Benefit-Cost Analyses Resull~ <br /> <br />The benefit-cost analyses identified eighteen businesses that are good candidates for dry floodproofing, and <br />four that are not. Generally speaking, dry floodproofing was considered to be cost-effective for those <br />businesses with first floor elevations (FFE) lower than the 10-year flood (10 percent chance of occurring in <br />any given YC'.Ir). II <br /> <br />Tbe costs for each floodproofing retrofit ranged from $20,000 to $ 120,000. <br /> <br />~ECT IMPLEMENTATION: NEXT STEPS <br /> <br />The engineering phase of the ~Iecklenhurg County Flood Audit Project has heen completed. The "numbers <br />are in." The benefit-cost analyses provide the CMS\VS engineering staff and the Projecl Impact committee <br />with a tool for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of the mitigation projects for each business. The ability to <br />quantity the henefits and costs of retrofitting flood-prone businesses is an important element in a broader <br />strategy to promote husiness risk reduction. <br /> <br />The ultimate success of the project depends on the progress made in several <br />other critical areas. <br /> <br />. Motivating small business owners to take action to reduce <br />risk. The commercial flood audit defines the problem, prmides a <br />technical solution and cost estimate. The challenge is to convince <br />business owners that investing in flood retrofit mC'.l.sures is a sound <br />husiness decision. <br /> <br />. Securing the necessary funding to implement risk reduc- <br />tion measures, To sustain the project, external sources of <br />funding will be needed to finance the floodproofing retrofits. The <br />Project Impact committee is currently exploring public and private <br />sources of funding to support the project. <br /> <br />THE COMMERCIAL FLOOD AUDIT <br /> <br />DEFINES THE PROBLEM. PROVIDES <br />A TECHNICAL SOLUTION AND COST <br />ESTIMATE. THE CHALLENGE IS TO <br />CONVINCE BUSINESS OWNERS <br />THAT INVESTING IN FLOOD <br />RETROFIT MEASURES IS A <br /> <br />SOUND BUSINESS DECISION. <br /> <br />. Developing incentive programs to fund the retrofits and other aspects of the project. <br />Insurance premium reductions and tax incentives are being e.xamined hy the Project Impact <br />committee and CMS\VS tu generate funding to carry out retrofits. <br /> <br />As the lead official for the CMS\VS observes, <br /> <br />"... we recognized at tbe outset of this project that in many respects the eas)' part would <br />be the analysis... we could come up witb tbe numbers and engineering solutions. What we <br />need to do is build on this ana/;'sis and Il'Ork /IIore close()! wltb the bl~,iness community to <br />explain the rationale oflhis project, why it is needed, and how they will benefit." <br />- Bill TIngle, Senior Engineer, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Stonn <br />\Vater Management Ser.ices, January 5, 2000, <br /> <br />47 <br />