|
|
|
IN THIS ISSUE |
|
|
|
FFY 2006
Pre-Disaster Mitigation
Competitive Grant Program Applications |
|
|
|
|
FEMA has just provided the states the FY06 Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program Grant Guidance and we anticipate it will be posted on FEMA's website shortly.
The FY06 PDM Grant Guidance indicates a due date of January 16, 2006, for the State's applications to be submitted to FEMA which will require sub-applicants (local governments, etc) to complete and submit their eGrants application to the state (EMD) no later than 5:00 pm December 15, 2005.
Please note, the release of the grant guidance does NOT indicate the start of the application period. The start of the federal application period is still pending. Until the application period is open, any costs associated with preparing an application or sub-application, such an engineering feasibility study or benefit-cost analysis, is NOT reimbursable if the grant is selected for award. Please keep this in mind as you decide what activities to undertake at the state and local level prior to the open application period.
FYO6 PDM Grant Guidance
FY06 Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program Grant Guidance - Overview (Adobe PDF)
FY06 Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program Grant (Adobe PDF)
One very positive note FEMA has stated that they will not be making any changes to the PDMc application which will allow us to use the state's FFY 05 PDMc application as a template to gather information and begin the application development process prior to the actual release of the FY 06 PDMc application.
Over the next month, we will work with FEMA to determine a strategy for providing PDM Program, eGrants system and BCA training necessary for development of eligible, complete, and competitive applications. Last year, 90% of the sub-applications from Region X States and Tribes were selected for award, compared to the national average of 50%. A contributing factor in this success was the close coordination we had with FEMA during the application development process. FEMA anticipates an increase in entities eligible for project grants and an increase in number of applications nationwide, so it will be especially important to continue and improve upon this relationship to ensure eligible projects will be competitive in the process.
For more information, please contact Marty Best, Mitigation Program Manager, at (253) 512-7073.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PLANNING NORTHWEST
FEATURED SPONSORS |
|
|
PLANNING NORTHWEST
VOLUME XVIII, ISSUE 6 |
|
|
|
STATEMENT OF THE AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION IN RESPONSE TO HURRICANE KATRINA AND RITA
September 24, 2005
Buffalo, New York
The Katrina Hurricane and Flood was the greatest urban and regional disaster in U.S. history. The disaster was soon made worse by Hurricane Rita. The rebuilding of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast will involve the largest and most complex planning effort in our lifetime. It will involve substantial analysis and public debate regarding trade-offs between idealistic goals and expediency. It will include some of the most difficult planning issues of our time – environmental justice, racial equity, restoration of natural systems, infrastructure repair, property acquisition and condemnation, environmental clean-up, cultural heritage preservation, hazard mitigation, economic development and urban redevelopment, all at a scale never before seen.
The planning profession must be highly visible as it collaborates with affected citizens and allied professions. Planners must use the latest planning techniques and ideas in order to improve both the intelligence of this complex rebuilding process and the sustainability of the Gulf Coast. Good planning must ensure that the multi-billion dollar rebuilding effort is accomplished as equitably, efficiently, democratically and humanely as possible.
Now is the time to help shape these immediate and long-term planning processes, because they will be affected by decisions made over the next few weeks and months.
It is also important to recognize that our colleagues in Louisiana and Mississippi will require assistance from external sources, because their community and personal resources are severely depleted at a time when they are most needed by their communities.
APA believes that the following principles must be followed:
- Urgency must be balanced with informed decisions. The best examples of past studies, good planning, and the lessons of history must be utilized, so that the same environmental and rebuilding errors will not take place. Regulatory and environmental processes must not be bypassed in the name of expediency; the building and infrastructure review process, however, must expedite priority projects which will help everyone.
- The rebuilding must be fair, with solid attention to the creation of communities of mixed income, races and ethnic groups, built upon an economy of small and medium sized businesses, vibrant tourist areas, commercial downtowns, and petrochemical and shipping industries rebuilt with a greater concern for the fragile environment.
- Effective disaster prevention, response and mitigation measures can occur only with adequate and effective investment in infrastructure for all our communities and for this specific region.
- Temporary housing must be planned and built as part of the long-term redevelopment of communities, so that people who do return can, as much as possible, begin to live and recover with their neighbors.
- Permanent replacement housing must preserve homeownership for those who were homeowners at the time of the disaster, and must provide opportunity for improved and affordable housing conditions for low-income households.
