|
Cities, states try new ways to live with flood plains By Sara Shipley Copyright 2003 St. Louis Post-Dispatch 07/31/2003
GOING WITH THE FLOW: Sam Levine, 14, of Chesterfield, was practicing his drives at the Gateway Golf Center along North Outer Forty Road in Chesterfield. The golf center is behind the Monarch Levee.
(Teak Phillips/P-D)
|  |
From Chesterfield to Hazelwood to St. Peters, more than 18,000 acres of river bottom land have been developed or walled off by urban levees.
Still, the St. Louis area has more than 75,000 acres of flood plain untouched by building plans.
Conservationists hope that Missouri will follow a growing number of states and regions that are taking steps to limit flood plain development and move away from reliance on levees for flood protection.
But the confluence of economics, geography and Missouri politics promises an uphill battle for those who would like to see the remaining land left in a natural state. Without substantial changes on the federal, state or local levels, it's likely that large tracts of this land will be developed.
Federal regulations allow development to consume most of the flood plain. And while the Federal Emergency Management Agency promotes buyouts - moving repeatedly flooded buildings from the flood plain - other federal programs promote flood plain development. Levee construction, for example, is subsidized up to 65 percent by the Army Corps of Engineers.
A task force appointed by the Clinton White House to assess the Flood of 1993 recommended many changes, such as federal oversight of levees. But many of the recommendations were dismissed as too politically difficult.
RELATED LINKS:
Full series in our special report
Flood timeline, with links to archival photos and stories
<LI><A HREF="/stltoday/news/special/flood93.nsf/C4CCE258128EB3628625676F001EE75C#Graphics" CLASS="related">Graphics: How a levee works, riverfront development and more</A>
<LI><A HREF="/stltoday/news/special/flood93.nsf/C4CCE258128EB3628625676F001EE75C#ArchivalVideo" CLASS="related">Archival video, courtesy KTVI Fox 2</A>
<LI><A HREF="/stltoday/news/special/flood93.nsf/C4CCE258128EB3628625676F001EE75C#PhotoGalleries" CLASS="related">Photo galleries from the '93 flood (including readers' photos)</A>
<LI><A HREF="/stltoday/news/special/flood93.nsf/C4CCE258128EB3628625676F001EE75C#Outsidesources" CLASS="related">Related links to outside sources</A>
<LI><A HREF="http://www.stltoday.com/current" CLASS="related">Discuss the series in our forum</A>
</td><td bgcolor="ffffff" class="story"> </td></tr><tr></tr></table>]
Conflicting federal policies give states and local communities leeway over flood plain management. Illinois has flood plain development restrictions, but Missouri has no statewide flood plain rules of its own. Individual cities and counties in Missouri can make their own decisions without fully accounting for any increased flooding it might cause their neighbors.
The Missouri Legislature, historically dominated by rural interests, has avoided enacting state restrictions on flood plain development. About 25 other states have their own rules.
Levee districts have opposed additional regulation, on the grounds that federal standards contained in the National Flood Insurance Program are good enough.
David Human, an attorney for several major suburban levee districts in St. Louis County, testified against a bill that would have created flood plain development rules in Missouri.
"Frankly, I think it sets up a needless bureaucracy, and it's a waste of taxpayer's money," Human said.
The bill was backed by the Great Rivers Habitat Alliance, a St. Louis-based conservation group that aims to block flood plain development. Executive director Wayne Freeman hasn't given up hope. He and others plan to push again next year in the Missouri Legislature for statewide regulations similar to those used in other states.
Illinois, for example, is 10 times stricter than the federal minimum in defining the part of the flood plain where construction is allowed.
Creating new regulations in Missouri will be a tough sell, said Tim Fischesser, executive director of the St. Louis County Municipal League, which represents most of the county's 91 municipalities.
Fischesser said that development of the St. Louis County flood plains is a "foregone conclusion" at this stage.
This type of growth continues to spread farther from the urban center, creating new highways, sewers and water lines at the expense of older ones, Fischesser said.
"We just bump along and make decisions in a piecemeal fashion," he said. "There really is no cohesive vision, or even a reasonable study of what the costs and benefits are."
Fischesser said that flood plains should be included in a new land-use model being created for the East-West Gateway Coordinating Council, the St. Louis region's planning body. The model will show how different land-use choices would affect the region over the long haul.
"From a land-use point of view, we have to start considering these things as a region if we want to be a competitive region and a competitive state," he said.
