6 Necessary Components of Flood Adaptation Planning for Local Governments
As the costliest and most common natural disaster in the United States, flooding is a risk factor that local governments cannot ignore. From 2000 to 2017, flood-related disasters in the United States accounted for more than $750 billion in losses.
For local governments addressing the impacts of flooding, making a plan is a crucial place to start. Proactive planning enables local governments to protect their communities, bolster their economies, and reduce their disaster damages. While there are a number of approaches to flood adaptation planning, this guide outlines the six questions that all elected officials should ask as they develop a flood adaptation plan.
1. Does the plan clearly outline — using complete data — what’s at risk today and in the future?
Why this matters: Risk assessments are important for two reasons. First, they identify the areas, assets (i.e., property and infrastructure that are valuable to a community), and people most at risk. Second, a risk assessment provides a baseline to measure against adaptation efforts in the future.
What to look for:
Existing data to understand past flooding and future risk
- Hazard layers (e.g., tidal, storm surge, flash flooding, riverine)
- Physical layers (e.g., elevation data gathered through LIDAR technology, building footprints, stormwater asset inventory, transportation networks, existing flood modeling, adaptation measures, etc.)
- Any existing data or modeling that has been backtested against recent floods
Insufficient or missing data and the plan to collect it
- Collate existing data from municipal, county, and state sources, as well as academic institutions and interpret the results to assess the level of flooding
- Perform a gap analysis to determine data needs and the plan for acquiring this data over time
Data that identifies the most vulnerable areas, assets, and populations
An outline of critical infrastructure, to the extent that the information is publicly available, and other critical risk factors (e.g., social vulnerability, cultural resources)
2. Does the plan set flood risk reduction goals?
Why this matters: Good plans have established timeframes, defined goals that specify the desired level of protection, and clear metrics. To successfully reduce flood risk, local governments must know what they’re solving for to be successful.
What to look for:
A planning horizon. Comprehensive plans frequently span 20-plus years and are refreshed every five to 10 years. Given that assets are often operational for 30 to 50 years, planning for at least 20 years, to align with comprehensive plans, is typically recommended.
A desired level of protection and acceptable risk. Although flood risk will never be eliminated completely, plans can only succeed if they are designed with clear goals based on the desired level of protection.
Clearly defined metrics and a communications strategy to assess the project’s performance
3. Does the plan provide a list of specific projects, in order of priority, with cost estimates and clearly defined ownership?
Why this matters: If a plan includes a list of prioritized projects with clear cost estimates and jurisdictional ownership, then the projects are more likely to be funded and completed. An actionable plan must prioritize projects based on the community’s particular flood risk. Also, since flooding lies at the nexus of municipal, county, state, and federal decision making, it is critical to understand each entity’s jurisdictional control as well as the areas where coordination among entities is necessary.
What to look for:
List of current and future projects needed to address flood risk
Process to prioritize projects and investments. If your local government has just started this process, then a plan should do the following:
- Inventory of current or planned projects
- Areas of greatest risk and proposed interventions
- Estimated total costs of projects
- Estimated total benefits for projects
- Plan to develop new projects as needed
- Prioritization of projects based on costs, benefits, timeline, and other relevant factors
Outline of jurisdictional authority for focus areas and projects. A good plan will clarify jurisdictional authority and emphasize the projects and focus areas where the planning entity has authority. In other words, a county plan would focus on county roads, buildings, water and stormwater assets, open space, and waterways, while a city plan would focus on city-owned assets, buildings, and space.
4. Does the plan outline which local, state, and federal sources of funding and financing will be utilized?
Why it matters: A plan is only actionable if there is a way to pay for it. Successful plans will include a holistic funding and financing strategy that addresses total project costs over time and steps to fill funding gaps.
What to look for:
A holistic funding and financing strategy. The plan should differentiate between near-term, medium-term, and long-term needs based on project prioritization.
Comprehensive review of funding and financing options at all levels. In order to assess all available sources, a plan should look across municipal debt and revenue sources, county funding, state resources, federal programs, opportunities for private investment, public-private partnerships, and other innovative mechanisms.
Mapping of current projects to funding and financing sources
Sources of funding and financing within the local government’s budget
Gap analysis of financing and funding needs
5. Does the plan specify policy changes across land use, zoning, and other processes to ensure responsible development in flood-prone areas?
Why it matters: The most cost-effective element of a plan is to establish smart policies and rules that ensure responsible building and development. A good plan evaluates local policy options and considers the local context and input from relevant stakeholders. As local governments invest in infrastructure, it is fiscally responsible to consider the future flood risk of development projects and long-term investments.
What to look for:
Proposed policy recommendations that address building, zoning, and development. In most places, building codes and zoning will need to be updated to mitigate flooding and should be part of a responsible plan. Policies should ensure that the plan strikes the right balance between retention (i.e., keeping water runoff on site) and conveyance (i.e., system capacity to move water), and the policies should be updated regularly to align with flood risk trends and projections.
Independent review of impact. An independent report on how current flood-related ordinances and policies impact the community now and in the future.
An outline of roles and ownership. The plan should assign roles for drafting and implementing local policy.
6. Does the plan take community input into consideration and spell out a robust plan for public engagement?
Why it matters: A flood adaptation plan will only succeed if the community is engaged in its development and supportive of its success. Successful two-way communication strategies involve thoughtful public engagement, and they require regular updates from the local government about the status of the plan and its projects.
What to look for:
Robust public engagement strategy. The plan creation process must include a robust public engagement strategy. Engagement efforts could include public meetings to solicit input, open comment periods for a draft plan, or public presentations about the plan.
Defined roles for the relevant stakeholders. The plan should spell out key stakeholders, indicate their roles, and explain the processes for obtaining their input.
Regular public updates about plan progress
