FLOOD05740 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

gers may use to reduce landslide hazards in their communities is presented in Table 2. The key to achieving loss reduction is the identifica- tion and implementation of specific mitigation initiatives, as agreed upon and set forth in a local or state landslide hazard mitigation plan. Table 2. Techniques for reducing landslide hazards (Kockelman, 1986). Discouraging new developments in hazardous areas by: Disclosing the hazard to real-estate buyers Posting warnings of potential hazards Adopting utility and public-facility service-area policies Informing and educating the public Making a public record of hazards Removing or converting existing development through: Acquiring or exchanging hazardous properties Discontinuing nonconforming uses Reconstructing damaged areas after landslides Removingunsmestructures Clearing and redeveloping blighted areas before landslides Providing financial incentives or disincentives by: Conditioning federal and state financial assistance Clarifying the legal liability of property owners Adopting lending policies that reflect risk ofloss Requiring insurance related to level of hazard Providing tax credits or lower assessments to property owners 8 Regulating new development in hazardous areas by: Enacting grading ordinances Adopting hillside-development regulations Amending land-use zoning districts and regulations Enacting sanitary ordinances Creating special hazard-reduction zones and regulations Enacting subdivision ordinances Placing moratoriums on rebuilding Protecting existing development by: Controlling landslides and slumps Controlling mudflows and debris-flows Controlling rockfalls Creating improvement districts that assess costs to beneficiaries Operating monitoring, warning, and evacuating systems Although certain opportunities for reducing landslide losses exist at the state government level (selection of sites for schools, hospitals, prisons, and other public facilities; public works projects that protect highways and state property), the greatest potential for mitigation is in the routine operations oflocal government: the adoption and enforcement of grading and construction codes and ordinances, the development ofland-use and open-space plans, elimination of nonconforming uses, limitation of the extension of public utilities, etc. For this reason, state mitigation plans should emphasize mitigation activities that will essentially encourage and support local efforts. Local mitigation plans should provide guidelines and schedules for accomplishing local mitigation projects, as well as identify projects beyond local capability that should be considered in the state plan. 0