wI—I_I_-—!-—‘g—-—-—-—-—-—.- H.008 LOSS REDUCTION: A REWEW 0F ALTERNATIVE IfECa‘iMQUE-S FOR MECWGAN "E'h'esis ‘er the Degree of M. S. MtCHiGM STATE UNWERSHY ":‘WQTHY AiAN H3172 3.9232; .... __...L LIBRA KY E ~ Mir‘: ' ‘tatc E Uchr ..ty 9': j‘ 0.. \ I '. \. ) 3"!" “I... 2‘ ‘ w ”.W [.1 ‘ " "2' y. ”W: 02!.rm: r..- w. .1 ,,,_ Mt, l‘Qfl.~.‘xe :5. ,fi . ,E 9 Cum? 1' :12"; r; . ‘ . , 1’ 'Jr “00¢: plain .. -'- 1 .g -, ‘OILL. .4..‘.‘ (‘I &&N¢prqoflng. ; ‘Wa-I1t103. :10). €41.40) t...:}§»_;€ Slug". 0 :46" , t. flood laturrnre. fisfsbffilgf-‘a5 v.11» ’4' (.3, -;. ”tun, «cm»; assistance, W n «'9'; 11““; ‘ 4'," ‘ . ",.’;4.. ‘ Q’- < will” ”W1 h Mira. ”1.“ finesy‘ra “03) 1 ABSTRACT hm “14.1342... L. ’ J ”Mug“, ”1 .1 n . FLOOD LOSS REDUCTION: A ‘ REVIEW OF ALTERNATIVE 7‘ see town-o: ,_, ‘ _. TECHNIQUES FOR MICHIGAN . I N am PUM- “ . By ; A) a. munmtc- ,_, _- , Timothy Alan Hiltz . mantle“ , $325!“; '. -‘: . w’a‘ $55 “flying significant flood plain management responsibilities I mmgfigpmces Commission were enacted in 1967 and 1968. The legis- “*me tho responsibilities and involvement of the state in flood . “wont {b.1511 (lid not provide for a complete nor a comprehensive app- “mau‘g magnum: of flood loss reduction. A 1 Odtdtod 10 th f 11' MI fitflm $1.791! e! was c n no e eve p e range 0 alterna ive mmqkihaxe been preposed for reducing and mitigating flood losses. ‘ ' I' luv been offered for reducin flood losses wer c1 ssi— Lflm %% .'c '2‘". ' g e a M&?%fldopment, Postdevelopment, and Emergency technique tri- m mfig§mh means of implemention, and limitations of floodway b.-inla‘gzgfi371,00}; plain zoning, subdivision regulations, x4“ e'fionqhgzgod proofing, urban renewal, building and re- . Wfifim,.fifi9‘¥'i.‘31°?» .11”?! Plain “ruins signs. flood ' .n'reggvelopn‘ent, flood insurance, engineering works of galation, education, technical assistance, comprehensive » “Mane; are developed from the literature review. «3' ix‘” ::-":'fu‘.7 “Urrfi a- ' 'L‘.‘ £;J. ”haw“? to .“tfibfifigg‘ the meriatenesg,“ known v? 3'33 NOLA C‘ t“ ‘3 “‘93 1 It). :1, was: °5o3913§§tngfia3f 41.3%?" 3'.°w°,1.t'd -1 9.51"“..- . :3: L 15’ mtlete Letueen unuomie end eeoneaie Timothy Alan Hiltz “mum within Michigan . l r ! Chief reliance was given to perBOnal interviews, ( portend correspondence, state and federal agency flood management files, and 1mm holdings of local and state government documents for establishing the omprilttnIIB and applications of the above techniques. Itns found that a number of the techniques which have been prOposed in the flood literature are not thoroughly discussed in the literature nor known gob. upluented or practiced at the state or local level. Building code "fictions, taxation policies, warning signs, urban renewal, evacuation, re- developent, building and rebuilding finance, education, and comprehensive ‘ 1nd nee planning were found to be poorly developed in terms of flood loss and floodplain magmont considerations. Inadequate coverage in the literature 1| paralleled by little technique implementation at the local and state level. Significant attempts at utilizing floodway encroachment regulations, flood plain using, subdivision regulations, engineering works for flood protection and regulation, and technical assistance were found at the state and/or local level. Little use but considerable potential. for productive use of flood proofing, “dilution, flood insurance, and education was apparent from discussions with 100d, state, and l'ederal government agency personnel. Deficiencies and weaknesses were found in numerous applications of flood 3!. acumen techniques. Recommendations for additional specific studies are ‘3“ m sack of the techniques, regardless of whether they are currently WWW Val-thin the state. More specific concerns and recommendations " It flood plain regulatory programs at the state and local level. - nation between floodway encroachment zones and flood plain arid-eat. Furthermore, clear differentiation and application "inane power of eminent domain is needed. Existing ordinances 3 ,9?“ . ‘ meat to discriminate between uneconomic and economic «'35. ,:‘_ _ -3; A "a: . ‘ ‘0 . 4" Timothy Alan Hiltz ' .‘é ‘3 clad. non-hazardous structures. Excessively restrictive . “103 or flood plain areas may be deve10ped if the current \ r'ktinnOC 1n the State of Michigan. Greater attention should .J I ' ' w to ransom-us the sharing or flood plain regulatory "5...! 1311:1113”, and the Water Resources Commission in particular, ‘. .r . ”cation ”1(1) redirecting the responsibilities and _, ‘ro‘ulfition to local units of government, (2) establishing 101' ustmlhing economic and uneconomic flood plain - m Overlapping application of police powers in the pro- . and (4) evaluating the importance of education, technical to land use planning programs in advancing and inte- '_ «a. for reducing flood losses. . ‘ ,-, A $133313 “meted to “Mill State University femalhunt of the rectum-tents FLOOD L083 REDUCTION: A mm 01' ALTERNATIVE WIQU'BS FOR MICHIGAN _ — r..- ,_ ‘Vt-v " .1 3! filotlv Alan Hiltz ‘Wfl ? a,» P“ * ‘ .I OYt-a‘n 9s" L‘ '-"' .'.1 ‘ . “minim: N- .\.e. '- ‘ . i, , IWQ:Jtudiee m ., ft" Iv: III .. ‘3 cm: .r l -.-. s _ , I 3:% “It“, Mm: e 3- _ . W‘R , N w filbnmu “A" ”I "to . 3.5".CG!‘ 'u.."‘ ‘ :2.) . . . r 3 I13? ‘5 O f Id. Q' 1" 7 e- r ”.3le 811‘}? .. § hand Mbdifluum Regaliwm.» w. 453;; " " .. I “:3" - ‘ . f“. 3?? N g, '1 .tm need. pine W; - "i' 1"? "If. ‘g';“'—'";" .5- u: *- '1' LS Q! II' I '1 ’l .- om man 1420...!) adu- we .3 I ' -..». u 1" b‘c‘fi” . .. . ,_ . , z; ‘ {it J . ' i' I .—"~: ‘. , b 1 4- _ 1- . ._ f .4\~, tie-II:J§I‘>IVI -.' . ,~;q,- 3*4~-‘-r- _. , . , - . ‘ .- ~. . c \ ..Q ' 1"" I .:».‘ 5" If:€’?f.fi‘¥ 1:6,? .- =1e 1§f§ , thz‘J“ \ 4?.‘m ' 0,.f10..lewV“‘t,¢_‘-N I. '.“ 1.;,I‘I;' mead”; IQ}. :‘,_¥:;:% ii‘ I.“ . I_‘ <>_ ‘1‘ :fIriti-‘ff‘V'fie' Q LGKNO'LEDGMENTS “Cu” Of this masters thesis could not have been possible W “in” and support of nu wife, Carolyn. Her encouragement “Manama my decision to return to graduate school 9 and tofcontinue with further graduate study. . efler has provided patient and continuous éétgdées and thesis research. I deeply appreciate .5 contributions he has made to my graduate educa- " - Latte, assistant Division Chief, Hydrological Survey ; Mural Resources, State of Michigan and Dr. ”3, n edretary, State Soil Conservation Committee, {Nigf‘ginvtluablefiassistance in suggesting areas 'nmneseus eguestions. Professor Keith H. Honey's 1~ “MWHW Regulation in Fall of ., <._‘..._,,qé;. ma inquiry into the use of the i iee‘ ”mean we «pun development. I: If 16 the“ gentlemen for critically . .__~.. 0 e‘ i- c a a' t e .' 0 ft ~ .';I , " 9 Wm time may as thesis &‘ O .- . ‘ ‘ '- 6' I‘ d O a e e e e .- + z, lfi *fl‘VW‘i‘V", O 0. e e - a 'e a TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . Presence of a Problem . . . . . . . . . . Hypothesis and Study Objectives . . . . . General Plan of Investigation . . . . . . Limitations of Study . . . . . . . . . . Review of the Literature . . . . . . . . II.TELEPROBIBMSETTING............. Introductory Comments . . . . . . . . . . . Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . Flooding Causes of Flooding . . . . . . . . . . . . Hurricanes............... Riverine Settings . . . . . . . . . . . Urbanization as an Influence on Flooding............... Flood Risk and Loss Concepts . . . . . . . Flood Plain in a Riverine Setting . . . Floodway and Backwater Region . . . . . Frequency Expectations of Flood Occurrences............. Risk. Losses and Damages . . . . . . . . . . . 111.1:0L1crnwma-rivss Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Policy Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . A Classification of Alternatives . . . . . Predevelopment Flood Loss Management . . Compulsory Techniques . . . . . . . . Floodway Encroachment Regulations -Flood Plain Zoning . . . . . . . . Subdivision Regulations . . . . . ' ' " - Building Codes . . . . . . . . . . Lsubscriptive Techniques . . . . . . . . twarning-Signs . . . . . . . . . . P~n~~ Building Finance . . . . . . . . . -'51?Talatienwpclicy . . . . . . . . . 1“ *“Amitim e e e e e e e' e e e 0 Flood Insurance . . . . . . . . . iii \lU'lnh-UOH 10 10 10 10 ll 11 12 13 15 16 16 18 21 23 26 26 28 29 32 33 33 37 41 44 49 49 50 54 65 81 IV. Postdevelopment Flood Loss Management . . . . . Compulsory Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . Subscriptive Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . Engineering Works For Flood Protection and Prevention . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flood Proofing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flood Warning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Evacuation and Relocation . . . . . . . . . Redevelopment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rebuilding Finance . . . . . . . . . . . Flood Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Financial Relief . . . . . . . . . . . . . Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Technical Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . Integration Through Community Land Use Planning APPLICATIONS OF ALTERNATIVE TECHNIQUES IN MICHIGAN . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Predevelopment Policies for Directing Land Use . . Compulsory Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . Floodway Encroachment Regulations . . . . . . . Flood Plain Zoning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Subdivision Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . Building Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Subscriptive Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . Warning Signs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Building Finance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Taxation................... Acquisition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flood Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Postdevelopment Policies for Directing Land Use . . Compulsory Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . Subscriptive Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . Engineering Works For Flood Protection and Prevention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flood Proofing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Evacuation and Relocation . . . . . . . . . . . Redevelopment RebuildingFinance.............. FloodInsurance................ OtherTechniques................. Flood Relief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flood Warning System . . . . . . . . . . . . . Education and Technical Assistance . . . . . . v . WAT ION O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I '7’. _ I A n ‘ {1“ PredevelcpnentFloodLossManagement........ Compulsory...... Flocdway Encroaclment Regulations . . . . . . . :PloodPlainZoning............... SubdivisionRegulations BuildingCodes. iv 94 94 96 97 106 116 117 128 135 . 138 141 141 144 145 147 155 155 156 156 156 165 172 178 182 182 183 188 190 195 200 200 202 203 225 227 235 237 241 242 242 245 245 250 251 251 251 274 282 285 Subscriptive Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . Warning Signs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Building Finance . . . . . . . . . . . . . Taxation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Acquisition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flood Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . Postdevelopment Flood Loss Management . . . . . Compulsory Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . Subscriptive Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . Engineering Works for Flood Protection ‘ and Prevention . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flood Proofing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flood Warning System . . . . . . . . . . . Evacuation and Relocation . . . . . . . . . ‘ Redevelopment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rebuilding Finance . . . . . . . . . . . . Flood Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flood Relief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Education and Technical Assistance . . . . VI. RECQIMENDATIONS.................. Recommendations by Institutional Level . . . . . . Federal State Recamnendations for Improvement of Techniques . . Predevelopment Flood Loss Management Techniques....... Floodway Encroachment Regulations . . . . . FloodPlainZoning............. Subdivision Regulations . . . . . . . . . . Building Codes and Flood Proofing . . . . . Other Predevelopment Flood Loss Management Techniques.................. Warningsigns BuildingFinance............... Taxation................... Acquisition ................. FloodInsurance Postdevelopment Flood Loss Management . Techniques................... CompulsoryTechniques Subscriptive PostdevelOpment Flood Loss Management Techniques...... Engineeng Works For Flood Protection andPrevention............... EvacuationandRelocation .......... Redevelopment................ RehaildingFinance.............. Other‘l‘echniques................ FloodDisasterRelief Education and Technical Assistance . . . . . . Cmprehensive Land Use Planning . . . . . . . V 287 287 288 289 289 291 293 293 295 295 299 300 302 302 303 306 307 308 309 311 312 312 315 316 317 317 317 319 321 322 324 324 324 . 325 326 326 327 327 327 327 328 328 329 329 329 330 332 LIST or news Page as and Mitigating Flood Losses . . . . . . . . 30 ___\.—-—~——-—— -—-‘A_ . new control Program in "101116“ e e e e e e e 222 g “It: ~ ~ \ :91 “W“ -wflw .w .‘r' | \ 9' an to .m-uzscaa-te; Ha -<- .4: :13 N fig-M Mes-m u mm can :~ . . ‘3 .' '1. _. '; ' ‘T'LQ-‘z'u 6’6. '1...” “ dim“ ‘ p" ' mm 4‘” ‘J . I h‘ " ‘ I CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Wefafimhlsn Floods are 'acts of God,‘ but flood losses are largely acts of man.1 As Gilbert White tersely noted, man has often settled in such a manner as to expose himself and his developments to the risks of flooding. Estimates made in 1966, based upon inadequate information, place the average annual flood loss in the United States above 1 billion dollars.2 Figures for Michigan flood losses are even more difficult to report. Tlo decades ago, the average annual flood damage in Michigan was estimated in excess of 1.5 million dollars. This figure was apparently arrived at on the basis of tabulated flood losses. However, the actual flood loss figure was believed to exceed the estimated value by many times that cited, due to unaccounted flood losses}3 1 more recent tabulation of annual flood losses in Michigan was not 1011mm Fowler White. W- W 5 5 3,3, Ph. D. Dissertation, Published as Research Paper No. 29, Department of Geography, University of Chicago (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1945), p. 2. 2"11.8., Congress, House, Task Force on Federal Flood Control Policy, House Doc. No. 455: Government Printing Office, Reference cited hereafter as 0.3., Task Force Report on 89th c0113., 2dsess. (Washington, D.C.: 1966), p. 3e Rental Flood Control Policy, House Doc. No. 465, 1966. 3State Of Michigan, Inter Resources Commission, W, 1949-1950, First Annual Report to the Governor and Legislature (Loafing, ugh! Michigan Hater Resources Commission, n.d.), p. 37. O A, . . . : . ' b. '1 - . 30‘. n.0, .'."‘ ' V . ‘. .1 . . I i 1 * 2 found or known. Nevertheless, numerous reoccurring accounts of flood losses appear in Michigan newspapers nearly every year. A second perspective of the significance of flooding in Michigan is evident from figures on investments in engineering works of flood protection and regulation. Incomplete figures for 1967 show approxi- mately 89.1 million dollars for investments in Corps of Engineer projects completed, underway, or currently authorized for Michigan.1 More recent figures for l6 Small Watershed Protection and Flood Pre- vention projects reveal that more than 16.8 million dollars will be invested in these projects.2 The figures are incomplete in that they do not represent a current dollar basis. In addition, some multi- purpose projects costs are involved in several projects for which figures Vere summed. The figures do suggest that about 100 million dollars in flood prevention and protection projects have been constructed, or are presently authorized in Michigan. While this may not be as large an investment as found in other states, it still represents a considerable investment in flood protection and prevention.3 Moreover, there is every reason to believe that the risk of flood loss is in- creasing in Michigan as well as nationally/H5 - 1967 (Chicago: U.S. Am hgineere Division, North Central Division, January, 1967), ”O 30-‘1, 56.67. 59, 63, and 6‘. 211.8., Congress House, Committee on Appropriates, Subcommittee on “Airtight of Agriculture and Related Agencies Appropriations, W, 90311 Congress, let sees. (lashington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 3331.11.” Glenn Hoyt and Walter B. Langbein, m (Princeton, ll ‘i'treey: Princeton University Press, 1955), pp. 80-86; Figure 25 P. ”W31t3t8‘3 and Table 2, p. 86. Mg: Iit a, Chief Flood Control Unit, Michigan later Resources ., t i- ,, mm Interview, Lansing, Mich. , January 29,1967. ' . .,_ . 'M'N‘orce Report on Federal Flood Control Policy, House - mo. - 3 . We. test emails and mm mm mm widest that Michigan has continued to experience assess-nu and associated flood losses. Further, there has been an We literature deve10ping at the national level dealing with the em" 212v.“ .dsi:4tse¥natives for managing and reducing flood losses. While many ideas lflblto lt~c and 'metmt mement philosOphies have been advanced in the litera- . _ .. g t if. to Mint“. discussion and review of such ideas has been reported in ’ m e! ester ~: We hWingly, a charge was given to the author to embark upon 'Ifir Be: it fiend management policies and programs as they might be M than. : . m to Iishigan flood loss management needs. “3“” Upoc w ~ .W the premise that flood losses were a management problem tote 27. . -. 1.3 m hypothesized that such losses could be reduced and/0r .... my m“ o; 3;.T. - ' is the future through a broader flood loss management program. ‘I de‘Ie ' . W ‘ . ., . t3“ N e . . :Jhm‘ ' ' this 1wpothesis a number of objectives were established ._. fl”. *4 in) u. anvdrt .. " .. a, «‘3 a as initial charge involved providing a comprehensive : m». mind 1 .11 u ".- ' .-;1 and progosed flood loss management alternatives which ‘-' - , data ' ‘ V ’13 lichigan. A similar review was not known to exist . _‘ “hodw u. .1? .- . «ii-imam, such a review was felt to be of sufficient E? frt’mo e: wuv' .‘3'-- - -.- 93'.» Hereover, it was felt a comprehensive review 9 c u. “ted loss when an: ‘ e 'ernaz. . -c. . :--.1; ,~ , I. .. k”. .. ,_ Wises management techniqnes was required ‘, ' '~' rests-i ztsd to a iii-Lace sunbu- o! anemo- “:3: is” the second main objective. . ' . at. “he! Mime eats sensation and recess-$55 ‘ ‘ ... should provide useful mutations to responsible ‘ Mb not“. Mb mm melted the m- mm mu m It sas max-eat that .‘ *‘ .. _ ‘ - ‘ -’ 'f! .- 914' . .H..‘;-"m ;. a C.:; t ‘r. _ . 5&1 ‘ ' \ ‘ ‘e -i' ‘3)“ ‘ . ,w .- .' ;. ' ' fl." ' T ' '9. T? *“1“%. 4 Fourth, because of the nature of this study, new ideas and additional recommendations will be posed for further research and study. 9.2mm. Elsa 9.: W The approach ad0pted for this study was largely set by a larger, more comprehensive study carried on at the same time. The study of flood loss management in terms of Michigan needs was a component of a more general review of water resource policy undertaken while the author was with the Michigan water Resources Commission. At the outset of the study it was recommended that the comprehensive study and review requested depended essentially upon secondary sources of data and information. Therefore, the approach taken entailed an extensive literature search. This included review of public documents and records. Supplementary informa- tion was obtained through personal interviews and by letter correspondence. In effect, (1) the nature of the study requested, (2) the time, and (3) the resources required in drawing together the policy review did not allow for detailed, primary data collection nor statistical analyses. Quantitative methods have only recently been introduced to this subject area.1 Some references were uncovered in which modest attempts have‘leem made at modeling flood loss management alternatives.2 However, the saddle to date have been restricted to a limited number of alternae tires. *lhimnthese'have involved extensive data collection and processing this! eeqeirec siseable research staffs. Such requirements exceeded the I) T. Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, W . —- .N;. , Report by TR! Systems GrOnp. ,Galifern‘ia submitted to U. 6. Army Engineer Institute for ' deifnéhnfiia, Virginia (Springfield, Virginia: clearing- has.“ feaficienéific and Technical Intonation, December, 1969). u. \‘9 r. J -- a“... "u ‘ t ; ' .’ '. . _ ‘ . ' 1‘ ' 26pm no. 16 (LexingtOn, Ky: University of R T‘;;;;1?I!pes'lsseurces Research Institute, 1968). 5 scOpe of this study and also fall short of the comprehensive review requested. In contrast, much narrative material has been written in terms of general flood loss management concepts. A variety of alternative techniques for reducing flood losses have been proposed in such materials. .Eowever, there is a sizeable gap between general concepts and detailed treatment of possible alternatives. Many alternatives have not had the objectives, program requirements, and limitations of their implementation set forth. Consequently, some attempt has been initiated in this study to fill in this disparity between concept anitechnique deve10pment. To accomplish this it was necessary to bring together many references in the flood loss management with materials in allied or compatible areas of 19%“1379 Limiiaiien§.2i.§in§1 - Th; disparity between concept preposal and technique develoPment is an understandable one. It illustnates the problem of bridging the separation between the concepts and perspective of the generalist and the detail'of the specialist. This study reflects the problems in trying to mirroi such a separation. It was found that once a general concept '1' Ht 0 " '_°_ was penetrated, the next level of inquiry and development was that of the U\$ HO‘“ cal specialist. The many alternatives preposed for flood loss \ . I 330‘. g ‘ e ‘\ ment‘ntémitate covering a wide range of fields, including: hy- filtered.bcverel ,._.l. *:'°*"' engineering, architecture, urban planning. economics, 1*c.9< 2' _ ,,_, law, and others. Within these fields many highly “ 693'.16t' W0 «an; .m such as hydraulics, building design and wrestle -H- gig-,gpsdsg, subdivision regulation, eminent domain, police power, ""‘Iieeheent or 'v' i: P _ «its ~ *.;‘>,amd.asaperty rights to name a few; Moreover, it was "' ,fllsnt or sit in. 2* . N --.. falso. Professor White's classic study in 1942 has been followed by a.series of special studies at the University of Chicago.1 His work was culminated recently in his chairing the Task Force on Federal Flood Control Policy. The report under his chairmanship came forth with far reaching recommendations for comprehensive flood loss management policy adoptions and adjustments.2 One reference from the University of Chicago of considerable importance to the present study was that of Francis Murphy, a studpnt of Professor White's at the University of Chicago.3 His study was of principle benefit in contributing to the develoPment of the framework of this study and the initial outlining of many of the alternative management techniques. Professor Allisin Dunham's writings contributed greatly to the deve10pment of the legal considerations of this study. He provided the most comprehensive and definitive legal study of the application of police powers for flood plain management found to date.4 'Iertheimeh is credited with the first substantive inquiry in this area.5 Much of the work.of“both writers was still found applicable today. ;nev£.e of techniques used in engineering works of flood protection end.prevention relied upon references of two authors and of the American v———‘r ‘— I Jim... W 1942. o 23 ., Task Force Report on Federal Flood Control Policy, House Doc. «5,, . . . 7x». . - --4Wm.1. c. Murphy. WW. Department Of Research.Peper No. 56, University of Chicago (Chicago: 0 cage . it e.er .Livfnpf ’ .1958) ”h M Mes "Flood Control Via the Police Power”, W . i _ _._ rm}; A,.V010 107, No. 8 (June, 1959); issued as a reprint. 9 Society of Civil Engineers. Harold Kilbirth Barrows,1 Yan Ch'eng Bhih,2 and the Report of the Committee on Flood Control, Hydraulics Division, A.S.C.E.3 provided the primary sources of information for this review. Two publications of B. Tate Dalrymplel"5 and one by the Hydrology Committee of the Water Resources Council6 provided the basic information for outlining hydrologic considerations in flood events. The latter publication provides the current accepted practices for computing flood flow frequencies by Federal water resource agencies. Finally several references deserve mention as general sources of background material. lElggdg by Hoyt and Langbein7 along with ihggfilggg gggtggl_ggntggxgngy by Leopold and Maddock8 provided good introductory references to the general problem of flood loss management. "Barrows. um. Win21 (New York: McGraw-Hill 300k COe, 1948)e 2Yang-Chang Shih, : = ' . (New‘Ionk: Bookman Associates, 1956). gimerican Society of Civil Engineers, "Flood-Control Methods: Their Physical and Economic Limitations," Report of the Committee on Flood Control, Hydraulics‘nivision,‘Ezgggggingg, Vol. 66, No. 3 (Lancaster, Pa: American Society of Civil Engineers, February, 1940), pp. 265-282. ‘Tate Dalrymple, "Flood Characteristics and Flow Determination - ‘Pert I of Hydrology of Flood Control," Section 25 in,flgndhggk_gj_gpplig§ Blilfllflilfl . , ed. by Von Te Chew (‘lew York: McCraw-Hill Book Company, 1964). - sTateIDalrymple, "Flood-frequency Analysis" in Manual of Hydrology: Pt. 3, nuance Techniques, U. S. Geological Survey Water Supply m W Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1960). sister Resources Council, Hydrology Committee, A Uniform Technique to: Det«fining Flood Flow Frequencies Washington, D.C.: Water Resources ' ”Neil. 1025 Vermont Avenue, N.W., December, 1967). Sr» - _ . fat ”4 Lanzhou, m. 1955. ‘i " ‘ ' erg Leopold and Thomas haddock, W. in}?! x if“: = w: , Tittle DamsJ and Land Management (New York: Ronald Press, I"’_ p’““'8 3‘. l . 0“; --------- - r .3 ‘wvAII . -- " - -_‘ 3". ._ _ - .- »_ CHAPTER II THE PROBLEM SETTING Ini:2§n&i2:x.§gam£n£§ An almost implicit causal relationship between flood losses and riverine settings is assumed in most of the literature dealing with flood loss management. The consequences of this tendency can lead to the disregard of other causes of flood losses when dealing with compre- hensive flood loss management programs. On the other hand, the degree of attention and amount of literature devoted to problems of river flooding is indicative of public priorities relating to management of flood losses. This is true at the Federal level and within the State of Michigan. Certain definitions and a number of qualifications will be set forth*below in order that a preper perspective of flooding as an occurrence and as a hazard may be obtained. Definitions are needed for at least two reasons. First, an understanding of types of flood events is important to the design of different sets of management techniques. Second, an explanation of a few concepts associated with flooding will indicate how technical considerations in an of themselves, tend to frus- trate effective-policy develOpment for managing flood losses. L.' J at ‘K. -cu‘ ~..- .. - Wailers: c,~m,. . . ‘ . \ . Flooding "a! 3th 5.. Etooding, as an event, is commonly associated with flowing water 'vy: \v have become excessively swollen from storm drainage and/or _ _ O Ringing» . , .e 10 11 snow melt. As a consequence, water overflows the channel banks and inundates adjacent land not usually covered with water.1 Such a con- cept can be too restrictive at times. A broader concept of flooding may 'be needed in order to give recognition to flooding due to hurricane driven storms and inadequate drainage in urban areas. This will be brought out below in the discussion of causes of floodings. In general, subse- quent discussions in this paper will maintain the narrower concept. That is, primary attention will be given to riverine settings and associated flooding in Michigan. This is due to (1) the dominant role riverine flooding has held in develOpment of alternative flood loss management policies, and (2) to the prevalence of this form of flood event through- out Michigan. Causes of Flooding Was One of the most dramatic and devastating causes of flooding is that associated with hurricanes. Here flood losses are not necessarily restricted to riverine settings nor coastal beachfronts. Flooding and subsequent damage may be a result of the interaction of hurricane winds'and (l) intense rainfall, (2) high tides, and/or (3) wind driven watereonrses.2’3 Intense rainfall may cause immediate flooding due to (l) inadequate runoff and drainage with resultant pending of waters, or to *4 1This narrow definition of flooding as an event is illustrated in (a) Dslyrymple, ”Flood Characteristics and Flow Determination," W 1964. p- 25-2; (b) Hoyt and Lansboin. 7‘_; _ 1955, Chapters 2 and 3; and (c) Iebeteg's Ne; ggggtigth Centugz ‘aagggn;- - Unabri ed (New York: Standard Reference lbrks Publishing 'fflfV«,,lnc.. 1957). Although, Hoyt and Langbein draw an apparent inciion between hurricane induced damage and riverine flooding, .. mtggmey- and Langbein, Elnggg, 1955, Chapter 2, "Ihy Us Have Flood 1, 1959' Be Be t I. .. l 4 . I n in . 1V HIV IJ. . . . a r n n c . u n . . ~ w . . . . ; . i ._ . . . u. a.” .. . . a . . . .\ . r... ..v‘. . . . 12 {23 the subsequent overflow of taxed stream channels and waterways. A further potential element in this type of flood hazard is the damage which results from salt water intrusion associated with wind driven sea waters in coastal areas. The corrosive effect of the salt water is an additional source of flood loss relative to those destructive elements associated with river flooding which include losses due to sedimentation and siltation. A variation of hurricane caused flooding is present in the Great Lakes Basin Region. Michigan along with other Great Lake states and the Province of Ontario, experience prOperty losses from flood waters associated with wind driven storms sweeping across the Great Lakes during years of extreme high water levels. In preceding years of high lake stages, flood losses due to coastal flooding have been known to greatly exceed flood losses associated with riverine settings when averaged on a year-by-year basis. This dramatic form of flooding merits separate i ! i study and consideration. .Rhflflina.§lilln£§ River flooding may result from a number of causes.1 As in hurricane (or wind driven) flooding, the causes of river flooding are not always distinct in their Operation or contribution. The most frequently en- °°untered form of flooding is that resulting from intense and/or pro- IMOd..rainfall. The rainfall is often coupled with rapid snow melt or ”findisurface water runoff resulting from impermeable soil conditions. I'liet'meabl'e soil conditions increase the rate of runoff delivery, as well . "I the-flout of precipitation yielded in the form of surface and sub- 13 of river flow by landslides, ice flows, debris, and/or structures built by man. Any of these forms of obstruction can impede flood flows causing the river to overflow its banks upstream from the obstruction. A third cause of river flooding is the overt0pping and possible failure of dams. A variation of this would be the failure or sudden removal of an obstruction to flood flow cited in the second cause. A second variation of the third cause is the failure of river levees, flood walls, and dikes to retain flood flows and flood waters. In the event of a dam or levee failure a sudden surcharge of water may be released to the adjacent occupied flood plain formerly protected by the dam or levee system. In any of the three preceding causes of flooding, the overtopping of a re- taining structure does not necessarily have to be accompanied by an eventual failure of the structure and accompanying sudden surcharge. Significant damage may result solely from the large volumes of water overtepping the retaining structure. In fact, in the case of levee systems, inadequate drainage behind levee embankments has been the cause of surface water accumulation and resultant flood damage not associated with a high river stage or flood event. deumiasiinnuss.snfllnflnnnsn.2n.Elandins Another form of flooding has been increasing in its occurrence and j-ll?¢.u‘te.uce in terms of economic losses. This form is associated directly with man's concentrated settlement patterns and urbanization. Soil Permeability and vegetation are reduced or eliminated in large expanses °‘ ”but was due to pavements and other sealed surfaces. Inadequate ‘5‘. Win“: drainage during intense rainfalls is resulting in Mammal.“ of urban areas. Depressed expressways, roadways, Ind MA We. surface waterways. Temporary surface water storage is 14 also provided by these roadways as well as other depressional areas, including basements and ground floors of low lying homes, businesses, and other buildings. This aspect of flooding is, in large part, an engineering design problem, i.e., relating storm sewer design to precipitation rates, runoff data, and cost data.1 A second facet of increased urbanization is the aggravation of riverine flooding. The aggravated flooding is attrubutable to imper- meable surfaces, increased surface runoff, concentration of surface runoff, and accelerated delivery of surface runoff. The significance of urbanization on increasing levels of runoff are well illustrated in civil engineering references. Ihcreases in levels of runoff are demonstrated with the progression from unimproved areas to highly developed down- town areas. Coincident increases in runoff coefficients are also noted by surfaces as they progress from porous to less porous surface types. For example downtown business areas and/or concrete streets may typically have runoff coefficients as high as 0.70 to 0.95. While unimproved areas and/or lawns of sanchr soil types and flat lepe may have coefficients chth or less. (In short, the less pervious the surface type the Heater the percentage of runoff of incident rainfall. Numerous additional factors, as surface or depressional storage, antecedent rainfall, intensity Ofxwdnfall, and surface slepe will also influence the magnitude and direction of adjustment of the runoff coefficients.2 The aggravation of riverine flooding due to urbanization is apparently M; A;"' "can; whim. of the American Society of Civil Engineers '1“! tin later Pollution Control Federation, W W, ASCE Hanuals of Engineering Practice Wham- no: manual of Practice No. 9 (New York: American Society WW,1960). Chapter 4. pp. 33-34, 47-50, and 77-73. H 1 1 ,.en ""Q 5,. 4 “a p11. air-34, 47-53. e O ___A. “t. 15 ~1J.}_I_rn_1t_l effects to the smaller but more frequent flood events. tho problem is important and worthy of concern was indicated by filo-special Tad: Force on Effect of Urban Development on Flood Discharges.1 1. review of the literature undertaken by the Task Force uncovered differing conclusions as to the degree of increased flooding associated fithmrbanisation. However, it can be concluded that urbanized areas are ' listening the magnitude and the frequency of the smaller, more frequent “I floods. This effect is lost as larger and less frequent flood events are I, «moored. As will be noted in the following sections, this is but one A 'i 031’;th conducting interrelationships between human settlement on flood t e... ‘ Mend the hydrology of flood events. 4 g a I " Flood Risk and Loss Concepts ,1 ' hf: Chile floods and flood damages are a very real and dramatically m .' ‘ ,é%.:l‘phenomena, the defining of flood risk and hazard in riverine settings h m: problems of an abstract nature. The misunderstanding or ignorance ‘mmnskgives‘cause to much of the human and institutional diffi- - achieving flood loss reduction. The misunderstanding and ig- mm in 1335. part from the probabilistic nature of flood risk. liqfloedarisk is a function of the frequency expectations of different ‘ “5,1,“, floods vary in time and dimension. Accordingly, the l or. flood plain risk area is an exercise in probabilities; I.” . e - :‘- :_,'-.' .gw. .. , caresses problems in flood plain policy development - _ ' ‘ . 5i it. I ,' ‘fl--:--r.‘.'.'?. his" . f d!“ ' '.-‘1{9'% . 1.2““ an at... of Urban Development on flood. Discharges. 359.: 45f M e o flannel. ”Effect of Urban Development on We? '1' _. ’ -. { ”Ag t Knowledge and Future Needs," Pregress W11; "5'31"“ .. ~ 4' ~~ Proceedings of the American - ”w. 151.90. 1 (Ann Arbor, intelligent ironic: I... 3'? ' "o,~ n‘ r Essa“. r. » . r r _Hj 1;.135‘ V \qfi’ gt}; . '.\-'~ . densely. 1969'). Do 289. -.-.-, ‘ l " J13]... w .1-~,i-.....‘.- 4.2.... “'44.. ‘0 0. ~— A . a ‘_ .4. . r--’- 16 mmusmsms ’0 Each flood plain can be discussed in terms of its t0pographical relationship with the stream channel or river bed. The delineation and definition of the flood plain is, in part, a function of the sus- ceptibility of the land to inundation as the water rises within the defined channel banks of the watercourse. (Use of "natural" can be misleading when specifying natural channel bank without setting forth the criteria for natural.) The delineation problem develops from the dynamic nature of a stream. The flood plain of the stream has been and may be at certain times part of the stream or river channel. At the same time the flood plain undergoes change or alteration due to flood scour, sedimsntation, and changing stream bed or channel flow. Such processes all affect the subsequent flooding or overflow of the channel banks. As a consequence, the flood plains and the associated flood risk 1,2 to land use are both dynamic and relative concepts. mmme The tepography and hydraulics of a watercourse are such that the flood plain may be sub-divided into two zones. The boundaries of each Tithe two zones are interdependent but variable, depending upon the flood magnitude under consideration. The area of first concern is the floodwq. It represents the area necessary to actively pass the flood flow under consideration. The destructive forces and damage potential in the area are considerable, due to shear and scour resulting from mm. W of flood waters and their suspended loads. Impedisents . b C - dussfidaai:42ss ‘.‘“ Laé ,..'De.' -‘ ‘ ' momma, m, 1955, pp. 13-18. [L put.“ 2.315 . - .- -' ' 14 and Haddock. MW. 1954. p. 10. 1' thiscsnms; restrict flow and effectively raise or increase the area of ., I‘- ‘1' .4. ft ‘1 1 a 17 the second zone. The second zone, the pondage or backwater region, results from owerflow of waters from the floodway onto adjacent lands fer temporary storage. Storage in the backwater area is necessitated by excess runoff and flood volumes relative to floodway capacity. Consequent, direct losses and damages in this zone are attributable to wetting action and/or sedimentation processes of relatively quiet ponded waters. (In the case of hurricane or marine water flooding, additional damage may be attributable to the chemical action of the salt water.) Indirect damages and losses are also related to general flooding as will be developed below.l’2 If the two zones were static, i.e., always of the same areal extent in each flodd, then flood loss management practices might be more readily deve10ped. This is especially true of land use regulatory measures. However, a portion of the pondage area for one flood may be in the floodway of a more severe flood. In some instances, the floodway my move out of the old channel bed and deve10p .a new flood channel. star.” The understanding of this dynamic phenomenon is apparent in engineering Practices. However, the importance of this dynamic two zone phenomenon ‘5 is not adequately reflected in previous considerations of regulatory ‘ Programs for directing land use in the flood plain.3 That the distinction 5 ~ - 17311613 c. Murphy. WW. 1958. pp. 13714. " zdohn Richard Sheaffer, W: W W (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960), pp. 77 a 183. star example: Allison Dunham in "Flood Control via the Police Power,” 1962;, correctly distinguishes between flood damages and losses caused to a party from those incurred directly by a flood plain occupant. How- 4 the. author fails to adequately distinguish between the two flood plain . .5333 their implementation for the resulting externally inflicted v ‘ has these borne solely by the flood plain occupant. In reality, - 3., tion between the two zones is muddled by the fact that each 9’3“ grid does, in fact, cause some external damage. The probld 1 "'~ 5'- K ‘73 e(‘r ‘n; L4..- :‘F‘L' _ ,3. ' .- t. . I ”E: “flak h .5 _ _ !'