Historically, Missourians have been more likely to see the region's rivers as well-trained workhorses than as wild, untamable things that should be left alone.
The upper Mississippi, Illinois and Missouri rivers, which converge at St. Louis, together drain 714,000 square miles in 13 states. The rivers have long given the St. Louis region a natural advantage for commerce, transportation and agriculture.
Now many developers see the river's wide, flat flood plains as land ripe for development. Critics say building on that ground will damage the environment, increase flood risk and create suburban sprawl.
National flood plain experts say it isn't an either-or choice between jobs and the environment.
The St. Louis region can manage its flood plains for economic growth, environmental health and reduced flood risks, said Larry Larson, executive director of the Association of State Floodplain Managers.
St. Louis could follow the lead of Denver, Charlotte, N.C., and suburban Chicago, all fast-growing areas that have some of the strictest flood plain regulations in the nation.
"If you only do the minimum, you're going to have increasing problems," Larson said.
Cities try new ways to manage flood plains
Changing strategy hasn't always been easy. When Charlotte/Mecklenberg County, N.C., made it harder to build near rivers, one homeowner said it amounted to "a condemnation of our land."
Yet Mecklenberg officials say the changes will save the community pain and suffering in the long run. The restrictions have been estimated to save $18 million in future flood damages in the area drained by just one river.
Mark Cramer, executive director of the Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition in Charlotte, said the regulations are flexible enough that they have not had any significant impact on the number of new houses built.
"Philosophically, we support the concept," Cramer said. "Over time, you would hope you'd have fewer and fewer flooding complaints."
In Wisconsin, the city of Milwaukee is building an integrated watershed management plan that includes returning concrete-lined streams to a more natural condition and discouraging new flood plain development.
David C. Fowler, senior project manager with the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewer District, said he is troubled by the explosion of new flood plain development in Missouri "because I've had to clean up the messes in my own state from what people did 50 or 60 years ago."
Larson sees such programs as part of a trend. Cities grew up along rivers because the waterways were needed for commerce and transport. Today, most homes and businesses don't need to be near the river, so flood plains can be preserved to protect their natural benefits, Larson said.
Undeveloped flood plains can be used for sports fields, trails and parks that can sustain occasional flooding with little serious damage. Open flood plains also provide wildlife habitat, store floodwater and filter out pollutants that would otherwise run downstream.
"We can create open space, we can create parks, and we can reduce flood damages, all at the same time," Larson said. "Let's not put development on our rivers and then go build our parks on the top of the hill. That doesn't make any sense."
Buyout money helps move flooded homes
Several communities in the St. Louis area have taken advantage of federal flood buyout money to move repeatedly flooded homes out of the flood plain. As a result, new parks or open space were created in St. Charles County, Lemay, Arnold, Grafton and Valmeyer after the Flood of 1993.
The Great Rivers Habitat Alliance wants to set aside 50,000 acres of St. Charles County flood plain for a new national wildlife refuge. Less than half of the land would be federally owned under the proposal; the rest would be privately owned land with conservation easements.
"We are conservationists with a vision that just makes sense," said Don C. Musick III, a St. Louis developer and board member of the group.
George Riedel, Missouri's state flood plain manager, said that Missouri communities could consider programs used elsewhere as a starting point, tailoring them to local needs and geography. Rural areas may not need as many restrictions, he said.
And the region at the confluence of the Missouri and Mississippi rivers already has federally imposed development limits. No more than 18 percent of the land may be developed, unless FEMA lifts its restriction.
David Conrad, a water resources specialist with the National Wildlife Federation and an expert on flood plains, said residents of St. Louis should carefully consider their options for managing the region's flood plains.
"St. Louis has the mother of all flood plains," Conrad said. "If ever there were a community that ought to truly understand what a flood plain is and what it represents, that should be St. Louis."
Here's a look at some alternative approaches to flood plain management and flood control being used around the country:
Finding the true value of flood plains
What are flood plains worth?
It's difficult to put a price tag on functions such as storing floodwater, filtering pollutants and providing open space and wildlife habitat, so the value of flood plains is often overlooked.
The National Academy of Sciences has several studies under way that could change the way the government calculates the value of flood plains. If that happens, more projects that protect flood plains could be authorized, and fewer projects that harm them could be built.
One study is looking at the value of aquatic ecosystems such as wetlands, flood plains and rivers. The study team will assess ways to quantify the services these ecosystems provide and how those values can be used to make better decisions for the environment.