- A regional approach to planning must be employed, in which city, suburbs, rural areas and regions are part of an overall redevelopment and environmental strategy, with funding priority being given for long-term far-sighted improvements that address the region's geographic, environmental and economic needs.
- Public funding must be provided for neighborhood and community planners to assist residents in planning and financing their reconstruction, to provide an opportunity to develop creative strategies for neighborhood improvement and evacuee community building, and to provide a communication link between local government and residents.
- The effort will require support for data collection and analysis, including mechanisms for sharing of data resources among agencies, as well as adequate staffing of municipal, regional, state, and Federal planning institutions.
- We also must develop technical materials and training programs that build local and regional capacity to engage in informed deliberations, and the development of a range of communication media, in order to ensure participation by all stakeholders, including displaced residents. Adequate citizen participation will be ensured through this process.
- The federal government must continue to work and collaborate with experienced planners in Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi and Texas.
- The federal government and the states must learn from the examples of others in the control of floods and natural hazards, such as the Netherlands, Venice, and London.
- Federal funding to support all of the above must be sufficient and must not be taken from programs that aid disadvantaged people throughout the U.S.
In response to this challenge APA has immediately launched a series of initiatives, including providing news media with contact names of members knowledgeable about disaster recovery, organizing a special Katrina recovery workshop at the Louisiana state chapter annual meeting, issuing an edition of our electronic publication interact focused on what planners can do within their own reach to help speed recovery, arranging a nationwide audio/web recovery conference for our members, and creating a Katrina section of the web with many educational resources made available.
APA National as well as our professional institute, AICP, and our Chapters, Divisions, and Student organizations will work to advance the following priorities*:
- Establish and be able to convey the planning principles that need to be embodied within disaster preparedness, mitigation and recovery planning.
- Focus our efforts on channeling volunteers, financial and other resources to assist in the recovery and advance our Development Plan objectives.
- Use Community Planning Teams to address a variety of planning, rebuilding, mitigation, and other needs. (For instance, the sponsorship or adoption of a particular community's planning needs.)
- Focus on building planning capacity to address immediate rebuilding needs, and assist other communities with disaster preparedness planning.
- Use existing APA opportunities, conferences and venues to focus on these issues.
- Articulate how our members can be involved on a personal basis and help build the capacity for planning.
APA will continue to dedicate resources to assist in an effort that must be commensurate with the challenges and opportunities presented by this unprecedented disaster.
*This list was developed by the Katrina Working Group at the Fall Leadership Meetings in Buffalo, NY on September 22, 2005 with representatives from the Board, Commission, Chapter Presidents Council, Divisions Council, and Student Representatives.
|
| | |
|
FEMA DISASTER PLANNING RESOURCES
| |
| | |
|
FEMA EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND DISASTER PLANNING RESOURCES
In this issue we highlight some Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) resources for emergency preparedness and disaster planning.
FEMA National Earthquake Reduction Program
 The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) is the Federal Government's program to reduce the risks to life and property from earthquakes. The NEHRP agencies are FEMA, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the lead agency; the National Science Foundation (NSF); and the United States Geological Survey (USGS).
The four goals of the NEHRP are as follows:
- Goal A: Develop effective practices and policies for earthquake loss-reduction and accelerate their implementation
- Goal B: Improve techniques to reduce seismic vulnerability of facilities and systems
- Goal C: Improve seismic hazards identification and risk-assessment methods and their use
- Goal D: Improve the understanding of earthquakes and their effects
NEHRP Publications and Resources:
http://www.fema.gov/hazards/earthquakes/nehrp/building.shtm
State and Local Emergency Operations Planning Guide
State and Local Guide (SLG) 101: Guide for All-Hazard Emergency Operations Planning:
http://www.fema.gov/rrr/gaheop.shtm
Preparation and Prevention
FEMA Preparation and Prevention Resources:
http://www.fema.gov/library/prepandprev.shtm#plan
|
| | |
|
GUEST ARTICLES ON HURRICANE RECOVERY
| |
| | |
|
KATRINA/RITA RECOVERY AND CHALLENGES TO LOCAL PLANNERS
Bob Freitag
Directory of the Institute for Hazards Mitigation, University of Washingtoni
This short essay outlines what I feel community planners will face when rebuilding their communities after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and offers some tools that should be considered. These thoughts come after 23 years with FEMA, working over 50 different disasters and having had the past five years teaching at the University of Washington to reevaluate accomplishments and mistakes. Of course if you have lived along the coast for the past 5 or so years you more than likely already have had an opportunity to pick up some recovery tools yourself. The big difference here is that Katrina and Rita were huge, and this offers some unique challenges beginning with the very basic question — what represents recovery and is there a pre-disaster base-line.