*~ 18 between, as well as the existence of the two zones, is important in considering flood plain regulation and flood loss reduction can be viewed in the differing consequences of building in a zone prescribed by administrative or statutory action. Building in a permitted flood plain area predicated upon a certain flood event of a more severe nature occurs. The hazard would lie primarily in the ignorance of the flood plain occupant of the remaining flood hazard and/or the associated false sense of security of residing in a flood plain area adjoining the regulated flood plain area. mm Motions 9.: £1221 W A common practice of classifying floods is by their frequency expectation. The frequency expectations are expressed in terms of variations in time and magnitude of flood occurrence. The most familiar expression of flood frequency is the selected time frequency flood, as in the notation of "a ten year flood," "a one hundred year flood," etc. These may be expressed alternately as floods having a ten percent chance or a one percent chance, respectively, of occurring in any one year. This latter is preferred, due to the misinterpretation often associated with the former notation. In either case, the floods have been associated with floods having a M W as measured by volume, rate of new, and/or stage level which can be expected to recur on an average as prescribed hy the notation.1 Two qualifications should be immediately noted. First, the proba- * Jr. 311137 of expectation is presumed to (1) be based on a long, historical Ag...“ 4L" “Mt the ability to determine the individual contribution to the " chine of backwater storage area and consequent increase in flood by difficult to arrive at and sustain in a legal proceeding. ”titres in the case of the floodwey. A‘s-h a h“: Weill, m, 1955, p. 64. N2. ' a. ...... -u’ + 19 5 record of events and (2) average out over a long period of time. Second, an expectation expressed in this way is less than ideal due to changes in the hydrology of the stream brought about by natural processes and human activities. The first qualification results from limitation in the historical record of flood occurrences and the long term averaging requirements. General flood records do not go back beyond the turn of the century. This causes the calculation of frequency expectation to be subjected to readjustments as the years of record continue to accumulate. The long term averaging requirements complicate the interpretation of the record. It is conceivable and has happened, for an extreme event, such as "a one hundred year flood," to repeat its occurrence within a relatively short period of time. The second qualification develOps from the changes in the hydrology of a.watershed. The changes often become significant as a result of bases activities, especially in the case of urbanization. Accelerated rates in runoff or in drainage yield from a watershed can increase a flood magnitude that would be normally associated with a particular meteoro- logical event and undisturbed environmental conditions. Human activities In: thus increase the magnitude of a "ten year flood," or correspondingly increase the frequency expectation of a specified flood magnitude. This will also complicate the first qualification by altering the watershed conditions for which the flood record is being kept. The effect will be loch that the historical record of a stream is a composite record of an “Nu'ehanging stream. l.sosewhat more desirable practice is the use of discharge frequency as ' hastens“ flood frequencies. This may be coupled with or used in mm ., ¢_. 'fllflsdsg stage-frequency curves. The latter curves are of more immediate . L_- t p -. <1 4 20 relevance in determining the risks of flood loss. Discharge frequency curves relate different peak discharge flow rates (usually the flows are expressed in cubic feet per second, c.f.s.) at a reference point on the stream to a recurrence time interval.1’2 Similarly, the stage-frequency curve relates the different peak flood flow heights at a reference point on the stream to a recurrence time interval. This latter frequency measurement will allow determining how frequently a spot at a certain elevation on the flood plain may be inundated to varying depths. It does not relate the duration for which this location may be inundated by a certain flood stage. Further, both of these frequency curve methods are subjected to adjustments resulting from natural and cultural activities. The adjustments in stage-frequency curves are of considerable interest as they relate more directly to areas (points) and heights of inundation and therefore reflect more readily the changes or adjustments in flood damage risks.3 The length of time for which a location may be inundated by a certain discharge - or stage - frequency determined flood can be inferred from a third curve - the flood hydrograph. Each reference station on a stream I111 have a distinct hydrograph for each frequency of flood. The flood ——‘ 13o: further statistical discussion of flow frequency, see H. Alden rfilter, “Theoretical Frequency Curves and Their Application to Engineering Pflfiflsms ,‘lngngagtignfl of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. ‘7 Paper No. 1532 (New‘Yonk: American Society of Civil Engineers, 1924), DT11A2-l73 with discussions pp. 174-203. (See especially pp. 145-147 “3 treatment of unsymetrical or skew curve flow frequency behavior.) zThe currently recommended method for flow frequency analysis is the Tearson Type III method; the basis for which was developed by Foster _;is his 1924 article. See Water Resources Council, W , 1967, pp. 67. O “.60 or. . ‘ 111, , . force on- Effect of Urban Development on Flood Discharges, “3" an», Wedge and Future Needs,” Proceedings of A.8.C.E., loco, :31”. .298‘308e ., . , . ‘ .a‘ 21 hydrographywill give the complete time record of a particular flood event at a specified reference point or station. A sequential series of different reference station hydrographs will yield an historical account of the particular flood event in question. The hydrograph does so by relating stage, discharge, velocity or other selected parameter of flood flow to the time period over which the flood develOped and subsided. The hydrograph can be regarded as an integral expression of the physiographic and climatic characteristics that govern the relations between rainfall and runoff of a particular drainage basin. It shows the time distribution of runoff at the point of measurement, defining the complexities of the basic characteristics by a single empirical curve. Further, it allows relating various elevations adjacent to and lying in a.line normal to the stream to the risk of inundation by that particular flood, along with the associated possible duration of inundation. This is an essential element in determining the risk of flood loss and/or damage due to a particular flood event. not In summary, the hazard of flood damages to cultural land uses is dependant upon the location of the parcel of preperty in question upon the flood plain and the frequency expectation of various flood magnitudes. _‘ In addition, the notion of risk involves economic and cultural concepts whihh:introduce new elements to the assessment which go beyond the hy- drolOgic possibilities and probabilities of natural occurrences. An Intensive.treatment of hazard and risk in relation to flood plain occupancy is given by Robert I. Katee.2 Katee abstracted four fundamental assumptions _—_ - ." 1‘~"'.J"‘ ‘ lveani Chow, "Runoff," Section 14 in Handbook of Applie ed §zdrology: ‘- due- of water Resources Technolo .1. , ed. by Von Te Chow New York: ‘7‘ ”Av“: ., Harem «Titan; 9'- 4- 8 (“TIH'l-fin " . .’ o, m. . -‘"~s"' " Ifllli t s Leash???» * - "' x. ' ’ W ’n sent of Geography Research Paper No. 78, University of i... , .. gm? ‘Mflrsity of Chicago, 1952). .. "' .eg‘ “9 L .L. :1 lot less exhaustive treatment of hazard and risk in relation 1 W e . e s ‘ . . e I ‘ . ‘ ‘ .9 L '5 ‘, t“ - ‘ r VJ: * HF '{Ghieagoz University of Chicago, 1969). no 089061011! no 22 underlying decision-making theory as it might relate to rec0gnition of flood hazard and risk and any associated subsequent land use adjust- ment actions. The assumptions relate to (1) the underlying view of man's rationality; (2) the types of decision processes involved; (3) the conditions of knowledge under which choice is made; and 1 (4) the criteria that are used to guide such choice All four of these assumptions were found to be related to the flood plain occupant's recognition of hazard, degree of risk, and the possible magnitudes of accompanying damages. 0f importance is the fact that the perceptions of flood risk varied significantly between the individual flood plain occupant, the flood loss management professional, and the public decision maker causing differing perceptions of appropriate correc- tive or protective actions. The principal concern here is for the flood plain occupant, for whom various alternative programs of flood loss reduction or relief are .wahqfi ----—— v~ In considering the alternative approaches and possibilities in amhieving flood loss reduction and prevention some qualigications should be noted. In the survey of possible alternatives much reliance is placed “monjpresently practiced methods or upon adapting existing techniques in -*~. .A ‘-.‘ e... ,,. other management endeavors to that of flood loss reduction. Thus i limitationsand constraints arise due to reliance on existing knowledge. viiietelophdiand foreseen. lhat research into management techniques :h' e ‘ fi_;.';ifsd.mt mere original thinking in the policy £1.14 will b {T ‘1‘” . a: | I, '. _ . . ‘. - . . "-fii3;Vi,§¢fl1fi to assess. However, this area in itself constitutes;;,; _;_ g ' "‘51? -- , ' ‘. ."'\ . '1’ 1;- - ‘ . ‘2' - b::‘-" \‘J‘ ., _"_ is, ‘:° J'— (wa - .‘. ' ' ~ ;.1 29 an alternative due to the prospects of developing further approaches in flood-loss management along with the following discussed ones. A W8 if' tion if. W The array of techniques available to direct land use on flood plains are varied. Ways of conceptualizing and classifying the various techniques are also varied.1’2’3’4 The technique classification schemes may be structured on the basis of the: (a) type of land area to be secured or managed, e.g., rural-urban undeve10ped-deve10ped; or (b) timing of technique implementation, 6.5., preflood-postflood, predevelOpment-postdevelopment; or (c) means of technique implementation; e.g., individual-collective, compulsory-subscriptive or elective. For the purposes of this thesis, the classification of the flood loss management techniques will be one of implementation timing. (See mama. I). The techniques will be structured and reviewed according to their application in the (a) predevelopment or (b) postdevelopment period. Coupled with this there will be an underlying emphasis on means of implementation. This concerns essentially whether the techniques amp compulsory or subscriptive in nature. This can be exemplified by lint-e. WW. 1962. p. 104. 2Jerrold A. Moore. WWW. Engineering Imperdsent Station Bepcial Report No. 35, Georgia Institute of Technology (it tai? Georgia Institute of Technology, Reproduced under sponsorship of Tiénessee Valley Lutherity, n.d. (post 1958) ). E7 ~- Mu W. 1958. pp. 6-10. 'L‘ 5’ 19195. Chm. IV. filllllll+msfiGGMHm obsmsoneamfioo wl} eosmumflmmm amussnoma sowumosmm museumflmmm coauwmflmwo< Hmowszoea moccasmsH coaumospm useEmon>mvom mosmusmsH AstEOp mosmsflm ucmsflfimv msowusdsuou mcapaflsnom assumes sens: sowuwmflswom epoo mswuaadm mofloflaom opoo mcmwm msoquHnboH w coflmxma 3.23 gm museums nonmafienam msowumasmmu mGOflumHmmoH msflmoonm meadow mowowaom msdsou msflunmflm pooam pooam om: mama soaumxma ems mama useso>oumsH msoflueasmou mGOHumHsmou mo mxuoz usossomosusm mosmsam usossomouoso 33mm 320835 $33on 3333 H383 meanness >osomaesm humusaao> anomammsoo auousmao> huoenmmsou usesmoao>emumom nonsmoae>emoum . a E mammoq moons qua¢uHsHm nzm ozHoszmz mom mmnanzmoms a names 1 l rteL‘I; 31 the contrast between regulatory devices and incentive, elective, or educational devices. Such considerations are felt to be important due to their instructive value in terms of technique selection and understanding the rationale for applying the technique. This is particularly important in the area of regulatory techniques, where the justification for applying a device having compulsory provisions needs careful development. The discussion of the alternative techniques for reducing flood losses will be structured by their application to pro-flood plain deve10pment or post-flood plain development. Commonly proposed techniques falling under'predevelopment applications are: (1) floodway encroachment regulations, (2) land use zoning regulations, (3) subdivision regulations, (4) building code regulations, (5) building finance, (6) modified tax policy, (7) warning signs, (8) land acquisition, (9) insurance, (10) education, and (11) technical assistance. Under postdevelopment implementation, the cosmonlyvprOposed approaches include: (1) engineering works of improvement and flood control, (2) flood proofing, (3) evacuation, (4) redevelopment, (5).insnrance, and (6) land acquisition. The relative placement of some of these techniques is somewhat arbitrary. (See Table I). Engineering works of improvement and flood proofing are techniques available to prospective flood plain develOpers, and therefore, are equally appropriate under predevelOpment techniques; although current stress or attention under both techniques is directed toward securing existing deve10pment. Similarly, land acquisition is available in both time periods. Difference may exist in the general availability or appropriateness of the various techniques available for acquisition. However, the distinction is not N1:s..' critical to the philosOphy of acquisition. Rather, it is reflective H51) '0: t} a} of the different land uses and options available for acquiring land. For . graspeetive {,0 m open space type easements would not be appropriate for acquiring gig; tun. ...,l V u-‘i v.1 -eflssrfront areas. , u1= III I? . 32 One of the other classification techniques can be viewed to varying ! degrees within the implementation timing based structure. A distinction between compulsory and subscriptive means of obtaining implementation are discernible in the predevelopment plan. (See Table I). The distinction fades in the second or postdeve10pment class. Channel encroachment, zoning, subdivision regulations, and building codes are all well established regulatory techniques for influencing land use. Building financing, taxa- tion policies, warning signs, and evacuation are a collection of policy techniques varying in their means of implementation. But they are basically voluntary or incentive in terms of attempting to direct flood plain land use. Engineering works of improvement, flood proofing, urban renewal, or acquisition may either fall under a compulsory approach or one of the other policy approaches depending upon the agent utilizing them. If condemnation is coupled with or accompanies engineering works of improve- ment, urban renewal, or acquisition, then the technique takes on a compulsory aspect. So to, if flood proofing is made part of a building code:requirement, it takes on or becomes part of a regulatory device. PredevelOpment Flood Loss Management in emerging concept of obtaining reductions in flood loss is one of influencing the pro-deve10pment and use of the flood plain. Here, the focus of thinking is upon (1) securing flood plain areas, (2) directing ”.1339. 01.nses to which flood plains may be put and (3) adjusting thousands which each use should be undertaken. The desired outcome or and.“ the prevention or minimization of losses and damages to life fizmflnwhishare associated with the inundation of these lands. If giyp speotive flood plain occupant or deve10per is made aware of the _ Jurist T'ro- ‘ . .. iglnherent in a flood plain site and subsequently adjusts g Fr.— his use of the flood plain in light of the riSk, then flood losses and 33 damages may accordingly be prevented or reduced. Various public policies and techniques are available for influencing both the awareness-perception function and the ultimate private-public use of these flood plains. Engineering works of improvement are increasingly utilized and Justified in terms of securing flood plain areas from flooding.1 Pro- tective flood water control structures are viewed as providing enhancement benefits in that more economic deve10pment can subsequently take place. At the same time land use regulations can be used in guiding the new land use deve10pments in terms of wise use of the flood plain. Such regula- tions can control types of use and guide the means in which such uses are undertaken. The regulatory and guidance function is important due to remaining unprotected flood plain areas and to any continuing risk of flooding in protected areas. For purposes of discussion, however, treatment of engineering works of improvement will be deferred to the postdevelopment technique section. This is in large part a reflection of the continued Justification such measures have in terms of reducing flood losses in developed areas. Further, unprotected areas continue to have flood loss management needs Ihich must be provided irrespective of possible or contemplated engineering works of improvement. Consequently, land use regulation will be treated first-under predevelopment flood loss management techniques. noon-'3 heroachnent Regulations . , ‘Og" A“. Influencing development and land use in the floodwq portion of the as? a: damage r fleed_plain.is one of the first land use policy goals usually recommended 34 in reducing flood losses and damages. The goal is One of preventing incompatible land uses from developing in or encroaching upon the floodway. When buildings, structures, fills, and other incompatible land uses are allowed in the floodway, an obstruction occurs to the natural flow of flood waters. Increased flood stages caused by encroaChments may result in increased peak discharges downstream from encroachment areas and in increased flood stages in upstream reaches. This often results in greater prOperty loss. Accordingly, losses and damages are reduced by preventing such obstructions through regulating the use of floodway areas. There are a number of possible ways of influencing the use of land in the floodway. The public sector has five broad powers to draw upon i.e., taxation, spending, eminent domain, proprietary, and regulatory for influencing land use in the floodway. All have been drawn upon in the past to implement one or more programs for using or influencing land use in the floodway. Recently, however, it has been the police power, which has been increasingly advanced as the means for directing land use in the floodway. It provides a comprehensive direct, and compulsory power through which regulatory techniques can be develOped. The justification for using the police powers in regulating use of lands in the floodway relates to the external effects arising from use of such land. The consequences of land uses in a floodway are not always borne solely by that flood plain develOper. That is, while damages may be experienced by the floodway land deve10per, greater damages or losses may be inflicted upon upstream and downstream land owners due to the actions of the floodway develoPer. Consequently it may be argued "free choice as to occupancy and use of a flood plain 35 (floodway) should be restricted by government because the use by one owner may harm the other."1 Dunham addresses the justification of using the police powers in regulating the floodway from several viewpoints: economic, hydrologic, and legal. He suggests: The only questions [refers to legal recourse] for judgment here are the validity of the claimed causal relationship between building and flood damage, and the method of accomplishing the end (should it be a preventative or liability imposing rule?). The legal principles are the same for any method?2 The selection of a preventative course of action results in the use of the police powers of the states. It has the advantages of (1) being preventative in terms of managing flood loss or damage and (2) avoiding the complexities of trying to affix prices and values for purposes of reimbursement. The liability recourse poses awesome problems with respect to determining causal relationships between actions and damages, and subsequently affixing values for reimbursement purposes. Not withstanding the judgment problem, there are the added factors of irrecoverable losses or damages which may only be Preserved through preventative actions. The preventative course of action focuses on defining the floodway within which limits no filling or structural deve10pment shall take place, unless specifically authorized by issuance of a publicly controlled permit. The definition of the floodway, due to its dynamic nature, will necessitate the adoption of a specified flood event. The flood channel, i.e., the 1Allison Dunham, "Flood Control Via the Police Powers," 1959, p. 1110. This is but one of four rationales reviewed by the author for justifying the use of police powers in regulating flood plain lands. He notes that of the four rationales "This one is the most ancient of reasons for exercise of the police power and is one completely acceptable to all schools of politics. . . ." 21b1g., p. 1112. 36 "normal" channel area and that portion of the flood plain needed to actively transport the flood associated with the specified flood event, can then be delineated with hydrologic data and recorded on maps for enforcement purposes. The permit system referred to allows variances to the restrictions of the floodway encroachment regulation where it can be established that interference with flood flows will not result from the intended structural development, or that compensating adjustments can be developed. Dunham's reference to "the claimed causal relationship" involves the resolution of a major problem in establishing floodway encroachment restrictions. The problem not only frustrates development of preventative regulations, but the effective use of a liability recourse, also. Both recourses are dependent upon (1) engineering abilities to define and causally correlate the interrelationships of land use and flood hy- drologic responses, and subsequently, (2) for economists (appraisers) to differentiate the losses and damages which would be expected to be associated with the "undisturbed" flood event and the floodway restricted flood event. The difficulty with the problem lies in the variability of the floodway which is dependent upon the tOpography of the flood plain and the magnitude of the flood event. Consequently, a consensus among hydrologists, economists, and policy decision makers must be arrived at with respect to what flood event (magnitude and/or frequency) should be adopted as a legal basis for regulating floodway encroachment. Further, analytical tools are needed for relating hydrologic phenomena to cultural occupancy of the floodway and the greater area, the flood plain.1 1For evidence of such problems and needs, see Murphy, BEEElflEiBE Eloog-Elaig QevgloEmgnt, 1958, p. 34. l'l . .-o 37 Besides a number of administrative and political problems, there are certain inherent limitations associated with the level of institu- tional enactment. If floodway encroachment is enacted at the local levels of government, problems may arise in inconsistent or nonuniform criteria of program design. Or, more troubling, are the differences which may arise from partial program adOption among the watershed basin communities and political jurisdictions. On the other hand, state, regional, or river basin planning units may also be faced with problems of deve10ping their plans and controls in harmony with the plans of the diverse local units of government which may have only a portion of their jurisdiction lying in the floodway. Flood Plain Zoning Flood plain zoning is another technique available in regulating human activities in a flood plain such that a reduction in potential flood losses may be obtained. Its principles and use follow that rationale emd application of the general land use zoning concept.1 Zoning originally develoPed in response to a need for public regulation of land uses, which by their nature were of a hazardous character or posed a nuisance to the public in general. The technique evolved eventually into a planning instrument whose goal was one of providing for orderly urban growth by which nuisances associated with certain land uses and arising out of imprOper or incompatible use of land might be minimized and such that the public welfare would be advanced.2 Consequently, as an instrument of land use planning, the enactment and 11.1urphy, WW 1958. p. 47. 2J.H. Beuscher, ng9 Egg gontgols--Cgses and materials, 3rd edition (Madison, Wisconsin: The College Printing and Typing Company, 1964), pp. 263‘2640 38 administration of a zoning ordinance is dependent upon a comprehensive plan that is preferably drafted and adopted prior to or as an antecedent of the zoning ordinance. The land use zoning technique . . . takes the form of dividing the city into districts, and within each district limiting the height, bulk, and use of buildings and other structures, the density of population, the use to which land may be put, and other matters.1 Flood plain zoning is a further extension of the land use zoning concept and technique. As such, a special flood plain zoning district may be set up. In this event, the district would be uniquely defined, and the allowed uses therein would be characterized by their (1) low flood loss susceptibility, (2) low flood damage threat to other land uses upstream or downstream, and (3) compatibility with the remaining land use plan. A variation or second application of the flood plain zoning technique is the delineation of a flood plain zone over existing zoning districts. As an overlay approach, it would entail applying further qualifications and restrictions as to types of uses to be allowed in those portions of existing zoning districts which happened to fall vdthin the flood plain as defined by the ordinance. Establishing flood plain use provisions necessitates an adequate :mpply of hydrologic data to delineate those areas susceptible to in- undation and the frequency expectation associated with inundation at various (tOpographical) levels on the flood plain. Information on existing and projected economic development and cultural use of the delineated risk areas is also required. The economic and cultural use data will most likely already be in the adOpted or existing master plan, official map, and zoning ordinance. The integration of the three sets of 1Fred H. Bair, Jr. and Ernest R. Bartley, The Text 9f A Mode; ZQQing Ordingngg with Commentggy, 3rd edition, (Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, 1966), p. l. 39 data (hydrologic, economic, and cultural) and such other information that is contained in the master plan should provide the basis for develOping the allowable land uses and/or the restrictions on how such uses are to be made. Murphy, in his late 1950's study, went farther in specifying the essential items to consider or include in the drafting of a flood plain zoning ordinance. It should be made clear (1) in the delineation of areas subject to flood that the adOpted flood plain zone and the restric- tions accompanying it do not obviate the need for further consideration of adjacent and outlying land areas with respect to their flood risk; (2) in flood zones where economic development is to be allowed, require- ments for the protection of the prOposed deve10pment and its use need to be deveIOped and also provisions for the review of development plans; (3) in preference to the use of a special purpose ordinance, the flood plain zoning ordinance should be placed over the master zoning ordinance; (4) detailed provisions should be incorporated which indicate the allowable and conditional uses for the zoned flood plain areas; (5) provisions should also be included which will allow adjustments of lot size and set back restrictions; and (6) instead of using the phrase flood plain zoning, use of some other phrase as "restricted district" or "conservancy district" should be adopted. The latter is designed to avoid the initial Opposition to classifying zoning areas as flood plain districts by current land holders and deve10pers.1 Ideally, provisions 1, 2, and 3 of Murphy's list can be combined, such that they provide a series of zones which presents a gradation from highly restrictive use requirements as contained in the floodway to relatively permissive use regulations in the upper limits of the delineated 1Murphy, in o - i e e 0 me t, 1958, pp. 145-146. 4O flood plain. As will be seen later, such a gradation (ideally) will be based in part On the varying applicability or apprOpriateness of other land use guidance techniques as flood proofing, building codes, flood insurance, building finance, or other techniques as those found in the philosophy Of physical regulation of floods. The variable and selective use Of these techniques will allow the gradation to evolve, as Opposed to the tendency of having extremes of no deve10pment. Some inherent limitations exist in flood plain zoning. First the enabling provision allowing zoning regulations must exist. That is, state COnstitutions or enabling acts must precede the use of zoning (police powers) and must also be broad enough in their enabling provi- sions so as to allow the use of zoning in regulating flood plains.1 Second, the existence of hydrologic data of sufficient quality (length of record, continuity, number of recording station positions, etc.) to allow the sound delineation of flood hazard areas is important. Where data is deficient or unreliable, the ordinance is Open to questions and challenge.2 This is not to say that adoption of a certain flood frequency or magnitude based On subjective judgment will invalidate the ordinance. The data upon which the statutory flood is based must be sound. Third, the relationship Of the restrictions in the regulations to the stated purpose of the (flood plain) zoning ordinance are Open to challenge. Care 1Edward M. Bassett, Zoning--Ihg Laws, Administratigg, and Court ci 0 w nt 3 (New York: The Russell Sage Foundation, 1936), Chap. 1, esp. pp. 13 and 31-32. 2Evidence of this is indicated indirectly by the provisions allowing for reconsideration of flood district lines in a model flood plain zoning ordinance amendment prOpOsed by Beuchert. In Section 3, allow- ance is made for petition by landowners challenging the validity of the flood district lines as established by the enacting legislation. Edward W. Beuchert, WW, Paper submitted in the Seminar on Land Use Planning of Harvard Law School, (Reproduced by the Tennessee Valley Authority, 1961), pp. 58 and 67-68. 41 must be exercised in relating the provisions of the flood plain regulations to the purposes of the ordinance. In part, this is a function of the provisions in the enabling legislation or constitution of the state.1 Another and possibly the most relevant limitation relates to the application and utility of the zoning ordinance provisions. Their utility in preventing unnecessary damages in undeveloped areas or pro- posed deve10pments is high. However, their effective application to old or existing developments is constrained. Retroactive application of the provisions to nonconforming uses is not generally possible. Generally, the ordinance can only prevent (1) redevelopment of a non- conforming use after it has been substantially damaged, (2) alteration of its use, (3) expansion of the development, and (4) prevention of reinstatement of use once it has been abandoned.2 In the event of a flood and associated destruction of prOperty, the redeveIOpment of these areas will subsequently come under the restrictions of the flood plain zoning ordinance. In this delayed manner, subsequent flood losses can be reduced in existing developed areas. Subdivision Regulations Subdivision regulation is a third technique Often cited as a means of regulating land development and occupancy of the flood plain so as to prevent flood losses. As a land use planning and regulatory instrument, it is closely allied and coupled with the master plan and zoning regulations. This relationship is succinctly stated by the following: Zoning relates to the type Of building deve10pment which can take place on the land; subdivision control relates to the way in which the land is divided and made ready for lBassett,,Zgning, 1936, pp. 54-56. 2Hair and Barney. WW. 1966. pp. 105-116. 42 building development. The two are mutually dependent because the layout of an area is inseparable from the character of the use to be made of the land. . . . 1 In general, subdivision regulations attempt to guide the division and development of rural or expansive land areas into smaller plats or tracts of land devoted to more intensive land use. How these subdivided lands are replatted and complimented with improvements will influence the permanence and maintenance of the subsequent deve10pments in the ensuing years. Performance standards and standards of design are set forth in terms of the subdividing, replatting, and recording of the land; improvements and services to accompany the subdivided plats; and the dedication or reservation of undeveIOped lands to assure the harmonious, orderly, and progressive development of the community. It is necessary to be able to demonstrate that the functions and safeguards are prescribed for and related to the public health, safety, comfort, convenience, and welfare of the peOple in general in order to justify invoking the police powers to obtain compliance.2’3 Consequently, subdivision regulations may be utilized in dictating hOW'the flood plain shall be considered and utilized in subdividing a psutel of land located partially or completely within a flood plain. The subdivision regulations will reflect the contents of the master plan and zoning ordinance which guide the type of uses which shall be allowed on the flood plain portions. For example, a zoning ordinance may forbid the location of a dwelling within a portion of the flood plain, as the floodway, 1Beuscher, W,1964, p. 210; citing Marygold Melli, "Subdivision Control in Wisconsin," 1953, W 389. 2 American Society of Planning Officials, WW ggggggl_L§g;(Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, March, 1947), Sec. 5 (p. 16) and Sec. 7 (p. 28). 3Beuscher, W, 1964 pp. 210-214. 43 and yet allow for some means of crediting flood plain land to minimum lot areas, setback requirements, etc., which are important considerations in drawing up subdivision plats. This example is illustrative only; as complicating factors could enter, as health questions relating to sewage disposal, which would prevent the credit from meeting necessary and sufficient performance standards. Techniques vary within subdivision regulations for obtaining flood plain regulations. Murphy suggest they will incorporate the following practices: (1) the delineation of the flood risk areas on subdivision plats as the precondition to their being filed, accepted, and recorded; (2) the establishment Of design standards for platting and developing in flood risk areas; and (3) the establishment of easement, reservation, or dedication provisions to allow for the active transport of flood flows along the floodway.1 The second practice may in fact begin to overlap with building code regulations as an additional and distinct means of reducing flood damages on a flood plain. Similarly, the third practice may be viewed as a modification of encroachment regulations. While Murphy found the inclusive integration of floodway, zoning, subdivision, building regulations a common practice where subdivision regulations had been enacted; it is not necessarily the desirable form for developing the different regulatory techniques. Which is not to say that the overlap or merging should not Occur. Rather, the successful integration Of the separate and distinct regulations may be accomplished through cross linkages and references between distinct and separate codes and ordinances. In contrast, accommodation of varying flood plain regulatory devices and programs under one regulatory ordinance may dilute and erode the phiIOSOphy or justification for each program. In 1Murphy, e u i 100 - l 1 Dev 0 m nts 1958, p. 47. 44 such event, the regulatory effectiveness of the combined program may be deficient. Conversely, overregulation may also result, if for example a floodway encroachment regulation was incorporated into or drawn up as a (flood plain) subdivision regulation or flood plain zoning ordinance. In both cases, the differentiation needed can be attributed to the differences (1) in restrictiveness needed in deve10pment location or (2) in the focus of the regulatory provisions. There appears to be a delicate balance lying between individual, distinct, Operational techniques and the complete, all-inclusive integration of all regulatory techniques into one onmibus package. The limitations in this technique are essentially the same as in floodway encroachment regulations and flood plain zoning. As inferred above, there are limitations resulting from limited application and scope of the subdivision regulation, as is true of the other regulatory devices. Equally true or similar with respect to the other techniques are the limitations resulting from (1) constitutional or legislated enabling provisions and (2) absent or deficient hydraulic data. Building Codes The previously discussed land use regulatory techniques were oriented toward controlling the type of use to be made of flood plain lands. A subsequent management focus is On how the allowed uses shall be implemented. If permitted uses will necessitate construction of buildings or struc- tures, then techniques of influencing the design and construction of such structures are needed to secure them as much as practical from flood damage. There are several techniques and enabling powers available to the public sector for influencing the erection of structures needed in deveIOping a prOposed land use. 45 All of the five basic public powers available for directing land use are applicable here to differing degrees. Possibly the most promiSing power is that of the police power, wherein individuals and organizations may be regulated in their conduct and the manner in which they make use of their own property, such that other individuals or the public are not unnecessarily injured. It poses as possibly the most comprehensive, direct, and relatively inexpensive (in terms of public expenditures) means of directing building and structural developments on the flood plain. The commonly used technique in the public sector for influencing design and construction of buildings and structures is the building code. Building codes attempt to safeguard the health, safety, and even the public morals through regulating the design of, construction of, use of materials in, and alteration of buildings or structures. Health safeguards are related to and reflected by requirements assuring adequate heat, light, ventilation, water, and sewage facilities. Safety considerations likewise are related to and reflected in requirements assuring minimum risk of fire, collapse, or accident associated with deficiencies in building design, construction, materials or building and equipment Operation. The safeguards for morals are related to requirements for separate or minimal sharing of bathroom facilities, soundproofing of structures, and other design or structural provisions assuring the 2 privacy or protection of family units and individuals.1’ lBuilding Officials Conferences of America, Inc., §a§;§_flgilfiggg Code, 1950 edition (New York: C.J. O'Brien, Inc., 1950), Sec. 100.3 "Code Remedial," p. 1. 2Robert M. Oster, "Municipal Housing Codes in the Courts,” (New York: American Council To Improve Our Neighborhoods, Inc., September, 1956.) 