United States
Environmental Protection
, Agency
EPA231-R-14-003
July 2014
www. epa. gov/smartgrowth
PLANNING FOR FLOOD RECOVERY AND
LONG-TERM RESILIENCE IN VERMONT:
Smart Growth Approaches for
Disaster-Resilient Communities
Office of Sustainable Communities
Smart Growth Program
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Project Contacts
EPA Project Leads
Stephanie Bertaina
Office of Sustainable Communities
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW (MC 1807T)
Washington, DC 20460
Tel 202-566-0157
bertaina.stephanie@epa.gov
Rosemary Monahan
Office of the Regional Administrator
Region 1
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
5 Post Office Square (ORA 18-1)
Boston, MA 02109-3912
Tel 617-918-1087
monahan.rosemary@epa.gov
FEMA Project Lead
Marilyn Milliard
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Region 1
Mitigation Division
99 High St., 6th Fl.
Boston, MA 02110
Tel 617-956-7536
marilyn.hilliard@fema.dhs.gov
Vermont Project Lead
Faith Ingulsrud
Vermont Department of Housing & Community
Development
Community Planning & Revitalization Division
National Life Building 6th Floor
1 National Life Drive
Montpelier, VT 05620-0501
Tel 802-828-5228
faith.ingulsrud@state.vt.us
Contractor Leads
Kate Marshall, Project Manager
SRA International, Inc.
3434 Washington Blvd.
Arlington, VA 22206
Tel 703-284-6234
kate_marshall@sra.com
Gavin Smith, Principal Researcher
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Department of Homeland Security
Coastal Hazards Center of Excellence
100 Europa Drive
Suite 540, CB 7581
Chapel Hill, NC 27517
Tel 919-445-9395
gavin_smith@unc.edu
Cover Photo: Mad River, Vermont.
Credit: EPA.
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Project Contacts 1
Executive Summary 3
1. Introduction 5
A. Background 5
B. Community Context 7
2. Overall Strategies for Flood Resilience and Disaster Recovery 9
A. Update and integrate comprehensive plans and Hazard Mitigation Plans 9
B. Conduct thorough policy and regulatory audits 10
C. Amend zoning, subdivision, and stormwater policies and regulations to match plans 10
D. Consider participating in the National Flood Insurance Community Rating System 10
3. Local Land Use Policy Options and Strategies to Improve Flood Resilience 12
A. River Corridors: Conserve land and discourage development in particularly
vulnerable areas along river corridors such as flood plains and wetlands 14
B. Vulnerable Settlements: Where development already exists in vulnerable areas,
protect people, buildings, and facilities to reduce future flooding risk 19
C. Safer Areas: Plan for and encourage new development in areas that are less
vulnerable to future floods 26
3. The Whole Watershed: Implement enhanced stormwater management
techniques to slow, spread, and infiltrate flood water 27
4. State Policy Options and Strategies to Improve Flood Resilience 32
A. Inter-Agency Policy Options to Enhance Flood Resilience 32
5. Agency-Specific Policy Options to Enhance Flood Resilience 34
5. Conclusion 37
Endnotes 39
Appendix A: About the Environmental Protection Agency's Smart Growth
Implementation Assistance Program A-l
Appendix B: About the Project B-l
A. Local Policy Assessment B-l
B. State Policy Assessment B-3
Appendix C: Flood Resilience Checklist C-l
Appendix D: Flood Resilience Resources D-l
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Executive Summary
Flooding from extreme storm events has affected many communities across the country, causing
billions of dollars of damage annually. Moreover, climate change projections suggest that storms will
likely become more powerful in many regions of the country in the future. In light of these trends,
many communities are recognizing the need to improve disaster recovery and long-term flood
resilience planning.
Communities throughout Vermont faced this reality when Tropical Storm Irene hit in 2011, devastating
infrastructure, communities, and lives. In 2012, in the wake of Irene, the state of Vermont requested
technical assistance from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). The assistance focused on incorporating smart growth principles into
state policies, local development regulations, and Hazard Mitigation Plans to increase community flood
resilience. "Flood resilience" means measures taken to reduce the vulnerability of communities to
damages from flooding and to support long-term recovery after an extreme flood.
Smart growth and more environmentally and economically sustainable approaches to development can
help communities become more resilient to future flooding by protecting vulnerable undeveloped lands,
siting development in safer locations, and designing development so it is less likely to be damaged in a
flood. Communities that identify areas that are safer for development and then implement smart
growth approaches in those areas will be most successful at creating more flood-resilient places. EPA's
assistance provided options for communities and the state to consider as they work to recover, rebuild,
and plan for a more resilient future.
Communities can take some initial steps to enhance their flood resilience:
• They can update and integrate their community or comprehensive land use plans with Hazard
Mitigation Plans, ensuring that the comprehensive plan identifies future growth areas in safer
locations and that hazard mitigation activities are consistent with the comprehensive plan
priorities. If these plans are not coordinated, they might inadvertently act at cross-purposes.
• They can conduct an audit of policies, regulations, and budgets to ensure consistency with flood
resilience goals outlined in their community plans and Hazard Mitigation Plans.
• They can amend existing policies, regulations, and budgets or create new ones that help achieve
the flood resilience goals outlined in their plans.
Specific local land use policy options to improve flood resilience are organized into four categories,
representing different geographic areas in a community:
• River Corridors': Conserve land and discourage development in particularly vulnerable areas
along river corridors such as flood plains and wetlands.
• Vulnerable Settlements: Where development already exists in vulnerable areas, protect people,
buildings, and facilities to reduce future flooding risk.
• Safer Areas: Plan for and encourage new development in areas that are less vulnerable to
future floods.
• The Whole Watershed: Implement enhanced stormwater management techniques to slow,
spread, and infiltrate floodwater.
1 "River Corridors" are areas of land that include the river channel and adjacent lands needed for the river to adjust laterally
over time and still maintain its natural stable form. The surrounding areas of land may be developed or undeveloped.
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
The policy options in these categories offer multiple and interrelated benefits. For example, directing
development out of flood plains not only keeps people and property safe, it also protects the ability of
flood plains to hold and slow down flood water before it reaches downstream settlements.
State-level policies also can support flood recovery and local flood resilience planning efforts. State
agencies can partner together to:
• Audit all state programs to determine how well they achieve flood resilience goals.
• Develop a comprehensive recovery plan before the next flood happens.
• Develop a personnel plan that delineates who will assist with post-disaster recovery.
Individual state agencies that manage natural resources, environmental protection, transportation,
emergency management, commerce, community development, economic development, housing, and
agriculture can also make changes to their policies and programs to ensure that they are helping
communities become more resilient to future floods.
While land use decisions that affect a community's flood resilience might seem to happen incrementally
or opportunistically, they are often guided by plans, policies, and regulations that shape development
over time. Vermont's experience with Tropical Storm Irene suggests that coordinating local and state
agency policies, plans, and actions can help facilitate disaster recovery and promote safer growth.
The Flood Resilience Checklist (in Appendix C) and the land use policies, regulations, and strategies
outlined in this report (many of which are listed in Appendix D) can help communities enhance their
flood resilience. Ultimately though, it is up to the state and communities to select the appropriate flood
resilience policies, adjust them to meet their specific contexts, and allocate resources accordingly. Each
jurisdiction can weigh its resilience goals with other community priorities and determine the best
policies and approaches that will help the community meet its objectives.
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
1. Introduction
A. Background
Many communities across the United States have experienced damage from flooding. Despite the use of
expensive, engineered solutions to reduce flooding risk, such as elevating buildings and constructing
levees, flood damage losses in the United States continue to grow.1 Moreover, climate change
projections suggest that floods will intensify in most regions of the United States, especially in the
Midwest and Northeast.2 According to the National Climate Assessment," "the Northeast has
experienced a greater increase in extreme precipitation over the past few decades than any other region
in the United States; between 1958 and 2010, the Northeast saw a 74% percent increase in the amount
of precipitation falling in very heavy events."3 Rainfall in New England is expected to continue to
increase due to climate change, a trend that will almost certainly increase the risk of river-related
flooding in this part of the country in the future.
These trends are creating a sense of urgency among communities, particularly those in states like
Vermont that are expected to experience increased flooding in the future, to look for better ways to
deal with flooding and build flood resilience. Resilience generally refers to "a capability to anticipate,
prepare for, respond to, and recover from significant multi-hazard threats with minimum damage to
social well-being, the economy, and the environment."4 This project focused specifically on resilience to
flooding, including a community's capacity to plan for, respond to, and recover from floods.