After such a catastrophic event, businesses and industries will relocate, others will be replaced, physical landmarks will have been destroyed, community demographics will change and most assuredly post disaster politics will be different. And, a recovery goal of building to what was in existence the day before the event will not be possible.
Planners need to be involved in the recovery process by helping their communities recognize the changes that have occurred, the need to construct a new vision, and create a process to assemble the resources needed to achieve that vision.
Katrina and Rita were huge events but they were not the events of the century. It is very likely that similar events will occur within our lifetimes. Herein is the problem and the opportunity. The problem lies with urgent demands for services, housing, a replenished tax base.... The opportunity rests with the ability to create a disaster resistant built environment and realize a new vision.
Here are some obstacles to and ways to address them.
- A post disaster environment does not lend itself to creativity — Where a community has not developed a post disaster vision before the disaster there will be a need to generate the time to allow for the formation of new and bold alternatives.
After a disaster, emergency needs will drive all other actions. Unless the community had considered what happened before the disaster they may not be able to see basic changes their communities are experiencing after the disaster needless to say any opportunities. The recovery baseline will more than likely not be the day before the storm. There may actually be no baseline. Community redevelopment processes and organizational structures need to be established to guide a re-visioning process.ii
The psychological need to return what's familiar is obviously very great. I have seen bold recovery actions following a disaster, but only when these actions were considered before the event or when the basic need of those impacted where provided — food, temporary housing, temporary business establishments, optimism,... This "bought" the time that was needed to think of new and created alternatives.
While working on various disasters, I have spoken to numerous home and business owners who have re-invested their life savings into the repair of structures that they knew would likely fail again or in the case of businesses knowing that their customer base was moving away. When these owners had the opportunity to consider mitigation alternatives (elevating or relocating their home off the floodplain, offering new products...) at times when they were not under extreme stress, they were better prepared to take action.
The challenge for community planners will be to have those who feel they have lost everything, participate in a recovery planning process and develop ownership for new solutions. This will require local leadership and the disaster will undoubtedly present real obstructions to new visions — the clusters of undamaged or insufficiently damaged buildings that prevent demolition of otherwise totally destroyed visions, manipulating voter registration through the location of FEMA financed temporary housing or where there are market incentives for development, planners can expect land assembly attempts by commercial real estate interests....
- Building and zoning codes and ordinances:
Another challenge will be the passing and enforcement of building codes and flood insurance ordinances. Many of my colleagues working the Katrina and Rita disasters are telling me of FEMA, State and local government officials bending to pressure and allowing rebuilding in that is in violation of current codes and ordinance requirement. Also of concern is that the states of Louisiana, Georgia and Texas do not have State codes.iii
States in RED have neither state building code requirements nor planning mandates.
Rebuilding offers an opportunity, and at the time of construction building hurricane or flood resistant structures is not exorbitant. Most importantly a community is not granting any long term favors by not requiring building to more hazard resistant standards In Hawaii after hurricane Eva the Mayor of Kauai, to "avoid red tape", did not process building permits. These "un-permitted" structures were the ones blown apart during Hurricane Iniki 10 years later. These structures became debris that had to be removed or worse yet, flying missiles that destroyed other's property.
- There are numerous tools available to meet a new community vision.
Should the community have a post disaster vision, there are many programs that can support sound recovery. FEMA will pick up direct costs of the local government's disaster response, recovery and mitigation efforts. This will typically include permanent work to pre-disaster conditions. However, FEMA will also cover cost effective mitigation and will contribute to betterments. The Small Business Administration, FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and the FEMA Public Assistance Program have moved structures off the floodplain, elevated others, strengthened structures against wind loads, placed utilities underground, created open space and buffers, and helped write, strengthen, enforce, and pay property owners for meeting required building codes and ordinances.
Community planners need to become familiar with these tools.
- Meeting this new vision will be up to local government:
A disaster will bring out both the best and the worst in a community. If the best is to is to prevail it will require ongoing leadership from every sector of your community (Wilson , ICMA)
Local planners are in a position to strengthen their communities; however they will probably be on their own. During the 1993 Mississippi flooding disaster, strong partnerships developed between FEMA, the State and local government to examine the effectiveness of levees and to move repetitively damaged structures off the floodplain. FEMA created levee task forces to examine the need for repairing each damaged levee and they created a process to help communities recreate their tax base off of the floodplain. These were creative, visionary and bold measures that took leadership on all levels. Unfortunately neither FEMA nor its parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security, is in a position to provide this leadership or the vision today. It will be up to the local government and they should not expect support from FEMA, but resistance from a tired, demoralized staff that very much want to go home and put this disaster behind them.