46 While little discussion was found in the literature of merging flood proofing concepts with building code deve10pment or amendment, the two management techniques focus on the same problem. A basic objective is to reduce potential flood damage and loss through alteration of building design, construction, or materials used in construction. The distinction in the two techniques is more adminstrative than substantive. Under building code development, much of the burden of technique initiation falls upon the building inspection department to enforce the code re- gulations by making building permit applicants aware of the minimum provisions and then seeing that the applicant incorporates those provi- sions in the construction of his building or structure. Under flood proofing, the emphasis is placed upon the various engineering facets of the technique and the initiative of the flood plain occupant in adopting elements of flood proofing. This will become more apparent with the later treatment of flood proofing as a flood loss reduction management technique. The drafting andenfiorcement of a flood plain building code is most aptly done in conjunction with the general building code. Like flood plain zoning, flood plain building codes should not be viewed as a separate planning instrument to the larger, more comprehensive regulations. Flood hazard is but one of a large number of considerations which can be and should be dealt with in a comprehensive zoning ordinance or a general building code. The extension of building codes, such that they give adequate re- cognition of flood risk and accompanying destructive forces, would presumably be justified on the basis of safety and health. Currently, the recommendations for building code coverage of flood plain areas are directed at design and construction specifications with some definition 47 of performance standards. Murphy suggested building codes could (1) specify minimum elevation for footings on the first floor of a structure; (2) require re-enforcement to with- stand water pressures and high velocity flow; (3) prohibit basements; (4) require that buildings can be firmly anchored to prevent their floating Off their foundations. Such recommendations illustrate possible areas or types of approach, as Opposed to constituting adequate specifications. They also illustrate the current mixing of specification and performance type building code standards. Questions have existed in the past concerning whether special minimum building standards could be developed on a uniform basis for application in flood plain areas.2 Presuming the questions can be answered affirmatively for both performance and specification building standards, a consensus among building code drafters is needed for deciding where research efforts should be directed in assisting the deve10pment of sets of minimum flood plain building standards. Questions and doubts have been expressed by model building code officials concerning the feasibility of deveIOping flood plain standards capable of inclusion in a model building code. Murphy discounted the doubts while giving recognition to the fact that flood events vary by physiographic region. He suggested that from a building code or struc- tural standpoint there should only be a limited number Of variations necessitating different code requirements. Accordingly, a corresponding number of building standards should be capable of being set forth for w 3 g e o e 3 tne various pny31ographic settings. :leurphy, , 1958, P. 980 2 We . P- 99- élbido. p. 100. 48 The more apparent limitations will develop from the deficiencies and problems associated with the drafting, enactment, and enforcement of general building codes. The Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations conducted a comprehensive review of building codes in 1965. They found a larger number of deficiencies and problems at all stages and levels of building code development and use. Most of these problems relate to building code practices and not their designed purpose. Al- though the practices in effect dictate the outcome in terms of realizing the expressed purposes. The implications for limitations in terms of flood plain building codes are several. First, it is apparent that research efforts and current knowledge are not sufficient to develOp performance type flood plain building standards. Second, there is not an adequate means of getting apprpval of any such standards on a comprehensive basis. Third, imple- menrtation and enforcement of such standards, where adOpted, would depend u;n3n.existing administrative and enforcement procedures. These procedures Idanre been frequently criticized and found deficient.1 Consequently, while tuiiLLding codes can be discussed as an alternative technique, it appears that such consideration needs to be tempered with knowledge of limitations associated within the general building code area. These limitations should be reviewed with respect tO their relevance to the special treatment of f1°°d Plain areas by building codes. It is also apparent that it would be undesirable to attempt develOping a special flood plain building code 8G’Parate from the general building code. From the standpoint of Special flood plain consideration, this might be desirable. However, g l C U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, Building P‘§°8 0 o o e nm form (Washington, D.C.: Government m“tine Office, January, 1966). pp. 81. 96-102- *- n- 49 from a general planning and administrative standpoint, this would be undesirable as noted in those areas having fragmented special building codes and code authority.l’2 Subsgpiptiyg Qevicg§ Floodway encroachment regulations, flood plain zoning ordinances, and building codes are all dependent upon the ability of the state to emutise police powers. In contrast, the techniques which will be treated bathe following sections are not dependent upon the police powers. Consequently, such techniques will not have the regulatory directness of those utilizing police powers. Such a statement does not infer that the remaining powers do not present significant bases for developing tech- niques to manage flood losses and influence flood plain land use. Public Policies concerning property taxation or building financing which are based upon the power to tax and the power to spend, respectively, are exmunples of measures containing considerable leverage for influencing decisions On whether and how to develop land lying in a flood plain. Warning Signs A little discussed technique for influencing decision outcomes of prosPective develOpers of flood plain areas is that of warning signs. r1‘1’1'8 lack of current literature discussion and emphasis with respect to SuCh a technique might be attributable to experiences reported for c0mmunities which have previously employed such measures or had them employed in their environs. As a result, the lack of success and ¥ 1 MO, PP. 28-300 2 1 W (Detroit: Metropolitan Fund, Inc., 1966), 5. 3 Murphy, Bfigulgting ElgOd-Elgig ngglOngnt, 1958, pp. P. 50 popularity Of such a prOgram in the past may now be a source Of dis- couragement in either suggesting, prOposing, or implementing such a program. Such a hypothesis needs testing, but initially offers some explanation for the current status and state of the art with this technique. The philosOphy of flood plain warning signs appears to be one of informing and warning a prospective property buyer or develOper of the flood hazard inherent with the location under consideration for deve10pment. The signs serve an educational function in alerting unsuspecting land buyers or developers of the existence of a flood hazard. Building Financingl The means for obtaining financial assistance in acquiring and develOping flood plain land are relevant to program deve10pment considera- tions in managing flood losses. The policies of public and private lending and loan guarantee institutions pose as possible policy areas available for modification in terms Of their consideration Of loan applications. The degree of flood risk in the proposed deve10pment area should be reflected in the criteria utilized in evaluating a credit application where flood plain areas are involved. Denial of sources of financial assistance or penalties added to a loan in the form Of increased interest 01- insurance rates can contribute greatly to the prevention of unwise lAlthough, building finance as a technique is alluded to by several f1°0d Plain management authors, there is an absence of detailed discussion of this technique as a means for reducing flood losses. Consequently, reliance has been placed upon such general studies as (a) U.S., Department of Housing and Urban Development, Federal Housing Administration, Diesel of us r 1) Lo (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, October, JA966); and (b) Federal Housing Administration, Housing and Home Finance Agency, Ex 8 lens ' 10 0 er C: i it' ns (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, January. 1963). 51 deve10pment in the flood plain. Thus, the objective in using financial policies as a land use guidance technique are directly related to the directive influences financial institutions may have through withholding or granting credit to flood plain develOpers. ’ Techniques for using building financing as a means of directing flood plain occupancy involve relating hydrologic events to economic considerations. Essentially, the same hydrologic data is needed as that necessitated for the previously discussed flood plain management techniques, i.e., history of flood events (flood magnitudes and their frequency expectations), selected flood hydrographs, valley cross sections, stage- discharge curves, and stage profile curves. Subsequently, the process of relating the prOposed deve10pment to flood risk can be undertaken muian evaluation can then be made of the associated economic risk. 'an risk can be expressed and evaluated in terms of prOperty damage amilcss, interrupted business activity, and premature amortization of property. These will influence the continuity of loan repayment schedules and/or the ability to successfully repay financial Obligations. Similarly, the provisions for loan, mortgage, or other credit insurance programs should.reflect considerations of flood risk, the associated factors of ctisrvption and destruction, and the implications for defaulting on loan IWHPaUEents. The presumption here is that foreclosure proceedings resulting fxxnn flood losses and damages are less desirable than precluded development resulting from restrictive lending policies. l U.S.. Task Force Report on Federal Flood Control Policy, House Doc. No. 465, 1966, 2 . h u d b Dev 10 en ct of 968, Title XIII, National rlood Insurance, Public Law 90-448. AHEUSt 1: 1958: 82 £19..- 573! Section 1302(9), 52 The point or source of leverage for flood loss management in financing deve10pments lies in the process of granting, underwriting, or guaranteeing a loan, mortgage, or other extension of financial credit. Approval of an application for financial assistance could be made dependent upon hydrologic and economic criteria unique to flood plain areas. Where it is determined that the flood risk is such that it will jeopardize the financial security of the deve10pment and/or the repayment of the loan, mortgage, or debt; the application for financial assistance may be disapproved. In this way deve10pment of flood plains can be guided and ill-advised construction may be forestalled. A large number and assortment of financial institutions and programs exist which would have influence in the acquisition and deve10pment of flood plain lands. Because of diversity in private and public financial institutions, it would be neceSSary to have substantial agreement among various lending and financing institutions in terms of evaluating flood plain risk and subsequent approval or rejection of an application for financial assistance.1 Such agreement would effectively increase the influence financial institutions could bring to bear in inhibiting unwise deve10pment in the flood plain. The adoption of policies by financial institutions which reflect nsiderations of flood risk in their review and approval of loan appflications may be encouraged through several processes. Educational programs which relate (a) the importance of flood risk, (b) the incor- poration of flood risk within the determination of interest rates, (c) the means of evaluating and incorporating the risk in review of loan applications, and (d) the means for reducing flood risk which are available 1 Examples of this need are illustrated in U.S., Task Force Report °n Federal Flood Control Policy, House Doc. NO. 465, 1966, p. 27. 53 to the flood plain develOper. Educational programs can be initiated, directed, and coordinated by public agencies and various associations of financial institutes. Second, existing public loan, mortgage, credit, or other financial assistance programs may be modified by administrative rules and regulations. Administrative policy may direct that loans, mortgages, etc., shall be withheld where flood risk is not adequately accounted for in the location and design of the development. Such conditional policies may be instituted by the public sector where it underwrites loan or credit guarantee programs. Some of the limitations associated with this technique are character- istic of most of the land use guidance programs. Specifically, a limitation exists in the ability to translate hydrologic data of limited history and reliability into economic locational factors and design factors. Mums the hydrologic data is deficient, technical assistance is lacking 0r the responsibilities of the financial institutions are unclear; accordingly, such institutions will be unable to act in a supportive manner to flood plain land use control. Other limitations arise due to the number and diversity of loan, zmortgage, and credit institutions which operate in the building finance field. Strong directives can be exerted where public credit programs areeinvolved. Indirect influence from the public sector can be exerted (M1 private financial institutions and their programs through the modifica- tion Of Public credit programs which interface with the private sector. For example, FHA and VHA mortgage insurance programs can be adjusted such that: their risk assessment procedures are adjusted to more adequately reflect axud cover flood hazards and risk. Subsequently, private mortgage applications for public insurance or credit underwriting can be approved or denied upon the basis of flood risk in addition to other risk factors. 54 However, the diversity of lending and financing programs is such that comprehensive and compulsory coverage Of financial policies in their application to flood plain areas is not easily obtained. Consequently, undirected or uncontrolled building and development can take place due to the less than comprehensive, compulsory building financing policy. It might be noted here that flood risk is but one of many risks and factors which should be evaluated by a lending or insurance institu- tion in reviewing a loan application. However, such a limiting phenomenon, i.e., where flood risk is but one of many factors to be considered in a land deve10pment loan application, is pervasive throughout the land use chroctive program effort. Consequently, while the philosophy of land use adjustment can focus on flood plain land use and theavailable tedudques for directing land use therein, actual technique implementation amd practice are confronted with the limitations associated with a nmrger Of flood plain risk considerations with the myriad of other considerations inherent in each land use guidance technique. Taxation Policy Taxation is another financial policy technique which is little fluo¢ GOaumuflHOSpam m>fluo< Umuwamsoo wmumamfiou Umumamsoo vomnoum mo msumum oom.mm ooo.omo.H ooo.omm.v ooo.ma ooo.oam.ma ooo.mmm.a oomcama Ohm.oam.a ooo.oma.H w umoo mmumsflumm mcwummau was mcwmmmcm uqmsm>onmEH Hmscmno psosm>oumEH Hmssmno ucmfim>onmEH chsmno Housman “no usu vcmamw AHMEm wagons mmxwv vomfiom muawfim>oumaw Hoaqmnu Hoqcmno soamuw>fia w00>mq mmxne emmnmm pawEm>oumafi Hmccwno Hmssmso sowmum>wa sowuomuoum venomoum mo ounumz aflazmm 3mm ooumamamx xmmuo mauumm voosxoom ummm mswmsmq .m was mafimsmq maaa>eamuu nommm Hwhumm «was uaouuoo GHGAHHOZ Gflflhfinflm mnwfimau .uz mwwufiqsasoo vmuommm¢ ZdUHmUHE ZH Edmwomm domBZOU QOOAm mmmmZHUzm m0 mmmou H N mamdfi GHH3MM 3mm um>flm ooumssamu xmmuo mauumm a H0>fim OONMEMHMM xomuu Hw>awm a Hm>flm cousm um>fim udvmo vmm w Hm>Hm vsmuw Hmbflm wanna menu mxmn SUMwm HMHUmW nflm vwm um>wm downwau Hw>wm couswau uo>flm 222 Umuwamaou moosmusmmm HmooH was mpcsm mo umflmomu msflucom coauosupmsou >m3hmvss cofluosuumcoo >m3uw©ss coauosuumsoo UmumHmEou assumvcs GOHHUEUWGOU omumHmEoo pownoum mo msumum .vo 6cm .mo .mm .hmlmm 0mm.omm ooo.vmm.o~ ooo.ovaeh ooo.omm ooo.mm ooo.ooo.HN oomehm umoo cmumeaumm Hm>oSmu exam was muQmEm>oumEfl Hmccmno momsflmua can mucmSm>oumfiw qusmso mmo>oq .Hflo>ummmm mmm>mq ucmEm>oumEH Hmcsmno ommaflwuv HoflumucH was aamspooam .mm>oq mcflummao was mawmmmcm usmso>oumsw Hmssmnu uswso>oumaw Honcmno unmSm>OHmEH mmmcwmun uc080>oumafi Hmssmno coauowuoum venomoum mo unnumz Gmscwucou II N mandfi .anmm .mm .homa I cmmflnoflz aw pamEmon>mQ mmouSOmwm umumz mcflm3mnmm zmcwmmm ocean sunscmxcmum soumsflsumm uaonumn xwo “Ham moHUHGSEEoo Umuommmd "mousom H Hm>flm mswm3wnmm mHMHm momm36finm mxmwuu vcouneluuumzm w Ho>wm unwah um>flm mmmo momma Immsom Hm>flm mmsom H®>Hm Hm>flm mflnwmnm Hm>flm 223 channel improvement and/or modification in contrast to storage structUres. A notable absence in prOposed reservoir deve10pments have been absent in the past. Further, the principle focus of downstream construction program authority continues to be at the Federal level. This is largely a result of the liberal financial assistance available for construction programs. Waterghgngggtggtign andlflggg prevggtion. -- Some data is available on the execution of Federal Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention programs in the State of Michigan. Sixteen projects involving nearly 500,000 watershed acres had been approved as of mid-year 1970. Total estimated Federal cost for the 16 Michigan projects was more than 6.6 million dollars. This constituted 39.2 percent of the total estimated project costs. Total cumulative Federal obligations for these projects was reported to be slightly in excess of 5 million dollars, or nearly 77 per cent of the total estimated Federal commitment.l It is significant to compare some of these figures with the national figures. In particular, it was found that the 39.2 per cent average Federal project cost sharing was considerably below the national pro- portion of 58.4 per cent. 0n the other hand, the prOportion (76.6 per cent) of committed Federal funds towards the 16 Michigan projects significantly exceeded the national average of 44.3 per cent.2 In light of the information contained in the data, a hypotheSis con- cerning the importance of flood prevention measures and their adOption in Iichigan may be developed. But, first, the above information needs sub- stantial qualification. It should be noted that flood control is but one 1U.S., Congress, House, Committee on ApprOpriations, Subcommittee on Agriculture, fieggings, 1971, Tables (not numbered), pp. 514 and 515. Ibid. 224 of several functions covered under the now heavily amended Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act. Additional policy areas of recrea- tion, fish and wildlife deve10pment, industrial and municipal water supply, and agricultural water management (irrigation, drainage, and other agricultural supply and distribution uses) are incorporated into the Act. Also noteworthy is the fact that in these latter cases the Federal govern- ment does not absorb all the construction costs attributable to the respective purposes as it does in flood control. Accordingly, any conclusions drawn from the data will have to be tentative and general. The figures reflecting the proportion of Federal cost sharing suggest that the amount of flood prevention included in Michigan watershed pro- jects is relatively low compared to the national average. On the other hand, the State was doing better than the national average in terms of obtaining commitments of federal funding for the construction of projects within the state. In conclusion, it is important to note that the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention program embodies both flood management philos0phies with respect to controlling flood waters and regulating land uses. That is, the program merges the concept of regulating flood waters with that of directing human activities on flood plains. In terms of the latter, the land and conservation treatment measures are develOped in a different light than that normally viewed in regulating occupancy in urbanizing and settled flood plains. However, the elements of the two focuses are still present and offer an example of integrated flood loss management philoSOphy. Flood1 Proofing The land use management technique which poses possibly the greatest potential for reducing flood loss in existing deve10pments is flood 225 proofing. However, little information was available at the state level or local level in terms of flood proofing. The few known examples of flood proofing by state and local officials were generally restricted to prOposed new structural deve10pments as Opposed to modification in existing developments. Two simple but effective applications of flood proofing measures were cited in the Cities of Lansing and Southfield. In Lansing, a recent request to build a small multiple dwelling apartment structure in the flood plain was reviewed. Approval was anticipated in light of the fact the architect designed the structure to be effectively secured from flood damages. The apartment parking area was located in the ground level of the apartment structure, while the first floon;of residences was designed to be well above flood levels.l Similar design concepts were involved in a proposed high rise motel structure in Southfield, Michigan. The first several levels of the structure would be devoted to parking area, while associated motel occupancy units would be located on upper levels above the reaches of flood waters. City approval of the building plans was being withheld ostensibly on the need for obtaining a reclassification of the zoning restrictions for the area in question.2 Other examples of flood proofing were suggested. However, the techniques involved were restricted to land filling as a means of raising foundation and floor levels above flood levels. The importance of flood proofing as a potential flood loss management device was established earlier. Accordingly, extensive field study 1Plans reviewed in the Office of Building Inspection, City of Lansing (Lansing, Michigan: City Hall, September, 1971). 2Lawrence Witte, Personal Interview, September, 1971. 226 of the flOOd proofing techniques in terms of Michigan flood plain settings is thought to be highly justifiable. Various flood proofing measures could be evaluated in terms of potential for reducing flood losses. Further, the role flood proofing could play in encouraging adOption of other flood plain land use measures might also be evaluated. Evidence for this obser- vation is present in the authorized National Flood Insurance Program. Provisions are included in the enabling act which allow adjusting chargeable flood insurance premium rates in light of the presence of flood proofing measures.l As such, the provisions are excellent reflections of the 'desired integrative and compatibility function needed in flood loss management device. Eloisailan,ses.leassiige As noted in Chapter III, evacuation measures may be of a temporary or permanent nature. Permanent evacuation from a flood hazard area may be accomplished on an individual basis or on community basis through a . relocation process. The application of this latter process in terms of Michigan flood plain settings may be quite limited. In light of the observations made by Murphy and Deines,2 and in the absence of documented attempts at permanent relocation by Michigan communities,3 little time was given to pursuing field inquiry into this aspect of evacuation in Michigan. Accordingly, little could be concluded as to the apprOpriate- ness of this technique in terms of flood loss management in Michigan. Further study of this technique might be justified despite the prospects of encountering negative findings. lHousing‘ang Urban pgvelopment Agt‘gi 1968, 82 Stat. 577, 42 U.S.C.A. 4015(b)(l). 2 Liliane. pp. 123-124. 3Lawrence Witte, Personal Interview, January 29, 1969. 227 Several authorities exist at the national and state level which can be drawn upon to encourage permanent evacuation and relocation from flood plain areas. Provisions exist in (1) Federal flood control legi- slation (2) Federal and state urban renewal programs, and (3) in the recently enacted National Flood Insurance Program for pursuing the permanent evacuation of flood plain areas. These three program authori- ties will be discussed below. Permanent Evacuation Through Urban Renewal Authority exists at the federal level and the state level for slum 2 clearance and urban renewal.1’ These programs include general authority to assist clearance and relocation of blighted areas, and one contains more specific authority for assisting disaster stricken communities with urban renewal. In particular, federal policies are set forth to encourage evacuation and relocation in flood stricken areas irrespective of previous urban renewal planning. This is reflected in Section III of Title III, Slum Clearance and Urban Renewal, Housing Act of 1956 which states: in the subsequent preparation of the urban renewal plan with respect to a project aided under this section, the local public agency shall give due regard to the removal or relocation of dwellings from the site of re- curring floods or other recurring catastrOphies in the project area.3 In addition, other provisions under this particular section relax general urban renewal program requirements in order to facilitate quick 1W A91 93, 19$, as amended, Title I, Slum Clearance and Community Development and RedevelOpment; 63 Stat. 414; 42 U.S.C.A. 1441. 2State of Michigan, Act No. 344, Public Acts of 1945, Mighigan.§gmpilgg Lalo mm 125.71. at. m. 3 ‘ngg; 70 Stat 1102; 42 U.S.C.A. 1462. 228 response and action to flood or disaster stricken communities. However, one major constraint which controls qualification for assistance under this section is the situation that the disaster must have qualified as a major disaster as declared by the President under Public Law 875 of 1950.1 This has the effect of narrowing the application of this particular section to the less frequent or rare major flood events. Consequently, the potential application of this particular section of the urban renewal program in Michigan communities is significantly limited. On the other hand, the general provisions of urban renewal still allow considerable possibilities in terms of relocating blighted urban neighborhoods in flood plain areas. Michigan as a state actually preceeded the federal government in terms of enacting authorizing legislation concerning urban renewal. Public Act 344 of 1945 created enabling authority for counties, town- ships, cities and villages to adopt urban renewal programs. Pursuant to such authority, a municipality may reduce or eliminate urban blight and factors contributing to blight by acquiring preperty by purchase, gift, exchange or dondemnation.2 No specific provisions are included in the Michigan Act which pertain to flood events as a source of blight nor to developed flood plain areas as an area qualified for urban renewal. However, the provisions of the enabling act are quite general by the nature of the act. Accordingly, the state act appears to be quite compatible with the federal act in this particular area, i.e., urban renewal in a flood plain setting. lPublic Law 875, September 30, 1950, 64 Stat. 1109, 42 U.S.C.A. 1855a. 2State of Michigan, Act No. 344, Public Acts of 1945, Mighigan Emailed Lame Annotated 125.71. 125.73- 229 At the same time, considerable latitude is available to local communities in conceiving and carrying out urban renewal. As a result, sufficient federal and state authority appear to be present to enable evacuation and relocation of blighted areas in flood plain sections Of Michigan municipalities. As noted, little time was devoted to pursuing field inquiry into technique application in Michigan. One potential application Of permanent evacuation at the local level was uncovered. The City of Lansing has prOposed comprehensive studies for two additional urban renewal areas as part of their Model Cities Program.1 In general their urban renewal program appears to be redevelOpment oriented. However, an element of permanent evacuation appears to be contained in prOposed Urban Renewal Project Area No. 2. Permanent evacuation of some develOped areas may result from the identification of river front areas in Urban Renewal Area No. 2 as desirable Open space and recreation areas. In order to achieve such goals, acquisition of develOped land will be required, a program of land clearing undertaken, and subsequent initiation of open space and recreational deve10pment. The recreation area when secured will serve redevelOpment areas lying adjacent to such dedicated flood plain areas. Specifically, residential, commercial, and community college interests in existing Urban Renewal NO. 1 and prOposed Urban Renewal No. 2 will be served by the evacuated flood plain Open spaces. Permanent Evacuation Under the Flood Insurance Program Particular attention should also be given to a second federal program which includes provisions related to flood plain evacuation. The recently 101ty of Lansing, Imppoviag tha Qaality 2f Uzban Lifa: F1;§1_Iaaz Action Elan (Lansing, Michigan: City Demonstration Agency, Model Cities Program, April, 1970), Section V, "Long Range Land Use Plan," pp. v-l to v-6; v-lO to v-l4; and accompanying plates. 230 enacted National Flodd Insurance Program provides authority for the acquisition of flood insured properties which have been substantially damaged in a flood event.1 In this manner, a form Of permanent evacua- tion may be encouraged and achieved. On the other hand, the implications of the damaged prOperty acquisition provisions in terms of community or individual evacuation programs have not been clearly developed. Subsequent evaluation of such implicationsmay progress as policies and guidelines for administering this program are established by the Department of Housing and Urban DevelOpment. Authority for requiring damaged flood insured prOperties is granted to the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Provisions are also present for allowing the subsequent conveyance of acquired prOperties to state and local agencies through resale, lease, donation or other methods. Such conveyances can be made only after assurances have been given by the state or local agency to the effect that the conveyed prOperty will not be used for purposes not approved by the Secretary for a period of at least 40 years.2 While such policies do not constitute a restriction on the flood insurance program, they do reflect a stringent policy precedent in terms Of federal-state and federal-local program leadership and partner- ships in the flood plain management field. If the guidelines are developed such that permanent evacuation is encouraged, then this provision may offer a means of financing the conversion of heavily developed, high risk areas into low flood risk land uses. Any assessment of the application of acquisition provisions under the National Flood Insurance Program for evacuation purposes in Michigan will 1Housing'aag ggban Qevelopmant Actlaf 1968, Title XIII, 82 Stat. 589; 42 U.S.C.A. 41030 2Ibig. 231 have to wait until the insurance program is introduced in Michigan. In addition, further specific guidelines will have to be developed and adopted which translate enabling provisions in the act into Federal and state policy procedures for evacuating flood insured flood plain prOperties. Permanent Evacuation Under Flood Control Legislation A third federal authority which allows for considerations of permanent flood plain evacuation can be found in the Flood Control Act of June 28,1 1938. Restrictive provisions in the act allow consideration of permanent evacuation as an alternative measure only when levees or flood walls are being considered in flood control projects. In addition it must be es- tablished that the costs of evacuation will not substantially exceed the construction costs saved in not building the levees or flood walls. At the same time, substantial discretion is left to the Chief Of Engineers in terms of implementing such provisions. The Chief Of Engineers may negotiate. . . "agreements with States, local agencies, or the individuals concerned for the accomplishment by them of such evacuation and reha- bilitation and for their reimbursement. . ."2 Thus, authority for permanent flood plain evacuation is limited in its applicability under the Flood Control Act of 1938. Where applicable, however, it appears to offer some degree of latitude in terms of arranging for the process of evacuation. In fact, the House Committee on Flood Control recommended passage of the original legislation by noting, in part, that such measures presented possibilities for releasing evacuated flood plain areas for parks and recreational facilities.3 lzgoog goatnol Agj,gf June'gg, goas, Public Law 761, Section 3, 52 Stat. 1216, 33 U.S.C.A. 701(i). 21131.. 3U.S., Congress, House, Committee on Flood Control, Campgahanagga 232 Applications Of evacuation under the provisions of the Flood Control Act of 1938 are not well documented. Murphy and Deines in their separate studies of this particular flood loss management technique did not uncover many applications of flood plain evacuation in general, nor many specific applications under the 1938 Act.1 Applications in Michigan are now known or reported which can be related to this Act.2 Accordingly, the extent Of application Of permanent evacuation under this program has been slight at best on a national level and are presumed absent within this state. Temporary Evacuation The application Of temporary evacuation as a flood loss management device in Michigan may be more readily established than that Of permanent evacuation. Frequent experience with temporary evacuation measures on a limited scale has been noted in Michigan.3 At the same time, it is acknowledged that emergency preparation may be significant in reducing potential flood losses.4 However, there are inherent limitations in evaluating this program with respect to local planning and program execution. Extensive field interviewing and survey work would be required to evaluate the status Of such programs in Michigan. Budget and time ”700- CO 70. 9 a £1! 0_ S _o_ 38,: O -. ‘ -‘9 e!! F 900 ‘.,.-, Re- port to Accompany H.R. 10618, House Rept. NO. 2353, 75th Cong. 3d sess. (Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, May 13, 1938), p. 7. $52223: footnote 4, p. 123; footnote 1, p. 124. 2Carl Argiroff, Personal Interview, February 18, 1969. Lawrence Witte, Personal Interview, January 29, 1969. 3Lawrence Witte, Personal Interview, January 29, 1969. 4U.S., Task Force Report on Federal Flood Control Policy, House Doc. NO. 469, 1966, p. 24, 36, and 37. 233 constraints precluded undertaking such field study work. Consequently, such study efforts have been deferred to future studies. Authority for temporary evacuation measures appears to be largely a function of individual and local initiative coupled with federal and state technical and financial assistance. In terms of technical and fin- ancial assistance, the federal government has long accepted a role in providing emergency flood control assistance, evacuation, and relief. Accordingly, a significant technical assistance role has been developed in terms of aiding the temporary evacuations of flood threatened communi- ties. Much Of this assistance role is achieved through the Environmental Science Services Administration (ESSA) involvement in public preparedness for flood cOnditions. Here the basic Objective and function of ESSA is to provide: Reliable and accurate forecasts of floods and flood stages (which) can be coupled with temporary evacua- tion to save lives and reduce property losses.1 The program is administered by the River and Flood Prediction and Warning Service of ESSA as an integral part of the new Nationwide Natural Disaster Warning System (NADWARN). The completion of the network was only recently achieved in FY 1968. A smaller but important program allied to ESSA's forecasting and warning service is their furnishing information to be included in the Corps Of Engineers Section 206 flood plain surveys. ESSA provides ". information on the existing and potential flood plain warning services 2 . . available for each of these reports." This serves an educational function lU.S., Congress, House Committee On Appropriations, Subcommittee on Departments of State, Justice, Commerce, The Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations, figagaaga before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, Part 3, 90th Cong. lst sess. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967), p. 564. 2;bid., p. 565. 234 as to the warning capabilities and services available tO the local governments and their constituents. dev o n As in evacuation, the appropriateness and application of redevelOpment measures in flood plain settings is difficult to assess in terms of Michigan. Little information was uncovered in the flood loss management literature. In addition, flood plain management personnel at the state level were not able to cite redevelOpment efforts of any significant scale in flood plain areas within Michigan. 0n the other hand, the re- development efforts undertaken by the City of Pittsburg in the Golden Triangle area is an example that suggests the redevelOpment concept merits further consideration in terms of application to Michigan flood plain settings.1 Authority for redevelopment measures can be found in several of the federal and state urban renewal enabling acts cited in the previous section. Redevelopment, appeared to be the general program goal under these original enabling acts.2’3 it was the expected extension of slum clearance objectives under urban renewal. However, in terms of flood plain management needs, the specific policy provisions of Section III in Title III of the Housing Act of 1956, cited in the preceeding section on evacuation, tempered this general committment to redevelOpment in favor Of permanent evacuation in flood prone areas.4 The net effect of such a federal policy might be a limiting One in terms of redevelOpment of flood plains under urban renewal. lMurphy, Regalapaag Eloogfifilaga DevaLOpmaat 1958, pp. 374. 2Housing Act a; 1939, as amended, 63 Stat. 414, 416. 3Michigan, Act No. 344, 1945, M.C.L.A. 125.71. 4§apga, p. 81-82 and 138. 235 Similarly, other subsequent amendments to the 1949 Housing Act have resulted in broadening and diversification Of emphasis in urban renewal enactments. Considerable importance has been attached to re- habilitation and conservation Of existing deve10pments under the more recent federal urban renewal acts. In effect rehabilitation and conserva- tion are veiwed as more desirable alternatives, where feasible, to that of slum clearance and redevelOpment.1 Thus in terms of rehabilitation in a flood plain setting, the emphasis would seemingly be placed upon flood proofing existing deve10pments during the process of renovation. (No field studies were obtained nor conducted to refine and validate this hypothesis). As a result, the diverse program objectives and methods under nnban renewal do not allow drawing strong condlusions about the appropriateness of redevelopment and/or rehabilitation in (blighted) flood plain settings. This is especially true in the absence of empirical information. In effect the contrast or distinction suggested between rehabilitation and redevelOpment is that the latter entails a removal of the existing blighted land use with subsequent land preparation and eventual redevelopment of the urban renewal land. In terms of flood plains, this could mean redevelOpment of such lands with new uses which incorporate adequate design and construction features or involve land uses which pose minimal flood risk in time of floods. Accordingly, the final effects of flood proofing and redevelopment are essentially the same; the steps involved though, are viewed as being different. In contrast, some of the early steps to evacuation with relocation and redevelopment are essentially the same, but the end result is significantly different. 1Housing Act.gf 1954, Public Law 566, August 2, 1954, Title III, Slum Clearance and Urban Renewal, 68 Stat. 622. 236 Field Observations and information concerning applications of redevelOpment techniques in flood plain settings were not Obtained. Comments on the application of urban renewal techniques in the down- town Lansing area were presented earlier in the preceeding section on evacuation. As noted in that section, flood plain sections in Lansing urban renewal areas will be essentially cleared of existing structures (permanent evacuation) and dedicated to Open space and recreation purposes. At the same time, redevelOpment efforts are directed at lands lying adjacent to the flood plain and do not include land within the flood prone area. Reb ' i » Fiaaace The significance of selective controls in rebuilding finance in Michigan flood plain areas is substantial. As pointed out in Chapter III, selective financial controls and loan review procedures can be utilized in encouraging better structural design and construction practices.l Flood proofing measures could apprOpriately be required as a prerequisite to approval of a rebuilding loan. Other controls can serve as inducements in relocating former flood plain structures prior to their reconstruction and reestablishment. Compulsory flood insurance coverage and required flood proofing measures could serve in such a manner. The principle limitation to Obtaining such goals, especially the latter, appears to be the result of economic pressures brought on by time and capital investment commitments in the Old, flood damaged structure. Authority for rebuilding finance is shared by private and public 1%, PD 0 137-138 0 237 credit institutions. The principle program which can be identified in the flood loss management area is the disaster loan program of the Small Business Administration. No field information was acquired in terms of the practices Of private credit institutions in financing reconstruction of flood damaged properties. In addition little experience with the National Flood Insurance Program can be reported. As a result, the following discussion will concentrate on the Small Business Administration disaster loan program. The Small Business Administration administers the disaster loans made available to independently owned and operated small businesses, along with home-owners, suffering substantial loss from a major disaster as declared by the President. Loans are made in order to rebuild and/or reestablish businesses and homes which have suffered damages from natural disasters including floods.l The Small Business Administration administers a program involving loans to independently owned and Operated small businesses. In the event a natural disaster resulting from a flood is declared a major disaster by the President of the United States, the provisions of the Small Business Act become relaxed. Disaster loans become available to individuals (including homefowners), all businesses, churches, charitable institutions, and non-profit organizations.2 The loans are made in order to rebuild and/or re-establish businesses and homes which have suffered damages from declared major disasters. Funds from the loans may be utilized in repairing or replacing damaged structures, 1§mall Businass‘Agj, as amended, 72 Stat. 384; 15 U.S.C.A. 631, at, figg. 2George M. Strong, Supervisory Loan Officer, Financial Assistance Division, Small Business Administration, Detroit, Michigan, Personal Interview, February 17, 1969. 