The state of Vermont experienced widespread damage from river flooding as a result of Tropical Storm
Irene in 2011. Irene damaged more than 500 miles of roadways and around 200 bridges (with estimated
rebuilding costs of $175-250 million); released hazardous waste that contaminated floodwaters,
sediment, and soil; breached municipal wastewater
treatment plants; and caused agricultural losses by
damaging barns and flooding crops.5'6 The Mad River
Valley—located in north central Vermont, west of
Montpelier (see Figure 1)—was one of many regions in
the state that was affected by Irene. Many historic
structures, homes, and businesses in the Mad River
Valley were flooded. Irene was particularly damaging
to communities in Vermont, but communities
throughout the state and region have experienced
flood damage decade after decade, underscoring the
need for improved hazard mitigation planning at the
state, regional, and local levels.
Shortly after Irene, several Vermont state agencies and
communities in the Mad River Valley requested
technical assistance from the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). The state and Mad River
Valley communities sought help with incorporating
smart growth and resilience approaches into their
development plans, regulations, and Hazard Mitigation
„. . . . ,. . ... Figure 1. This project focused on the Mad River Valley in
Pans to increase their food resi hence. ,, . _ ,-,.„,
Vermont. Credit: EPA.
Burlington
Montpelier
Mad River
Valley
1 All relevant website links are spelled out in the endnotes.
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Smart growth is development that is compact and walkable, provides a range of housing and
transportation choices, and fosters distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place.7
Smart growth approaches use land efficiently, enhance community vitality, protect natural resources,
reduce costs for public services, save taxpayers' money, and create a higher quality of life.
According to the Vermont Natural Resources Council, a nonprofit environmental organization that aims
to protect Vermont's natural resources and environment, Vermont's distinctive sense of place is
influenced by the state's landscape of compact cities and villages surrounded by working farms and
forests. Smart growth approaches to development can help preserve Vermont's sense of place by
promoting development that is good for the state's economy, community, and environment.8
However, smart growth approaches alone cannot completely address flooding risk. Communities that
seek to become more resilient to future flooding must also protect vulnerable undeveloped lands, site
development in safer locations, and design development so it is more resilient to floods. Communities
that identify areas that are safer for development and then implement smart growth approaches in
those areas will be most successful at creating more flood-resilient places.
EPA and FEMA provided assistance through the Smart Growth Implementation Assistance Program (see
Appendix A for more information on the program), funding a team of national experts in hazard
mitigation, flood recovery, land use planning, and state policy. The team reviewed state policies, local
development regulations, community plans, and Hazard Mitigation Plans and developed policy options
for the state and communities to consider. In October 2012, the team visited the Mad River Valley and
presented initial policy options for the state and communities to consider. During the visit, the team
solicited feedback from state and local leaders and the community about those ideas during a public
meeting; and then refined the policy options outlined in this report. More information on the project is
in Appendix B.
This project included two elements: an assessment of local policies and an assessment of state policies
to enhance flood resilience. The local policy assessment, which was funded by EPA and completed by
consultants from SRA International, Inc., Clarion Associates, and CSA Ocean Sciences, Inc., focused on
two Mad River Valley communities, Waitsfield and Moretown, which are representative of towns within
the Valley and throughout the state. The goal was to offer policy options to these communities to help
them update and strengthen their policies and strategies to improve flood resilience and that other local
governments in Vermont and elsewhere in the United States could also consider.
Figure 2. These images show the flood damage in the Mad River Valley from Tropical Storm Irene: a damaged home along
Vermont Route 100 adjacent to Moretown Village (left) and a damaged building in Waitsfield (right). Credits: Lars Gange and
Mansfield Heliflight (left), Jeff Knight, The Valley Reporter (right).
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Faculty and staff from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's Department of Homeland Security
Coastal Hazards Center of Excellence (Coastal Hazards Center team) led the state policy assessment;
FEMA funded the state policy assessment. The Coastal Hazards Center team focused on potential
barriers to flood response, hazard mitigation, and disaster recovery at the state level, including the
degree to which state programs and policies support or hinder local governments' ability to incorporate
smart growth and flood-resilience measures into their day-to-day activities.
B. Community Context
The Mad River Valley, which
lies about 15 miles west of the
state capital of Montpelier, is a
historic, scenic area that is
home to two popular ski
resorts, Sugarbush Resort and
Mad River Glen. The rushing
waters of the rocky Mad River
cut through this deeply incised
valley, attracting kayakers,
canoeists, and anglers. There
are five small towns in the
watershed—Warren,
Waitsfield, Fayston, and a
portion of Moretown and
Duxbury (see Figure 3).
The two municipalities involved
in this project, Waitsfield and
Moretown, each have
populations of around 1,700.
Both have grown faster than
the state of Vermont as a
whole over the past two
decades, but their population
growth rate has been less than
1 percent annually—a very
modest pace. Both jurisdictions
are typical of many smaller
riverfront communities in
Vermont. They have compact,
historic village centers that are
next to the Mad River in high-
flood hazard areas.
To wn s
Mad River
of the
Watershed
Figure 3. This project focused on Waitsfield and Moretown, two of the five communities
in Vermont's Mad River Valley. Credit: Mad River Watershed Conservation Partnership.
Because Vermont has no county governments, the municipalities have land use planning and regulatory
authority over the surrounding large tracts of forests and open space. Waitsfield, along with Fayston and
Warren, participates in a sub-regional organization, the Mad River Valley Planning District, which
provides planning support and inter-town coordination for the three towns, amplifying the planning
capacity for those communities. Moretown does not participate in the Mad River Valley Planning District
and has a very small, part-time staff to handle community planning issues.
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
The Mad River Valley jurisdictions have begun
revamping their hazard resilience policies and
strategies and have a solid foundation upon
which to make additional changes. For
example, Mad River Valley communities have
access to critical data on the location and
nature of fluvial (river-related) erosion hazards
that can cause damage to public
infrastructure, homes, businesses, and other
private investments during flooding events.9
These data—available from organizations like
the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources,
Central Vermont Regional Planning
Commission, and the Friends of the Mad River
can help Mad River Valley communities
determine where they can more safely locate
development in the future.
Figure 4. Waitsfield, Vermont was one of two Mad River Valley
communities that received technical assistance from EPA and
FEMA. Credit: Clarion Associates.
Waitsfield completed an update to its town plan in 2012 and is considering amendments to its
development codes and Hazard Mitigation Plan. In 2013, Moretown began the process of updating its
town plan. This project aimed to help these communities identify smart growth and resilience
approaches to development that they could incorporate into their plans and development regulations in
their continued efforts to enhance their flood resilience. These approaches can also be considered by
other communities throughout the state and country that are facing similar issues.
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
2. Overall Strategies for Flood Resilience and Disaster Recovery
Vermont communities that want to better
withstand and recover from flood-related disasters Overall Strategies for Flood Resilience
in the future might wish to consider updating, This section of the report corresponds with the
integrating, and revising their plans, policies, and "Overall Strategies to Enhance Flood Resilience"
regulations to ensure that they are consistent with section in the Flood Resilience Checklist in
the community's resilience goals and objectives. Appendix C. Please see the checklist for a list
These approaches, while specifically helpful for of strategies to consider to enhance overall
Vermont communities, might also be useful for flood resilience-
other communities seeking to enhance their flood
resilience. Several basic steps might help communities get started on their road to resilience:
A. Update and integrate comprehensive plans and Hazard Mitigation Plans.
B. Conduct thorough policy and regulatory audits.
C. Amend zoning, subdivision, and stormwater policies and regulations to match plans.
D. Consider participating in the National Flood Insurance Program Community Rating System.
A. Update and integrate comprehensive plans and Hazard Mitigation Plans.
Many local governments adopt comprehensive plans to guide future land use decisions in their
communities. State governments and FEMA also encourage communities to prepare Hazard Mitigation
Plans to improve planning for and reduce or eliminate risk from natural hazards.10 A community must
have a Hazard Mitigation Plan to receive Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funding from FEMA.
Comprehensive plans shape communities' flood resilience by determining where and how development
will be built in the future, and Hazard Mitigation Plans shape communities' flood resilience by informing
how communities will plan for and reduce or eliminate risk from natural hazards such as floods. And yet,
communities do not always integrate their comprehensive plans with their Hazard Mitigation Plans.