Katrina and Rita have provided the opportunity of a lifetime. It appears that we are entering a period of increased hurricane activity and now is the time to act and to make at-risk communities more resilient and better places to live.
Bob Freitag is the Director of the Institute for Hazards Mitigation Planning and Research. He is also the Executive Director of the Cascadia Region Earthquake Workgroup (CREW www.crew.org) as well as the Director of the Institute for Hazards Mitigation Planning and Research at the University of Washington. CREW is a not-for-profit corporation of private and public representatives working together to improve the ability of Cascadia Region communities to reduce the effects of earthquake events. He is also a Certified Floodplain Manger and is on the Board of Regions for the Association of State Floodplain Managers.
iBob Freitag is the Executive Director of the Cascadia Region Earthquake Workgroup CREW www.crew.org and the Director of the Institute for Hazards Mitigation Planning and Research at the University of Washington http://depts.washington.edu/mitigate/index.html. Bob came to these organizations from FEMA where he served as special advisor to Regional Director on mitigation policy issues and was appointed by President Clinton as the Federal Coordinating Officer (FCO) to manage declared disaster response and recovery operations in Alaska, Washington, Oregon and Idaho. He served on over 50 presidentially declared disasters in 18 states and 2 territories and prepared over 40 post disaster hazard mitigation recovery plans covering floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, landslides, wildland Fires, earthquakes and winter storms.
iiRead the "Loma Prieta Earthquake – What one City Learned" by Richard C. Wilson Santa Cruz City Manager, an ICMA publication
iiiPaper S97-31, NATURAL HAZARDS AND BUILDING CODE ENFORCEMENT recorded by Karen Kristiansson, Spangle Associates from presentations by discussants Peter May, University of Washington and Ray Burby, University of New Orleans
HURRICANE KATRINA: ONE EX-LOUISIANA PLANNER'S PERSPECTIVE
Fritz Wagner
Chair, Landscape Architecture Department and Research Professor, Department of Urban Design and Planning, University of Washington
fwagner@u.washington.edu
From 1974 through 1992 I lived in the city of New Orleans and was a professor of urban planning at the University of New Orleans. I spent my 28 eight years working to make the city and region a better place for all, especially from an urban planning perspective. For eight years of my tenure, I was on the New Orleans City Planning Commission and chaired it two years. I was involved also with efforts to preserve historical areas and planning throughout the region. Our College, which I directed for 20 years, was continuously involved in making the city/region a much more livable place.
Since Katrina made her way through New Orleans and harmed the city in so many ways, it is hard to imagine where one should begin to sort out this overwhelming catastrophe. Presently we have FEMA moving forward with its recovery efforts coupled with aid from various countries, states and agencies. In addition, we have Governor Blanco and Mayor Nagin working with various federal officials to try and help bring back the city. Commissions have been set up by the Governor and Mayor and other national organizations are also becoming involved, such as our own APA, the ASLA. AIA, ULI. In addition many private firms are seeking business opportunities. What is missing in the redefinition/rebuilding effort is the involvement of the local planners and people. Given that virtually all have been displaced it is no wonder they are not involved. However, attempts are being made to link the planners and neighborhood leaders through email networks and other creative electronic mechanisms in order to try and get their voices heard in the planning work that is underway.
Having just come back from Louisiana where I attended the annual state planning meeting, I can assure you that the planners in the state and from the New Orleans metro area are very upset about what is going on and their lack of involvement in the rethinking effort. APA National is trying their best to be helpful and to work with the Louisiana planners so they can be heard and be part of the planning process that is evolving. No one is really sure of the decision making structure now in place and this needs to be clarified. I believe the New Orleans City Planning Commission will find its place the planning process and they will have some influence on future land-use decisions. But at this juncture this is not clear. I heard many stories of much frustration and sadness from our fellow planners. They are going through much grief as they are trying their best to cope with their personal lives and professional lives. Many will be let go as there is no revenue coming into the city to support them. A few spoke to me about relocating to Washington State as their futures are so uncertain now. If any of you have an opening please let me know and I will pass it onto the Louisiana Chapter President.