238 and replacing lost or damaged furnishings, business machinery, equipment and inventory.1 The loans may be used to pay existing financial obligations except some bank loans. Bank loans may be repaid if the bank is participating in the new loan, i.e., if the new loan is what Small Business Administration refers to as a participation loan. A further condition is that the bank's portion of the new (participation) loan must be at least equivalent to the amount which is being repaid on the previous bank loan. The disaster loans are characterized by easy terms. The disaster loans carry low loan rates with a maximum ceiling of 3 per cent; an extended maturity of 30 years; and no loan limit. Other Small Business Admini- stration loan programs may have interest rates as high as 5% per cent; maturity periods of 10 to 20 years; and limits on loan sizes.2’3 The Small Business Administration can also perform an analogous service to that of the Federal Housing Administration Mortgage Insurance program, in t hat the Small Business Administration can insure up to 90 percent of a bank loan. This is true even in those cases where the bank sets the in- terest rate on its loans above the Small Business Administration interest rate levels. From conversations with a Small Business Administration loan official, it appears that the emphasis of the disaster loan program is replacement and/or renovation without significant allowance for upgrading or improvement lU.S., Small Business Administration, ' ' t 'on- What It Is, What It DoesJ March, 1968 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1968), p. 10. 21mg... pp. 4-12. 3W. as amended, Sec. 7(b)(l)(2)(4), 72 Stat. 384; 15 U.S.C.A. 631, 21;. m, 239 of conditions over that which existed prior to a flood disaster. It was indicated that financial assistance for relocation is possible. It is not a stataipolicy objective and the degree to which it is encouraged is not clear. The loan official indicated relocation might be expected in individual, isolated cases. Where communities are involved, extensive evacuation was suggested as not practicable from an economic standpoint.l In response to a question concerning the influences Executive Order 11296 of August 11, 1966 has had on the Small Business Administration Disaster Loan Program, it was indicated that it has had little effect. It was indicated that in the non-disaster loan programs, flood hazard and risk were already being evaluated prior to the Executive Order. In the 1950's, the focus of such reviews was on improper drainage and flooding due to intensive rainfall with little attention given to riverine flood situations. Subsequently, the focus was broadened to include riverine flooding such that areas were being evaluated prior to the 1966 Order.2 There is no coordination by the Small Business Administration with the Federal Housing Administration. This may be attributed in part to the independent nature of the Small Business Administration; i.e., it is not within the cabinet, the Small Business Administration disaster loan program is largely a relief function or post-flood approach to mitigating economic losses. This is in contrast to the Federal Housing Administration's program of passing upon proposed deve10pments. (Although it is true they also administer insurance programs which entail the refinancing of old mortgages or of financing mortgages covering rebuilding, expansion, or lStrong, Personal Interview, February 17, 1969. Ibid. 240 improvement of existing deve10pments). Consequently, the two programs are viewed by the Small Business Administration as having different objectives. In the case of agricultural disaster loans, the applicant is referred to the Farmers Home Administration. £1222.In§uranas As noted in previous sections flood insurance in terms of insurance principles is essentially a postdevelOpment flood loss management technique.1 Like flood relief, it does not achieve significant reduction in flood losses as such, but redistributes the loss bearing over a greater number of individuals than those immediately affected by any particular flood event. Its contribution in terms of reducing flood loss potential is derived from qualifications and sanctions attached to the insurance program. At the same time, the insurance principle which underlies flood insurance makes it a highly attractive device for offsetting and hedging against potential flood mosses associated with existing deve10pments. This appears to be especially true where public subsidies are involved in making flood insur- ance policies marketable. Such a conclusion appears applicable to Michigan flood plain management needs and highly appropriate in light of the existing deve10pments in flood plain areas. Discussion of the program, as presently authorized was given in a preceeding section. One aspect of that discussion can be reiterated here. The flood insurance program is directed at small business Operators and residential property owners. For example, the ceiling on subsidized flood insurance coverage for business is 330,000 liability per structure and 35,000 liability per occupant for any contents. Similarly the ceiling 1 £2225. pp. 81-82 and 138. 241 on residences is 817,500 per dwelling unit or 830,000 per residential structure and $5,000 aggregate liability per dwelling unit.1 Provisions are also included for any other properties which might become eligible as non-profit institution or public properties. In such an event, the ceilings applied to business structures and contents will apply to the added coverage classes. Such limits effectively secure the policy of directing the program at small residential units and business Operations.2 Evaluations of the extent of application of flood insurance programs will have to wait until the currently authorized National Flood Insurance Program is made available and implemented in Michigan. Other Techniques ,Elggg Re i f Flood Relief is frequently discussed in flood loss management articles. However, it is generally regarded as a means of mitigating flood losses of those caught in the flood plain by redistributing their loss bearing through the general public. This is accomplished through private and public grants of money, materials, labor and other forms of assistance which ease the loss burden of flood stricken residents and facilitates their return to a pre-flood condition. Because of the redistributional aspects in loss bearing, relief is not considered as a means of reducing flood losses. Accordingly its apprOpriateness as a flood loss management device is not evaluated in the same light as those techniques discussed above. However, it should be recognized as a management device. Thus, as long as there are deficiencies 111.92.53.38 32.9. W W Act of 1968, Title XIII, 82 Stat. 575; 42 U.S.C.A. 4013(b). 2Lbid., 82 Stat. 574; 42 U.S.C.A. 4013(a). 242 or gaps in community comprehensive flood loss management programs, there will be a corresponding need and demand for public relief. Flood relief is not exhaustively covered in this study because of the minimal contribution it makes in terms of reducing flood losses. At the same time, it should be noted that there are numerous potential authorities and sources for flood relief. Two of the principle authorities will be discussed below. PrOgram evaluations and history of program actions in terms of Michigan are not reviewed. This omission is not a result of the lack of available documentation of such activities; rather it is a reflection of time and budget constraints. Disaster Relief An Act of September 30, 1950 authorizes the President or agencies designated by him to provide disaster assistance in the event of a major disaster.1 The 1950 Act specifies that the Governor of any state may request disaster assistance when a major flood event is experienced. And while the Act stipulates that a governor must certify the need for disaster assistance, final discretionary approval is left with the President. That is, the final determination is made by the President as to whether a major disaster as defined by the Act has occurred in such severity or magnitude that Federal help is warranted. Once the President declares a major disaster, various Federal agencies may be called upon to provide relief in the form of technical assistance; loans of equipment, supplies, facilities, personnel, and other resources; and extension of credit. In order to facilitate provision of disaster relief the Office of Emergency Planning has been designated the coordinating 1Public Law 875, September 30, 1950, 64 Stat. 1109; 42 U.S.C.A. 1855. 243 agency which will act on behalf of the President in organizing relief efforts. It selectively screens applications for disaster assistance before relaying them to the President for his declaration of a major disaSsr. And when a major disaster is declared, the O.E.P. administers the funds used for disaster relief and coordinates the activities of Federal agencies providing assistance.1 Authority to provide disaster relief at the state and local level is provided by the Civil Defense Act of 1953 as amended.2 Under the original Act a State Civil Defense Agency was created to respond to hostile attacks and natural disasters. Under a later act, the agency was transferred to the State Police and the powers originally authorized by the 1953 Act were invested in the State Police.3 Powers conferred by the Civil Defense Act included the granting of emergency powers to the Governor and local heads of government during the declaration of a state of emergency by the Governor. The Act further enables the creation of county and local civil defense units. Under the Act such units are empowered to provide aid during a state of emergency. Such aid can be received from federal or private sources in the form of gifts, donations, grants; or loans of supplies, materials, equipment, money, and other resources. The Act does not specifically allow for the creation or funding of a state disaster fund. Rather, it appears to rely heavily upon the ability of the state to qualify for federal and private 1U.S., Congress, House, Committee on ApprOpriations, Subcommittee on Independent Offices and Department of Housing and Urban DevelOpment,‘H§azing§, Part 2, 90th Cong., lst sess. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967), pp. 47-50. 2State of Michigan, Qigil Defgnse Act, Act No. 159, Public Acts of 1953. W 9.222123. Laws Mining. 30.222. .91. mo 3State of Michigan, Act No. 236, Public Acts of 1962, Hishisanmggmailad Ira—'8 AM 30-310. at. sea. 244 assistance during times of natural disaster. The amount of financial relief received or dispersed by civil defense units after serious flood events in the State of Michigan was not compiled. Such data may be compiled through contacts with civil defense offices. However, the general picture given by the Federal Office of Emergency Planning for the Great Lakes Region was one of relatively low involvement in terms of flood relief.1 This picture was further substantiated by Mr. Strong of the Small Business Administration. He indicated that the Small Business Administrations has had only four occassions to draw upon its disaster loan program under a major disaster declaration in Michigan.2 ioreover, tornadoes and high winds constituted at least two of the events which qualified for a major disaster declaration. _1.__AF 00 mm The existence of a decentralized flood warning system was cited as existing in the State.3 However, no attempt was made under this study at acquiring information and evaluating the warning system. Such a study and evaluation would be a worthy undertaking. However, it was concluded such a study was precluded by the available resources. Wu tio and W W Education measures in flood plain management are most evident in technical assistance programs developed and sponsored by Federal and Michigan water resource management agencies. Discussions of applications 1U.S., Congress, House, Committee On Appropriations, Subcommittee on Independent Offices and Department of Housing and Urban DevelOpment, Hggging§, Part.2, 1967, pp. 47-49, Table (not numbered), pp. 50-51. 2Strong, Personal Interview, February 17, 1969. 3Lawrence Witte, Personal Interview, January 29, 1969. 245 Of educational measures will be incorporated with technical assistance measures and will reflect this integration accordingly. Educational programs which are distinctly viewed as such have yet to be identified and studied in Michigan. Furthermore, the ensuing treatment Of technical assistance and education will principally focus on the flood plain informa- tion study program of the U.S. Corps of Engineers. Recent Federal involvement in guiding Michigan flood plain deve10pment has been evident through the preparation Of flood plain studies. Federal flood plain information studies are directed at providing technical assistance in directing flood plain occupancy. In this manner, it is believed the second declared policy objective of achieving a more Optional utilization of flood plains can be furthered by assisting State and local efforts in directing the develOpment on their flood plains. A recent, strong move by the Federal Government into this policy field is found in Section 206 of the Flood Control Act of July 14, 1960.1 The Act authorizes the Corps of Engineers to compile and disseminate flood hazard information with an orientation of assisting local land use deve10p- ment decisions in flood plain and hurricane tide zones. Federal study work can only be initiated upon request from appropriate local governmental units. Approval of the requests by State coordinating agencies and the Chief of Engineers must be received before the district Corps Office can begin a study. The role of the coordinating agency in each State is to pass on the request and assign a relative priority to each request. Federal objectives in this program are: 1. To compile specific information on flood and potential flood hazards including identification of areas subject to inundation by various magnitudes and frequencies. lzlood Qogtro; Act 2f,lg;y‘lfi, 1960, Public Law 86-645, Section 206, 74 Stat. 500, 33 U.S.C.A. 709a. 246 2. To encourage Optimum and prudent use of the nation's river valleys by providing State and local agencies the basic flood data necessary for land use planning and regulation programs including preservation of adequate floodways and channel rights-of-way. 3. To publicize available information for the guidance of private citizens and interests on the use and hazards of using flood plain lands. 4. To reduce further expenditures for Federal projects to ' protect deve10pments which in the absence of the informa- tion program, would be constructed or imprOperly planned.l Other Federal agencies have been involved in flood information and technical assistance studies also. The U.S. Geological Survey is involved . . . . 2 . , . in flood plain mapping services. One program in particular conSists of outlining areas subject to occassional flooding. The program was recommended by the Task Force on Flood Control Policy with the suggestion that it be done with available information and without definition of frequency of flooding.3 In this manner, it was h0ped that a generalized definition of flood prone areas could be obtained in a relatively short period of time. Subsequent, more detailed studies could be undertaken which precisely define the extent, depth, frequency, and duration of floOding. This would relate to studies as those provided under the Corps Section 206 flood plain information study program. Allied to the flood plain delineation program are the contracted services performed by the Geological Survey for other agencies. The Survey conducts water resource investigations for Federal and non-Federal agencies lmwwmmm - 1967, p. 65. 2 U.S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Department of the Interior and Related Agencies,‘figg;igg§ before a Sub- committee of the Committee on ApprOpriations, Part I, 89th Cong., 2d sess. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1966), pp. 93, and 156-159. 3U.S., Task Force Report on Federal Flood Control Policy, House Doc. No. 465, 1966, pp. 21-22. 247 and interests on a reimbursable basis. In Fiscal Year 1966 the Geological Survey serviced contracts for States, counties, and municipalities totaling 12.6 million dollars. The Survey described them as consisting . . . largely of tnventorying and describing the water resources of selected problem areas and in studying technical aspects of specific water problems. A number of flood plain information studies have been requested by local Michigan governmental units. A listing of applications and state affixed priorities indicates that two urbanizing gegions are principle centers for study activity. Southeastern Michigan and south central Michigan have demonstrated an active interest in obtaining flood plain information studies. Reports which have been completed as of June, 1971 include: 1. Upper River Rouge, Farmington, Michigan (1963). 2. Clinton River, Michigan, Main River, Main, Middle, and North Branches (1964). 3. Red Cedar River, Ingham County (1968). 4. River Rouge, Main Branch. 5. River Rouge, Upper Branch. 6. Grand River, Grand Ledge Dam to Dimondale Dam. One experience was noted with the U.S. Geological Survey in providing flood plain delineation in Michigan.? The City of Mt. Clemens contracted with the U.S.G.S. to provide them with information regarding the definition of floods in Clinton River (North Branch and Middle Branch) and Harrington Drain. The resulting product was a tOpographical map with accompanying 1U.S., Congress, House, Committee on ApprOpriations, Subcommittee on Department of the Interior and Related Agencies, Hgggingfi, Part I, 1966, p. 83. 28.W. Wiitala and Arlington D. Ash. MW. Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-59 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Geological Survey, 1962). 248 text which graphically delineated the flood plain for the flood Of April, 1947. Also illustrated is the projected effect a completed cut-off canal would have on a flood of equivalent discharge to that of April, 1947. Other stage levels are related to recurrence intervals through a scaled figure. The study was later complemented by a Corps flodd plain information study and was followed with the adoption of flood plain regulations by the City of Mt. Clemens.1 However, no information was obtained for this community on its flood plain regulations. A case study would be valuable to Obtain the experiences of this community in adopting flood plain regula- tions using U.S.G.S. and Corps Of Engineers flood plain information. It was found that a number of flood plain regulations had been adOpted by communities as a result of flood plain information provided by the Corps of Engineers.2 Some of the actions were taken during the conduct of the study and were initially based upon tentative study results. Additional enactments were also forthcoming upon completion and publica- tion Of these studies. The adoption of such ordinances has furnished evidence that such technical assistance programs do make a significant contribution to flood plain management. Such evidence reaffirms the findings of Murphy and others when they concluded that (l) the provision Of technical information; (2) assistance in interpreting hydrologic data, and (3) assistance in develOping flood plain planning and regulatory 1Paul C. Bent, Assistant District Chief, Water Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey, Lansing, Michigan, Personal Communication, February 25, 1960. 2Letters from Mr. Maurice Rapkin, Chief, Flood Plain Management Services, Detroit District, Corps of Engineers, Department of the Army to Mr. Bernard Giampetroni, Director, Macomb County Plannim5COmmission, Mt. Clemens, Michigan, July 26, 1971; Mr. William Rowden, Assistant Director, Tri-County Regional Planning Commission, Lansing, Michigan, July 26, 1971; Mr. George Scrubb, Director, Oakland County Planning Commission, Pontiac, Michigan, July 26, 1971. 249 measures were essential in community adOption of flood plain management programs. Comments made by a Lansing city planner responsible for flood plain planning in the city further supported the justification for Federal and State technical assistance.2 He noted that considerable assistance and COOperation was received from state flood plain management personnel in developing the city flood plain zoning ordinance. Assistance was of considerable benefit in interpreting hydrologic data and frequency expectations provided in Corps of Engineers flood plain information studies. The assistance was essential to the drafting of adequate flood plain definitions and provisions for establishing flood plain limits under the flood plain zoning ordinance.3’4 lMurphy. WW. 1958. pp. 149-153. 2James Church, Personal Interview, October, 1969. 312m. 4Lawrence Witte, Personal Interview, January 29, 1969. CHAPTER V EVALUATION How does flood loss management measure up in terms of program adOption, implementation, and success? Suggested techniques and measures for managing flood losses were explored in Chapter III. In particular, emphasis was placed upon those techniques directed at reducing flood losses. In the subsequent chapter, treatment was given to the apprOpriateness and extent of application of such techniques. Now it is apprOpriate to evaluate program adoption and make recommendations for program improvement when possible and/or further study where necessary. Varying levels of evaluations will be found in each of the following techniques. Greatest attention is given to floodway encroachment regulations, flood plain zoning, subdivision regulations, and engineering works of pro- tection. Such attention is given to these techniques because they have received the most attention in this state in terms of program execution. At the same time, some coverage needs to be given to several promising areas Of flood loss management in Michigan. Techniques included in the promising category include acquisition, building finance, flood proofing, flood insurance redevelopment, and comprehensive planning. In some cases, evaluation of these techniques may be limited in terms of present program execution. Nevertheless some specific consideration can be advanced regarding further needs for research, evaluation, and application. Tech- niques not mentioned in the above two listings will also receive brief comment. Much of the OOmment will reflect the lack of collected information 250 251 or absence of technique applications within the State of Michigan. Finally, two frequently overlooked techniques will be evaluated in terms of their application and contribution to overall flood loss management objectives. These two techniques are education and technical assistance. Ezedgyelopment Eloog Loss Manggemenp Compulsory Techniques From the research and discussion presented in the previous chapter it is clear that much of the recent movement in flood loss management in Michigan has been in regulating the development of flood plains through applications Of the police power. State involvement has focused on flood- way encroachment regulations and subdivision regulations. Local programs of action have focused on flood plain zoning and to a lesser extent channel encroachment restrictions. In short, attention appears to be increasingly directed at compulsory flood plain management techniques by state and local governments in Michigan. Evaluation of some of the existing appli- cations will be presented below. Elaadwai.Engraaehmsai.Essulaiians (A number of information sources were utilized in evaluating Michigan floodway management problems and needs. Current program information was requested from selected states in terms of their applications of floodway regulations. The states were contacted on the basis of prior knowledge of authorized floodway regulation. Studies and evaluations made by Dunham (1959), Morse (1962), Murphy (1958), Perry (1956), and others were used as the background base against which the current programs were evaluated. Information was sought concerning adjustments in floodway regulatory programs which had occurred since the previous study work of the late 1950's and early 1960's. Requests were made for information concerning 252 program authorizations, causal basis for recent adjustments in program authorizations, program implementation, legal challenges, and experiences with program administration. The latter aspect emphasized the need for program cost information in defining or establishing floodway encroachment zones. It was expected that information relating to historical problems and ensuing program adjustments in other states would be of substantial value in evaluating Michigan floodway management needs. It is important to note that at the initiation of this study Michigan was without any statewide floodway regulatory program. In June Of 1968, a little over a year after the start of this study, floodway encroachment legislation was enacted at the state level. The legislative action changed the perspective for evaluating other state regulatory programs. Nevertheless, experiences of other states in floodway regulations were still felt to be potentially relevant in evaluating the new State of Michigan floodway management program. The ensuing evaluation will focus on state and then local floodway encroachment regulations in Michigan. Principle attention will be focused at the state level on legal soundness, floodway criteria, program imple- mentation, and administrative enforcement. Local program evaluations will be constrained to floodway criteria. Authority for state floodway regulation in Michigan issues from Act 167 of Public Acts of 1968.1 It is a relatively recent enactment when con- strasted to the nine states known to have floodway or channel encroachment regulations. The states and their dates of legislative authorization in- clude Connecticut (1955), Indiana (1945), Iowa (1949), Kentucky (1948), lMichigan, Act 167, 1968, m. 323.1, 33;. seq. 253 Massachusetts (1939), New Jersey (1929), New York (1956), Pennsylvania (1913), and Washington (1935). Strengths and weaknesses of these various programs were assessed to varying degrees by Dunham, Morse, Perry and others. Their reviews coupled with information obtained specifically for this study from seven of the nine states have provided a background against which the recent enactment in Michigan could be evaluated. Iichigan Act 167 of 1968 provided a much stronger and sweeping authority than those originally enacted in the other states. Integration of flood plain delineation with application of restrictive regulations in flood- ways is achieved under the Michigan act. Such an integration is reflective of recent amendatory actions taken in at least four Of the above cited states. Prior to the 1960's most of the floodway or channel encroachment regulations were quite narrow in authority and program application. A series of amendments in the 1960's altered this picture in Iowa, Massa- chusetts, New Jersey, and Washington wherein more rigorous regulation of floodway areas was combined with general flood plain delineation. Iowa in a 1965 amendment expanded the scope of its floodway regulations to include flood plain regulations under the original 1949 enabling act.1’2 Massachusetts followed a different approach in which flood plain and flood- way regulations were jointly authorized under special wetland protection and flood plain zoning acts. Such enactments serve effectively to complement 3,4,5 the weaker Channel Encroachment Act of 1939. A seeming weakness or 1Letter from Othie R. McMurray, Director, Iowa Natural Resources Council, September 15, 1969. 2State of Iowa, Acts of 1949 (53 G.A.), ch. 203, sec. 18, as amended with particular reference to Acts of 1965 (61 G.A.), ch. 373, sec. 3; 1213 godg Angotgtgd 454.35. 3Annotated Law§,g§ Mgssgghgsetts, Vol. 3, ch. 91, sec. 12a. 4Letter from John P. King, Associate Commissioner, Department of 254 drawback to the Massachusetts approach is the large number of separate regional authorizations, each one of which provides for a number of water resource management functions.1 In like manner, New Jersey has not liberalized nor strengthened its original Stream Encroachment Act of 1929.2’3 The state did enact a Flood Plain Delineation Act in 1962 which corrects deficiencies in the 1929 Act but does not supersede the older Act.4 The 1962 Act allows for a much broader, integrated flood plain and floodway regulatory program.5 Finally, the State of Washington proceeded to extend and strengthen its floodway regulatory program by adOpting more stringent and sweeping rules and regulations.6 No new legislation was adopted; rather the rules and regulations were promulgated upon a more liberal interpretation and application of the Old act of 1935.7 Public Works, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, September 16, 1969. 5Letter from Clinton E. Watson, Resource Planner, Water Resources Commission, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, September 16, 1969. 1Commonwealth of Massachusetts; Chap. 554 of Acts of 1961; Chap. 571 of Acts of 1962; Chap. 421, 426, 435 of Acts of 1963; Chap. 131, 220 and 768 of Acts of 1965; and Chap. 444 of Acts of 1968. 2Letter from George R. Shanklin, Director and Chief Engineer Division of Water Policy and Supply, Department of Conservation and Economic DevelOp- ment, State Of New Jersey, November 12, 1969. 3State or New Jersey. stream W as 9_r 1__929. Banned Siam 58: 1-26- ‘State or New Jersey. £19.93 mm W m 2:: 1_962. its: inner; Statutes Aussies 58: 16a. at. 5.99. 5Dirk C. Hofman, Supervising Engineer, Division of Water Policy and Supply, Department of Conservation and Economic Development, State Of New Jersey, "New Jersey's Flood Plain Management Program Implementation in the Raritan River Basin," paper presented at National Meeting on Water Resources Engineering, American Society Of Civil Engineers, New Orleans, La., February 4, 1969, pp. 21-23. 6Letter from Walter Bergstrom, Engineer, Operations Section, Division of Planning and Development, Department of Water Resources, State Of Washington, September 16, 1969. 7Administration of State Flood Control Zones by the Department of Water Resources Pursuant to and under the authority of Chapter 86.16 R.C.W., Department of Water Resources Docket NO. 68-9, February 27, 1969. 255 Dunham's review was the most penetrating for reviewing the consti- tutionality of floodway encroachment regulations. Michigan Act 167 appears to conform or answer the three fundamental criteria suggested by Dunham as essential to meeting constitutional requirements.l Requirements of due process, equal protection of the law, and considerations of federal supremacy appear to be adequately provided for within the act and within the adopted rules and regulations of the Michigan Water Resources Commission. Dunham found weaknesses in floodway encroachment statutes in Connecticut and Indiana.2 Both states enabling acts were found potentially deficient in fulfilling equal protection of the law requirements. In Connecticut the language of the 1955 Act was suggested as being to narrowly applied. The provisions of the act appeared to restrict regulations of floodway en- craochments in those areas where flood control projects were being con- sidered. It was argued the effect of such legislation could be construed as attempting to minimize future acquisition costs. In Indiana, the provisions of the 1945 Act were suggested as being pointed at regulating residential deve10pments in floodway areas. The Indiana Flood Control Act of 1945 was revised and amended in 1961.3 Provisions of the Act were expanded and generalized such that any structure . . .by Virtue of its nature, design, method of construction state of maintenance or physical condition, will constitute an unreasonable hazard to safety of life or prOperty, and the same are declared to be and constitute a public nuisance.4 1Dunham, "Flood Control Via the Police Power," 1959, p. 112l,,et..figg. 2 . 1121.9- SState of Indiana, M m A91 9; 1.945, as amended, with parti-f cular reference to the Eloog,§gngzgl Act,_f 1961; Agnotgpgg,1pg1ang W 27-1101. at. ass- I'm. 256 Mr. Robert F. Jackson in his letter stated We do not know if the articles cited in your letter had any bearing on the amendments made to the Flood Control Act in 1961. We are more inclined to feel that the changes were made to correct deficiencies or short comings that were experienced during several years of Operations under the original act.l Whatever the stimulus for causing the revision in the 1945 Act, the narrow- ness Of statutory application discussed by Dunham appears to be corrected. Connecticut's 1955 Stream Encroachment Act has also been revised. However the 1963 amendments did not alter the language which was of particular concern to Dunham.2 Moreover, a Connecticut Supreme Court of Edmors ruling upheld the constitutionality of the Connecticut Act in June, 1959. This unfortunately coincided with the time Dunham's article was published and therefore prevented his review Of the ruling.3 The decision is highly significant in that it was one of the few recorded cases directed at challenging the constitutionality of a floddway en- croachment law. In its decision the court reversed the lower trial courts ruling. The unpublished lower court ruling was reported by Dunham to have concluded that the law was in fact attempting to save the government from the expense of acquiring prOperty through unjust application of the police powers.4 Unfortunately, this line of reasoning is not directly addressed in the review and ruling of the Supreme Court of Errors. The latter court overruled the lower trial court by noting that the plaintiff 1Letter from Robert F. Jackson, Chief, Division Of Water, State of Indiana, October 29, 1969. 2State of Connecticut, Public Act No. 435 of 1963, figngzgl‘SLgtupg§,gf Connggtigut, Title 25, Chapter 477, Sec. 25-4a (1963 supp.). BMW. 146 Conn. 650. 153A-2d 822 (1959). 4Dunham, "Flood Control Via the Police Power," 1959, p. 1125; Note: Footnote No. 46 cites Unpublished Opinion of Dube J., Court of Common Pleas, Judicial District of Waterbury, Conn., Docket No. 16.018, decided July 18, 1958. 257 had not exhausted all the remedies available to him. Moreover, The commission has, at most, refused its permission for the erection of a particular structure. Whether the plaintiff could build another type of structure --for example, one on piers or contilevers -- which would not impair the capacity of the channel in time of floods is a matter which the commission was not asked to, and did not, pass upon.l In reviewing the background of the case, the Supreme Court of Errors made careful note of the need to distinguish between application of the police powers and eminent domain. It is in this discussion, that the Court comes closest to Dunham's point of concern when it found that the obvious purpose of the enactment . . .was to enable the water resources commission to fore- stall, by stream clearance, channel improvement and other flood control measures, a repetition of the havoc wrought in those floods of August, 1955. The legislation was an exercise of the police power of the state in the interest of public welfare.2 Because Dunham's argument is clear and forceful and in light of a careful reading of the 1955 version of the Connecticut Act, i.e., prior to the 1963 amendments, it is difficult to offer reasons for the Supreme Court of Errors avoidance of the issue concerning the discriminatory application of channel encroachment limits. Specifically, were channel encroachment regulations being selectively applied to only those reaches of the stream for which future public works for flood control? NO comment is made anywhere in the discussion of the facts of the case concerning prOposed public works for flood control which would involve the flood plain property being contedted. Consequently, it may be found that a more liberal interpretation of the application of the provisions of the act is being sustained in regulating stream channel encroachments in general. In 1Vart R 3 ur omnissio 153A.825. 2Ibid. 153A.824. 258 such an event, the equal protection of the laws requirement may be more closely achieved. The Eaztelag v. Eater Besougges Commission case is nevertheless highly significant to Michigan and other states where floodway encroachment, flood plain zoning, or subdivision regulations are being enacted and implemented. The Supreme Court of Errors carefully developed and followed the justifica- tion for applying police powers in regulating flood plain areas. The fact that the decisiOn reaffirmed a questionable statute is not damaging, in that the argued weakness in the Connecticut statute can be easily corrected without altering the application or appropriateness of the ruling. Neither Of the two problem areas pointed out in Indiana and Connecticut acts have been found within Michigan Act 167. Encroachment as defined under the adopted rules and regulations applies to ". . .any structure, deposit, or fill, in, along, across, or projecting into any flood plain, channel or floodway."l Nevertheless, a potential deficiency in the Michigan floodway encroachment regulatory program may be suggested. This pertains to the question of whether injunctive relief can be brought under the Act to remove an unlawful obstruction in a defined floodway. The Act allows for the commission . . .to bring any apprOpriate action. . . , either at law or in Chancery as may be necessary to carry out the pro- visions of this act, and to enforce any and all laws relating to. . . the obstruction of the floodways of the rivers and streams of this state.2 In the event relief is available and can be sought from an obstruction which predates the enactment of Act 167, then questions based upon due 1Rules and Regulations of the Michigan Water Resources Commission, January 21, 1970, R. 323.201.(5). 2Michigan, Act 167, 1968, Sec. 3. 259 process may be forthcoming in challenging such relief. In contrast, it should be noted that other states provide more explicit statements of the enforcement and judicial remedies available for abating existing floodway encroachments. Connecticut, Indiana, Iowa, and Washington include specific provisions in their respective acts which authorize floodway encroachment abatement actions.l New Jersey and Pennsylvania have provisions for assessing fines against those who would permit or construct obstructions in the floodway without permit.2 How- ever, little comment was found or received which related experiences in taking such courses of action in any of these states. Authority under Michigan Act 167 is granted for regulating the filling, grading, and construction of obstructions in the flood plain, stream bed, channel, or any stream in the state. Particular attention is given to establishing performance type criteria which state that harmful interferences with the discharge or stage characteristics of a stream are unlawful unless formally permitted by the State Water Resources Commission. Precise definition of structures, flood plain areas, and hydrologic criteria are left to the Commission. This is somewhat unusual relative to other state authorities, wherein general definitions of regulated structures, flood plain, and/or floodway are set forth in the authorizing legislation. On the other hand, operational or precise definitions of 1% e amt s at WC 1 u . 25-49; W mm mm. 27-1117 and 27-1123a. lama mg m, 455A.33. Annotated Lang: 11W. Vol. 3. 011.. 91. See. m. was mm 21: W22. 