Comprehensive plans are often silent on the topics of hazard planning and resilience, and many Hazard
Mitigation Plans do not discuss land use tools that could guide future development away from known
flood hazard areas. In many communities, local planning and zoning staff are not involved in the
preparation of Hazard Mitigation Plans, just as emergency management personnel are often not
involved in the comprehensive land use planning process. If comprehensive plans and Hazard Mitigation
Plans are not coordinated, they might inadvertently act at cross-purposes. For example, a
comprehensive plan might identify future growth areas in unsafe locations if it does not take into
account future flood hazard areas. Similarly, a Hazard Mitigation Plan that is not coordinated with the
comprehensive plan might inadvertently recommend hazard mitigation activities in areas that are
inconsistent with the comprehensive plan priorities.
To improve flood resilience, communities could better coordinate the process of developing and
implementing their comprehensive plans and Hazard Mitigation Plans. They could ensure that
stakeholders involved in resilience planning, such as emergency managers, also help develop the
comprehensive plan and that planners help develop the Hazard Mitigation Plan. Ensuring that
comprehensive plans and Hazard Mitigation Plans are integrated and consistent with each other can
help decision-makers understand what infrastructure in their communities is at risk and help them
outline a strategy for fostering growth in safer locations. FEMA's Integrating Hazard Mitigation Into
Local Planning provides information about how to integrate hazard mitigation activities into local
planning efforts,11 and FEMA Region 10's Integrating the Local Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan Into a
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Community's Comprehensive Plan: A Guidebook for Local Governments provides case studies of
communities that have integrated their plans.12 Several communities across the country have
successfully integrated hazard planning elements into their comprehensive plans, including Bourne,
Massachusetts and Roseville, California.13 Some states, including Vermont14 and Rhode Island/5 now
require communities to address natural hazards in their comprehensive plans.
Coordinating these plans and implementing the appropriate policies, regulations, and strategies to make
these plans a reality can also place communities in a better position to request post-disaster assistance
if and when the next disaster occurs. Communities that identify potential hazard mitigation projects and
begin completing hazard mitigation grant applications before a disaster occurs, instead of having to
quickly develop such lists of projects in the aftermath of a disaster, are better positioned to apply for
federal funding for disaster recovery and can speed up their recovery process.
To make comprehensive plans and Hazard Mitigation Plans more effective, communities can also ensure
that their capital improvement plans and budgets match the priorities outlined in their comprehensive
plans and Hazard Mitigation Plans and can prioritize capital improvements that are located in safer, less
vulnerable locations. This approach might mean that a community might prioritize fixing or expanding
facilities and infrastructure in safer locations, or a community might choose to strengthen or relocate
existing facilities and infrastructure that are located in vulnerable locations. Using these approaches can
help make better use of scarce capital improvement funds while also enhancing flood resilience.
B. Conduct thorough policy and regulatory audits.
Communities might also wish to undertake a thorough assessment or audit of their zoning, subdivision,
stormwater management, and other regulations. This assessment can tell the community whether
current policies and regulations will let it achieve the goals in its plans, identify which policies might
need to be updated, and determine where new policies could be helpful. The checklist in Appendix C can
provide a starting point for communities that are interested in conducting a policy and regulatory audit
to enhance resilience. Other scorecards and checklists, such as the Vermont Natural Resources Council's
Resilient Communities Scorecard, may also help communities in Vermont and other states assess their
resilience in key areas including transportation, energy, housing, land use, and healthy community
design.16 The Smart Growth Implementation Toolkit provides another set of tools to help communities
implement smart growth approaches to development.17 Communities might choose to review several
smart growth and resilience audit tools to determine which audit (or audits) will fit their needs.
C. Amend zoning, subdivision, and stormwater policies and regulations to match plans.
After assessing existing policies and regulations, communities are well-positioned to update and amend
those policies and regulations to match the goals outlined in their plans. Communities can consider
several policy and regulatory options to achieve their resilience goals and can choose those options that
fit their community context and tailor those policies and regulations to fit their needs. These policy
options are discussed in greater detail in Section 3.
D. Consider participating in the National Flood Insurance Community Rating System.
Communities that are beginning to implement strategies to enhance their flood resilience might wish to
participate in the National Flood Insurance Program Community Rating System.18 The Community Rating
System is a voluntary program that recognizes and encourages community flood plain management
activities that exceed the minimum standards of the National Flood Insurance Program. One of the
benefits of the Community Rating System is that flood insurance premium rates for policyholders in
participating communities are discounted. The Community Rating System uses a class rating system that
is similar to fire insurance rating to determine flood insurance premium reductions. Most communities
10
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
enter with a Class 9 rating, which entitles policy-holders in participating communities to a 5 percent
discount on their flood insurance premiums. The maximum discount is 45 percent for Class 1
communities.19 Currently, only three Vermont communities participate in the Community Rating
System, all at a Class 9 level.20 The low level of participation might be due in part to the high
administrative cost of participating, which can be burdensome for towns with few permanent staff. To
decrease the administrative burden to participate in the Community Rating System, a regional
organization might assist several of its communities to develop their applications simultaneously,
thereby achieving an economy of scale.
11
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
3. Local Land Use Policy Options and Strategies to Improve Flood
Resilience
There are several policy options that communities can consider implementing to increase flood
resilience. Communities can choose which options fit their community context and tailor the policies to
fit their needs. The policy options are organized into four categories (see Figure 5):
A. River Corridors: Conserve land and discourage development in particularly vulnerable areas
along river corridors such as flood plains and wetlands.
B. Vulnerable Settlements: Where development already exists in vulnerable areas, protect people,
buildings, and facilities to reduce future flooding risk.
C. Safer Areas: Plan for and encourage new development in areas that are less vulnerable to
future floods.
D. The Whole Watershed: Implement enhanced stormwater management techniques to slow,
spread, and infiltrate floodwater.
These four place types—River Corridors, Vulnerable Settlements, Safer Areas, and the Whole
Watershed—describe different geographic areas within a river valley. The types of policy options and
strategies that would be most effective at enhancing flood resilience will differ from place to place. For
example, in river corridors, communities might focus on conserving undeveloped land to allow room for
flood water to periodically inundate, while in safer areas, they might target future growth.
The policy options under these four categories offer multiple and interrelated benefits. For example,
directing development out of flood plains not only keeps people and property safe, it also protects the
ability of flood plains to hold and slow down flood water before it reaches downstream settlements.
Ultimately, it is up to the state and communities to select the appropriate policies, adjust them to meet
their specific context, and allocate resources accordingly. Each jurisdiction can weigh their resilience
goals with other community priorities and can determine the best policies and approaches that will help
them meet their objectives.
12
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
The Whole Watershed
Manage Stormwater
W
Safer Areas
Plan for New Development
River Corridors
Conserve Land and Discourage Development
Vulnerable Settlements
Protect People, Buildings and Facilities
Figure 5. This graphic illustrates the four categories of approaches to enhance resilience to future floods. Credit: Vermont
Agency of Commerce and Community Development.
13
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
A. River Corridors: Conserve land and discourage
development in particularly vulnerable areas
along river corridors such as flood plains and
wetlands.
River Corridors
This section of the report corresponds with the
"Conserve Land and Discourage Development in
River Corridors" section in the Flood Resilience
Checklist in Appendix C. Please see the checklist for
a list of strategies to consider to conserve land and
discourage development in river corridors.
Communities that wish to reduce future flood risk
can consider conserving land and discouraging
development in particularly vulnerable areas, such as
flood plains along river corridors. Conserving land in
river corridors, especially land that is in a natural, vegetated state, can reduce flood risk by absorbing
and making room for water during floods. Moreover, discouraging development in these areas can
reduce the risk that homes, businesses, and critical infrastructure will be damaged by floods.
1. Acquire or protect land in flood-prone locations.
To accommodate flood water and reduce the risk that homes and businesses will be damaged,
communities can acquire or protect land in flood-prone locations. EPA's 2012 publication, Essential
Smart Growth Fixes for Rural Planning, Zoning, and Development Codes, also provides helpful
information about protecting agricultural and sensitive natural areas.21
Vulnerable land in river corridors can be
protected in several ways.
• Purchase land or acquire
conservation easements from
willing sellers.
• Coordinate buyouts of properties
that are repeatedly flooded.
• Develop a Transfer of Development
Rights (TDR) program.
• Provide tax incentives for
conserving vulnerable land.
