Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Plasencia addressed the issue of funding. To date, mapping has been paid for out ofa <br />surcharge on flood insurance. Instead, he suggested that mapping costs incurred by a local <br />community could be "banked" as a cost-share payment on future disaster assistance. <br /> <br />Ms. Haward challenged the attendees to respond to the proposal to have the Federal Government <br />LIDAR the entire country over the next 3 years and establish an agent database ofthis base-map <br />information. The Federal Government could reapportion the $80 million FEMA budget to the <br />communities to be used for studies that would add hazards and other data to these maps. <br /> <br />Mr. Larson responded that the goal of the NFIP is to identify zones and set insurance rates. A <br />LIDAR map alone is not accurate enough to regulate property and rates. <br /> <br />Mr. Michael Buckley, FEMA, indicated that although it might be a good place to start, the most <br />expensive part of mapping is the field study. <br /> <br />Mr. Armstrong added that FEMA is required to certify an unnamed product to set insurance <br />rates; they are not obligated to develop that product. By providing some of the base data, FEMA <br />hopes to assist and cost-share in the process of floodplain hazard/risk identification. <br /> <br />Mr. Kusler indicated that not all maps require a great deal of detail unless someone is planning to <br />do something in that area. He suggested that the money might be better spent by taking more <br />factors into consideration in high-need areas. He further suggested that buffer zones can help <br />identify the floodplain in places where expensive engineering is not necessary or feasible. <br /> <br />Mr. Ellegood offered that although FIRMs are good, they could be better if they included hazard <br />information such as erosion setbacks. He further advocated that everyone, not just those in flood <br />zones, should have flood hazard insurance just as they have fire hazard insurance. <br /> <br />In response to Ms. Howard's proposal for LIDAR mapping, Mr. ?? indicated that he felt it would <br />be a good incentive and starting point for the communities, but policy still needs to be decided on <br />how the floodplain is going to be represented on the map; no one knows how to put a future <br />floodplain on a map, and the Web site does not help. A mapping effort should be the starting <br />point for a hazard mitigation planning effort. <br /> <br />Mr. Sheaffer pointed out a conflict in the messages: On the one hand, there is a trend to map on <br />full development, which would lead to higher flood levels. However, some new development, <br />which is based on sustainability, might be storing its own water and not causing any increase in <br />storm runoff. <br /> <br />Facilitated Discussion: Insurance <br /> <br />Ms. Howard started this part of the forum by reiterating some of the topics she had heard: <br /> <br />· Mandatory purchase should be expanded to areas outside the 100-year floodplain. <br /> <br />· Flood risk information is not clear, nor is it adequately conveyed clearly to local officials. <br /> <br />Floodplain Management Forum <br /> <br />33 <br />