86.16.0909 2H§g_ggrsgy StgtgtegyAnngtgpgg, Title 58, Ch. 1-26. Egnnfixlxggia Statutes Agngpatgg, Title 31, Ch. 25, Sec. 682 & 687. Note: New Jersey allows each days continuance to constitute a separate offense. Pennsylvania provides for a maximum fine and/or imprisonment of up to one year. aMichigan, Act 167, 1968, Sec. 5b. 260 these terms frequently do not result until rules and regulations are adopted by the regulating agency. Operational definitions are established in the adOpted rules and regulations for administering Act 167.1 Criteria adopted for flood plain and floodway delineation in Michigan are quite inclusive in that extensive portions of natural flood plain areas are encompassed. An intermediate regional flood has been established as the implementation standard. The event is defined to have "a 1% chance of occuring or being exceeded in any given year."2 Such a frequency probability achieves a high degree of flood plain area definition. The form of the intermediate flood definition is significant and desirable in that it stresses the probability risk function associated with flooding as an event. The probability level, 1 percent is comparable to the 100 year flood reoccurance concept, but it avoids the stage-discharge levels often associated and specified with the latter notion. As noted earlier, frequency occurances of given flood discharges may be altered due to natural and human adjustments in river basins and watersheds. This is particularly true in urbanized areas and the smaller more frequent flood events. Thus, some of the distinction is lost between a probability function expressed as a percentage and one expressed in terms of a number of years with an associated stage-discharge level as more infrequent flood events are considered such as the Michigan intermediate flood. Nevertheless, the percentage probability expression remains a desirable method of expression. Use of a 1 percent probability frequency level places Michigan among th- ose states having more restrictive floodway definitions. Connecticut continues 1State of Michigan, Rules and Regulations of the Michigan Water Resources Commission, Department of Natural Resources, Flood Plain Control, January 21, 1970, R. 323.201,.gt. seg. 2Lbid. R. 323.201.(8). 261 to use a flood event defined by multiplying the mean annual flood by an adjustment factor.l Murphy had indicated that in 1958, a factor multiple ranging from five to seven resulted in a flood frequency interval of 34 to 125 years.2 Indiana did not have uniform criteria in 1958 and may still not have adopted any. Permit applications are reviewed individually and no floodway limits have been defined although they have been authorized. ' Iowa until recently did not have any criteria established.5’6 Now urban areas are subject to floodway limits defined by a regional flood concept. The relative frequency intervals of these were not specified. Rural or non-urban areas are subject to an individual project permit review criteria in which displacement or impoundment factors are considered in terms of backwater effects. Massachusetts Operated under a weak criterion. The high water mark in the channel was defined as the channel encroachment 7’8’9 This criterion continues to be the basis limit under the 1939 act. for definition under the 1939 Act. More recent acts allow the flood plain and floodway to be defined in specifically authorized streams or river basins. However, no encroachment limits other than the high water mark are utilized 1Letter from Robert A. McCabe, Hydraulic Engineer, Water Management, Water Resources Commission, State of Connecticut, November 5, 1969. Mr. McCabe noted that a factor of 3 times mean annual floods has been used in some cases since Murphy's writing. 2Murphy. WW 1958, p. 21. 3 . man” Po 22- 4Letter from Robert F. Jackson, October 29, 1969. 5Murphy. WW. 1958. p. 24. 6Letter from Othie R. McMurray, September 15, 1969. 7Murphy, Begglgting Elgogfifilgin peyelopmegt, 1958, p. 27. 8Letter from John P. King, September 16, 1969. 9Letter from Clinton E. Watson, September 16, 1969. 262 when defining floodway limits.1 New Jersey, currently follows an approach similar to Connecticut. A mean annual flood multiplied by an appropriate factor to derive a design discharge level for delineating floodway and flood plain areas is used.2 Formerly, a minimum channel encroachment zone was defined wherein an improved earth trapezoidal channel was assumed in defining an encroachment limit.3’4 Experience demonstrated that channel improvements were not generally instituted and the associated encroachment limits were then much too narrow. Pennsylvania was reported by Murphy to have no set criteria in using an envelope curve method. Individual permit reviews were made with resulting encroachment limits falling in a 25 to 100 frequency range.5 Assistant Attorney General Mapel registered some disagreement with Murphy's assessment in terms of interpretation of what constituted an obstruction and what was available in setting encroach- ment limits. Mr. Mapel indicated that the encroachment limits are "limited by statute to low water mark," and that attempts to extend jurisdiction into the natural flood plain were rebuffed by the Courts.6 Further clarification of these remarks and assertion are needed to clarify the discrepancies. Washington was also cited by Murphy as employing no uniform criteria in defining encroachment limits. The resulting encroachment limits 1Letter from John P. King, September 16, 1969. 2Hofman, "New Jersey's Flood Plain Management Programming," 1969, pp. 22. 3Murphy. WW. 1958. p. 28. 4Letter from George R. Shanklin, November 12, 1969. 5Mum-pm. WW. 1958. p. 27. 6Letter from Assistant Attorney General Carl R. Mapel, Jr., Water and Power Resources Board, Department of Forests and Waters, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, October 30, 1969. 263 fell within a flood frequency range of one to 100 years. Since that time a more aggressive administration has adOpted rules and regulations which establish a minimum frequency interval of 10 years and a maximum of 50 years for defining floodway encroachment limits. A considerable range in channel and floodway encroachment limits is evident in other states. {urphy concluded that, in general, state restric- tions were in themselves overly conservative using ". . .very low criteria for defining channel encroachment. . ."1 Correspondence was initiated with the states reviewed by Murphy in order to update his evaluations. Some of the important changes and improvements were noted above. Never- theless, there still appears to be a general need for improvement in the state of the art in those states reviewed in terms of adOpting uniform criteria for delineating floodway encroachment limits. As noted, Michigan may in fact be among the leaders in states having restrictive criteria for defining floodway encroachment limits. The significance of this may be heightened by the fact that Michigan streams and watercourses are generally noted for having weakly defined channel areas. As a result, floodway areas may encompass more of adjacent flood plain areas than floodways found in well dissected watersheds where t0pographical relief is more develOped. On the other hand, it was noted that generally there were not significant differences between floodway areas needed to pass a '50 year flood' and a '100 year flood.’2 In this regard, it is important to note a subtle but significant distinction is present in Michigan Water Resources Commission administration of flood plain regulations. Principle concern is directed by the Michigan lMurphy. WW: 1958. p. 16. 2Lawrence Witte, Personal Interview, January, 1969. 264 Water Resources Commission at preserving floodway channel flows. Similar concerns are directed at fill Operations or developments which threaten to materially alter flood plain storage capacity. Smaller fills in flood plain storage areas do not appear to be of primary concern. This in large part relates to the difficulties in evaluating minor flood plain fill effects on flood stage levels.1’ A second important observation should be noted. There was little estimation or evaluation of the economic implications of varying floodway encroachment limits. Such work is absent in Michigan as generally else- where. Dunham presented some of the elements required in such an evaluative process, but his presentation was based largely on the presumption that such evaluations can be made. Specifically, his legal review directed attention at the question of precluding the development of floodway obstructions which posed large or hazardous external diseconomies.3 In light ‘of Dunham's work and othem such as Murphy, it was quite surprising to find so little in terms of reported economic evaluation of the conse- quences of different floodway encroachment limits. This latter observation is quite important in that it can be extended to the general area of flood plain management regulations. It appears that it is often concluded‘g'pziggi that those areas which will be restrictively regulated are areas in which economic deve10pment could not be established or would result in large external diseconomies. Actually, not enough work has been presented to carefully document such conclusions 1mg. 2Such problems are also recognized in the Farmingtgg, Mighiggn Eloog Plain Information.ngg;t, 1963, p. 20. The conclusion in that report suggested a different approach to all fills in the flood plain. 3Dunham, "Flood Control Via the Police Power," 1959, pp. 1103-1107. 265 in the general flood plain. In the floodway zone the ability to establish the external hazards to health and safety posed by obstructions to flood flows may be sufficient justification to bring about application of the police powers. Nevertheless, little work is actually available which establishes the economic implications of physically protecting flood plain and floodway areas as contrasted with the prevention of economic deve10pment under restrictive land use regulations. Once floodway encroachment criteria are established, program imple- mentation must be initiated. In this regard Michigan appears to be troubled by administrative problems similar to those experienced in other states. Murphy and Perry in separate studies noted that floodway encroachment limits were not effectively being implemented due to deficiencies in administrative staffing.1’2 In effect too few resources were being provided by the state legislatures to fully implement the acts. Communi- cation from Mr. McMurray (Iowa) and Mr. Bergstrom (washington) indicate that the lack of financial resources and manpower continue to constrain full implementation of their floodway programs.3’4 It is suspected that this assessment continues to be typical of the other states with floodway encroachment regulatory programs. Such was the case in 1969 in Michigan when initial interviews were conducted at the Michigan Water Resources Commission.5 Severe shortages lMurphy. WW. 1958. p. 16. 2Joseph I. Perry, "Use of Zoning Principles in Flood Plain Regulations," Reprint in Journaliflyggggligg Division of American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 82, No. HYZ, Paper 957, April, 1956, p. 957/4. 3 Letter from Othie R. McMurray, September 15, 1969. 4Letter from Walter Bergstrom, September 16, 1969. 5Lawrence Witte, Personal Interview, January 29, 1969. 266 in numbers of staff personnel curtailed the general flood plain management program and caused significant backlogs in permit reviews for subdivision plats as well as floodway encroachment permit applications. This also curtailed the amount of field inspection that could be undertaken. Sub- sequent additions of staff members has increased the capacity of the flood plain management section for processing permit applications. However, the number of applications have increased at such a rate that considerable time delays still result from continuing backlogs.1 Little has been done in Michigan in terms of establishing floodway encroachment limits along reaches of state watercourses. Such a failure is again reflective and is characteristic of the situation in other States. Only Connecticut and New Jersey were reporting success in moving ahead with the establishment of encroachment limits.2 Massachusetts and Iowa related significant increases in authority for setting floodway encroachment limits, but failed to report on successes in establishing such limits.3 Washington reported that 16 rivers had flood control zones established prior to 1935; but no further rivers had been zoned since then. Present energies were directed at just handling individual permit applications.4 It is interesting to note that one writer observed that the review and administrative order entered on each floodway encroachment permit was in fact a method of establishing encroachment lines. Mr. Dola of New Jersey lLawrence Witte, Personal Communication, September, 1971. 2Letter from Robert A. McCabe, November 5, 1969. Hofman, "New Jersey's Flood Plain Management Program," 1969, pp. 22-23. 3Steven Dola, Flood Damage Alleviation in New Jersey, Water Resources Circular No. 3 (State of New Jersey: Department of Conservation and Economic DevelOpment, Division of Water Policy and Supply, 1961), p. 6. 4Letter from Walter Bergstrom, September 16, 1969. 267 noted "encroachment lines are essentially established each time a permit is issued. . ." While this is a novel argument it is believed that floodway encroachment limits defined for continuous reaches of a water- course are a more desirable objective and practice. In part, this would facilitate the transfer and sharing of responsibilities between state and local areas. Several states noted the importance of obtaining a c00perative and integrated approach to floodway encroachment regulation. Communi- cations from Mr. McMurray in Iowa and Mr. Bergstrom in Washington empha- sized the importance of such relations. Mr. McMurray noted that the revisions in the flood plain management program in Iowa allowed for local governments' to administer local flood plain regulations without each individual construction project having to be approved by the Council, if the local regulations meet Council require- ments. Such an arrangement removes a tremendous work load from the Council and distributes it among the various local communities where such administration logically belongs.1 Such an observation would seem equally applicable to the State of Michigan if more of the administrative burden could be shifted to local governments, more attention could be devoted to research, data collection, deve10pment of new techniques for defining encroachment limits, providing technical assistance, and reviewing local encroachment regulatory programs. Some information was available for the engineering costs in establishing floodway encroachment limits. Even less information was available on costs of reviewing and permitting individual floodway encroachment applications. In general, the above cited states reported that records of administrative costs in such programs were not kept or that the costs 1Letter from Othie McMurray, September 15, 1969. 268 of separating out the various administrative duties of their staffs was not readily available. Connecticut was the only state to have reported on the costs of establishing channel encroachment limits. Murphy in 1958 cited 2,000 dollars per mile of stream reach.1 Pelletier in 1960 gave an estimate of 5,000 dollars per mile of stream reach.2 He also gave a clearer break- down of the aggregated estimate: 1,500 dollars per mile for the original channel survey, EAOOO dollars per mile for computations and study reports, 2,000 dollars per mile for surveys of final lines, and 300 dollars per mile for miscellaneous costs including advertising, printing, recording, and other costs. These averages were develOped from 46.6 miles of com- pleted river channel encroachment limits and 62.6 miles of river in process of having such limits defined. The aggregate costs were 350,000 dollars to data. At that time, between 1,250 and 1,300 parcels of land and 1,150 land owners had been affected. More recent cost figures were relayed on a graph forwarded with a letter from Mr. McCabe an Hydraulic Engineer with the State of Connecticut Water Resources Commission.3 ‘The graph plotted cost of encroachment line surveys, study, and mapping versus length of river. The costs were scaled in dollars per river mile. The graph revealed a range of slightly less than 5,000 to 15,000 dollars per river mile. It was suggested that there was a slight tendency for the costs per linear mile of reach to decrease as longer rivers were dealt with. Also, photogrametric topographical survey-line locations which were scaled from the map were consistently found near the 5,000 dollars per mile minimum range level. This was contrasted to ground t0pographic 1Murphy, Regulating Flood-Plain Developments, 1958, p. 22. 2Charles J. Pelletier, Hydraulic Engineer, Connecticut Water Resources Commission, "Connecticut's Program for Establishing Stream Encroachment Limits," Paper presented before Thirty-Third Meeting Northeastern Resources Committee, 269 survey-line locations staked in the field. No further information was offered on these techniques. Local floodway encroachment regulations in Michigan were earlier characterized as one of two types: (1) general landfill ordinances and (2) flood plain zoning containing floodway encroachment control provisions. In general neither ordinance approach evidenced a clear definition of the floodway concept, nor was there a clear distinction maintained between floodway encroachment zones and backwater storage areas. Two of three communities adopted floodway encroachment regulations as a part of their comprehensive landfill ordinances. Fill ordinances in the City of Southfield and the Township of Farmington in Oakland County were found to be lacking in clear definition of floodway and flood plain areaml’2 Both ordinances prohibited dumping of materials in Spillways, flood plains, or upper and lower banks of local watercourses. Spillways and flood plains were not adequately defined. The third area cited in the ordinance, upper and lower banks of a watercourse, offered somewhat more precision for delineating an area, but such criteria would effectively limit the regula- tions so as to constitute a channel encroachment regulation. Only the City of Detroit evidenced an understanding of floodway and flood plain areas in its flood plain fill ordinance.3 It came closest of all local Michigan ordinances reviewed for this study in approaching a distinct floodway encroachment ordinance. Nevertheless, the definitions Berlin, Connecticut, September 13, 1960, p. C-8. 3Letter from Robert A. McCabe, November 5, 1969, with graph enclosed plotting cost figures for the 1963-1969 period. 1City of Southfield, Fill Ordinance No. 718. 2Township of Farmington, Ordinance No. 33. 361ty of Detroit, Ordinance No. 784-F, Sections 2(a), 2(b), and 5. 270 within the ordinance lacked some degree of precision in criteria for floodway delineation. It appeared that more precise definitions were provided by the City Engineer's Office in administering the ordinance. Limits of the flood plain and floodway apparently were available on maps in the City Engineer's Office which provided identification of such limits on individual parcels.1 Little information was provided on actual Operational criteria utilized in defining such zones. Several limitations are discernable in the Detroit ordinance. The provisions of the regulations apply only to the reaches of the Rouge River lying within the City of Detroit. Only control over filling and placing of depOsits in the flood plain and floodway is provided. Consequently, control over structural developments are not specifically provided for in the ordinance. Penalty provisions are available for fining and potentially imprisoning violators. However, provisions are absent in terms of obtaining abatement of fill Obstructions. No information was acquired on experiences in ordinance implementation and enforcement in any of the three cited communities. In light Of the deficiencies in ordinance definitions, it is still possible to conclude that significant improvements in ordinance deve10pment could be accomplished through increasing the precision of the definitions. The principle and pervasive weakness of all three acts is the restricted application of the controls. Each ordinance is directed at fill and excavation Operations. None are specifically directed at controlling erection of structural obstructions in flOodway areas. Accordingly, such local ordinances are not comprehensive enough in terms of attaining the Objectives of floodway encroachment regulation. 1Letter and attached materials from Guenther K. Weidle, Head City Planner, Current Plan Division, City of Detroit, February 26, 1969. 271 Similar deficiencies were found in flood plain zoning ordinances which included floodway encroachment limits. Most notable was the confusing or mingling of floodway and flood plain pondage zones. Many of the flood plain zoning provisions were in effect floodway encroachment regulations. As a result, excessively restrictive controls were placed on general development in flood plain pondage areas. It has been argued that restrictive controls as no filling and deve10pment of structures in the floodway zone appear sustainable.1’2 However, their projection and application in the flood plain zone may be quite inappropriate. Such a statement is tempered by the fact that most of the reviewed ordinances allowed for granting of special use permits. Nevertheless, ordinances generally failed to clearly distinguish between encroachment zones and flood plain pondage areas. One qualification to the above statement may be noted in the City of Farmington Zoning Ordinance. The flood plain provisions for the River Valley Districts maintain an implicit or ginflgig distinction between floodway and flood plain pondage areas.3 However, the floodway area in the City of Farmington ordinance appears to be delineated by the flood plain area of the flood of record. That is, the floodway area required for the flood of record (1500 cfs) does not appear to be the basis for defining the ordinance floodway. Rather, the flood plain of the flood of record is used as a basis for defining the floodway. If this is an error or the result of a confusion of concepts the cause might be attributed to an 1Dunham,'Flood Control Via the Police Power," 1959, pp. 1108 and 1110- 1111. 2mm x. Eater W W 153 A. 824. 3City of Farmington Ordinance No. C-180-63. Elgggflgx as such is not mentioned in the ordinance, but the development of the regulations are such that an implicit floodway area is created. 272 inadequate understanding of the line defined by a flood of 1500 cfs in a Corps of Engineer flood plain information study.1 The result of this interpretation is one of applying floodway encroachment regulations to a flood plain zone defined by the flood of record. The Corps of Engineers attempted an explanation of the consequences of fill Operations in the floodway and flood plain. They aptly noted The channel and the flood plain immediately adjacent should not be encroached upon with any filling or structures which would tend to obstruct flood flows and raise upstream stages. It is in the continuation of their presentation that questions and problems emerge in terms of what constitutes appropriate deve10pment restrictions. They state Although small, more-distant filling in the pondage area may be less harmful in the immediate area, it should be recognized that numerous individual fills will in the aggregate, increase the flood problem downstream. The best rule is to avoid any 3 filling of the flood plain which can be expected to be inundated. Their suggested rule if taken to literally by a community may result in no filling or structural developments in the flood plain pondage area. It is believed that such a translation, as evident in the City of Farmington ordinance, may be too extreme. Such a rule is based upon a premise that the existing regimen (flow characteristics) of the stream is the most severe that is tolerable by all of the inhabitants and users of the flood plain of the entire river,. . .4 What constitutes the criteria for "tolerable" appear to be elusive at present in light of the absence of economic data and analysis. 1W. Eighteen m2: 21.51:: W Rm. 1963. pp. 10. ll, 18, and 20; figure A-2, and plate 2. 2 1.10.1.4- PO: 200 3122.4. p. 20. 4 mm. Po 11- 273 As a general principle, the Corps rule obtains its justification for the assumed reason cited in the 1a8t quote. However, because it is frequently difficult to relate individual actions in a causal manner to increased flood damages affecting others, more discretion may be justified in applying the rule to flood plain pondage areas. The reasons for this were presented earlier and discussed at length by Dunham.1 In the illustration at hand, the community not only prescribed restrictions on placement of fill in the flood plain but structures also. A complicating consideration here is brought about by the exact characterization of the zone lying below the 1500 cfs flood plain limit; i.e., Is it in fact a floodway zone? If not, where does the floodway encroachment limit terminate? Part of the answer to the dilemma is found in the Special Use Permit concept as adopted in many of the ordinances reviewed earlier. Fills can be prohibited as a general rule. Some adjustment or flexibility may be allowed in granting a special use permit if "through compensating exca- vation and shaping of the flood plain, the flow and impoundment capacity of the flood plain will be maintained or improved."2 Even this adjustment needs some qualification. Mr. Shanklin, Director and Chief Engineer of the New Jersey Division of Water Policy and Supply, commented that issuance of their permits will now be based on the existing natural channel in an effort to maintain the natural flood regimen of the stream. This is not to say that we will be eliminating channel improve- ments. We will however, require that channel improvements be done on a significant seach of stream. We will no longer permit improvements on a piecemeal basis, as this is what tends to aggravate flood conditions.3 1m: PP 0 34-37 0 2City of Farmington Ordinance No. C-180-63, sec. 5.484(2). gLetter from George Shanklin, November 12, 1969. 274 Emphasis in the quote relates to channel improvements as they relate to flood flows. This should be the principle concern in floodway encroach- ments. Adjustments in flood plain storage areas may be more readily obtained on an individual permit basis due to the focus on displacement as contrasted to flood flows. In a similar vain, flexible restrictions are required when_considering structural developments in the pondage areas. Structures could be allowed where design features provided for flood proofing and/or structural adjust- ments which would minimize (l) displacement of flood plain storage area and, (2) potential inundation of building contents. In short, extreme restrictions may be unjustly applied under the guise of protecting the floodway, when in fact structural adjustments in a prOposed building might accommodate the flood risk and still allow use of the flood plain pondage area. This brings us into flood plain zoning, subdivision regulations, building codes, and flood proofing. E122£;£le;s.§22125 An evaluation of historical applications of flood plain zoning in Michigan must focus on the local unit of government. Flood plain zoning in this state as elsewhere has been chiefly the province of the municipal unit of government. More recent actions in other states as well as in Michigan suggest that such practices may no longer be solely developed at the local level. Hawaii has been a noted exception in allowing state level application of comprehensive land use zoning. Wisconsin has moved aggressively into flood plain zoning at the state level. Michigan has also evidenced movement into land use zoning in specialized problem areas as flood plains, shorelands, and recreational rivers. Extensive inquiry was not made of other states as to their experiences with flood plain zoning. Considerable difficulty and costs were anticipated 275 if an attempt were made at surveying the experiences of other state municipal units in terms of their practices in flood plain zoning. Selected examples of such application, as reported in the literature, were utilized as a basis for evaluating Michigan municipal ordinances. The flood plain management program in Wisconsin was investigated at the state level. Information was gathered after references to their program were made by several persons involved in water resources management. It was found that Wisconsin has established a significant compulsory local flood plain management program. The program is facilitated by a strong state technical assistance and review program which is designed to help local units of government adept flood plain management programs as required by state law.1 Consequently, principle focus under their program is directed at assisting local units in adOpting local flood plain zoning ordinances. Flood plain zoning appears to be the key local action which is then followed and/or coordinated with such other recommended actions as subdivision regulations, building codes, sanitary regulations, flood proofing, acquisition, property taxation relief, and others.2 The Wisconsin Water Resources Act of 1965 required local adoption of flood plain zoning by January 1, 1968 (if technical data was available) which met or exceeded the minimum requirements established by the Division of Resource DevelOpment.3 If local governments had not adOpted such 1James M. Lee, Supervisor, Flood Plain Shoreland Management Program, Division of Resource DevelOpment, Department of Natural Resources, State of Wisconsin, "The Answers to Your Questions About Flood Plain Management," Xerox c0py of an article not identified by publication source or date. 2W (Madison: Division of Resource DevelOpment, Department of Natural Resources, State of Wisconsin November, 1967), p. 5. SState of Wisconsin, m; W A91 of 1965, Laws of Wisconsin, 1965, fligcgngig Spatutgg 87.30. 276 measures or their adOpted measures failed to meet minimum requirements, then the Division of Resource DevelOpment will specify the required measures for the local unit. When complaints of possible violations of flood plain encroachments are received, the complaint is referred to the local enforcement unit for investigation and enforcement.1 Reserved review and approval powers are retained by the State agency in this type of enforcement procedure. Similarly, such reserved review and approval powers are also maintained when local application are received for vacancies or conditional uses. The establishment of such procedures appears to be a reflection of a state policy of maintaining primary responsibilities for adOption and enforcement of flood plain zoning at the local level. In order to achieve such a policy the State of Wisconsin has pursued a strong technical assistance function. A model flood plain zoning ordinance has been drafted and published for assisting local units of government in drafting their own ordinances.2 In addition, minimum standards have been adOpted and described by the Division of Resource DevelOpment.3 Such standards must be met or exceeded by local ordinances as required by state law.4 The state has responsibilities for coordinating federal and state resources for assisting the local efforts in drafting flood plain zoning ordinances and other complementary or supportive ac- tions. Studies and surveys which provide the technical information needed for lfligconsig'g Elood Plain Magggemgnt Epogzgg, 1967, p. 5. 2State of Wisconsin, 0 ' o r (Madison: Division of Resource DevelOpment, Department of Natural Resources, December 1, 1967). 3W. 1967. pp. 13-23. 4Wisconsin,‘flat§;.§ggguzgg§‘Agp‘gj 196:, Wisconsin Statutes 87.30. 277 proper local ordinance deve10pment are to be coordinated and conducted according to priorities established by the Division. Moreover, the Division is charged with the responsibility of continually updating t echnical information and transmitting such to local units of government with information on how to obtain further improvements in their local flood plain management.l Several comments made by water resource management officials in other states give further evidence for pursuing an approach like that taken by Wisconsin. Mr. McMurray of Iowa expressed a commonly held notion that land use controls are appropriately the province of local units of government.2 Manpower requirements in enforcing flood plain regulations are quite demanding upon state administrative staff. While such comments were made in the context of floodway regulations; they are equally valid for flood plain zoning. As a result local enforcement with state super- vision appeared to be the more desirable policy. To a certain extent, Michigan has moved into the area of flood plain zoning. Provisions of the Subdivision Control Act of 1967 and of Act 167 of 1968 provide limited entries into the field of flood plain zoning. Principle provisions of these acts relate to subdivision controls and flood- way encroachment regulation; however, considerable overlap is found in the provisions with flood plain zoning. More precise definition of such zoning powers and illustrations of their application can be viewed in the adOpted rules and regulations of the Michigan Water Resources Commission.3 lWisgonsin'g Flood Plgiu fiangggment Ezogrgm, 1967, p. 8. Supra, p. 266. For examples of Federal Policy declarations re- cognizing this view see W and m ngelopmgnt M 21 1968, Title XIII, National Flood Insurance, Section 1302(e); 82 Stat. 573. 3Sn r , p. 256. 278 The effect of such legislation and administrative action is one of super- imposing a state flood plain zone over the watercourses of the state. Where existing zoning ordinances are in effect, there is considerable likelihood of conflict in local and state allowed land uses. This is especially apparent where local zoning ordinances do not include flood plain zoning provisions. On the other hand, considerable dependence will be required of local governments in COOperating with the enforcement of such provisions. This is necessitated by the permit system which depends largely upon voluntary compliance of prospective flood plain developers. Local units of government are currently depended upon to refer prospective flood plain developers to the Michigan water Resources Commission for a permit.1 Further, the large man hour demands required in inspection of flood plains for violations of flood plain regulations creates a dependence upon local inspection due to limited state inspection staffs.2 Michigan has established some precedents for following an approach similar to that taken by Wisconsin. Passage of two water resource related acts strongly encourage local enactment of special zoning ordinances.3’4 In the absence of such actions the state may step in and enact zoning rules and regulations for application in the local area. The subject areas involve (l) zoning rivers for recreational, scenic or wilderness purposes; and (2) zoning Great Lakes shoreland for protection from overdevelopment, hazardous 1Lawrence Witte, Personal Interview, January 29, 1969. 2Letter from Othie R. McMurray, September,15, 1969. 3State of Michigan,[Hgtuzal‘fiiygz‘ggt.gf 1929, Act No. 231, Public Acts of 1970. WM 281.764. at. £9.51 State of Michigan. W Men And W A91. .91 1.9.2.9 Act NO- 245 Public Acts of 1970 W 281. 632, 313.533 279 shoreline encroachments, and environmental destruction or deterioration. Like flood plain zoning, both programs have the advantage of narrowly defined spatial areas and associated land use objectives. They appear as potential exclusive zone classes or special strip zones. The distinc- tion in the Michigan approach as contrasted with the Wisconsin approach is that flood plain zoning regulation is becoming the primary responsibility of the State of Michigan. The Wisconsin flood plain management program appears to maintain primary flood plain zoning deve10pment and enforcement responsibilities at the local level. Local adoptiomsof flood plain zoning in Michigan were noted in the preceeding chapter. At least ten municipal units had adOpted some form of flood plain zoning. Critical evaluation of these will be limited to criteria used in ordinance definition of floods and flood plains, pro- hibited and allowed uses, and some administrative procedures. In general, little use of frequency expectations was found in the definition of flood events in municipal ordinances. Principal reliance in municipal ordinances was made of flood levels experienced in 1947, a period of significant flooding in much of southern lower Michigan. Average recurrence intervalsassigned to the 1947 flood in the Upper River Rouge-Farmington area and the Red Cedar-Grand River Lansing area were 70 and 50 years respectively.l’2 Because of the use of large flood events, little fault can be found with such practices in terms of possible unstable flood frequency expectations. As noted earlier, adjustments in frequency expectations are most noticable in smaller, more frequent flood events. That is, changes in natural and cultural factors are not as easily correlated or translated in the larger and more infrequent flood events. , 1963, p. 18. 2City of Lansing, Ordinance No. 161, Sec. 36-60 and 36-61. 280 At the same time, one note of caution should be entered in light of the limited stream records from which probabilities are computed. For example, incomplete or partial flood records in the Upper River Rouge date back to 1930, or about 40 years of record.1’2 Somewhat more complete flood records have been kept for the Red Cedar River with its flood record dating back to 1911 or about 60 years. In either case, probability expectations com- puted for such infrequent flood events as those experienced in 1947, are less reliable than those develOped for the smaller, more frequent floods. Thus, in the final analysis, it may be wiser to utilize a flood stage or discharge level as a basis for defining a flood event in a flood plain zoning ordinance. Some questions may be raised about the intent of local ordinances in terms of securing open space objectives and in terms of unequal pro- tection of the laws. Dunham expressed this concern by observing The basic evil of a classification which excludes private activity but which permits obstructions by government and public utilities is that landowners within the flood water area are forced to bear the external costs of the permitted activity while other persons, without COSt, share in its advantages.3 The observation was significant because at least six municipal ordinances were found to specifically permit public utilities, bridges, roads, and other public buildings or structures.4 However, each of the ordinances Mich igan (DetrOit: U. S. Army, Corps of Engineers, Detroit District, March, 1968), p. 19. 3Dunham, "Flood Control Via the Police Power," 1959, p. 1129. 4Clinton Township, Zgging_gzg;ngngg, Sec. 1502.2. City of Grand Ledge ZOning Ordinance No. 156, Sec. 1300.3. City of Lansing, Ordinance No. 161, Sec. 36.62.d. Shelby Township, Ordinance No. 1.11, See. ll.OlB.(3). City of Southfield Ordinance No. 718, Sec. 5.49. f. Sterling Township, Zoning Orgingnge, Sec. 15.01.3. 281 specified that such developments and structures must be constructed in a manner that will not impair the storage and discharge capacity of the flood plains. Such performance criteria in effect preclude hazardous public deve10pments. However, in light of the preceeding quOte, such performance criteria would seem equally apprOpriate to private structural land uses. If any unequal protection of the law exists, it may be found in the application of such performance criteria. In similar fashion, serious questions can be raised about the general regulation of permissible uses in flood plain zones. The tendency of local Michigan ordinances was to restrict land use in flood plain areas to Open space uses. Little recognition of flood proofing measures as a means of securing potential deve10pments was evident. Two or possibly three communities made some provision for flood proofing as a means of allowing for an otherwise prohibited land use.1 As a result, greater attention needs to be given to flood proofing as a means of allowing pro- hibited structural land uses to be located in some flood plain settings. It may be possible to allow for land uses which would normally be compatible for the area when flood proofing is used in constructing structures. At present, most of the local Michigan flood plain zoning ordinances appear to be designed for the purposes of achieving community open space and recreation objectives at the expense of structural land uses which might be effectively develOped with flood proofing measures. It was found that municipalities did not as a general rule delegate such review and approval responsibilities to the municipal engineer or a 1The City of Lansing, Meridian Charter Township, and possibly Clinton Township have ordinances which allow for deve10pment of flood proofed structures in their flood plain zones. City of Lansing, Ordinance No. 718 Sec. 36.63a.l. Meridian Charter Township, Ordinance No. 30, Sec. 4.14.5a. Clinton Township, Zoning Ordinance, Sec. 1501.2. See discussion, 53223.. pp. 170-171. 