• Restore riparian and wetland
vegetation.
Figure 6. Conserving land in undeveloped river corridors like this
one in the Mad River Valley can help minimize risk to structures
during floods. Credit: EPA.
Communities can partner with willing
landowners and land trusts or other
organizations to purchase land outright or
acquire conservation easements'" on undeveloped properties along a river, such as a farm or
forestland, to ensure that the land remains undeveloped and retains its ability to accommodate
flood water. To create an acquisition program, a community would establish clear goals for the
program, identify priority lands to protect based on community goals and flooding risk, and identify
potential funding mechanisms. Communities that already have an acquisition program in place
might need to change the program to ensure that it includes areas within the community that are
vulnerable to flooding. Funding sources for acquisition programs (depending on state-enabling
legislation) could include sales taxes (many communities across the United States, for example in
111 A conservation easement is "a legal agreement between a landowner and a land trust or government agency that
permanently limits uses of the land to protect its conservation values." Land Trust Alliance. "Conservation Easements.'
http://www.landtrustalliance.org/conservation/landowners/conservation-easements. Accessed Apr. 9, 2014.
14
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Colorado/2 use this source), general obligation and revenue bonds, real estate transfer taxes,
impact fees, and special district fees.
River corridor conservation projects in Vermont
are often funded by combining a variety of
sources. Potential sources of revenue include:
• A statewide 1 percent property transfer
tax that is distributed by the Vermont
Housing Conservation Board for
conservation and housing projects
statewide.23
• Local land trust conservation funds.
• Federal Fish and Wildlife conservation
funds.
• State river management funds.
• Conservation funds managed by
municipalities.24'25
Several Vermont communities, such as Brattleboro
and Shelburne, have established local conservation
funds through the authorities under state-enabling
legislation for the purpose of protecting open
space.26'27 Some communities have increased the
local property tax rate to provide a stream of
revenue for these funds. For example, voters in
Charlotte, Vermont, passed a levy to increase the
property tax rate by 2 cents for 10 years to
establish a conservation fund.28'29 Williston,
Vermont enacted recreation impact fees to acquire
parks and open space.30 The Vermont River Conservancy has several additional examples of
conservation projects that combine several sources of funding.31
Communities could also work with FEMA or state agencies to identify properties that have been
repeatedly flooded, and when funding is available, coordinate buyouts of those properties, remove
structures on those properties, and allow the land to serve as a buffer for future floods.32 FEMA's
Property Acquisition Handbook for Local Communities provides a helpful resource for communities
considering buyouts.33 Charles City, Iowa used FEMA's buyout program and other resources to turn
frequently-flooded riverfront property into a vibrant, riverfront park that can help buffer from
future floods and is an amenity for the community.34
Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) programs can also help protect agricultural lands and
sensitive natural areas. TDR programs must be allowed under state law in order for municipalities to
implement them. Vermont state law allows TDR programs,35 and several Vermont communities,
including Stowe, Vermont, have developed such programs. Under a TDR program, sensitive or
vulnerable lands, such as flood plains or land in a river corridor, are zoned to restrict development
and designated as a "sending area." Communities then designate "receiving areas" where they wish
to see additional development. Those "receiving areas" are zoned to allow additional density.
Landowners who own properties in a sending area are granted development credits for the
development rights that have been reduced by the rezoning and can sell those credits to developers
345 Acres (15%)
MRV Floodplain
protected by
conservation easements
Figure 7. This map shows land within the Mad River
Valley flood plain that is protected by conservation
easements. (Vermont Land Trust easements are shown
in green and conserved flood plain areas are shown in
green stripe.) Credit: Vermont Land Trust.
15
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
who wish to develop in a receiving area. TDR programs have been used successfully in many areas,
including Maryland36'37 and New Jersey,38 to preserve open space and agricultural lands while
compensating landowners for the change in development rights. TDR programs have often been
implemented in faster-growing areas with significant development pressure, but rural regions or
small towns might consider a TDR program implemented at a county or regional scale.
Communities or states could also consider providing tax incentives to protect important land.'v For
example, in Virginia, the state legislature passed a Riparian Buffer Tax Credit in 2000 that grants a
tax credit equal to 25 percent of the value of timber retained in a buffer up to $17,500. The buffer
must be at least 35 feet wide and maintained for 15 years.39 In Vermont, owners of farm and forest
land can apply to participate in the Current Use program, the purpose of which is to allow the
valuation and taxation of farm and forest land to be based on its remaining in agricultural or forest
use instead of its value in the market place. This program can help keep agricultural and forest land
in production, slow development on these lands, and achieve greater equity in property taxation on
undeveloped land.40
To further enhance the ability of vulnerable land to accommodate flooding, some communities
encourage riparian and wetland vegetation restoration. Restoring such vegetation can help absorb
stormwater and decrease erosion. Restoring wetland and riparian vegetation is a major focus of
Chesapeake Bay protection efforts such as stream restoration projects in Baltimore County,
Maryland.41 Federal programs, including the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Conservation
Reserve Enhancement Program, could help restore agricultural land along streams, as has been
done in Vermont.42 Several other USDA programs might also be helpful to communities that wish to
conserve vulnerable land.43
2. Encourage agricultural and other landowners to implement pre-disaster mitigation measures.
Agricultural land in flood plains
may be subject to erosion during
floods, impacting farmers' ability
to continue agricultural activities
on their property. However, with
planning and implementation of
pre-disaster mitigation measures,
agricultural land can be protected
and can provide flood storage
capacity during heavy rains,
reducing flood-related damage
and associated losses to both the
farm and the community.
Localities can work with
agricultural landowners to reduce
the risk that farmland will be
eroded by future floods and
simultaneously reduce flood risk
for the community by purchasing conservation easements on farmland or providing other incentives
to agricultural landowners to implement pre-disaster mitigation measures that could reduce
flooding risk. Disaster preparedness checklists such as Ready Aq: Disaster and Defense Preparedness
Figure 8. Agricultural land can help absorb flood water, particularly when
landowners implement pre-disaster mitigation measures. Credit: Lars Gange
& Mansfield Hell/light.
' Specific incentives that communities can offer vary by state and by community.
16
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
for Production Agriculture, developed by Penn State College of Agricultural Sciences Cooperative
Extension, may be useful in identifying general disaster preparedness techniques for agricultural
landowners.44
Agricultural landowners might also consider implementing specific flood mitigation measures, such
as storing hay bales in areas less likely to be flooded, since these bales can be carried into the river
during floods, clogging culverts and bridges, which can create a dam downstream and inadvertently
contribute to increased flooding along the riverbanks. Farmers and forestland managers can also
install ponds or swales to capture stormwater and plant vegetation that can tolerate occasional
inundation. Using such techniques can help reduce damage from flooding and can also help
recharge aquifers. The Extension Disaster Education Network provides information on best practices
and resources to reduce the impact of disasters, including flooding.45
3. Implement flood plain development limits that exceed FEMA requirements.
Many communities place restrictions on development in FEMA-identified Special Flood Hazard
Areas. However, those designated areas do not always represent the extent of land that is
vulnerable to flooding, such as in Vermont, where areas subject to fluvial erosion might be outside
the mapped flood plain. Other communities regulate land use in the flood plains based only on the
National Flood Insurance Program recommended standards, which allow new structures, fill, and
other uses in the flood plain, as long as the development meets minimum protective standards (i.e.,
residential structures are elevated 1 foot above base flood elevation).46'47
The experiences of communities across the country demonstrate that simply adopting the National
Flood Insurance Program minimum standards does not guarantee avoidance of flood damage and
losses.48 To avoid this problem, local governments could explore prohibiting all new development in
flood plains or floodways. According to the National Flood Insurance Program definitions, a flood
plain is "any land area susceptible to being inundated by flood waters from any source,"49 and a
floodway is "the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be
reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface
elevation more than a designated height."50
For example, in the wake of repeated flooding along the Harpeth River in Franklin, Tennessee, the
town prohibited all new development in the flood plain. From a legal perspective, exceptions may
be necessary in cases where already-subdivided lots are wholly within the flood plain and might
have vested development rights. In such instances, development might be allowed but would be
subject to higher elevation requirements (e.g., 2 or more feet above the base flood elevation) and
additional waterproofing and safety standards. However, in areas subject to fluvial erosion
(described below), simply elevating a structure might not reduce the risk of damage.