Another study focuses specifically on the Principles & Guidelines, the cost-benefit formula used by the Army Corps of Engineers when planning projects such as levees.
The White House task force that studied the Flood of 1993 recommended that the 20-year-old guidelines be revised. Retired Corps of Engineers Gen. Gerry Galloway, who led the task force, said the guidelines are weighted too much toward economic benefits and not enough toward environmental protection.
The value of the ecosystem worldwide has been figured at $33 trillion a year, nearly twice the global gross national product, according to a study led by Robert Costanza of the University of Maryland and published in the journal Nature in 1997.
New York City found that it was much cheaper to protect the rivers feeding the city's water supply than to build a new water treatment plant.
Runoff from development was contaminating the city's reservoirs. Building a new water treatment plant would have cost $8 billion, according to John McShane, an environmental scientist with the Environmental Protection Agency's office of wetlands, oceans and watersheds.
Instead, the city and state worked together to create a watershed management plan to keep local streams clean for about $900 million, a fraction of the cost of artificial treatment.
"The point is, nature does all this stuff for free, so why are we destroying it?" McShane said. "We'll have to pay for it sooner or later."
Future conditions mapping
When tropical storms hit the Charlotte, N.C., area in 1995 and 1997, many people living outside official flood zones suffered damage to homes and property.
The county's 1970s-vintage flood plain maps were badly out of date, said William Tingle, manager of stormwater planning for Mecklenberg County, which includes Charlotte.
"We said hey, our maps aren't accurate. We should redo them, and if we do, let's do it right," he said.
Flood levels had increased over time because new construction and filling in the flood plain caused water to run off quicker and higher than before. Rather than redoing maps every few years, The county also created buffer zones around streams and widened the floodway, the part of the flood plain where development is tightly restricted.
Charlotte-Mecklenberg County became the first area in the country to have its "future conditions" noted on official flood plain maps published by FEMA. City and county officials approved the new maps in 2000.
Mike Grimm, chief of FEMA's community assistance branch, said future conditions mapping is being done in "quite a few cities," including Denver and Las Vegas. At least two-thirds of FEMA's maps are outdated nationwide, making it all the more important for local communities to plan for the future, he said.
"The key is long-term planning," Grimm said. "We would prefer to keep people away from the hazard."
"No Adverse Impact" approach
Illinois' Lake County strives to have new development cause as little increased flooding as possible.
The county is one of six in the Chicago area given authority to create independent countywide stormwater commissions after severe flooding in 1986 and '87. Situated north of Chicago along Lake Michigan, Lake County is growing quickly, and officials wanted to prevent flooding problems from growing along with the population.
The county adopted a strict watershed development ordinance in 1992. Watershed engineer Jason Obergfell said it aims not only to help people protect themselves from flooding, but also to prevent them from flooding their neighbors.
"If you don't regulate on a regional basis and look at the watershed effects, then you have the potential for everyone to pass the problem on downstream," Obergfell said.
Lake County's regulations include:
Compensatory flood storage. When someone fills in part of the flood plain, another area on the same lot must be excavated to create a low-lying area for floodwater to be stored. For every 1 cubic yard of fill, 1.2 cubic yards must be excavated at the same elevation.
Water detention on site. Any development that creates more than half an acre of new impervious surface, such as a parking lot or building, must store runoff water on site and release it slowly to a stream or drain. Also, the water must be filtered through a cleaning system or a natural wetland or pond before it's released.
Extra "freeboard." All new construction in the flood plain must be built 3 feet above the level of a 100-year flood. This extra height is called freeboard.
Many of these concepts are catching on nationwide. The Association for State Floodplain Managers promotes the idea of wise flood plain management under the banner of "No Adverse Impact."
"If you look at flood policy 50 years ago, there was the 'common enemy' doctrine - you could take whatever action you needed to protect yourself" against flooding, said Doug Plasencia, a flood plain consultant in Arizona who was chairman of the association during the 1993 flood.
At one time, that meant that someone could build a levee to protect himself without worrying about what impact that levee had on neighboring properties.
Now, courts see actions taken on one property that harm a neighboring as a unreasonable "taking," he said.
"What No Adverse Impact is suggesting is, communities need to come up with a common approach," Plasencia said. "Don't put your problems on another."
Reporter Sara Shipley:
E-mail: sshipley@post-dispatch.com
Phone: 314-340-8215
|
|
|
|