In closing, it will be interesting to see what the future bodes for the "Big Easy". No one really knows what will happen-one can only hope and pray for the best.
CONGRATULATIONS TO NEW AICP MEMBERS
A total of 34 Washington Planners have recently joined the ranks of the American Institute of Certified Planners. Congratulations to those who passed the November 2004 and May 2005 AICP exams! This is an important professional milestone in a planning career, and certification of planners strengthens the entire planning profession. Please congratulate these folks on their accomplishment.
November 2004
Angela D. Brooks, AICP
Kirsten Campbell, AICP
Celeste Carlson, AICP
Chris Comeau, AICP
Mitzi A. Crystal, AICP
William W. Hall, AICP
Kurt Brian Hanson, AICP
Leslie Ann Hauer, AICP
Curtis R. La Pierre, AICP
Curtis M. Lillquist, AICP
Patrick Lynch, AICP
Lee A. Michaelis, AICP
Brandon J. Moen, AICP
Josh D. Peters, AICP
Ed Pickering, AICP
Marja Preston, AICP
Nicholas P. Roach, AICP
Shadde N. Rosenblum, AICP
Corey Smith, AICP
Alice Strand, AICP
Elizabeth Arnesen Thompson, AICP
November 2004 Exam
WA Planners Passing the Exam: 81% (out of 26 taking exam)
All Planners Passing the Exam: 60%
May 2005
Christi Amrine, AICP
Elliott Barnett, AICP
Julie Bassuk, AICP
Sarah Bohlen, AICP
Kristin L. French, AICP
Anne Aurelia Fritzel, AICP
Kent Hale, AICP
Brent Huizingh, AICP
Ryan Kohlmann, AICP
Lora Patino Lillard, AICP
Ikuno Masterson, AICP
Nathalie A. Schmidt, AICP
Philip J. Wuest, AICP
May 2005 Exam
WA Planners Passing the Exam: 76% (out of 17 taking exam)
All Planners Passing the Exam: 66% (out of 628)
Other News
The next AICP exam is being offered between November 7-19. The application deadline for the May 2006 exam has not yet been set.
The Chapter will again be offering a reduced fee scholarship for taking the AICP exam. Watch the Chapter Website for more information on that program.
Two New AICP Exam Resources are available – AICP has developed a CD-ROM and manual will help you answer questions like these as you prepare for the AICP certification exam. The cost of the CD and manual is $150; sold separately, the CD is $105 and the manual is $145. The Chapter has purchased a copy, and although it cannot be copied, information from the CD and manual will guide next year's Chapter Exam Preparation Session.
Also, the Chapter President's Council has issued the 7th Edition of the CPC's Study Manual for the AICP Exam. It is currently only available in CD-ROM format, however, there will be a choice of either CD-ROM or hard copy for the May 2006 examination. Information on how to order a copy is on the Chapter website.
Continuing Professional Development Program (CPD)
In September 2005, the AICP Commission modified the name of the program slightly from CPDP (Continuing Professional Development Program) to CPD Program. All members of AICP are encouraged to participate in continuing education. A minimum of 60 professional development hours obtained within a three-year period is the principal requirement for earning a CPD certificate. The Chapter is currently updating the listing of sessions eligible for AICP continuing education credits. To log credits online, click here.
AICP Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct
The revised AICP Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct http://www.planning.org/ethics/conduct.html became effective June 1, 2005. Questions on the November 2005 exam pertaining to ethics may be answered using either the old or the new versions of the Code. The Advisory Rulings are no longer operative.
Monthly Newsletter
Planning Northwest is going to become a monthly newsletter soon, so submit your article today. Planning Northwest is always looking to highlight projects and research of our members. If you are interested in having an article published feel free to submit your article. Upcoming issues will focus on tribal planning, emergency management/planning, annexations, state legislative agenda, and transportation.
The deadline for the newsletter is the first of every month. Please submit all newsletter articles to Angela Brooks, AICP at angela.brooks@seattle.gov.
REMINDER
Last year the board approved a new chapter-only group membership opportunity.
This membership is available to planning commissions, city councils and commissions, tribal councils, and board members of non-profit organizations and other professional associations.
Up to 10 members may be included in a group membership. The group rate if $150 and is administered by the chapter office.
To obtain a group membership form or learn more about the benefits of this membership, contact Anna Nelson, AICP, Membership Committee chair, at (206) 382-9540 or anelson@buckgordon.com.
|