4. Implement fluvial erosion hazard zoning.
In some communities, erosion along rivers and streams caused by flooding is a more serious threat
than flood inundation, especially in Vermont's hilly and mountainous terrain. Fluvial erosion is
erosion caused by streams and rivers and can range from gradual bank erosion to catastrophic
changes in river channel location and size during floods.51 Development in river corridors can cause
erosion and changes to the river channel (see Figure 9). Such erosion is particularly prevalent in
narrow valleys or where streams have been altered and channelized. Fluvial erosion can destroy
bridges, culverts, roads, and houses.
To further protect vulnerable land and avoid exacerbating downstream flooding, communities could
explore fluvial erosion hazard zoning for land along rivers and streams. Such zoning, which is based
17
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
on river corridors and flood hazard areas, can limit or prohibit development in fluvial erosion hazard
areas. This technique is relatively new but is being implemented in Vermont and New Hampshire.
Waitsfield, one of the Mad River Valley communities studied in this project, has incorporated fluvial
erosion hazard regulations in its development codes. However, in many states the mapping
necessary to implement such zoning is not yet available. Those jurisdictions might wish to conduct
river corridor assessments and use the best available science and data upon which to base fluvial
erosion hazard zoning.
If communities choose to allow limited development in fluvial erosion hazard areas, they could
require compensatory flood storage to balance the loss of natural flood storage capacity caused by
that development and thereby offset impacts on existing structures and public safety. However, this
strategy might not reduce flooding risk as effectively as limiting development and redevelopment in
these areas altogether.
1. Development in
River Corridor
Structure built in river corridor is
vulnerable to damage as the river
channel changes over time.
2. Flooding Event
' r ua KM :lc
and too close to
that • VN '•
Normal vrattflsvtl
Structure in river corridor is Hooded
during high water {flooding} event
3. Attempt to
Protect Property
after Flooding
High WI<«T te«l
In an attempt to prevent property
damage, physical barriers are erected.
As a result, the river is confined and
flows faster, scouring and deepening
the channel and eroding the banks
downstream.
4. Unintended
Damage
The deeper river channel and (aster
water flow caused by encroachment
eventually leads the bank to collapse
during a high water event- Structures in
the nver corridor are lost or damaged.
5. Reduced
Flood Risk
Confined water 9m
-• deepens the rrvw
channel
The energy from scounng water
redistributes sediments and establishes
a new floodplain. With room m the river
corridor for the river to move and to
flood, property damage is reduced.
Why Protect River Corridors?
Figure 9. This graphic shows how development in the river corridor can impact the
river channel. Credit: Vermont Agency of Commerce and Community Development
and Vermont Agency of Natural Resources.
18
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Figure 10: The Mad River and its surrounding landscapes
make the region a beautiful place to live and visit. By
planning to conserve land in the river corridor, Mad River
Valley communities can also reduce damage from future
floods. Credit: EPA
5. Adopt agricultural or open space zoning.
Agricultural or open space zoning is another
technique available to communities that wish
to protect land to allow flood water to spread
and soak in the soil. This type of land use policy
can limit or prohibit development in agricultural
or other natural areas by limiting the number of
residential units allowed on a parcel.
Some communities with agricultural or open
space zoning currently allow development at
densities of one unit per 2 to 5 acres. This
density might inadvertently lead to spread-out,
large-lot development that might fail to protect
agricultural lands and open space and fail to
allow effective flood storage. Increasing the
agricultural or open space zoning to require a
minimum lot size of 20 acres or more might
more effectively preserve agricultural and open space uses and manage flood water. Many farming
communities in Wisconsin and Minnesota52'53 have adopted agricultural zoning with a minimum lot
size of 20 acres or more, and Blaine County, Idaho, adopted a resource conservation zone district
that allows only one unit per 160 acres.54 Colchester, Vermont, a community near Burlington, has a
minimum lot size of 25 acres in their agricultural zoning district.55
6. Adopt conservation or cluster subdivision ordinances.
Some communities are adopting conservation or cluster subdivision ordinances that encourage or
require new development to protect tracts of intact open space (including sensitive natural areas
like river and stream corridors) while clustering development into a smaller section of the parcel.
Windsor,56'57 Hartford,58 and St. George59 are examples of Vermont communities that have
implemented such approaches. These types of ordinances might help conserve land that is
important for retaining flood water. Conservation subdivisions work best when they are adjacent to
existing development rather than being separated and spread out across the landscape. More
information about cluster subdivision best practices can be found in EPA's 2012 publication,
Essential Smart Growth Fixes for Rural Planning, Zoning, and Development Codes.60
B. Vulnerable Settlements: Where development already exists in vulnerable areas, protect people,
buildings, and facilities to reduce future flooding risk.
Many historic downtowns are located along rivers
and in flood plains, which often contributes to their
attractive character and to the town's or region's
economy. These historic downtowns represent
significant investments in infrastructure over
generations, and many communities choose to
repair and rebuild these areas after floods because
of their economic, cultural, and social importance.
If communities choose to rebuild in areas that are
particularly susceptible to future flooding, they can
Vulnerable Settlements
This section of the report corresponds with the
"Protect People, Buildings, and Facilities in
Vulnerable Settlements" section in the Flood
Resilience Checklist in Appendix C. Please see the
checklist for a list of strategies to consider to protect
people, buildings, and facilities in vulnerable
settlements.
19
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
take some steps to reduce the damage that might occur in future floods, although they cannot eliminate
these risks entirely.
Changes to the National Flood Insurance Program might influence how communities consider protecting
assets in vulnerable locations. In 2012, the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act became law. It
removes subsidized rates (pre-Flood Insurance Rate Map rates) for certain classes of structures and
allows rates to increase by 25 percent per year until actuarial rates are achieved. These changes will
mean that premium rates will increase for some, but not all, National Flood Insurance Program
policyholders. However, on March 21, 2014, President Obama signed the Homeowner Flood Insurance
Affordability Act into law. This law repealed and modified certain aspects of the Biggert-Waters Flood
Insurance Reform Act. FEMA is in the process of providing guidance for how the Biggert-Waters Flood
Insurance Reform Act and the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act will influence flood
insurance rates in the future.61
Figure 11. Roads, bridges, businesses, and homes in the Mad River Valley were vulnerable to flooding during Tropical Storm
Irene. Credit: Clarion Associates.
1. Finance conventional protection methods.
Many communities that have experienced flooding from events like Tropical Storm Irene in Vermont
or Hurricane Katrina in Mississippi and Louisiana have pursued conventional, engineered
approaches to protect development in these areas, such as armoring riverbanks and coastal areas
with rock riprap, channelizing rivers, and elevating structures in the flood plain. These approaches
will likely continue to be used in the future but can be combined with non-structural techniques,
such as planting trees and vegetation along riverbanks, to enhance their success. FEMA's publication
Engineering with Nature: Alternative Techniques to Riprap Bank Stabilization provides examples of
alternatives to engineered approaches towards streambank stabilization.62
One of the challenges of conventional, structural engineered approaches to flood resilience is their
cost. Armoring riverbanks and rebuilding and elevating structures can be very expensive. Engineered
approaches can also cause future unintended flood damage upstream and down. Riprap tends to
increase the speed of water flow and can cause erosion downstream in some areas while
contributing to siltation in other areas.
Due to the cost of rebuilding damaged infrastructure, communities often seek funds from the
federal government for these efforts. The major federal funders include the U.S. Army Corps of
20
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Engineers (USAGE), FEMA, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and the
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).
The USAGE builds and repairs major flood control projects such as dams and levees, sometimes
requiring a state or local match for the investment. These projects can be very expensive,
underscoring the need for less expensive, non-structural techniques discussed above.63
FEMA has several funding programs, including its Public Assistance Program, which provides local
governments with funding to repair critical public infrastructure following a disaster.64 In addition,
FEMA's Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program and its Hazard Mitigation Grant Program help
underwrite the cost of repairing and upgrading damaged public facilities. These programs also
provide funding to demolish, relocate, or elevate structures in hazard-prone areas such as Special
Flood Hazard Areas.65'66 The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program requires that projects proposed to
reduce flooding risk or increase resilience be included in or compatible with their local Hazard
Mitigation Plan. FEMA has other programs67 that local governments can use to repair and upgrade
their damaged public facilities.
