Description

1) Balancing Multi-Benefit Criteria in a Capital Project
Dan Brubaker, PE, CFM, King County, jbrubaker@kingcounty.gov
Co-presenters: None

Abstract: Fort Dent is a city park along the Green River in Tukwila, Washington, south of Seattle in King County. Slope failures along the levee protecting the park led to authorization of a capital project by the King County Flood Control District. When considering alternatives, the project management team considered the District’s policy of integrated floodplain management. This requires an examination of alternatives that address not just structural issues, but environmental stewardship, tribal government considerations, healthy communities, and social justice issues. This presentation will look at the District’s Multi-Benefit policy and how it pertains to the County’s capital projects in general, and how these considerations played out for several County projects, the Fort Dent project in particular. It will review the need for habitat restoration along the Green River, the need for recreational opportunities in a city with a relatively large historically-marginalized community, and how those needs will ultimately be balanced when the project is constructed. It will provide lessons learned to communities working to balance similar considerations within their capital projects programs.

2) Index Overload: Making Sense of Vulnerability Indexes for Floodplain Management
Aaron Henderson, CFM, Arcadis Inc., aaron.henderson@arcadis.com
Co-presenters: None

Abstract: When it comes to social vulnerability it seems like everyone has an index, but what differentiates those indexes and how do you use them? Beginning with the source data, we’ll explore several social vulnerability indexes and attempt to cut through the overload of options available to floodplain managers. An overview of US Census Bureau data products, and recent changes to obscure data in the name of privacy, will set the stage for further exploration of the vulnerability indexes that exist today. We will then take a deeper dive into some of the most widely used indexes including the federal government’s new Justice40 criteria, FEMA’s National Risk Index, EPA’s EJ Screener, CDC’s Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), and USDOT’s Transportation Disadvantaged Communities. For each index we will look at what is being measured, what that measurement means, and how to use that information for floodplain management. We will also look at the weaknesses of each index and provide some cautionary points for what an index can’t do. Finally, we will turn back to the underlying Census Data pairing that with additional data points to go beyond the indexes for considering social vulnerability in floodplain management. Events like Hurricanes Katrina and Harvey have shined a light on the impacts of development within flood prone areas and the disproportionate impact of those events on socially vulnerable populations has further illuminated the effects of historic development on at-risk communities. Furthermore, federal, state, and local funding has placed a priority on addressing the myriad of risks within socially vulnerable communities, including flood risk. Given the growing public and federal will to reduce impacts to socially vulnerable groups, it is more important than ever for floodplain managers to understand the tools available for measuring vulnerability and how those can be applied to better serve all members of our communities.

3) Place-Based Inequity: Case Studies from Hurricanes Ian and Ida
Heather Hilliard, CEM, IEM, CFM, R Roan Enterprises, heather.hilliard@rre-llc.com
Co-presenters: None

Abstract:This presentation will review equity issues in heavily hit areas from Hurricanes Ian and Ida that apply to nearly every are of the United States. By reviewing not only the geographic "desirability" of the most devastated locations but also the limitations of community populations as a feature of historical bias, this session will highlight data sets that can be used before disaster strikes. For example, building codes are a significant tool of mitigation, but exacerbate rebuilding reality of resilient populations that frequently exclude vulnerable populations as showing in findings of studies that highlight wealth inequity increases post-disaster. As floodplain managers, CRS coordinators, grant administrators and the many other hats we wear, taking local facts and mapping how mitigation as well as recovery funding can help disadvantaged members of our communities is more than 'bonus points' for FEMA funding, to meet Justice40, or other requirements - it's how we bring inclusive action to our all of our neighborhoods and strengthen recovery, decrease costs of response, and lessen mental health trauma for responders and residents/businesses alike.