282 technically qualified body. Typically, the approach adopted was that of having the legislative body or planning department pass on special use permits. Such practices do not appear to be as desirable as those in which a technically qualified person or party grants such permits. Political pressures and technical considerations make this an extremely difficult function to perform effectively.1’2 Consequently, leaving such review functions to a legislative body would appear to seriously jeOpardize any hopes of effectively administering flood plain regulations. Subdivision gontggl.3§gulgpign§ Allison Green, Treasurer, State of Michigan, in 1967 noted that significantly less than one half of the incorporated villages and cities in the State of Michigan had enacted subdivision control regulations.3 No real estimate exists as to how many of these communities provide for some flood plain regulation within their subdivision controls. Notwith- standing this, the State of Michigan assumed primary responsibility for subdivision control in the state under the Subdivision Control Act of 1967. Consequently, principle attention will be directed at evaluating the State subdivision control regulations. Extensive state involvement in flood plain regulations is given under the Subdivision Control Act of 1967. Principle focus of the flood plain regulations under the act is directed at residential subdivision deve10pment. Regulation of industrial, commercial, or other non-residential subdivision deve10pments are not Specifically covered in the controlling act nor in the J‘Murphy. WW. 1958. pp. 81 and 85-86. 2Letter from Walter Bergstrom, September 16, 1969. 3Green, "State Legislature Revises Plat Act," 1967, p. 230. 283 . . . 1,2 adOpted rules and regulations of the Michigan Water Resources Commission. Some question may be raised as to why the controls should be so narrowly applied to "control residential building development within flood plain areas."3 Dunham argued Where the objective is to protect health and prOperty the basic question is whether the state may make some people safer than other similarly situated. To say that there is less need for protection for some uses than others will be legitimate if this is indeed a reasonable conclusion. It is possible that a conclusion was reached that industrial, commercial, or other non-residential subdivisions do not merit such controls as are applied to residential subdivisions. If such a conclusion was made it is not noted in the act nor easily documented elsewhere in background material. This is not to deny the possible validity of such a conclusion. However, a statement of such a conclusion and a presentation of its basis might clarify the question and establish the justification of discriminatory class regulations wherein only residential subdivisions are regulated in flood plain areas. The Water Resources Commission adopted a flood frequency recurrence . . . . 5 interval of one in 50 years for regulating proposed subdiviSions. This is not the same frequency expectation as that selected for floodway en- croachments. While a reason for the differences in frequency expectations was not given, it was noted that the frequency expectation adopted for 1Michigan, ub ' ' i0 0 967, Sec. 102. 2Michigan, Rules and Regulations of the Water Resources Commission, 1967, R. 560.301,,gt.,§§g. aMichigan, éubdiyision Contrgl Ag; g: 1962, Preamble. 4Dunham, "Flood Control Via the Police Power," 1959, p. 1129. 5Michigan Rules and Regulations of the Water Resources Commission, 1967, R. 560.301,,2;.,§§g. 284 implementing Act 167 of 1968, was no longer controlling.1 In effect, Act 167 has conferred more comprehensive regulation of floodway and flood plain areas in Michigan and is therefore now utilized in reviewing such subdivision permits. The regulations are relatively restrictive. Allowances are made for structural Land uses when the discharge capacity can be maintained. Provision is made for allowing excavation and shaping of the flood plain in order to meet such criteria. Similar qualifications or performance criteria were also encountered elsewhere in floodway regulations and flood plain zoning. Administration of the Michigan Subdivision Control Act of 1967 provides some interesting comparisons with flood plain zoning practices in Wisconsin. The Subdivision Control Act of 1967 delegates and allo- cates review and approval responsibilities among state and local units of government. Mandatory enactment of subdivision control regulations is not required of local units, but is provided for under enabling pro- visions of this act and others. As a result, the State must assume primary responsibilities in many cases in regulating new, proposed subdivisions. This is quite evident in terms of flood plain regulations. If local units have more restrictive regulations, some of the primary enforcement responsibilities can be transferred to the local unit. However, little success with such an approach in subdivision regulations has been nOted yet. Principle responsibility for enforcing flood plain restrictions in prOposed subdivisions deve10pments continues to rest at the state level. One other note relating to administration of the Subdivision Control Act of 1967 relates to the overlap with flood plain zoning, building code 1Lawrence Witte, Personal Communication, September, 1971. gfiflRIfl . PP. 168 and 273-274. 285 restrictions, and flood proofing measures. The adopted rules and regulations of the Water Resources Commission require that restrictive deed covenants be filed with the final plat.1 The various covenants required relate to lot area and building site location requirements, building design, and flood proofing. Accordingly, some overlap and integration with zoning, building codes, and flood proofing is achieved. Integration of lot area requirements will in large part be a function of existing or prOposed local zoning requirements. The minimum building site requirements of 3,000 square feet of natural grade land may pose some problems in some areas although provision of the alternative flood proofing building design would seem to relax potential conflicts in lot area requirements.2 Bu; lding 9.941% Building codes have yet to be demonstrated as effective measures in regulating flood plain deve10pments. This results from a number of factors some of which are interrelated. Nevertheless, their potential for special application in flood plain controls continues to be asserted and suggested in the literature. In this study, little could be cancluded in terms of Michigan experiences in applying building codes as a means of control in flood plain regulation, other than that the potential appears to be present in Michigan for such applications. As a result, a considerable amount of research effort is implied and needed in this area, at the national level as well as in the state, in order for significant deve10pment and implementation of flood plain building code provisions. lMichigan, Rules and Regulations of the Water Resources Commission, 1967, Rule 560.304(1) and 304(2)-(g). See also text accompanying foot- note no. 1., p. 176, gupra. zine. 286 A number of points need to be addressed or answered in such research efforts. Additional research is required in develOping special per- formance criteria which can be incorporated into model building code standards. The four national model building codes do not at present have such criteria.1 Additional study and research needs to be conducted in order to fit such flood proofing concepts as discussed by Shaeffer into building code provisions.2 In Michigan it was established that a state building code does not exist. A Housing Law which does exist dates back to 1917.3 However, provisions in the Housing Code as in the four model building codes, no not address themselves to flood plain building needs. Accordingly, further research is needed for evaluating the need for (l) a state building code or (2) a special flood plain building code. The latter might be drafted for state enactment or for model code purposes for local adOption. In addition, further study is needed in enforcement and administrative problems in building code regulations in Michigan. The results of a recent study of building codes in southeastern Michigan suggests that administrative problems in building code enforcement in general may be the ultimate constraint to obtaining flood plain deve10pment regulations under such a prOposed technique.4 Two observations may suggest further testable hypotheses. First, flood proofing concepts need to be incorporated into building codes to enable successful code application in achieving flood plain management 1&0! pp. 180-1820 2Shaeffer, Elogd Ezoofigg, 1960. Shaeffer, lpgggddgtigp_jg_zlggd Proofin , 1967. 3State of Michigan, Stdte Hou§igg L31, Act No. 167, Public Acts of 1971, Michigdg Compiled deg Annotated 125.401, £1. sgg. 4Regiongl Building Codes, 1966, Chap. 1, pp. 7-13; and pp. 22- 24. 287 objectives. Second, the success of Special flood plain building code provisions will only be successful to the extent that general building codes are implemented and enforced. Subscriptive Techniques Wilkes Evaluating the effectiveness of warning signs in flood loss management in Michigan is not yet possible. Applications of flood warning signs in this state have not been found. Murphy observed the employment of warning signs in other states and noted problems in maintaining such signs. He cited examples of local Opposition to erection of warning signs near develOped lands.1 Wisconsin has recently recommended that flood limit markers should be set up to show "both the depth of inundation and the area affected."2 Additional information on program administration and implementation was not obtained. Consequently, little can be concluded about flood warning signs. They are frequently cited in the literature as an available measure. However, only Murphy's article was found to give any significant discussion to the measure. His findings indicate further study is needed before this measure can adequately be evaluated in a Michigan context. Case studies would appear to offer potential in relating Wisconsin experiences. In addition, research needs to be conducted on how such a measure might have application in an educational program, land acquisition program, and/or various regulatory programs. In light of some of Murphy's obser- vations, a study is needed in evaluating possible interrelationships between flood plain warning signs and floodway encroachment regulations, lMurphy. WW. 1958. p. 123 and 163. 2W. 1967. p. 23. 288 regulations, flood plain zoning, subdivision regulations, and/or building codes. Building Elngndg Financial policies of credit institutions were found to vary in treatment of flood plain risk in reviews of credit applications by public and private credit institutions. Significant policy declarations have been issued at the Federal level.1 These have been followed up with strOng to weak pOlicy guidelines and/or field adjustments in Federal financial assistance programs in Michigan. At the same time no informa- tion was obtained on policies of private credit institutions in Michigan. The need for such information is considerable. This results directly from the importance of credit availability in carrying through flood plain deve10pment prOposals.2 Accordingly, additional study work is justified in this area. A variety of study needs can be suggested. Several questions are appropriate in pointing out these needs. What information and technical assistance needs are required in reviewing credit applications for pro- posed flood plain deve10pments? Where are the various points in credit application and negotiations in which leverage can be applied to obtain adequate recognition of flood risk? How can flood plain risk be translated into credit restrictions or credit terms when extending financial assistance? Finally, further detailed study of existing Federal and private credit policy and review criteria is needed in terms of Michigan flood plain management objectives. Insufficient information was acquired on actual field review procedures. Specifically, case study illustrations were not 1Executive Order 11296, August 11, 1966, Section 1.2. 2U.S., Task Force Report on Federal Flood Control Policy, House Doc. No. 465, 1966, p. 27. ' 289 obtained in this study. Tam Little can be concluded about applications of special taxation. policies in pursuing flood plain management in Michigan. Information on existing prOperty taxation policies in restrictively regulated flood plain areas has not been acquired. Examples of special income or property tax policy adjustments have not been identified in Michigan. Clarification is needed of how prOperty tax and income tax policy adjustments can further flood loss management objectives in Michigan. A real need exists for a specialized study of taxation policy as it concerns flood loss management considerations. Significant limitations and administrative problems were noted in the deve10pment of this technique in Chapter III. Answers to and resolution of these problems are needed prior to suggesting adjustments in local and state tax policies. An important question which needs answering relates to the actual costs invol- ved in a tax subsidy or concession. As was noted earlier in Chapter III a progressive weakening of the property tax system can occur with the granting of various property tax relief measures.1 Acquisitiod Considerable attention is being given to the use of landzrquisition measures as a means of obtaining control of flood plains. Typically, such measures are discussed in terms of advancing open space and recreation I 2 O O I objectives. In fact, detailed discuSSions of such measures were more 1Supra, p. 64. 2U28., Task Force Report on Federal Flood Control Policy, House Doc. No. 465, 1966, p. 29-30. 290 notable and advanced in the recreation and open space literature as contrasted to flood plain management references.1 In this respect, the recreation and Open space literature referred to flood plain management in a secondary or ancillary manner to the principle consideration of Open space needs. As a result, some attention should be given to the matter of differen- tiating between the two program objectives and noting the resulting implications. The principle concern suggested here is that it is possible for these programs to be in conflict. It may be discovered that not all flood plain land should be devoted to Open space or recreational use. Conversely, not all Open space needs can be met by acquiring flood plain tracts when possible. Selected applications of acquisition measures have been noted in Michigan. Programs of both the Federal and Michigan governments were found to have applications for Michigan flood plain acquisition. No specific examples of flood plain tract acquisition for flodd plain management purposes were obtained in this study. However, it was established that the State has adopted policies and programs which encourage flood plain acquisition. Principle authority was found in connection with the Michigan Outdoor Recreation Plan and program. At the same time, it should be noted that the principle state flood plain management agency, the Water Resources Commission, does not have similar powers for acquiring flood plain tracts. Examples of local acquisition of flood plain tracts were noted in the Lansing area. Significant parcels of land lying in several flood plains 1Examples of such treatments can be found in the following: Little, W len of the = Wiles. 1966. Whyte.§.§.s.um Oped Space, 1959. Sussna, "Open Space Control,” 1969. 291 were given to the City of Lansing in the early part of the 20th century. More recently, acquisition of flood plain tracts has required negotiated purchase and in the future may involve use of eminent domain. In all cases, the acquired tracts have been utilized for Open space and recrea- tional purposes. The principle limitation in such a program was found to be one of financial limitations.l Little problem was reported with earlier conveyances of prOperty by gift; although, the actual method of conveyance was not always precisely noted. It appears that this technique offers some real benefits in terms of flood loss management. However, little detailed information or compre- hensive evaluation was available as to the complete benefits and costs of such acquisition programs. Such items as enhancement benefits, recreational benefits, reduction of possible flood losses, as well as land costs, prOperty tax considerations, and constrained prOprietary interests need a more detailed evaluation. Several case studies would appear to offer significant additional information as to the benefits and problems associated with various acquisition techniques in a flood loss management setting. Flood Insurancg Actual implementation of flood plain insurance in Michigan has not been achieved as yet. Indications are that the program is undergoing deve10pment and marketing tests in six communities, none of which are in Michigan.2 Additional information on experiences with the program has not been acquired. Nonetheless, some general problems can still be noted in the authorized program. 1City of Lansing, Flood Plain Information Files, 1968. 2Kunreuther and Shaeffer, "Economically Meaningful Flood Insurance Rates," 1970, p. 659. 292 The hydrologic or flood risk method has been selected for the 1968 National Flood Insurance Program.1 Principle justifications for such a selection relate to utilization of existing data and application of available agency technical skills. Two limitations which are characteris- tic of any risk method selected are associated with the reliability of collected hydrologic data and the subsequent methods used for extra- polating and projecting frequency probabilities for unmonitored streams. A third limitation associated with the particular implementing the act arises from the limited number of flood risk zones which can be identified for premium rate deve10pment. This latter limitation could be reduced according to Kunreuther and Shaeffer, if their prOposed approach were applied.2 However, the merits of either method must be evaluated in terms of program implementation. Consequently, more information needs to be acquired and evaluated in terms of program deve10pment, marketing, administration, and Operating costs. Kunreuther and Shaeffer have suggested some tentative costs but little can be reported from field experiences. It was found that some preliminary feasibility study work was done on establishing premium rates using flood plain field data from Grandville, Michigan.3 However, the actual study materials did not receive wide distribution and were still being sought at the time of this writing. Little can be concluded about the Grandville study without actual access to it. lgodsidg 39.9 M W A95 9; 1968, Title XIII, National Flood Insurance, 82 Stat. 572. 2Kunreuther and Shaeffer, "Economically Meaningful Flood Insurance Rates," 1970, pp. 663 and 665-666. 3U.S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Banking and Currency, IEEHIEBSS 0th 0 r s For V'c ' s, 1966, p. 62, 68-69, 72-73. See footnote no. 2, p. 196, 53225. 293 Additional study and inquiry is also needed in other matters. In- quiry needs to be made as to what additional measures or adjustments are required in existing State or local flood plain regulations in order to qualify for the National Flood Insurance Program. The Housing Act of 1968, as amended, requires that adequate State and local land use controls must be adOpted and enforced before a community may qualify for flood in- surance. Pursuant to this, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development is charged with developing ". . .comprehensive criteria designed to en- courage, where necessary, the adOption of adequate State and local measures . . ." for regulating flood plain development and occupancy.1 The 1968 Act as amended stipulates that such adequate land use regulations will have to be adopted after December 31, 1971, in order for an area to qualify for flood insurance. Attention is directed here at the term‘adgddatg. Further inquiry is needed to determine what criteria the Department of Housing and Urban DevelOpment will adOpt and use as a measure of BQEQHELQ- Eospddvglogmenp £1991 L£l§§ uggagement Compulsory Techniques As noted in the preceeding chapter, many of the techniques develOped under the predevelopment section have application in existing or post- development areas as well. Principle extension of such applications can be achieved through non-conforming use provisions. Unfortunately, little information was acquired on such provisions, particularly in Michigan. As a result, little evaluation of such provisions can be undertaken here. A few observations and comments can be made. 1Housin d Urban De 0 m c 1968, Title XIII, National Flood Insurance, as amended, 82 Stat. 587. Note the word,gdgddg§§ was inserted in place of.pgpmgn§p§ by the December 24, 1969 amendment to the 1968 act; Housipg £39 Upbgp Deyglgpmen§ Ac; 9: l9§9, Sec. 410; 83 Stat. 397. 294 The existence of non-conforming use restrictions and provisions were noted in floodway encroachment regulations of at least seven states. Furthermore, at least four of the seven states had abatement powers over nonconforming floodway structural uses.1 Little could be concluded from the comparative review other than that the Michigan Water Resources Commission appears to be lacking similar abatement powers as found in four of the states.2 Comment on flood plain zoning or building code employment of non- conforming use restrictions is even more sketchy. The model flood plain zoning ordinance develOped by the Wisconsin Division of Resource DevelOpment does provide for extensive use of nonconforming use regulations and has enabling provisions for abatement actions. Significant alteration, expansion, remodeling or reconstruction of a nonconforming flood plain use under the model ordinance could not be undertaken Until a permit was obtained pursuant to the provisions found in the model ordinance. However, information was not provided as to experiences with such provisions in Wisconsin. Further, such provisions were not spelled out in local Michigan flood plain zoning ordinance sections. It is expected that such provisions are spelled out in the general or enve10ping comprehensive zoning ordinance.3 In conclusion, postdevelOpment applications of flood plain regulatory measures needs further study. In this respect, concentration can be narrowed to the area of nonconforming use provisions. To what extent can nonconforming uses in a flood plain be regulated? Can they be abated through forced removal? Or are nonconforming use regulations restricted to léuprg, footnote no. 2, page 7278. ZMiChigan, ACt N0. 167, 1.968, sec. 3 and SOC. Sb. 3Model Flood Plain Zoning Ordinance for a City or Village, 1967. 295 rigid provisions which prevent significant alteration, remodeling, expansion, or reconstruction of the existing use without first obtaining a permit? It may be found that the answers to these questions may wary by flood plain area; i.e., floodway be contrasted with flood plain pondage araae Subscriptive Techniques A number of voluntary or subscriptive land use management techniques discussed in a pre-land deve10pment context are also available for use in a postdevelopment land use setting. Such techniques include taxation, acquisition, (re) building finance, and insurance. Additional techniques which particular relevance in a postdevelOpment land use setting include engineering works of flood protection, flood proofing, and evacuation. In this section principle attention will be devoted to engineering works of flood protection and control. Additional but brief discussion will be given to the other techniques cited. The briefness results from the lack of information as opposed to a reflection of technique insigni- ficance. Wi r1 mmmwmw Engineering works for regulating and controlling flood flows has had some application in Michigan. Detention and storage reservoirs have not been generally available for downstream flood protection of urban areas. Channel improvements and modifications have been found to be more apprOpriate as engineering measures for achieving flood protection in Michigan. As a result a number of projects have been constructed, are under construction, and have been prOposed in many urban reaches of watercourses in Michigan. In the rural areas, another program has been prOposed and undertaken to obtain flood prevention benefits. In this 296 instance, applications of the Federal Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention program have been approved in sixteen project areas as of 1970.1 Some significant project benefits have been reported by the Detroit District Corps of Engineers as a result of channel improvement and alteration projects. The most significant illustration of project bene- fits was presented in the discussion of the channel enlargement and straightening project fer the Red Run Channels north of Detroit, Total costs for the completed project were slightly more than 1.3 million dollars The project was completed in 1952 and has been estimated to have prevented more than 5.7 million dollars in net cummulative damages.2 Other examples were present, but a summation of their figures would not be meaningful without more information on the accounting system and dates used in develOping them. Critical evaluations of engineering works for flood control are extremely numerous in flood loss and water resource management literature. Critical articles and analyses have covered a wide range of considerations including technique philos0phy, project justification and implementation, benefit and cost analyses, equity, perception of protection, and many others.3 Principle attention in this section will be briefly directed at liaise. p. 224. 2W - m9 . p. 41. 3Further exploration of these issues can be found in the following: Fox, "National Water Resource Policy Issues,” 1957, pp. 476-477 and 481; Haveman, WW. 1965; Leapold and Haddock. WW 1954; Murphy. WW. 1958, pp. 131-132; National Academy of Sciences and National Research Council, Wait. 1966 pp. 18-19; Gilbert F. White. shoal... h: lL~B .'J .C .9.4 . 0 '00 ' z o: a g- 4 'o , : '-, Department of Geography Research Paper No. 57, University of Chicago (Chicago: Univer- sity of Chicago, 1958), pp. 227-228; Gilbert F. White, thlgg_g£_gdjn§1mgn13 to Floods, Department of Geography Research Paper No. 93 University of Chicago (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1968), pp. 14-16. 297 the problem of enhancement values and benefits. It was indicated earlier that increasing emphasis and dependence is being placed upon enhancement benefits in project justification. This has considerable significance in terms of evaluating alternative flood plain (deve10pment) management techniques in Michigan as well as elsewhere. Irving K. Fox addressed the general problem in a 1958 paper on National Water Resources Policy Issues. He approached it from an equity consideration which is still relevant today. He found The issue has two aspects which may be expressed aS' follows: (1) to what extent is it equitable to provide flood control for the benefit of flood plain occupants at the expense of the general taxpayer? and (2) to what extent is it administratively practicable to undertake a flood management program of optimum efficiency when the beneficiaries bear such a small portion of the costs of the structural program. . .?1 The effect of this consideration was linked with deficiencies in benefit- cost calculations and reimbursement policies, and then related directly to failures in realizing flood management objectives. Of particular concern here is the fact that the justification of the structural program is often to enhance the value of the flood plain; even though enhancement value is a function of human perception which poses inherent deficiencies in itself. Thus, while these enhancement values are part of the benefits to be measured in providing flood control protection structures; they are difficult to arrive at and subject to differences in judgment.2 This in part contribute to a problem of defining bene- ficiaries and cost sharing burden. As a result, the flood plain owner is not required to participate in any of the cost of protection. This is true despite the fact the justification of the project is dependent upon h 1Fox, "National Water Resource Policy Issues," March, 1958, p. 481. 2U.S., S. Doc. No. 97, 1962, p. 10. 298 enhancing the attractiveness of private land for subsequent development. Considerable concern about this fact was registered in the Task Force on Federal Flood Control Policy in their report. In the report they indicated, The major purpose of engineering projects is changing from protection of established property to the under- writing of new deve10pment. Increasingly, Federal funds are used to support projects justified on the basis of protection of land for future use. This raises serious questions as to the effectiveness and apprOpriateness of existing Federal programs in obtaining policy objectives. It has been noted that while flood loss prevention benefits have been significant; the projected costs of pursuing the flood control construction program are increasing while the rate of flood losses continues to mount also. More- over, the increasing role enhancement values play in project formulation can be seriously questioned in light of the mounting losses in the develOping and develOped flood plains.2 As a result, the selection of engineering works is natural when viewing the individual occupant's and the community's basis of selecting a means of securing their existing or prOposed flood plain deve10pments. The relatively low cost to the individual beneficiary under the Federally funded flood control program compares most favorably with other means of flood protection and reduction of loss potential. Notwithstanding this, the costs which must be borne by the community (the so called a,b,c, requirements) are fre- quently, significant enough that they prevent final funding of favorable projects. This has been evident in Michigan. A number of projects were cited in a 1967 Corps report for Michigan as pending local commit lU.S., Task Force Report on Federal Flood Control Policy, House, Doc. No. 465, 1966, p. 9. 2lbid., pp. 1, 3, 4, 9, 12 and 14-15. 299 to or fulfillment of local project requirements.1 The most notable example has been the Shiawassee Flats project which has been held in abeyance for nearly two decades because of the inability to secure local requirements and commitments.2’3 In the final analysis, the Task Force Report stated "Public Policy should distinguish between the problem of minimizing damage to existing flood plain developments and the problem of achieving optimum future use of flood plains."4 The first problem is a matter of present protection; the second is one of selecting the best investment alternative. Flood plain regulations, when properly drafted, create a decision making environment that forces the flood plain owner to consider and absorb more fully the costs of pursuing his prOposed investment. Engineering works of flood protection attempt to ease some of these costs through the economies of collective action. Reconciliation of these two decision making processes is particularly difficult when dealing with projected new investments and enhancement values. Cost bearing and reimbursement responsibilities incurred under various program alternatives have a marked effect on investment decisions in the flood plain.5 Historically, the tendency has been towards relieving and easing individual cost bearing burdens without at the same time guiding subsequent investments. fflsmelfusuishws Flood proofing is similar to engineering works of flood protection 1Water R§§9u29§§ Dgyelgpment lg Mighlggn, 1967, p. 56-57 and 59. 2 Ibid., p. 57. 3Lawrence Witte, Personal Communication, September, 1971. 4U.S., Task Force Report on Federal Flood Control Policy, House Doc. No. 465, 1966, p. 15. 5Ibid., pp. 1 and. 41-430 300 and regulation in that it involves engineering design and construction principles. However, it differs significantly in that flood proofing as a technique is implemented through individual actions. In contrast, flood protective works are characteristically implemented through collective, public actions. Both techniques offer considerable potential for re- ducing flood losses. In Michigan flood proofing appears to hold significant potential in obtaining a reduction in flood losses and a prevention of further new losses from occuring. This latter must still be regarded as a hypothesis, because little empirical evidence has been acquired and reported in this state which would deny or support this hypothesis. The potential for flood proofing as a technique is outlined most ’ Further recognition of the value of convincingly by John Shaeffer. the technique is given in the National Flood Insurance Program. Provisions are included in the enabling act for adjusting chargeable flood insurance premium rates to reflect the reduction in flood damage risk resulting from adOpted flood proofing measures.3 In addition, it has significant relevance for develOping building code and flood plain zoning regulations which will allow reasonable use of flood plains. In conclusion, it is felt that this particular technique may deserve the highest priority in pursuing additional study into applications of new techniques for reducing flood losses in Michigan. F 00 n' Little comment can be made in this paper on the application and effectiveness of a flood warning system in Michigan. One does exist in lsnaefrer. W.1960- 2Shaeffer, Intgggggtion to filoog Proofing, 1967. 3Housigg and Ugban Deyglopmgnt Ag; of l968, Title XIII, National Flood Insurance, 82 Stat. 577. 301 this state, but its structure and organization appears to be decentralized.l Study of this system in Michigan is felt to be justified. In the absence of such work, comment here can Only be based upon literature reviews of the national system. The Task Force Report on Federal Flood Control Policy concluded that significant increases in data collection, river monitoring and technical assistance were needed in providing flood warning services to more communities and in develOping emergency preparedness plans.2 At the same time, emphasis was placed upon encouraging improvements in the utilization of communications systems and the provision of education services so that emergency preparedness plans would be effectively used when warnings are issued and temporary evacuation of flood prone areas is required. The hearings on Federal appropriations to the Environmental Science Services Administration were consulted for fiscal year 1966-1967. Significant budget increases were requested to implement the recommendations of the President's Task Force on Federal Flood Control Policy. An increase in permanent positions was requested involving 2.9 million dollars in order that river and flood prediction and warning services of the Weather Bureau could be;improved as recommended by the Task Force Report.3 An additional 100,000 dollars was requested to improve the technical assistance and educational services of the Weather Bureau.4 lLawrence Witte, Personal Interview, January 29, 1969. 2U.S., Task Force Report on Federal Flood Control Policy, House Doc. No. 465, 1966, pp. 36-37. 3U.S., Congress House, Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Departments of State, Justice, Commerce, The Judiciary, and Related Agencies Hearings, 1967, p. 563. l'lbid” p. 552. 302 Evgcgation an; Relocation The importance of an adequate flood warning system to temporary evacuation and emergency flood proofing measures was noted in previous chapters.1 The presence of emergency preparedness plans or temporary flood evacuation plans at the municipal level was not documented in this study. An evaluation of such plans is therefore precluded under this study. However, such an evaluation would be merited under a separate study. Three Federal authorities and one Michigan authority were cited in the previous chapter as providing a basis for pursuing permanent public- evacuation of private flood plain deve10pments.2 General usage of these authorities for pursuing flood plain evacuation has not been documented in Michigan. Consequently, evaluation of actual technique application is restricted. One example of a potential application of the evacuation technique was noted in a Lansing Urban Renewal Project under the Model Cities Program.3 In a broader perspective, the prOposed evacuation of portions of the downtown Grand River flood plain is actually related to redevelOpment objectives and Open space objectives. The neighboring redeveloped residential, commercial, and community college prOperties will be served by the evacuated flood plain Open spaces. Accordingly, its significance as a technique may be better evaluated in the following section. Redgxglopmgnt As suggested in the preceeding section, evacuation measures used leugra, pp. 112-113, 116-117, 119-120, 234 and 245. 28u r , pp. 228, 230, 231, and 232. 35uprg, p. 230. 303 under an urban renewal program authority may be more appropriately viewed in a redevelOpment context. Little experience in redevelOping flood plain areas has been reported in Michigan. The principle and outstanding example of employment of redevelOpment measures was found in the Golden Triangle Area in the City of Pittsburgh.1 A distinction in prOgram philosophy is again tentatively suggested here. The redevelOpment program in Pittsburgh stressed sound redevelopment of the Triangle Area. This involved significant use of flood proofing measures. In Lansing a con- trast is suggested by the permanent evacuation of flood plain areas in redevelOpment areas. Open space is secured On the flood plain to serve the aesthetic and recreational needs of the adjacent structurally re- develOped tracts. At best, the technique can be termed premising in Michigan flood plain management and flood loss management. However, specific and separate study of this technique is needed before further comment is made on its exact role in Michigan flood loss management strategies. Rebuilding,§igaggg Evaluation of rebuilding finance policies must focus on private and public credit institutions. This was seen in considerations of credit and financial policies in a postdevelOpment context.2 Limited experiences with this technique were obtained in Michigan. Information on private credit policies was not obtained at all. Some information was obtained from public credit agencies with respect to their role in influencing rebuilding of flood damaged prOperties. 1Murphy. WW. 1958. p. 3-5. 2Supra, pp. 135-138 and 237-241. 304 The principle public agency identified in the flood loss management literature which was contacted in this study was the Small Business Administration.1 In the future, it may develop that the Department of Housing and Urban DevelOpment will have significant impact upon rebuilding in flood plain areas through administration of the National Flood Insurance Program. However, to date, the Small Business Authority appears to be the principle public agency having a specific charge in aiding rebuilding of disaster stricken areas. In this respect, the program as administered tends to approach an emergency relief Operation as Opposed to a guidance program. The emphasis of the disaster loan program appears to be one of the replacement and/or renovation without significant allowance for improving the integrity of the rebuilt structure or its contents to with- stand flood losses. Criticisms and deficiencies of the Small Business Administration Disaster Loan Program seem to generate from the lack or absence of relating the program to long term economic use of the flood plain.2 This seems understandable when it is understood that one of the objec- tives of the S.B.A. Disaster Loan Program is swiftness in returning the flood damaged community back to its original economic activity. This objective seemingly runs counter to a program of considering or studying evacuation as an advisable program. In contrast, long term planning with respect to community deve10pment and relocation should be incorporated into any rebuilding finance programs.3 Consequently program considerations are lSu r , p. 238. 2U.S., Task Force Report on Federal Flood Control Policy, House, Doc. No. 465, 1966, pp. 11, and 30-31. 31223.. p. 31. 305 moved beyond this federal agency's scope. Examples of the type of thinking and extent of coordination necessarily required might be found in the evolving Model Cities Program of the Housing and Urban DevelOpment Department. Another deficiency appears from the absence of clear and definitive policy statements or directives with respect to having Small Business Loan Officials advise loan applicants of the possibilities of building structural modification and flood proofing measures. The capabilities of such a service function appear to depend largely on the background of the field appraiser or reviewing loan advisor. While it was indicated that flood proofing measures would certainly receive positive consideration in disaster loan applications, no assurance can be apparently given that such considerations will be entertained by indivudual loan applicants and loan advisors.1 It is interesting to note that the Official with which the author discussed Small Business Administration Disaster Loan policies had an engineering background and had availed himself of oppor- tunities to become acquainted with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers programs through annual work sessions. Consequently, this particular official is likely to have a greater awareness of alternative flood loss reduction alternatives and phiIOSOphy than might be found of other loan officials. A consequent impression was that the success of a Small Business Disaster Loan in reducing future flood losses depended a great deal on the personal awareness of the involved Small Business Administration loan official, his personal philosophy, and his disposition with reSpect to the alternative of prescribed role functions. And yet, it should be noted here, that an overly defined or prescribed duty function is found less 1George Strong, Personal Communication, February 17, 1969. 