HUD has several programs that fund infrastructure construction and repair. Many small
communities have funded flood resilience-related capital improvements through the competitive
Small Cities Community Development Block Grant program.68 Local governments can, for example,
use these funds for public drainage projects before a flood. After a disaster, HUD activates its
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Disaster Recovery Funds.69 In Vermont, HUD has
delegated the administration of the HUD disaster funds to the Vermont Agency of Commerce and
Community Development in accordance with its HUD-approved plan, Vermont's Community
Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Action Plan.70 Other states might have similar state-
level administration of HUD disaster funds. Flood-related projects can be implemented under the
regular Community Development Block Grant program as well.71
Finally, both FEMA and DOT's Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) make funds available for
road reconstruction due to flood damage.72 FEMA's funds can be used to reconstruct local roads,
while FHWA's funds can only be used on roads that are on the federal-aid highway system, which
typically does not include most local roads.
While states do not typically have flood disaster funding programs at the same scale as the federal
government, they often give some assistance to communities in the aftermath of a disaster. State
agencies that fund disaster recovery and resilience usually include transportation, community and
economic development, health, environment, natural resources, and agriculture agencies. See
Section 4 of this report for more information on the role of states in disaster preparedness,
response, and recovery.
2. Upgrade regulations to protect vulnerable structures.
Many communities control flood plain development through special flood plain or flood hazard
area zoning overlay districts with associated development standards. Many of these standards
require the lowest floor of any structure in these districts to be elevated at least 1 foot above the
base flood elevation. Base flood elevation is the elevation to which flood water is expected to rise
during a 100-year flood (a flood that has a 1 percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any
given year).73 Communities could consider increasing this requirement to a minimum of 2 or more
feet above the base flood elevation to provide an extra margin of safety, although as noted above,
this may not be sufficient in some places such as fluvial erosion hazard zones (see Section 3.A.4).
Lake County, Illinois,74 and Fort Collins, Colorado,75 have implemented these enhanced
requirements, and the State of New Hampshire's model flood plain protection ordinance
21
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
incorporates this approach.76 While these enhanced standards might help protect structures in
frequently flooded areas, these requirements alone might not eliminate flooding risk entirely,
particularly since climate change projections suggest that floods will intensify in most regions of
the United States, especially in the Midwest and Northeast.77 The Land Use Institute's report,
Preparing for the Next Flood: Vermont Floodplain Management, discusses the legality of these
enhanced standards and other stormwater management regulations.78
Alternatively, towns could consider prohibiting development in the floodway or flood plain
entirely to reduce risk further (see Section 3.A.3). Communities could also establish a temporary
building moratorium on all new development after a flood occurs, allowing time to ensure that
new development will be compatible with the community's goals.
3. Address nonconforming uses.
Regulations for nonconforming structures and uses might also affect a community's flood resilience.
Many communities commonly place zoning and building code controls on the expansion or
renovation of nonconforming structures and uses, with a goal of replacing or removing these
structures over time. If a nonconforming structure or use that does not meet these standards is
reconstructed or redeveloped following significant damage—"significant" typically means that
repair costs exceed a dollar amount or percentage of the structure's value specified by the local
government—the new structure or use is required to be in full compliance with all current
standards, including setbacks, height, and lot area. Nonconforming use zoning rarely allows any type
of expansion, including elevating a building to make it more flood resistant.
While these nonconforming use regulations
make sense in many circumstances, they can
have unintended consequences in areas that
have been or might be subject to major
storm damage. Because full compliance with
current standards might be costly, property
owners might choose to undertake only
minor repairs to make their structures
habitable rather than invest in major
renovations that might trigger
nonconformity provisions. This unintended
consequence of nonconformity provisions
might lead to less investment in a storm-
damaged area and might mean that
property is still vulnerable to future floods.
Local governments also might have
complicated approval procedures for
renovations or expansions on nonconforming properties, which creates another hurdle to economic
recovery in storm-damaged areas.
Many areas of the country were developed before implementation of the National Flood Insurance
Program. As a result, many communities have large stocks of development that do not comply with
current flood damage prevention requirements. Often these homes and businesses fail to comply
with zoning-related requirements such as setbacks, off-street parking, or design-related provisions.
Because modifications to these older structures would trigger the requirement for full compliance
with all development standards, which can be cost-prohibitive, these nonconformities continue
unchanged through the years. Standards that allow identical replacement of these nonconforming
Figure 12. There was extensive cleanup work in Moretown,
Vermont after Tropical Storm Irene. Credit: Stephen Magill,
Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation.
22
-------
HVAC
COMPONENTS
RAISED TO
SECOND FLOOR
OR ATTIC
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
structures following storm events are politically popular but do little for the community's long-term
flood resilience.
To address these problems, some communities are
implementing nonconforming use regulations that
recognize partial compliance with development
standards and incorporate incentives for property
owners to redevelop and/or reconstruct
nonconforming structures using more hazard-
resilient techniques, such as building elevation or
flood-proofing of heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning (HVAC) equipment (see Figure 13).
Incentives for redeveloping nonconforming
structures, when coupled with requirements for
greater hazard resilience, can help development in
flood-prone areas better withstand future floods.
Modifications to the nonconforming provisions that
also provide an incentive for redevelopment (for
example, expanding a building's floor area) can help
home and business owners justify the costs of
achieving compliance and can foster redevelopment
that is more consistent with current zoning and
CONCRETE FLOODWALL AROUND
HVAC COMPONENTS BELOW
FLOOD LEVEL
100-YEAR
FLOOD LEVEL
Figure 13. HVAC equipment can be raised or flood-
proofed in buildings located in areas at high risk of
flooding. Credit: FEMA.
building codes. Coupling these incentives for redevelopment with requirements for partial
compliance with key development regulations (e.g., flood damage prevention standards within
special flood hazard areas) can improve overall flood resilience more than if full compliance with all
development regulations was required. In this situation, both the property owner and the
community reap benefits. The home or business owner can increase the value of their property
without incurring the expenditure of full code compliance, while the community benefits from a
structure that is less likely to sustain serious damage during a future flood.
4. Upgrade or adopt building codes to promote safer development.
Adopting building code requirements for structures built or reconstructed in or near flood plains can
help protect structures and people. The way states handle building codes varies from state to state.
Some states have statewide codes and leave little opportunity for communities to adopt more
stringent codes, while other states delegate building codes entirely to the local community's
jurisdiction. In Vermont, the state administers building codes for commercial buildings and multi-
family housing, but not for single family homes. The state also allows local jurisdictions to have
stricter building codes than what the state requires and allows municipalities to adopt codes for
single family homes.79'80'81 When local jurisdictions have control over their building codes and have
the resources to administer such codes effectively, they could consider upgrading their standards to
provide an extra margin of safety from flood damage. The International Building Code and
International Residential Code, which most state building codes adopt or use as a foundation,
reference FEMA, the National Flood Insurance Program, their maps and information, and the
American Society of Civil Engineers' Flood Resistant Design and Construction Standards 24-05—all of
which require higher design and construction standards for flood-prone areas.82'83
While each state and local jurisdiction has differing laws governing local authority to adopt or modify
building codes, most local governments in the United States have the legal authority to adopt zoning
provisions that respond to varying levels of risk, including those related to flood and weather
23
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
variability. Thus, communities can use zoning codes, including overlay zone districts, as an alternative
to building codes to enact requirements for flood mitigation and flood-proofing activities.
If local governments have limited authority to vary from state-imposed building codes and do not
choose to use zoning codes to enact flood mitigation requirements, they could provide incentives
such as increased density or building height for the voluntary use of flood-resistant design and
building standards, such as those outlined in the International Green Construction Code.84
5. Create new flood storage capacity through redevelopment.
When redevelopment opportunities arise in vulnerable areas next to rivers, communities can
require developers to design projects to include additional flood storage capacity. New flood storage
capacity could mean creating parks and other open spaces in flood-prone locations, replacing a
vertical wall along a river bank with a more gradual slope to create more room in the river channel
for rising water, creating a shallow depression in a lawn that can accommodate inundation, or
designing buildings to enable the first floor or basement to flood (and then be readily repaired when
the waters recede). Localities can encourage developers to create flood capacity in new
development by providing density bonuses or reduced stormwater fees in exchange for creating
flood capacity improvements on site or zoning overlays that indicate where new development must
include additional flood capacity features.
6. Help people connect with the river.
In some historic, riverfront towns and villages, the development faces away from the river, including
some communities in Vermont. Except at bridge crossings, residents might rarely see or consider the
river as a part of community life—until a flood occurs. A river can be a social and economic asset if
residents can safely access the riverfront. Opportunities to see and engage with the river could
increase residents' consciousness of the river's presence and motivate them to engage in planning
for future flooding and river protection.
