My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD07643
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
7001-8000
>
FLOOD07643
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 7:12:22 PM
Creation date
10/5/2006 3:07:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Statewide
Basin
Statewide
Title
Physical and Economic Feasibility of Nonstructural Flood Plain Management Measures
Date
3/1/1978
Prepared For
US
Prepared By
US Army Corps of Engineers
Floodplain - Doc Type
Educational/Technical/Reference Information
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
232
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />shown. This indicates that protecting to 3 .feet above the first floor will generally ~e <br />economically feasible for this type structure. Naturally, if significant additional cost are incurred <br />above those assumed, it may become infeasible. A two story, no basement structure (Figure 3-3) <br />shows damage reduced roughly 50 percent of that for a single story structure. This reduction <br />causes economic feasibility to be somewhat marginal for conditions with a flood hazard factor <br />of twelve or greater and located with the 20 year event at the first floor. Because of the closeness <br />of the values in this range it is difficult to draw definite conclusions from the analyses since a <br />change of anyone of several factors could make up the difference. <br /> <br />Advantages and Disadvantages <br />Table 3-2 summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of this measure as an adjustment <br />tool. <br /> <br />TABLE 3-2 <br /> <br />ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES <br />OF TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT CLOSURES FOR EXISTING STRUCTURES <br /> <br />Advantages <br /> <br />Flood proofing may be done on a selective <br />basis to only those openings through which <br />water enters and only to the height desired. <br /> <br />Easy and quick to implement. <br /> <br />For large commercial and industrial type <br />structures, this. may be the most important <br />nonstructural means of flood damage reduc- <br />tion. <br /> <br />Disadvantages <br /> <br />Applicable only to structures with brick or <br />masonry type walls, without basements, <br />which can structurally withstand the hydro- <br />static and uplift pressure of the design flood <br />and which are generally watertight. <br /> <br />Reduced likelihood of effective closure at <br />nights and during vacations with temporary <br />closures. <br /> <br />May create a false sense of security and <br />induce people to stay in the structure longer <br />than they should. <br /> <br />References <br /> <br />1. Anderson, Charles M. et ai, "Manual for the Construction of Residential Basements in Non- <br />Coastal Flood Environs", National Association of Home Builders Research Foundation Inc., July <br />1976. <br /> <br />2. Black, Richard D., "Flood Proofing Rural Residences," Department of Agricultural <br />Engineering, Cornell University, May 1975. <br /> <br />3. Vierling, Steve, "Report on the Initial Costs of Nonstructural Alternatives for the Protection <br />or Evacuation of Existing Structures Withi", a Flood Plain," Louisville District, Corps of Engineers, <br />Unpublished Report, January 1976. <br /> <br />17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.