306 desirable to one allowing significant discretion. It appears that where the latter is exercised, a more innovative and individual treatment is given to each disaster loan application. What appears to be desirable is a uniform distribution of information concerning flood loss management techniques to loan officers for their minimal or initial consideration. An educational and training function is needed to increase and reinforce their potential function as effective flood loss management advisors. This may require a directive similar to the one given by the Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelOpment in his Secretarial Order No. 25 of May 25, 1967. The Secretarial Order appears to have been successfully passed down to appropriate Housing and Urban Development agencies, as evidenced by the Federal Housing Administration.1 Flood Insuzgpge Flood loss insurance was covered earlier in the predevelOpment section. However, an additional comment is needed in terms of the acqui- sition provisions included in the enabling act.2 At present, it is not known how extensively these provisions will be applied within the flood insurance program. More experiences with the program as it is developed further, will clarify this question. Even without such experiences, it can still be pointed out that such a provisions integrates the insurance technique with several other techniques including redevelOpment, rebuilding finance, and permanent evacuation. It remains to be seen how such a feature will be integrated with other programs and how it will be used to lower flood losses in develOped flood plain areas. 1m. p. 185. 2Hous an b o 968, Title XIII, National Flood Insurance, 82 Stat. 588. 307 Study is needed in determining how criteria should be develOped 'for implementing acquisition provisions. Contact with the Department of Housing and Urban Development should be undertaken to determine what studies are being pursued or need to be pursued in applying acquisition features of the flood insurance program. At the same time, a need exists for determining what role flood insurance will or can play in rebuilding flood damaged buildings. It is apparent from the act that the program is directed at small flood plain Operations and is restricted to those Operators and residents whaelect to buy flood insurance. However, what guidance, counseling, and financial assistance will be made available to the flood plain Operator in relocating or rebuilding a flood damage prOperty is not clear. Study is needed here also. Finally, what further actions are required to make Michigan and its local units of government eligible for natural flood insurance needs to be studied and evaluated. This was noted earlier in the predevelOpment section discussion of flood insurance. Other Techniques Several flood loss management techniques do not fit into the dichotomy of a predevelOpment and postdevelOpment classification scheme in terms of flood loss reduction measures. Flood insurance would be an example of such a technique if it were not for the land use control constraints attached to the program. Moreover, the constraints are a means of ob- taining implementation of other techniques for reducing or preventing flood losses. Without such constraints, flood insurance, would be an example of a technique utilized for mitigating flood losses through redistribution of flood loss bearing and not one of truly reducing flood losses. 308 Mimi A second example of such a technique is flood relief. A similar function is served by flood relief as that found in flood insurance, except that redistributional effects are even broader. The recipients of flood relief have only very indirect financial relationship with the program as administered. The relationship is dependent upon governmental programs of relief, wherein tax revenues are utilized from the general fund to financially assist flood stricken prOperty owners or occupants. Little relationship exists between flood risk, taxation burden, and flood relief payments. Because the program is not veiwed as a significant program in reducing flood losses, it is briefly reviewed. Evaluation of the flood relief program in a national context was noted in several references. The Task Force on Federal Flood Control Policy concluded that: The minimum objective of public policy should be to assure consideration of the advantages and disadvan- tages of flood proofing and of relocation before action is taken to restore damaged property. Their conclusion was prompted by the observation that the current focus of flood relief is on quick restoration of conditions to a pro-flood status. This in turn reflects a public and private norm which needs to be broadened and redirected where possible so relocation or flood proofing will be considered along with considerations of immediate restoration. In terms, of Michigan, little can be concluded from this study. General comments made by state and local officials suggest that a good study hypotheses in this area would be that existing flood relief policies 1U.S., Task Force Report on Flood Control Policy, House, Doc. No. 465, 1966, p. 31. 309 and measures in Michigan do not or are unable to give serious conSideration to the possibilities of assisting relocation or flood proofing in re- develOpment relief requests. Education gng Technical Assistance From what information that was obtained for this study, it appears that Federal and Michigan technical assistance measures are meeting with significant results. The principle deficiency might be that not enough of such assistance is being utilized or requested. From information provided by the Corps of Engineers and the Michigan Water Resources Commission, it can be concluded that a considerable need continues to exist in many communities for some flood loss management. As cited, earlier, at least 105 Michigan communities were found to have stream flooding problems.1 At the same time it was pointed out that the initiative for requesting technical assistance under the Section 206 flood plain information studies resides with the local community. Consequently, increases in local requests for technical assistance might be prompted through (1) State agency contact and encouragement, (2) compulsory state flood plain regula- tions like those found in Wisconsin, or (3) subsequent flood events. One other possible improvement is needed. Some reconciliation is needed between national policy objectives and restrictive regulations concerning structural deve10pments in both the floodway and flood plain storage area. At present, flood plain zoning ordinances tend to be quite restrictive. The 1963 Farmington, Michigan Flood Plain Information Report on the Upper River Rouge was found to suggest that restrictive regulations 2 in terms of filling would be apprOpriate for both areas. On the other 1511 I‘ , p. 158. , 1963, p. 20. 310 hand, the State demonstrates a primary concern for floodway encroachments; wherein, small fills in flood plain storage areas are permitted when they do not affect the regulated floodway.l Consequently, it appears that some need exists in reconciling methods of reviewing developments in flood plain storage areas as to their potential detrimental effects. Such a reconciliation is needed in order that a more Optimum use of the flood plain can be achieved within flood plain management regulations. lLawrence Witte, Personal Interview, January 29, 1969. CHAPTER VI RECOMMENDATIONS What needs to be done in Michigan in terms of flood loss management? The principle initial charge for this study was a review of flood loss management policy and practices with reference to Michigan needs. The formulation of recommendations that could be made in terms of program development, adOption, and/or revision were an integral part of that initial charge. It was also anticipated by the exploratory nature of the study that much of the work would produce further questions and outline additional research needs. Both of these expectations were pre- mised on the hypothesis that flood loss management in Michigan could be improved. Accordingly, the ensuing recommendations will reflect contrif butions and findings of the previous chapters in terms of (l) prOposed flood loss management techniques, (2) present practices and applications of these in the State of Michigan, and (3) an evaluation of these practices as applied to the state. A significant weakness in this thesis has been the absence of direct field observations and primary data collection. Such observations and data provide the strongest basis of critically evaluating management program adOptions and achievements. Five areas for which a significant amount of information was acquired are focused upon for making actual program recommendations. The five areas which will receive particular attention are floodway encroachment regulations, flood plain zoning, subdivision regulations, flood proofing, and engineering works of flood protection and prevention. Other areas for which some, little, or no 311 312 field information was acquired will be commented on in terms of recommen- dations for further information collection and/or study analysis. Recommendations will be approached in two divisions. Initially, recommendations will be prOposed and reviewed on an institutional basis. Following this, there will be a series of proposed recommendations made on a technique by technique basis. In this manner, program needs and potentials can be more thoroughly covered. WHWM Recommendations have been made in the literature which are keyed to 1,2,3 institutional levels of implementation. Such approaches give recognition to the difficulties in develOping various alternative pro- posals without giving recognition to institutional structures and jurisdictions. At the same time, such approaches offer the opportunity to reinforce the concept of a range of alternatives which can be integrated into a program of multiple thrusts. While doing this, recognition is given to the constraints attributable to institutional organization which impede attainment of various actions in a multi-level, multiple technique, Progrwe Federal Improvements in Federal policies and programs in flood loss management have been recommended frequently in the literature. In terms of Michigan 1Wallace E. Akin and Merwin D. Dougal, "Flood-Plain Regulation in Iowa," in Bap§;§_pg_Elggggfizgplgm§, ed. White, Departments of Geography Research Paper No. 70, University of Chicago (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1961), Po 1800 2 Summagy 9f Engggedings, Third Annual Meeting on Interstate Conference on Water Problems (Chicago: Council of State Governments, December 5-6, 1960), p. 15. 3D'qu‘plrw. WW. 1958. p. 160-161. 313 needs, two measures deserve significant attention. First, increased levels of technical assistance in providing hydrologic data for flood plain management is needed. Second, provision of the Federal Flood Insurance Program should be requested for implementation in this state. Both needs are dependent upon local and state initiative in making the requests; but ultimate control of the program is provided by the Federal Government. A third area also needs attention. Federal programs for engineering works of flood protection and regulation need to be thoroughly reviewed. Matters of enhancement benefits and cost reimbursement need further study and adjustment. The Task Force on Federal Flood Control Policy out- lined five points which need addressing in policy reviews and adjustments. (1). The more widely the beneficiaries share in costs, regardless of the type of project, the more likely the programs will promote efficient and socially desirable use of flood plains. (2). The larger the proportion of costs that are repaid the greater the check on uneconomic investments. (3). There is special advantage to any policy which identifies beneficiaries and charges them some portion of the cost of achieving economic future development in the flood plain. (4). There is no reasonable basis for differing cost-sharing requirements. . .for varying requirements between regions. (5). Fifth, and absolutely essential, cost-sharing policy should be consistent for all Federal construction agencies. While such adjustments in policy must be directed at the Federal level, the impact of the needed adjustments will be one of increasing the attention given to state and local land use planning and control techniques. As a result, these latter techniques will need to bear more of the burden in achieving an Optimum economic deve10pment of the flood plains in the state lU.S., Task Force Report on Federal Flood Control Policy, House Doc. No. 465, 1966, p. 42. 314 and the nation. State The State of Michigan should reevaluate its movement into direct regulation of flood plain development and occupancy. Comments from officials in other states and information on the State of Wisconsin's comprehensive flood plain management program strongly suggest that the State of Michigan redirect flood plain regulation to the municipal level. A strong state involvement in flood plain management can be secured by enacting provisions which require local adOption of flood plain regulations which must meet minimum standards established by the Michigan Water Resources Commission. Commission review and approval of ordinance enactments and program enforcement should also be provided. In the event local regulations are not adOpted or do not meet state standards, then authority should be available for Commission establishment of flood plain regulations which provide minimum standards for local regulation of flood plains. The Michigan Water Resources Commission should make inquiry as to the availability of the National Flood Insurance Program. If compliance with Federal program requirements is not currently present, measures for meeting such compliance should be evaluated and adOpted. A special educational program should be established at the state level. Information should be designed to demonstrate the need for private and public regulation of flood plain deve10pment. In part, this function can be achieved through increased state activity in encouraging local requests for U.S. Corps of Engineers, Section 206 Flood Plain Information Studies. In the final analysis the state should be directly involved in stimulating and encouraging local program deve10pment. Subsequently, it should act as a coordinating unit when local programs need or draw upon 315 Federal program assistance. In this latter function, Michigan has 2 performed well in coordinating Federal local involvements.l’ Local Problems have been confronted in the past in obtaining satisfactory local flood loss management programs. This results from the large number of local units of government, their political autonomy, and their de- centralized nature. The Interstate Conference on Water Problems reflected this situation when they could not achieve a consensus on how to get local governments functioning successfully in flood loss management.3 Wisconsin has moved to answer this problem by adOpting a program of compulsory local enactment of flood plain regulations. It was recommended above that Michigan reevaluate its current trend and review the possibilities of following an approach similar to that found in Wisconsin. In any event, the ultimate focus for flood plain management should center on local units of govern- ment regardless of the incentives, sanctions, or pressures elected by the state to bring about such local flood plain planning and management. The first step in local flood plain management should be the develOpment of a comprehensive plan which reflects flood risk to the special deve10pment control needs in flood plain areas. This should be followed with special flood plain develOpment restrictions within subdivision regulations, floodway encroachment regulations, zoning ordinances, building codes, and sanitary or health regulations. Other techniques as warning signs land acquisition, building finance, flood proofing, and relocation should be 1Carl Argiroff, Personal Interview, February 18, 1969. 2Lawrence Witte, Personal Interview, January 29, 1969. 3§ummggy of Egogggdingg, Interstate Conference on Water Problems, December 5-6, 1960, pp. 15-16. 316 encouraged where appropriate. Urban renewal and capital improvement plans should reflect flood plain risks and associated needs for deve10pment protection. Property tax relief should be granted where restrictive flood- way and flood plain prevent or depress deve10pment of income producing land uses. Flood insurance, when available should be required of proposed flood plain develOpments. Finally, a strong educational program should be maintained which provides information on why such flood plain planning and guidance programs are needed. R omm i r m o PredevelOpment Flood Loss Management Techniques Floodway Encrgachment Regulations The State of Michigan should reevaluate the floodway encroachment program established under Act 167 Of Public Acts of 1968. Program developments in other states as well as here suggest that more of the floodway regulatory burden should be retained by municipalities. A compulsory program could be adOpted whereby the relevant local units of government would be required to adopt floodway encroachment regulations. Care in moving to such a program is needed. It may be found that only municipalities of a certain p0pulation size or jurisdictional level can afford the resources to support a staff qualified to undertake technical review and enforcement functions, as are required here. At the minimum, local governments should be encouraged to adopt floodway regulations which would allow primary review and enforcement functions to pass to the local unit of government. Provisions for establishing minimum standards could be granted to the Michigan Water Resources Commission, In addition, local ordinance review and approval powers should be retained by the Commission as is presently provided for in Act 167 of 1968. 317 A series of specific recommendations follows: 1. If the current state level program continues, then serious consideration should be given to the establishment of floodway encroachment lines. This would be in addition to the present individual permit review functions. Personnel should be ob- tained and dedicated principally to delineating encroachment lines along reaches of Michigan watercourses. 2. The Commission should encourage municipalities in adopting local floodway regulations. Such regulations and enforcement could be more restrictive than state requirements, or they could reflect the state established minimum criteria. 3. In order to further the above, a model local floodway encroachment ordinance should be develOped. State and Federal technical assistance should also be provided to further aid local (a) adoption Of such an ordinance and (b) establishment of a permit review program. 4. A distinction needs to be drawn between floodway and flood plain pondage areas. In existing flood plain regulations such a distinc- tion needs to be carried through in regulated uses prohibited and/or permitted in the respective areas. 5. As a general policy, the transfer of primary field review and enforcement responsibilities should be encouraged as much as possible to local units of government. Review and supervisory functions should be maintained by the state. 6. The Commission should undertake a legal analysis of what powers are available for abating nonconforming floodway uses. Where such powers or provisions are not present, guidelines for obtaining and establishing such powers should be develOped. 318 7. The Commission should also undertake or sponsor economic studies to evaluate the differences in economic impacts of varying the floodway encroachment zone. Moreover, means of establishing and evaluating the hazardous externalities posed by floodway obstructions should be studied and illustrated. Flood Plain ZOping Experiences with local enactments of flood plain zoning in Michigan suggest a possible need for a more comprehensive approach. Information regarding Wisconsin's broad flood plain management program lends evidence for a compulsory program requiring local enactment of flood plain zoning in Michigan. However, information concerning existing flood plain zoning ordinances in Michigan and the Wisconsin program was generally devoid of observations or data on actual field applications. Accordingly, further study, particularly of Wisconsin's experiences with their program, is needed before actually embarking upon a similar program in this state. As suggested in floodway regulations, some consideration must be given to what political units are capable of supporting the technical staff required in administering flood plain regulations. At the minimum, the Michigan Water Resources Commission should proceed in drafting a model flood plain zoning ordinance for consideration by municipalities. In addition, the Commission and technical-administrative staff should encourage a program of state review and technical assistance in drafting local flood plain zoning ordinances. An excellent example of such a COOperative effort was evident in the drafting of the Lansing flood plain zoning ordinances. Specific recommendatiOns are listed as follows: 1. A compulsory local flood plain zoning statute should be studied and evaluated. Under such a prOposal, a thorough 319 review of Wisconsin's experiences with their flood plain management program should be of significant benefit. Addi- tional states should also be contacted to evaluate their experiences with flood plain zoning. Within such a program, state review and approval of required local ordinances should be considered. In return, state technical assistance and data should be available for support in develOping local ordinances and interpreting their administration and enforce- ment requirements. 2. A model local flood plain zoning ordinance should be drafted by the state in order to assist local governments in adopting such ordinances. This would be of considerable benefit regardless of the existence of a state compulsory local enact- ment program. 3. The availability of state technical assistance in developing data, interpreting data, and applying data should be assured local units of government regardless of the existence of a compulsory local enactment program. This assistance should include procurring Federal technical assistance when possible and interpreting the results when requested. 4. There should be considerable distinguishment between floodway encroachment areas and flood plain pondage areas when new local flood plain zoning ordinances are adopted or existing ones are revised. Most of the existing ordinances fail to distinguish between these two areas adequately and/or regulate allowed land uses accordingly. Currently, open space needs appear to be secured at the expense of reasonable (flood proofed) structural land use in flood plain storage areas. 320 5. In addition, studies should be conducted into means of relating flood proofing, building codes, flood insurance, and other techniques to zoning criteria which can be used in permitting flood plain land use. Specifically, what criteria are apprOpriate for use in a flood plain zoning ordinance? What criteria give adequate recognition to means of preventing or managing flood loss in structural developments on flood plains? Sub 'visi n Re. 'ons Consideration should be given to redirecting more of the administrative burden under subdivision controls to local units of government. The state should establish definitive criteria and procedures for municipal considera- tion in regulating the subdivision of land into plats which will be partially or wholly within a flood plain. Some attempt has been made at pursuing this goal in the existing rules and regulations of the Water Resources Commission.1 Thereafter, local units of government should be encouraged or required to adopt subdivision controls which at least meet state minimum requirements. State review and approval responsibilities should be maintained over these units. It may also be found that only municipalities of a certain p0pulation size or jurisdictional level can provide resources for supporting the professional staff needed for the technical reviews required in flood plain deve10pment permits. Thus, where local reéources are inadequate or satisfactory regulations are not enacted, the State may find it necessary to continue with direct permit review and enforcement programs. lhichigan, Rules and Regulations of the Water Resources Commission, 1967, R. 560.303(2) and (3). 321 Currently, the backlog of subdivision permit applications continues to tax Bureau of Water'Management review capacities. In 1969, inadequate staffing prevented adequate review of subdivision permit applications in the alloted review period.1 Staffing has been increased since that time, but so has permit applications and other flood plain management program requirements.2 Consequently, increased staffing is required and/or a redirection of primary review and enforcement responsibilities. Finally, some experience with this approach is available under the existing program. Mr. Witte observed that under the general subdivision control procedures, some subdivider‘s were conferring with various review bodies in an attempt to find one or more that would favorably approve a plat prOposal.3 Thereafter, such approval was used as a lever in trying to get other review bodies to approve a land subdivision proposal. In contrast, a countervailing strategy was noted whereby local units were sometimes found to refer applicants to other municipal or state review bodies for indications of assurances of approval before they would approve a subdivision application. This phenomenon suggests that local units are interested in enforcing subdivision controls, but they need support in their actions from higher units of government. Further study of this phenomenon would be extremely valuable. At the minimum, it should provide further insight into the dynamics of sharing flood plain regulatory responsibi- lities between state and municipal governments. Building Codes and Flood Broofigg The use of building codes for preventing flood losses in this state lLawrence Witte, Personal Interview, January 29, 1969. 2Lawrence Witte, Personal Communication, September 1971. 3Lawrence Witte, Personal Interview, January 29, 1969. 322 is thought to be nominal. Use of flood proofing is also thought to be little practiced in reducing flood loss potential in flood plain develop- ments. A few illustrations of prOposed buildings incorporated flood proofing principles were noted in discussions with flood plain management personnel. Nevertheless, this premise still needs substantiation. Literature discussions of building code practices and applications of flood proofing in other areas can be used in guiding the needed research to be undertaken in this state. Studies should be initiated which identify prOposed and existing examples of flood proofed buildings in Michigan. Research is needed as to how flood proofing concepts might be adopted in building code regulations. An evaluation is also needed as to the impli- cations of administrative problems in flood plain areas in enforcing present building codes if amended. Information needs to be develOped and provided such that local units of government and the private sector are better informed as to the potential benefits of flood proofing. Evaluations of technical assistance services should be undertaken to identify the role such services might provide the private sector and local units of government. Specific research needs include: 1. Determination of means for translating flood proofing concepts into building code provisions. Particular attention should be directed at performance type criteria. Research work at the U.S. Forest Service Products Laboratory in Madison, Wisconsin has been conducted on wood structures and their 1,2,3 ability to withstand hurricane winds. Similar work was 1L.O. Anderson and Walton R. Smith, "Houses Can Resist Hurricanes," U.S. Forest Service Research Paper FPL 33 (Madison, Wisconsin: Forest Products Laboratory, August, 1965.) 2 R.F. Luxford and Walton R. Smith, "Observations of Damages to Houses by High Winds, Waves, and Flodds, and Some Construction Precautions," Forest 323 not being done in terms of flood damage, but is definitely needed for structures of all types of construction. 2. Evaluation of the need for a state building code or a special flood plain building code; and/or 3. DevelOpment of model flood plain building code provisions. 4. Evalustion of the administrative problems in building code regulations which might have bearing on implementation of flood plain building code restrictions. Other PredevelOpment Flood Loss Management Techniques J r ' Si- Warning signs have received insufficient exploration and treatment. Murphy's findings suggest major weaknesses which have prevented their successful employment as a flood loss management device.1 On the other hand, the identified weakness also suggest negative implications for successful applications of other flood plain regulatory measures. Accordingly, further study of flood plain warning signs is needed. Attention should be given to potential interrelationships between warning signs and floodway encroachment regulations, flood plain zoning, and/or building codes. If flood plain warning signs are not acceptable to the local area, what are the prospects for implementing flood plain regulations? Bui i ' c Studies are needed to evaluate private and public credit program procedures in terms of recognizing, evaluating, and reflecting flood risk Products Laboratory Report No. 2095 (Madison, Wisconsin: U.S. Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory, October 1957). 3H.F. Zornig and G.E. Sherwood, "Wood Structures Survive Hurricane Camille's Winds," U.S. Forest Service Research Paper FPL 123 (Madison, Wisconsin: Forest Products Laboratory, October 1969). 1Murphy, Regulating Flood-Plain DevelOpments, 1958, pp. 123 and 163. 324 in granting credit or insuring the extension of credit. A field review of private and public sources of credit should be undertaken to determine the impact that the recommendations of the Task Force on Federal Flood Control Policy had on the credit institutions in Michigan.1 In particular, the impact of Executive Order 11296 and the Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelOpment Order No. 25 should be evaluated in terms of Federal credit programs in Michigan.2’3 A number of specific study needs can also be pointed to: I. What information and technical assistance needs are required in reviewing credit applications for proposed flood plain developments? 2. Where are the various points in credit deliberations that leverage can be applied to obtain adequate recognition of flood risk? 3. How can flood risk be accounted for in the terms of a loan contract? 4. What should the interrelationships be between credit poli- cies and flood plain insurance if and when it becomes available to Michigan flood plain occupants? Taxation A Special study of tax policy is needed as a means of furthering flood loss management objectives.h Within Michigan more attention should be directed at property tax policies. How can the property tax reflect 1U.S., Task Force Report on Federal Flood Control Policy, House Doc. No. 465, 1966, p. 27. 2U.S., President, Executive Order No. 11296, August 11, 1966. 3U.S., Department of Housing and Urban Development, Secretary's Order No. 25, February 17, 1967. 325 flood loss management needs without further eroding the existing tax base? What adjustments if any are needed in appraisal policies, where flood plain parcels are restrictively regulated? EC . 13' Acquisition of flood plain lands appears to be compatible with other program objectives as open space and recreation. Considerable attention was given in Chapter III to Outlining the various measures available under this technique. Case studies are needed in Michigan and elsewhere for illustrating the costs and problems of such measures in addition to their benefits. Such items as enhancement benefits, recreational benefits, reduction of possible flood losses, reservation of flood plain storage areas, as well as costs of property interests conveyed, property tax considerations, and limited proprietary interests in conveyed property of less than the fee simple need more detailed spedification and evaluation. It was noted earlier that acquisition of develOped flood plain prOperties is available within urban renewal programs. In addition, it may become available under the National Flood Insurance Program. However, consideration of both of these latter possibilities is more appropriate under evacuation and redevelopment measures. W Inquiry needs to be made into the availability of the National Flood Insurance Program for Michigan flood plain residents and occupants. What additional prerequisites might be needed to qualify for the program? What constitutes adequate land use control measures? Andto what extent will chargeable premium rates reflect flood proofed buildings and contents? 326 Postdevelopment Flood Loss Management Techniques Compu sor e ’ ue Considerable study of nonconforming use restrictions in floodway encorachment regulations, flood plain zoning, and building codes is re- quired. When and to what extent can abatement measures be utilized? What use can be made of controls over alteration, expansion, remodeling, or reconstruction of nonconforming uses? Studies of the interrelationships between flood proofing aninonconforming uses should be undertaken. Subscriptive Postdevelopment Flood Loss Management Techniques Engineering fldrks E9; Flood Erotegtidd and Ezevgntidn Information on Federally assisted programs of engineering works for flood protection indicates that these programs are receiving continued attention nationally and locally. Problems were noted in obtaining local "a,b,c, requirements" in some Michigan projects. Indications were Athat sufficient resources were lacking or were difficult to commit in advancing these projects towards construction phases. Case studies should be considered which might identify financial and other resource allocation problems in securing local fulfillment of the "a,b,c, requirements." Strategies should also be studied which might assist local units in meeting cost sharing responsibilities. Loan programs are available to local participants in Public Law 566 Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention projects. However, such loan assistance programs are not generally availa- ble to local communities in engineering works for flood protection construc- ted by the Corps of Engineers. This is quite important in light of increasing arguments and prOposals calling for a readjustment in Federal-local cost sharing policies.1 The impact of such prOposals is generally to increase 1U.S., Task Force Report on Federal Flood Control Policy, House Doc. No. 465, 1966, p. 43 and 45. 327 the cost bearing burden of private and community beneficiaries in Federally assisted projects. More importantly, such proposals will likely increase the shift of attention in flood loss management to land use guidance and control measures. v . Re ' n Further study is needed of these techniques. Significant application of both can be obtained in blighted urban areas where flood hazards may be a factor in causing blight. Authorities exist for evacuating urban flood plains under urban renewal programs, engineering works for flood pro- tection (principally as an alternative to levees), and the National Flood Insurance Program. Examples of evacuation as an alternative to an engin- eering work for flood protection project are not known in Michigan. However, case studies of evacuation authorized under urban renewal projects should be investigated in Michigan. In practice it can be eXpected that evacuation under this last program authority will actually be associated with redevelopment measures. Rgdgvelopmgnt RedevelOpment offers somewhat of a contrast to the focus of acquisition, evacuation, and relocation. RedeveIOpment focuses on sound land use which includes structural developments in flood plains. At present it can be termed a promising technique for blighted flood plain urban areas. Poten- tial and existing applications of urban renewal in blighted flood plain deve10pments need to be identified and studied in Michigan. Urban Renewal Project Area No. 2 in the City of Lansing offers an example of evacuation and redevelopment in a flood plain setting.l Further study of this example 1Redevelopment appears to be confined to areas adjoining the flood plain; while permanent evacuation of existing structures are projected for flood plain areas. Snags, p. 130. 