In vulnerable settlements, communities can consider creating parks, outdoor dining and vending,
river-based recreation like fishing and kayaking, and other activities that can withstand flooding and
bring people closer to the river during normal flows. Implementing these approaches can also
provide important economic development opportunities for communities. A 2009 publication
developed by EPA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Rhode Island Sea Grant,
and the International City/County Management Association, Smart Growth for Coastal and
Waterfront Communities, provides a set of smart growth guidelines for waterfront development.85
The tools, techniques, and examples described in the publication provide specific ideas for how
Vermont communities could target their efforts to promote flood-friendly uses along the riverfront.
7. Relocate structures to less vulnerable areas.
As certain structures are flooded time and again, some communities and property owners might
determine that it would be preferable to relocate them or rebuild them in safer areas. The decision
to relocate can be difficult, emotional, and expensive, and it is usually a last resort for a community
whose residents may be reluctant to leave their homes and move their businesses. Relocating can
impose a disproportionate burden on low-income people in the community who often live or own
businesses in vulnerable areas. Making a concerted effort to engage low-income, minority, and
underserved community members in any discussion of relocation can help ensure their concerns are
well-understood and that they are informed about their risks.
When the community decides to relocate structures through extensive and thorough community
outreach, local governments can make the process easier for those who choose to relocate by
24
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
creating a coordinated package of relocation services and resources for residents, including financial
and logistical assistance with relocation. Through the relocation process, local governments can also
move critical facilities such as town halls, fire and safety facilities, and drinking water facilities to less
vulnerable locations, if possible.
Figure 14. Protecting assets in Waitsfield, Vermont, is critical to maintaining the
town's resource- and recreation-based economy and quality of life. Credit: Lars
Gange & Mansfield Heliflight.
Some communities have
created funding mechanisms
to buy properties that are
susceptible to future floods.
For example, in Napa County,
California, the community
voted to institute a VT. cent
sales tax to pay the local share
of a federal flood control
project that includes acquiring
flood-prone properties.86
Stormwater utility fees could
also be used for this purpose
(see Section 3.D.I). According
to a study by the University of
Maryland, a stormwater utility
fee of $20 per residential unit
could generate from $500,000
for counties with 25,000
households to $10 million annually for counties with 500,000 households. The revenue generated
from such stormwater utility fees could be used to purchase flood-prone properties, which can
protect other properties within the community.87
Local jurisdictions could choose to create a pre-disaster anticipatory relocation fund when such a
program is cost-effective (i.e., if the costs of anticipatory relocation are presumed to be less than the
costs of post-disaster relocation). Communities considering this approach could first prepare a
relocation assessment to identify:
• The range of uses, services, and facilities eligible for funding;
• Priorities for protecting vulnerable areas;
• Potential impacts of the anticipated event (e.g., flooding) to both people and structures; and
• The potential total funding created by each available source.
Communities could also prepare a cost-benefit analysis for structures and infrastructure that compares:
• Anticipatory relocation.
• Post-impact relocation.
• Status quo with no further action needed for the damaged service or infrastructure.
If a local government is considering offering relocation as an option for residents, it must ensure
that all community members are informed of their risks and involved in determining their options
for relocation, should they wish to relocate. Based on the outreach results, the local government
can determine the funding it will need to meet the community's wishes regarding relocation.
For a relocation fund to be successful, it must be backed by a long-term, reliable funding source such
as a dedicated sales tax. Additional available funding sources might include annual appropriations
25
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
from the general fund, bond issuance, and potentially, where funding will be used to relocate
infrastructure, a tap fee or stormwater utility fee. If vulnerable areas will be converted to natural or
open spaces, funding might also be available from foundations, nonprofit land preservation
organizations, federal government grants, or local or regional parks and recreation budgets. In
addition to local funding, there might be opportunities to leverage federal assistance, such as
FEMA's Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant program (authorized by the Stafford Act), Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program, or Flood Mitigation Assistance Program; and HDD's CDBG program. The funds
collected as part of the relocation fund can be provided directly to recipients as grants or could be
used to underwrite low-interest loans for relocation costs.
C. Safer Areas: Plan for and encourage new development in areas that are less vulnerable to future floods.
Communities seeking to enhance their resilience to
future floods can identify areas that are less Safer Areas
vulnerable to flooding, where growth can occur
more safely in the future. By encouraging This section of the reP°rt corresponds with the
, , . . ., , ., "Plan for and Encourage New Development in Safer
development in these safer growth areas,
Areas section in the Flood Resilience Checklist in
communities can accommodate new growth while Append|xC p|ease see the check|ist for a |jst of
reducing flooding risk. After communities have strategies to consider to plan for and encourage
identified where they can more safely grow in the new development in safer areas.
future, they can then also shape how development
is built in those locations by using the smart growth
principles. Several approaches and policies can help communities' direct growth into safer locations.
1. Identify locations suitable for development and redevelopment that are safer from flooding.
Many communities have identified locations where future growth is desired for a variety of reasons,
such as having access to existing infrastructure and/or being contiguous to other development in
the community. However, some of these desired future growth areas may not be in safe locations.
Communities that are interested in targeting growth in safer locations would need to ensure that
their desired growth areas are also located in areas that can more safely accommodate growth.
They can then identify these safer growth areas in the land use plan or comprehensive plan. Bringing
residents, property owners, and other stakeholders together to develop a vision for how the
community might accommodate new development in these locations can be very helpful. The
community can incorporate that vision for future development into the comprehensive plan, revise
existing regulations or adopt new regulations necessary to implement the plan, and plan new public
facilities with the vision in mind.
To identify where growth can occur more safely in the future, communities will need information
about where flooding has occurred in the past and, to the extent possible, projections for future
flooding that take climate change into account. The Vermont Agency of Natural Resources is
developing a comprehensive website for municipalities with mapping resources that will be
completed later in 2014 and could be used for this purpose.88'89 Designating new nodes for
development, including the desired density and mix of uses for those new nodes of development, in
the community's land use plan shows developers which locations the community has identified as a
priority for expansion. If developers understand where the community wants to grow, they may be
more likely to propose development in those locations.
26
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
2. Steer public policy and investments to
support development in safer locations.
Once communities have identified locations
that are safer for development, they can
adopt and implement policies and make
public investments that will encourage
development in those safer locations.
Localities can update their zoning and
subdivision regulations to remove barriers to
development in safer areas. If the local plan
calls for more compact development in safer
growth areas, local governments can ensure
that land use regulations do not
unintentionally inhibit development there.
For example, if regulations do not allow
multifamily developments or restrict the size
or height of multifamily buildings, they might
make it difficult to construct medium-density
developments that might be appropriate for
the area. Similarly, larger front setback
requirements and off-street parking standards
require more land and can increase the cost
of development. Revising these requirements
can make streets more attractive and safer for
Smart Growth Principles
Based on the experience of communities around
the nation, the Smart Growth Network developed a
set of 10 basic principles:
• Mix land uses.
• Take advantage of compact building design.
• Create a range of housing opportunities
and choices.
• Create walkable neighborhoods.
• Foster distinctive, attractive communities with
a strong sense of place.
• Preserve open space, farmland, natural
beauty, and critical environmental areas.
• Strengthen and direct development towards
existing communities.
• Provide a variety of transportation choices.
• Make development decisions predictable, fair,
and cost effective.
• Encourage community and stakeholder
collaboration in development decisions.
Source: Smart Growth Network. "Why Smart Growth?"
www.smartgrowth.org/why.php
pedestrians and bicyclists.v
Localities can also direct public investments in new infrastructure, facilities, and schools into safer
locations, which might help attract additional private investment in these areas. They can also
coordinate local capital improvement plans with community plans, ensuring that maintenance and
repair of existing infrastructure, as well as future capital improvements such as roads and utilities,
are located in safer areas. By prioritizing capital investments such as sewer, water, and streetscape
improvements in safer areas, communities can provide incentives for development to locate there.
Furthermore, communities can apply the smart growth principles (see text box) to ensure that all
new development that is built in safer locations is also compact, walkable, and has a range of
transportation and housing opportunities for residents. Using the smart growth principles can help
ensure that future growth is both safe and smart.
D. The Whole Watershed: Implement enhanced stormwater management techniques to slow, spread,
and infiltrate flood water.