328 is warranted. In addition, other similar case studies should be attempted in other Michigan communities. The study recommendations made in the Building Finance Section above apply here also. This technique currently overlaps with redevelOpment measures and flood relief. Information was not obtained in this study on policies of private credit and lending institutions. Some information on the Small Business Administration suggests that further study is needed of public credit policies. In particular, to what extent do existing policies as applied in Michigan reflect pressures to rebuild and restore damaged structures as quickly as possible? Are considerations of flood proofing or relocation allowed and promoted in rebuilding finance applica- tions ? In terms of both private and public credit institutions, what information and technical assistance is required for introducing flood proofing or relocation considerations in applications for rebuilding finance? Other Techniques lood Dis ster i f Little attention was given to this technique in this study. Selected sources of flood relief were noted. Applications and extent of use in Michigan were not studied. Recommendations have been made at the national level which suggest that adjustments be made in flood relief programs as currently administered. Program adjustments should reflect a recog- nition of the contributions and importance of flood proofing and relocation measures. The tendency to quickly restore communities to reexisting conditions should be tempered by long range considerations of reducing flood loss potential. Most of the attention is then focused at the Federal 329 level to bring about such adjustments. However, a significant need exists for studying the contingency planning of local units of government. Are local units of government prepared to bring about corrections in flood plain land use after a flood event passes? How can nonconforming land use provisions, rebuilding finance, acquisition, urban renewal, flood proofing, building codes be integrated to prevent simply reestablishing a community to its preflood state? Education dad Techgicd; Asgispdnce It is difficult to make specific recommendations concerning an educational program. This results from inadequate and frequently divergent discussion of education in the flood loss management literature. In short, disseminating more and clearer information may not elecit the anticipated program responses. At present, there are conflicting accounts concerning the incorporation of flood plain information in the decidion making processes of the flood plain occupant or developer. Accordingly, basic research is needed on the educational process, information flows, and decision making as they relate to flood plain deve10pment and occupation. Such research is essential for develQDing the ability to predict responses to educational programs and to other regulatory programs which require a strong educational program. Specific research needs include the identification of the various individuals and groups which need to be served by information and educa- tional programs. Differentiating the recipient public into various audiences is essential in develOping objectives and methods of implementing educational programs. This is especially apparent where public educational programs may be initiated at the state or local level. More research is needed on the different flood plain information requirements of various private and public decision makers and associated problems of perception, attitude, and 330 sensitivity to flood risk. The needs for and problems of an educational program directed at local governmental officials are evident in the existing Federal and State flood plain information and technical assistance programs. The need and. justification for allocating more resources to these programs are evident as noted in the preceeding chapter. At the same time, deficiencies in the educational function are also evident. Specifically, it was found that flood plain management efforts are significantly enhanced when the technical information and advisory assistance are furnished to local governments. Nevertheless, problems are still present in effectively translating the hydrologic information into sound land use controls. This is most evident in flood plain zoning ordinances. An initial state educational program effort should indlude the goal of bringing about a clearer understanding of floodway and flood plain storage area dynamics. A goal or benefit sought under such an educational effort would be a clearer discrimination in floodway and flood plain management programs at the local level. A complicating issue arises from local and state efforts in securing Open space and park lands in flood plain areas through the use of police powers as contrasted to the use of eminent domain. Accordingly, the Water Resources Commission shduld publish materials and guidelines which would assist in clarifying the regulatory needs of floodway and flood plain storage areas and the issue of police power versus eminent domain. These two efforts should assist local communities in designing sound flood plain management programs which alleviate the potential of problems with litigation. Additional Specific study needs relate to establishing public programs to provide educational information and technical assistance to architects, contractors and builders, private and public credit institutions, building 331 code inspectors, planning officials, property tax assessors, administrators of emergency or disaster relief officials and the news media. As noted in several of the preceeding sections, there is a particular need for the Michigan Water Resources Commission to develop and publish model flood plain control ordinances or provisisions. For example, there is need for model floodway encroachment regulations, flood plain zoning ordinance, local flood plain subdivision regulatory provisions, and local flood plain building code provisions. Com rehensive se nin Greater attention needs to be given to comprehensive land use planning as a basis for integrating many of the flood loss management techniques. To date insufficient discussion has been given to the concept in the flood loss management literature. Reviews of a limited number of muniCipal land use or master plans during this study suggest a similar conclusion, i.e., to little attention is given to flood hazards and associated land use problems by communities during the development of their master plans. A more exhaustive review is needed in Michigan of comprehensive land use or master planning at the municipal level; specifically in those communities where flooding has been identified as a hazard. Case studies of communities with flood plain land use regulations or management programs are needed to study the degree of correlation and integration achieved between land use plans and implementation of flood plain management pro- grams. Where such integration is absent, then evaluations and recommenda- tions are needed as to what might be done to correct such disparities in comprehensive planning and flood plain land use management. Research is needed in evaluating various mechanisms needed to assure that flood plain land use planning is incorporated into land use planning by communities faced with flood risk. In what manner and to what extent 332 can education and technical assistance be used in assisting the incor- poration of flood plain land use planning in comprehensive planning? Would special flood plain land use management information guides and state technical assistance programs be of value in promoting community con- sideration of flood plain land use? How might subdivision regulations, land use zoning, prOperty taxation procedures, open space land acquisition, public capital improvements construction, and urban renewal in flood plain areas be made dependent upon prior treatment and adequate recognition of flood hazard in a community land use plan? In summary, local land use planning offers considerable potential for tailoring and integrating implementation techniques such as subdivision regulations, zoning ordinances, building codes, special ordinances, taxation policies, acquisition plans, and redevelopment plans in such a manner as to reflect flood plain land use considerations and needs. A thorough review of the current state of the art is needed to point out the disparities between recommended policy and actual prac- tice. Specific recommendations should follow which are directed at improving current comprehensive planning practices as they relate to flood hazards and flood plain land use. LI ST OF REFERENCES LIST OF REFERENCES delig pggppgppg Esdsnal Act of April 27, 1935. 49 Stat. 163. 16 U.S.C.A. 590a. o s‘ r r . Washington, D.C.: Office of Economic Opportunity, Executive Office of the President, June 1, 1967. F rmin o Iic i n 00 P i nfor tion R ort n the er Riv R u e. Detroit: U.S. Army Engineer District, Detroit Corps of Engineers, February 1963. Federal Elddd lnsugdnce Apt,g§_lg§§. 70 Stat. 1078. Elddd Qontrol Ad; 9; ldpp,gg, lags. 49 Stat. 1570. 33 U.S.C.A. 701. Eldgd Cogtzol Apt,df_dugu§t gs, 1231. 50 Stat. 875. 33 U.S.C.A. 701. _Flgdd Control Ag; 9; m _2_8, ngfi. 52 Stat. 1215. 33 U.S.C.A. 701. Flggd Control Apt Qj_gugdst lg, lggl. 55 Stat. 638. 33 U.S.C.A. 701. E1229 Control A£1,Q£ Dgpembe; gg,,1ggg. 58 Stat. 887. 33 U.S.C.A. 701. El_Q_c_>_d gogtzol 5.9.1; pf Jpn; 99,, 134$. 62 Stat. 1171. 33 U.S.C.A. 701. Elddd Control Apt_g§,ddly,lfin lgég. 74 Stat. 480. 33 U.S.C.A. 709a. E192d Cogtgol Agtlg£,Adgd§tll§,,12§§. 82 Stat. 731. 33 U.S.C.A. 701. 00 P ' nfor io R Ce 'v n ount Mic ' an. Detroit: U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers, Detroit District, iarch 1968. Housing Act of 1949. Title I, Slum Clearance and Community Development and RedevelOpment. 63 Stat. 413. 42 U.S.C.A. 1414. Housing Act 2;,l9 5. Title III, Slum Clearance and Urban Renewal. 68 Stat. 622. 42 U.S.C.A. 1450. W and. 11m W A21 9.: LU ., Title XIII. National FlOOd Insurance. 82 Stat. 572. 42 U.S.C.A. 4001. 333 334 President's Water Resources Council. Ihg Eoligigg, Stggddrdg, Broceddr§§,ig thg Eopmdlatiod, Eydlddtign, and Bevieg,d§ Plans for Use ggd DevelOpmdnt pg;Wdtgglgnd13§lg;§d,Ldnd Besddrggs. Senate Document No. 97, 87th Cong., 2d sess. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1962. Public Law 875, September 30, 1950. 64 Stat. 1109. 42 U.S.C.A. 1855. Public Law 91-152. December 24, 1969. 83 Stat. 379. 42 U.S.C.A. 4001. Small EUSiflgSS m. 72 Stat. 384. 15 U.S.C.A. 6310 U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Appropriations. Subcommittee on Department of Agriculture. Egaringg before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, 92d Cong., lst sess. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1971. U.S. Congress. House. Committee on ApprOpriations. Subcommittee on Department of Agriculture and Related Agencies. Hggrlngs before a Sub- committee of the Committee on ApprOpriations, 90th Cong., lst sess. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967. U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Appropriations. Subcommittee on Department of the Interior and Related Agencies. Hearings before a Sub- committee of the Committee on ApprOpriations, Part 1, Department of Interior, 89th COng., 2d sess. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1966. U.S. Congress. House. Committee on ApprOpriations. Subcommittee on Departments of State, Justice, Commerce, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies. Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on ApprOpria- tions, Part 3, Department of Commerce, 90th Cong., lst. sess. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967. U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Appropriations. Subcommittee on Independent Offices and Department of Housing and Urban Development. Hearlngs before a Subcommittee of the Committee on ApprOpriations, Part 2, 90th Cong., lst sess. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967. U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Banking and Currency. Hgtiongl Flood lnsurdgge dc; p§,l96 . House Rept. No. 786 to Accompany S. 1985, 90th Cong., lst sess. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, October 16, 1967. U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Banking and Currency. Report gi,th§ gpmmippdg,dn,fignklng and ngrgngx. House Rept. No. 786 to Accompany S. 1885, 90th Cong., lst sess. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967. U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Flood Control. gomnghgngl g Elddd ___100ntr0 Plan and Tasks is}: We VO'r . Leases and Elmo Hells- Report to Accompany H.R. 10618, House Rept. No. 2353, 75th Cong., 3d sess. Wash- ington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, May 13, 1938. 335 U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Public Works. Insurgpce and Other Egggggm§,fdg,fiidgddial Agsistdngg Lg_£lood VictimsI Report from the Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelOpment to the President, Committee Print No. 43, 89th Cong., 2d sess. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1966. U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Public Works. §tudy,d; Compedgdpion ,gdd,AS§istdng§ f0; Egzgddg Affgctdd by Eggl,2r09grty Acouigitidn lg Fedezdl and,£gdgggllylAssigtgd,£;gggam§. Committee Print No. 31, 88th. Cong., 2d sess. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, December 22, 1964. U.S. Congress. House. Eidgl ngogt12d thg Federal Flood Indemnity Adminiggggtlgn. House Doc. No. 426, 85th Cong., 2d sess. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, July 28, 1958. U.S. Congress. House. Task Force on Federal Flood Control Policy. ,A Uglf; ed W £19m for W Flood Losgeg. House Doc. No. 465, 89th Cong., 2d sess. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1966. U.S. Congress, Senate. Committee on Banking and Currency. ns r c i t er Pr r s or ' c’ As i o 00 V' t ms. A report from the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development to the President, Committee Print, 89th Cong., 2d sess. Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, September 1966. U.S. Congress. Senate. Speech by Senator William Proxmire on the Senate Floor. -89th Cong., lst sess., July 27, 1965. gongggggigndl_3egdgd, pp. S 18325 - 18333. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service. Opgn Space: lt§ Use EEG Prgsezvgtiod. Miscellaneous Publication No. 1121. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, November 1968. U.S. Department of the Army. Corps of Engineers. A Methodology f9; 00 P ’ Dev 0 e ’ e . Report by TRW Systems Group, Redondo Beach, California submitted to U.S. Army Engineer Institute for Water Resources, Alexandria, Virginia. Springfield, Virginia: Clear- inghouse for Scientific and Technical Information, December 1969. U.S. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers. "Survey Investigations and Report -- General Procedures." 1 e in I 2 - 2 - . Washington, D.C.: Office of the Chief of Engineers. October 12, 1964. U.S. Department of Commerce. Environmental Sciences Services Administration. Weather Bureau Office of Hydrology. r ro i the N t'o ’ve o o s W i rv'c . Washington, D.C.: Govern- ment Printing Office, 1970. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban DevelOpment. Federal Housing Admini- stration. s b o . Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, October 1966. 336 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban DevelOpment. Federal Housing Admini- Stration.' Housing and Home Finance Agency. F i no 't io r 10 re r r is' ion . FHA Publication No. 554. Wash- ington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, January 1963. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Secretary's Order No. 25, May 10, 1967. Xerox copy furnished by Maurice Rapkin, Federal Housing Administration, Detroit, Michigan, February 17, 1969. U.S. Department of Interior. Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. Outdoo; Re re tion G ts-‘n-A' - O o Recr ion - V t r Co se v t' u for m r‘ . Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, June 2, 1966. U.S. Federal Interagency Committee on Water Resources. Subcommittee on Evaluation Standards. 0 s ' es 0 Econo ' An ‘ is of ’ r Bgsld Projgctg. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, May 1958. U.S. Housing and Home Finance Agency. a este an S bdivision R 'u ti ns. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, Reprint, 1960. U.S. President. Executive Order No. 11296. Egdergl Registrar, Vol. 31, No. 155, August 11, 1966, pp. 1063 and 10664. U.S. Small Business Administration. " u usi ss dmi 'str t'on - What lt lg, What It 22E . Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, March 1968. Water Resources Council. Hydrology Committee. n for so i u Fo D rmin'n F ood F o Fre ci Washington, D.C.: Water Resources Council, 1025 Vermont Avenue, N.W. December 1967. Water Resou ces ev onm nt in i'c ' - 967. Chicago; U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers, North Central Division, January 1967. W missiles .and M We _Act if LL11? 8’6 A. 1.__95 . 68 Stat. 666. 16 U.S.C.A. 1001. state Connecticut State of Connecticut. t e of C ti t. State of Connecticut. Public Act No. 435 of 1963. r t tutes of W. Title 25, Chapter 474, Sec. 25-4a (1963 supp.). e o c o ' ’ . 146 Conn. 650. 153 A.2d 822 (1959). 337 Indiana State of Indiana. A ' n t ut . State of Indiana. 31093.22EL291.A£1.22 l9 5. As amended with particular reference to the Flood ggntgdl,gdt,d§ l96l. Annotgted lndland Statdtgg 27-1101. Iowa State of Iowa. W- State of Iowa. Acts of 1949 (53 G.A.), ch. 203, Sec. 18, as amended with particular reference to Acts of 1965 (61 G.A.), ch. 373, Sec. 3. Kentucky Commonwealth of Kentucky. Kentdgky Acts, 195,. Commonwealth of Kentucky. Kentuggy ngjggd §tatnte§, 1948, Massachusetts Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Agnotdted ngg pf Mgssgghdsgtts. Michigan Flood Plain Information Files. Michigan Water Resources Commission. Lansing, August 31, 1971. State of Michigan. Act No. 62. Public Acts of 1943. Laws Addotgtgd Sections 125.251 - 125.258. State of Michigan. Act No. 167. Public Acts of 1968. i' " om ngs Annotdtgd 323.1. State of Michigan. Act No. 184. Public Acts of 1963. J c iv n '1 ngg Agnotgtgd 281.131. State of Michigan. Act No. 215. Public Acts of 1895. i' '. omb' e W 97.1- State of Michigan. Act No. 236. Public Acts of 1962. M cli Com i ws 30.309. State of Michigan. Act No. 245. Public Acts of 1929. As amended by Act 167. Public Acts of 1968. Mlchiggn Compilgd deg Annotdtgd 323.1. State of Michigan. Act No. 278. Public Acts of 1952. Mithiggn_ggmpiled W 281.601- 338 State of Michigan. Act No. 344. Public Acts of 1945. 4: i: c W 125.71- State of Michigan. Qity, Villaga and Magi;lpal,Flandlng mealaadgalAct. Act No. 285. Public Acts of 1931. v' -, ' 1 125.31. State of Michigan. City §£§.Kill£8§ Zggigg Act. Act No. 207. Public Acts of 1921. Mlghlgan gompilad Lays Annotated 125.581. State of Michigan. Civil Dafansa At . Act No. 159. Public Acts of 1953. M'chi o. i e n ot 30.222. State of Michigan. Constitutlon 9f 1963. State of Michigan. din ty,3_;al Zodiag Att. Act No. 183. Public Acts of 1943. thhi gag QQmDi lad Law § Annotatad 125.201. State of Michigan. Department of Conservation. Recreation Resource Planning Division. filthlgaa thdoor Recreation Plat. Lansing: Department of Conservation, Loose Leaf Bound, March 1, 1967. State of Michigan. Department of Conservation. Recreation Resource Planning Division. {M chlgan'a Regraatlo a 2322293 A CQZIQEt Statement WWW- Lansine: Department of Conservation, September 1966. State of Michigan. Local Drain Code of 1950. Act No. 40. Public Acts of 1956. Mighlgaa ggmpilad Lafls Aadgtatad 280. State of Michigan. L_£al Bl_a;,maaagemant Act. Act No. 253. Public Acts of 1964. W 323. 301. State of Michigan. Mappad lmpr 91 eaant§,Aat. Act No. 222. Public Acts of 1943. WWW 125. 51. State of Michigan. HBikEfll.EiI§£.A£I.2_.l9 29. Act No. 231. Public Acts of 1970. MW 281 761. State of Michigan. Rules and Regulations of the Water Resources Commission. Department of Natural Resources. November 30, 1967. State of Michigan. Rules and Regulations of the Water Resources Commission. Department of Natural Resources. "Flood Plain Control." January 21, 1970. State of Michigan. Shoreland Protection and Management Act of 1970. Act No. 245. Public Acts of 1970. 4' ' m v not t 281.631. State of Michigan; fiflil.922fi22131i2fl.21§££1£2.Lflflmgi l93 . Act No. 297. Public Acts of 1937. Mi ' Com i ws 0 t d 282.1. State of Michigan. .§L§L§.HQH§128.LaHo Act No. 167. Public Acts of 1917. W 125 401. 339 State of Michigan. W M Adt 91 196 . Act No. 288. Public Acts of 1967. Flatigan go mpllgd Lav I§ Annotatad 560. State of Michigan. ,Igfiaahlpfluialmdm Qodatpdgtlon A t. Act No. 185. Public Acts of 1943. Eggtlgaa Cpmplled Laws Annotated 125.351. State of Michigan. Togaship Elaanlag Commission Agt. Act No. 168. Public Acts of 1959. Highlgaa Campilad Laws Anaotated 125.321. State of Michigan, Township Rural Zoning Act. Act No. 184. Public Acts of 1943. W 125 271- State of Michigan. Water Resources Commission. First Annual Report, l950. First Annual Report to the Governor and Legislature. Lansing: Michigan Water Resources Commission, n.d. State of Michigan. Water Resources Commission. Flood Plain Information Files. Lansing: Michigan Water Resources Commission, August 31, 1971. New Jersey State of New Jersey. i r s . State of New Jersey. Flood Plaln Delineation Act a; 1962. Revised Statdtes Anno Ea; Ed. New York State of New York. w N w o 956. State of New York. I "n ' onso i ate we of N w or:. Pennsylvania Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. C i t t o e . Washington State of Washington. *v' 0d 0 J " t . State of Washington. Administration of State Flood Control Zones by the Department of Water Resources. Pursuant to and Under the Authority of Chapter 86.16, Beylaad Qoda 9t Washingt a. Department of Water Resources Docket No. 68-9. February 27, 1969. Wisconsin State of Wisconsin. 0 F 00 1 in o ‘n O ce fo Cit or Vi Usi En ee i for t o i ce 1 o 8. Madison: Division of Resource DevelOpment, Department of Natural Resources, December 1, 1967. 34) State of Wisconsin. Water Resourgea Apt,p§ 1935. Lays of Wisconsin, 1965. Wisgonsip's Flgoa Plain Management Epogram. Madison: Division of Resource DevelOpment, Department of Natural Resources, State of Wisconsin, November 1967. State of Wisconsin. Wisconsin's Statutes. Local City of Detroit, Ordinance No. 784-F. Chapter N0. 266, Section 2(a) and 2(b), April 15, 1963. City of Farmington. Ordinance No. C-l80-63, Amending Section 5.48 of Article III, Chapter 39 of Title V of the Coda pi the City,p§ F min ton, May 6, 1963. City of Grand Ledge. Zoning Ordinance No. 156. Article XIII, FP Flood Plain Districts, Sections 1300-1303, AdOpted November 14, 1966. City of Lansing. Improving the Qualitv of Urban Life: First Year Action Plan. Lansing, Michigan: City Demonstration Agency, Model Cities Program, April, 1970. City of Lansing, Ordinance No. 161, Amending Tha Coda of Ordinances of the City pf Lansing, adding new Article V, Sections 36-59 to 36-67, July 1, 1968. City of Lansing, si n'form Bu'l in 0d . February 24, 1971. City of Lansing. Red Cedar Basin Park PrOposal. Lansing: Lansing Planning Board, July, 1966. City of Lansing. Planning Department. Flood Plain Information Files provided by Mr. James Church, Planning Department, Personal Interview, Lansing City Hall, October, 1968. City of Lansing. Subaiviaion Ragulations. Ordinance No. 156, Chapter 77 of the Coda at the City Qt Lagging, Adopted March 18, 1968. City of Lansing. Cgmpragansive MastardElap_Lap§iag_ang_Enxiggn§. Prepared by Ladislas Segoe and Associates, City Planning Consultants, Cincinnati, Ohio. Adopted by City Planning Board, Lansing, Michigan, December 3, 1959. City of Livonia. Ordinance No. 636, Amending Ordinance No. 543, The City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance, Adding Article XXVIII, Sections 28.01 to 28.04, August 17, 1967. City of Southfield. Damptpg ang Cog; Removal Ordinance. Ordinance No. VIII, Section II.c.(2), February 9, 1959. City of Southfield. Ordinance No. 718, Subsection (1) of Section 5.49. Amending the Coda Q: the City 0; Coathtielg, Adding Subsection (7) to Section 5 of Article 2, Chapter 45, Title V, and Adding Section 5.49, August 31, 1970. 341 City of Southfield. Subdivision Regulations Ordinance. An Ordinanca for tha Elatting of Land, Article V, Section 521, Enacted September 30, 1968. Clinton Township, Macomb County. Zoning Ordinana . Article XV, FP Flood Plain Districts, Sections 1500-1503. Date adopted not determined. Xerox c0py obtained from Flood Plain Information Files, Michigan Water Resources Commission, Lansing, Michigan, August 31, 1971. Meridian Charter Township, Ingham County. Zoning Ordinapce. Ordinance No. 30, Sections 4.14 to 4.14.6, as amended through July 1967. Redford Township, Wayne County. Zoning Ordinance No. 152, Section 3.23, Date adopted not determined. Xerox c0py obtained from Flood Plain Infor— mation Files, Michigan Water Resources Commission, Lansing, Michigan, August 31, 1971. Shelby Township, Macomb County. Ordinance No. 1.11 to amend Shelby Township Zonipg Ordinap a. Adopted September 21, 1965, published Ctica Santinal, September 30, 1965. Sterling Township, Macomb County. Sterling Township Zoning Ordinanca. Article XV, FP Flood Plain District, Sections 15.00 - 15.03. Adopted November 4, 1965. Xerox c0py obtained from Flood Plain Information Files, Michigan Water Resources Commission, Lansing, Michigan, August 31, 1971. Township of Farmington, Oakland. Township of Farmington Land Fill Ordinanae, Ordinance No. 33, Adopted October 14, 1963. ' Books American Insurance Association. National Buildipg Coda. 1967 edition. New York: American Insurance Association. American Society of Planning Officials. M e tat Subdivision Control Law. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, March, 1947. Bair, Fred H., Jr. and Bartley Ernest R. h t f 10 e n ce pita Commentapy. 3rd edition. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials 1966. Barlowe, Raleigh. Lapg Besoarca annomica. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc. 1958. Barrows, Harold Kilbirth. o s heir drolo Control. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1948. Bassett, Edward M. Iha Maste; Elap. New York: The Russell Sage Foundation, 1938. Bassett, Edward M. Zoning -- The Laws, Administration, apd Coart Daciaions the First Twenty Yearg. New York: The Russell Sage Foundation, 1936. 342 Beuscher, Jacob Henry. Us ntro - e .d M t ials. 3rd edition. Madison, Wisconsin: The College Printing and Typing Company, 1964. Building Officials Conference of America. Basic Building Code. 1970 edition. Chicago: Building Officials Conference of America, Inc. Building Officials Conferences of America, Inc. Basic Builaing Coda. 1950 edition. New York: C.J. O'Brien, Inc. Burton, Ian; Kates, Robert W.; and Snead, Robert E. The Hum Eco o of Co stal F100 H z r in 1e 10 olis. Department of Geography Research Paper No. 15, University of Chicago, Chicago: University of Chicago, 1969. Chow, Ven Te, ed. dbook of plied Hi rolo : A Commandiam of Water Resour e Te h o o . 1 Vol. 29 Sections. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1964. Deines, Vernon Phillip. nve ti tion of eloc tion As a t of Elood Contra; Planning. Thesis for Master Degree in Regional Planning, Kansas State University, 1962. Reprinted as Special Report No. 50, Engineering Experiment Station. Manhattan: Kansas State University, December 28, 1964. Due, John F. Govarnment Finance-An Economic Analysis. Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1963. Goodman, William I. and Freund, Eric C., eds. Principlas apg Practicas af rb l nin-. Washington, D.C.: International City Managers' Associa- tion. 1961. Guiding Lapd Supdiviaion: Papt I Procadure . Lansing, Michigan: Tri- County Regional Planning Commission, 535 N. Clippert St. November, 1961. Haveman, Robert H. Water Easouzcas Investment apg the Publia Intezes : Ap Apalyaia of Fegaral Eypanditpraa in lap Soatharp §tatas. Nashville, Tennessee: Vanderbilt University Press, 1965. Hoyt, William Glenn and Langbein, Walter B. Floods. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1955. International Conference of Building Officials. 'f r ui ' o . 1971 edition. Pasadena, California: International Conference of Building Officials. Joint Committee of the American Society of Civil Engineers and the Water Pollution Control Federation. Dasign apd Construction of Sanitary apa Storm Cawera. ASCE Manuals of Engineering Practice No. 37 or WPCF Manual of Practice No. 9. New York: American Society of Civil Engineers, 1960. Kates, Robert William. r C oi ti ' 00 ° m . Department of Geography Research Paper No. 78, Unflersity of Chicago. Chicago: Uniersity of Chicago, 1962. 343 LeOpold, Luna Bergere; Wolman, M. Gordon; and Miller, John P. Plyyial Pro es s Geo o o o . San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Company, 1964. ‘ LeOpold, Luna Bergere and Maddock, Thomas. he 00 C t Colt 0 rs ; ' s i M , . New York: Ronald Press, 1954. Little, Charles E. Challanga_gi_tha_Land: Opan Cpace Ppesarvation At tha oc ve . New York: Pergamon Press, Inc., 1969. Netzer, Dick. Economics of tha PrOperty Tax. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institute, 1966. Murphy, Francis C. ' o - e o n . Department of Geography Research Paper No. 56. University of Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago 1958. Papers Prasantad at the Nipth Midyestapd States Flood Coatrol Capfazence tin to o ic l d -a A ct of W ter M e ment. E. Lansing, Mich.: Kellogg Center of Continuing Education and the Michigan Water Resources Commission, June 15-17, 1954. Peterson, Elmer Theodore. Pig Dam anlishaess; e P ob em of Co 0 “ r , . Introduction by Paul B. Sears. New York: Devin-Adair, 1954. Regional Buildings Codes. Detroit: MetrOpolitan Fund, Inc., 1966. Baatatamant of tha Law at Pyapayty. Vol. V. St. Paul: American Law Institute Publishers, 1944. Sheaffer, John Richard. Eload Pzaoflpg: Ag Elemapt in a Flaad Damaga e 'o o . Department of Geography Research Paper No. 65, University of Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1960. Sheaffer, John Richard. Intzaddctlon ta Flood Proofing. Chicago: Center for Urban Studies, April, 1967. Shih, Yang-Ch'eng. Amazlcaa Wata; Pagodtaes Administyation. 2 Vols. (New York: Bookman Associates, 1956). Southern Building Code Congress. er u' 'n C . 1957- 1958 edition. Birmingham, Alabama: Southern Building Congress. Tiffany, Herbert Thorndike. w e ro . Vol. 3. Chicago: Callahan and Company, 1939. White, Gilbert Fowler; Calef, Wesley C.; Hudson, James W.; Mayer, Harold M.; Sheaffer, John R.‘ and Volk, Donald J. n n rb 0 WW Department of Geography Research Paper No. 57, University of Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1958. 344 White, Gilbert Fowler. ‘oic of A ’ust ent o F oods. Department of Geography Research Paper No. 93, University of Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1964. White, Gilbert Fowler. Human Adjustment to Floods - A Geographical Approaca to F ood P ob s i e U ' d S t s. Ph.D. Dissertation. Published as Research Paper No. 29, Department of Geography, University of Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1945. White, Gilbert Fowler. Papars on Flood Ppoblems. Department of Geography Research Paper No. 70, University of Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1961. Wilson, James Q. Urbap Renewal: The Record and the Controversy. Cambridge, Mass.: The M.I.T. Press, 1966. Papapts American Society of Civil Engineers. "Flood-Control Methods: Their Physical and Economic Limitations." Report of the Committee on Flood Control Hydraulics Division. Ptoaaedings, Vol. 66, No. 2. Lancaster, Pa.: American Society of Civil Engineers, February 1940. American Society of Planning Officials. Elood Plain Regdlatlons. Planning Advisory Service. Information Report No. 53. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, August 1953. Blair Associates. Plood Insuranaa apd Flood-Plain Zoning. A report to the Legislative Research Commission of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Providence, R.I.: Blair Associates, Seven Dyer Street, September 1957. Dola, Steve. F ood Dam evi t'on i w rs . Water Resources Circular No. 3. State of New Jersey: Department of Conservation and Economic DevelOpment, Division of Water Policy and Supply, 1961. Dunham, Allison. Pyasarvatlaa af Cpep Spaca Araa : A Stady of tha Noa- Governmental Bole. Publication No. 1014. Chicago: Welfare Council of MetrOpolitan Chicago. 123 W. Madison St. August, 1966. Luxford, R.F. and Smith, Walton R. be v tions of D a t o s b ‘ 'n s I es F oods ome Cons tio P ec u ’on . Forest Products Laboratory Report No. 2095. Madison, Eisc.: U.S. Forest Service Forest Products Laboratory, October, 1957. Manuel, Allen D. oc Bu' i R ions. Prepared for National Commission on Urban Problems. Research Report No. 6. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1968. {oore, Jerrold A. Plaaalpg for Plood Damaga Preyantioa. Engineering Experiment Station Special Report No. 35. Georgia Institute of Tech- nology. Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Technology. Reproduced under sponsorship of the Tennessee Valley Authority, n.d. (p0st, 1958). 345 National Academy of Sciences and National Research Council. Alternatives i ‘ r M en . Washington, D.C.: 1966. Oster, Robert M. "Municipal Housing Codes in the Courts." New York: American Council to Improve Our Neighborhoods, Inc. (A.C.T.I.O.N.), Sept., 1956. Pickard, Jerome P. Ch ' Urban L ses as Affecte b‘ T t'on -- A Conference Summary Report. Research Monograph No. 6. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute, 1962. Pickard, Jerome P. Taxation_and Lapd Use in Metropolitan apd Urbap America -- A Pppgrass Repar . Research Monograph No. 12. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute, 1966. Plimpton, Cakes A. Conservation Easements. Washington, D.C.: The Nature Conservancy, 1522 K Street, n.d., circa 1965. Rothman, Leda. e r 1 s n e1 t b m . Washington, D.C.: The Nature Conservancy, 1522 K Street, N.W., December, 1964. Summapy of Proaaadipg . Third Annual Meeting on Interstate Conference on Water Problems in Chicago: Council of State Governments, December 5-6 , 1960 9 Task Force on Effect of Urban DevelOpment on Flood Discharges, Committee on Flood Control, "Effect of Urban DevelOpment on Flood Discharges - Current Knowledge and Future Needs." Progress Report in dodppal of H dr ulics Div sion, Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers. V01. 95, No. 1, 287-309. Ann Arbor, Mich.: American Society of Civil Engineers, January, 1969. U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. Bdildipg Codaa, A oar I o , t R f r . Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, January, 1966. U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. Ro th Stata in Strangthaning tha onpayty Iax. V01. 1. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, June 1, 1963. Wertheimer, Ralph B. 00 P ’ Z i 055' ’ it' s a ' *. Sacramento, California: California State Planning Board, June 1942. Whyte, William H., Jr. Cataring Cpep Cpaca f0; Cpbap Amapiaa: on- aetyati n Eaaemapt . Technical Bulletin No. 35. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute, 1959. Wiitala, S.W. and Ash, Arlington D. 00 t i C me " i n. Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-59. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Geological Survey, 1962. Williams, Norman, Jr. Lapd Acgulsitioa tor Outdoor Pacraatioa - halyais Of 919 t PrOb o OOROROROCO StUdy Report NO. 16. VJaShington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1962. 346 Zornig, R.F. and Sherwood, G.E. "Wood Structures Survive Hurricane Camille's Winds." U.S. Forest Service Research Paper No. FPL-123. Madison, Wisc.: Forest Products Laboratory, October 1968. A i les P are Akin, Wallace E. and Dougal, Merwin D. "Flood-Plain Regulation in Iowa." Papaps 0p Flood Ptablema. Edited by Gilbert Fowler White. Department of Geography Research Paper No. 70, University of Chicago, Chicago: University of Chicago, 1961. ’ Anderson, L.D. and Smith, Walton R. "Houses Can Resist Hurricanes." U.S. Forest Service Research Paper FPL 33. Madison, Wisconsin: Forest Products Laboratory, August 1965. Beuchert, Edward L. "A Legal View of the Flood Plain." Submitted as third year written work for Seminar on Land Use Planning, LLB Candidate, Harvard Law School. Reproduced by the Tennessee Valley Authority, limited distribution, 1961. Beuscher, Jacob Henry. "The Land Use Plan." Plapplng;lgdd. Selected Papers from the National Planning Congress, Washington D.C., May 18-22, 1958. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, 1958. Chow Ven Te. "Runoff." Section 14 of Handbook of Appliad Hydyalogy -,A Com en " of ‘ o c e hno o . Edited by Ven Te Chow. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 1964. Dalrymple, Tate. "Flood Characteristics and Flow Determinations." Part I of "Hydrology of Flood Control." Section 25 of Handbook 0; Appliad HVdpolagy: A Coapandium of Wata; Raaodpaea Ieahnology. Edited by Ven Te Chow. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 1964. Dalrymple, Tate. "Flood-frequency Analysis.“ A o H o o , pt. 3, Floodflow Techniques. U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Papar l553-A. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1960. Davis, Otto A. and Whinston, Andrew B. "The Economics of Urban Renewal." Ugbap Raneyal: Th e or the Co rover . Edited by James Q. Wilson. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1966. Dunham, Allison. "Flood Control Via the Police Power." Univeraity of Pgaapaguggggylgngggguag,‘Vol. 107, No. 8 (June 1959), 1098-1132. Eddy, Gerald E., Director of Conservation, and Chairman, Water Resources Commission, State of Michigan. "Basic Problems of Water Management in Michigan." e ' o ' t 1' w star 8 00 f . E. Lansing: Michigan Water Resources Commission, 1954. Foster, H. Alden. "Theoretical Frequency Curves." Iyansaationa of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 87, Paper No. 1532, 142-173. New'York: American Society of Civil Engineers, 1924. 347 Fox, Irving K. "National Water Resources Policy Issues." ' n r rv Ppoblema, Vol. 22, No. 3. Durham, N.C.: Duke University School of Law, 1957. Green, Allison, State Treasurer, Department of Treasury, State of Michigan. "State Legislature Revises Plat Act." u' , Vol. XI, No. 9 (September 1967). Ann Arbor: Michigan Municipal League. Hall, Otto H., Engineering and Architectural Section, Michigan Department of Conservation. "Some Engineering Aspects of Headwater Storage." Proceedings of the Ninth Midwestern Flood Control Conference. E. Lansing: Iiichigan Water Resources Commission, 1954. Herbert, Paul A., Conservation Division, Michigan State College. "Land Management as a Factor in Michigan Water Conservation." ngaaadlpga_ai the Ninth Midwestern States Flood Control Conference. E. Lansing: Michigan Water Resources Commission, 1954. Hofman, Dirk C., Supervising Engineer, Division of Water Policy and Supply, Department of Conservation and Economic DevelOpment, State of New Jersey. "New Jersey's Flood Plain Management Program Implementation in the Raritan River Basin." Paper presented at National Meeting on Water Resources Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana, February 4, 1969. ! James L. Douglas. conom' si f tern tive F ood Con r01 1 . Research Report No. 16. Lexington, Ky.: University of Kentucky Water Resources Research Institute, 1968. Krutilla, John V. "An Economic Approach to Coping with Flood Damage." Water BRSQHE§§§ Resaapah, Vol. 2, No. 2, (Second Quarter 1966), 183-190. {unreuther, Howard and Shaeffer, John R. "An Economically Meaningful and Workable System for Calculating Flood Insurance Rates, Vat R o c a Research. Vol. 6, No. 2 (April, 1970), 659-667. Lee, James M., Supervisor, Flood Plain Shoreland Iianagement Program, Division of Resource Development, Department of Natural Resources, State of Wis- consin. "The Answers to Your Questions About Flood Plain IMana ement." Xerox copy of an article not identified by publication source or date. Nauman, A.C., Colonel, District Engineer, Detroit District, Corps of Engineers. "Flood Control in the Detroit District." onceadlpga of the Nlpth M'd- wester St t s 00 o tro Co f n . E. Lansing: Michigan Water Resources Commission, 1954. Pelletier, Charles J., Hydraulic Engineer, Connecticut Water Resources Commission. "Connecticut's Program for EstablishingStream Encroachment Limits.” Paper presented before Thirty-Third Meeting Northeastern Re- sources Committee. Berlin, Conn., September 13, 1960. Perry, Joseph I. "Use of Zoning Principles in Flood Plain Regulations." Reprinted in dodppal of the Eydpadliaa Plylsion of the American Society of Civil Engineers. Vol. 82, No. HY2, Paper 957, April, 1956. 348 Sogg, Wilton S. and Wertheimer, Warren. "Legal and Governmental Issues in Urban Renewal." flrpan Renewal: The Record gnd the Controversv. Edited by James Q. Wilson. Cambridge: The M.I.T. Press, 1966. Sussna, Stephen. "Open Space Controls." Kentucky State Bar Journal, Vol. 33, No. 4 (October, 1969), 42-48; reprinted from New Jersey Law Journal, Whipple, William, Jr. "Optimizing Investment in Flood Control and Flood Plain Zoning." Water Resources Research, Vol. 5, No. 4 (August, 1969), 761-766. Unpublished e ers Letter from Walter Bergstrom, Engineer, Operations Section, Division of Planning and Development, Department of Water Resources, State of Washington, September 16, 1969. Letter from Robert F. Jackson, Chief, Division of Water, tate of Indiana, October 29, 1969. Letter from John P. hing, Commissioner, Department of Public Works, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, September 16, 1969. Letter from Assistant Attorney General Carl R. Mapel, Jr., Water and Power Resources Board, Department of Forests and Waters, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, October 30, 1969. Letter from Robert A. McCabe, Hydraulic Engineer Water Management, Water Resources Commission, State of Connecticut, November 5, 1969. Letter from Othie R. CcMurray, Director, Iowa Natural Resources Council September 15, 1969. Letter from Maurice Rapkin, Chief, Flood Plain Management Services, Detroit District, Corps of Engineers, Department of the Army to Bernard Giampetroni, Director, iacomb County Planning Commission, Mt. Clemens, Michigan, July 26, 1971. Copy available from Flood Plain Information Files, Michigan Water Resources Commission, Lansing, Michigan. Letter from Maurice Rapkin, Chief, Flood Plain Management Services, Detroit District, Corps of Engineers, Department of the Army to William Rowden, Assistant Director, Tri-County Regional Planning Commission, Lansing, Michigan, July 26, 1971. Copy available from Flood Plain Information Files, Michigan Water Resources Commission, Lansing, Michigan. Letter from Maurice Rapkin, Chief, Flood Plain Management Services, Detroit District, Corps of Engineers, Department of the Army to George ScrUbb, Director, Oakland County Planning Commission, Pontiac, Michigan, July 26, 1971. Cepy available from Flood Plain Information Files, Michigan Water Resource Commission, Lansing, Michigan. 349 Letter from George R. Shanklin, Director and Chief Engineer, Division of Water Policy and Supply, Department of Conservation and Economic DevelOp- ment, State of New Jersey, November 12, 1969. Letter from Clinton E. Watson, Resource Planner, Water Resources Commission, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, September 16, 1969. Letter from Guenther K. Weidle, Head City Planner, Current Plan Division, City of Detroit, February 26, 1969. Person Int views Abbott, Robert, Real Estate Loan Officer, Farmer's Home Administration, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Personal Interview, E. Lansing, Michigan, February 24, 1969. Argiroff, Carl, Chief, Flood Plain Management Services, U.S. Army Engineer District, Detroit Corps of Engineers. Personal Interview, Detroit, Michigan, February 18, 1969. Bent, Paul C., Assistant District Chief, Water Resources Division, United States Geological Survey. Personal Interview, February 25, 1969. Church, James E., Planner, City of Lansing Planning Department. Personal Interviews, Lansing, Michigan, October 1968. Dersch, Eckhart, Assistant Secretary, State Soil Conservation Committee. Personal Interview, E. Lansing, Michigan, November 1, 1971. Rapkin, Maurice, Zone Site Engineering Advisor, Federal Housing Administration, Detroit, Michigan. Personal Interview, Detroit, Michigan, February 17, 1969. Strong, George M., Supervisory Loan Officer, Financial Assistance Division, Small Business Administration, Detroit Michigan. Personal Interview, Detroit Michigan, February 17, 1969. Witte, Lawrence, Chief, Flood Control Unit, Michigan Water Resources Commission. Personal Interview, Lansing, Michigan, January 29, 1969. Othg; List of Urban laces 'ith fo matio A out 100 rob ems i Ii 1' . January, 1967. Xerox c0py obtained from Carl Argiroff, Chief, Flood Plain Management Services, U.S. Army Engineer District, Detroit Corps of Engineers. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIILIEIIIIIIIIIILIIIIIIIIIIIFS 479