Communities can also implement policies to more
effectively manage stormwater throughout the
entire watershed. Adopting these policies can help
slow stormwater, spread it out over a larger area,
and allow it to infiltrate into the ground rather
than running off into nearby streams and rivers.
The Whole Watershed
This section of the report corresponds with the
"Implement Stormwater Management Techniques
throughout the Whole Watershed" section in the
Flood Resilience Checklist in Appendix C. Please see
the checklist for a list of strategies to consider in
implementing stormwater management techniques
to slow, spread, and infiltrate flood water.
v For example, many communities require an off-street parking space for every 200 or 300 square feet of commercial building
when one per 400 square feet will meet parking demand, especially in smaller jurisdictions.
27
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
1. Explore watershed-wide stormwater management.
Flood damage mitigation measures, such as constructing levees or armoring banks, that are
implemented in one jurisdiction in a watershed can have unintended consequences for other
communities in that watershed by speeding the flow of floodwaters downstream. Recognizing this,
some communities, including those in Chittenden County, Vermont, are joining together to take a
regional, watershed-wide approach to stormwater management.90 To do this, communities can
develop educational programs and stormwater master plans for their watersheds and use
hydrologic data and watershed modeling to understand more clearly what actions to take to absorb
and slow down stormwater across the watershed to reduce flooding risk.91
Some communities create stormwater utilities to address stormwater management across a wider
geographic area. A stormwater utility is an entity established to generate and administer a
dedicated source of funding for stormwater pollution prevention activities. Generally, users pay a
fee to the utility based on land use and their contribution of runoff to the stormwater system.92
Stormwater utilities can oversee stormwater management regulation and can help prioritize,
coordinate, and finance critical pre-disaster mitigation efforts such as streambank restoration
projects. A 2009 EPA publication, Funding Stormwater Programs, provides information on ways
that communities can finance stormwater management programs, the steps involved in
establishing a stormwater utility, and the advantages and disadvantages of different types of
stormwater utilities.93 The report includes case studies from South Burlington, Vermont, and
Newton, Massachusetts.
2. Better manage stormwater from roads, driveways, and parking lots.
Roads, driveways, and parking lots made of impervious surfaces do not allow stormwater to
infiltrate back into the ground and can increase stormwater runoff volumes, especially during
heavy rains. In addition, the runoff collects the debris, oils, and pollutants from these paved
surfaces and carries them into surface waters. Communities could consider implementing policies
that can reduce the effect that roads, driveways, and parking lots have on exacerbating flooding
and degrading water quality. They could encourage the use of pervious material in new driveways
and parking lots, and in new roads where feasible. Geo-synthetic materials that are pervious and
washout resistant can also be used for roads and can be funded using FEMA's Public Assistance
Program. In addition to green infrastructure practices such as pervious pavement and roadside
swales that allow stormwater to infiltrate into the ground, communities could also require that
culverts, which are often too small to adequately drain stormwater from large storms, be
upgraded to protect roads from damage during flooding. The state of Vermont offers guidance to
towns and cities about adequate culvert sizing.94 Where possible, communities can consider using
open-bottom stream overpasses instead of culverts, since culverts can be damaging to passage of
fish and other aquatic organisms. Vermont law, for example, prohibits the creation of obstructions
in streams that prevent the passage of fish unless authorized by permit,95 and the state's design
standards for road crossings over streams now generally results in an open-bottom or box culvert
design that allows for such passage.96
In many rural communities, roads and parking areas are made of gravel, rather than asphalt.
Communities often surround gravel roads and parking areas with ditches that drain and protect
the surfaces during heavy rains, but these ditches might also increase flooding by conveying
stormwater directly into streams and rivers. Communities can require techniques to slow the flow
of water by spreading it into vegetated areas and infiltrating it in areas with pervious soils.
Communities can also provide information about stormwater management techniques that
28
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
private landowners could use for their driveways. Such techniques not only reduce flooding risk
but can also improve water quality.
3. Adopt local stormwater management regulations that allow the use of green
infrastructure techniques.
While some communities in the United States have implemented comprehensive stormwater
management regulations to comply with EPA or state requirements, other smaller, rural jurisdictions
might not be required to implement such regulations. In Vermont, state stormwater permits are
required only for developments with more than 1 acre of impervious surface and sites that disturb
more than 1 acre through the stormwater program. Additionally, comprehensive state land use
regulations require a review of stormwater impacts for subdivisions of 10 or more lots, commercial
development of 10 or more acres, and any development at elevations above 2,500 feet. However,
stormwater runoff from developments with, for example, less than 1 acre of impervious surface on
a steep slope might also contribute to flooding problems. Recognizing this, some localities and
regions are going above and beyond federal or state stormwater requirements to regulate
stormwater throughout their communities. Williston,97'98 Rutland," and South Burlington100 are
three Vermont communities that regulate stormwater on smaller parcels or in vulnerable areas such
as steep slopes or land near lakes and streams.
Communities that want to improve stormwater management can consider requiring new
developments to prepare stormwater management plans that use best management practices
suggested by federal, state, or other agencies. "Hard" engineering solutions such as underground
cisterns are often used to meet these requirements, but "soft" green infrastructure approaches such
as ponds, swales, or wetlands could be considered as an alternative or supplement to structural
solutions. Green infrastructure is an approach that uses vegetation and soil to manage rainwater
where it falls (see Figure 15). It can help retain and/or reuse stormwater near where it is generated
and can be less costly and less environmentally damaging than conventional stormwater treatment,
particularly when it is designed into development from the start.101 Specific green infrastructure
approaches include:102
• Reducing the amount of impervious surface by designing parking lots and other paved
surfaces so that they are smaller.
• Reducing the effect of impervious surfaces by directing the runoff into features where it can
infiltrate, such as rain gardens; depressed landscape islands in parking lots (instead of
mounded landscape islands); or bioswales, which can be located in public right of ways.
• Using pervious concrete, pavement, or pavers in appropriate locations such as some parking
lots and driveways. To maintain the perviousness of the materials, however, it is important
that these surfaces be maintained by practices such as vacuum sweeping.
• Reusing rainwater for landscaping, gardening, or irrigation (i.e., rainwater harvesting) on
industrial, institutional, commercial, or residential lots.
• Promoting the use of rain barrels to capture rainwater for later use.
• Constructing green roofs (vegetated roofs that absorb stormwater) or blue roofs (non-
vegetated roofs that are designed to store water)103 where a controlled flow system allows
water to collect and then gradually drain away.
• Including storage underneath parking lots, streets, and sidewalks that empties through small
holes into the sewer system or infiltrates into the ground.
29
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Figure 15. Green infrastructure techniques such as rain gardens (left) and rain barrels (right) retain stormwater
runoff on site and reduce peak flooding. Credit: Clarion Associates.
The town of Williston, Vermont, has adopted stormwater management regulations that
incorporate many of these concepts in the "Watershed Health" section of its Unified Development
bylaw.104 The regulations include standards for holding pre-construction meetings with town staff
to discuss erosion control, avoiding development on steep slopes, and requiring buffers around
wetlands and along streams.
4. Adopt tree protection measures.
Large trees can absorb significant amounts of rain and can reduce stormwater velocity. To protect
trees, communities could start by preserving existing, undeveloped forested areas. Communities
could also require that larger trees, such as those that are more than 8 inches in diameter, be
preserved on a development site as much as possible. Or, if those trees must be removed, a
community could require that they be replaced at a minimum one-to-one basisvl on site or mitigated
through payment into a municipal tree protection fund.105 Communities could also implement
requirements to retain a specified percentage of the tree canopy on a development site. For
example, for a parcel that has 100 percent tree canopy cover, regulations might be designed to
require that development on the site be placed so that 75 percent of the canopy is preserved.
Currituck County, North Carolina, and Folly Beach, South Carolina, have tree protection codes that
illustrate these approaches.106'107 The town of Wellesley, Massachusetts also has a tree protection
ordinance that may serve as a useful model.108 Additional standards can protect trees during
construction, such as requiring fencing at the tree dripline, which is the area bounded by the outer
circumference of the tree branches, and where most of the roots are located.
5. Adopt steep slope development regulations.
Development on steep slopes can cause erosion and can increase stormwater volumes (see Figure
16). However, regulation of steep slope development varies widely in communities across the
nation. Some communities with a history of landslides, mudslides, or earthquakes have
implemented standards that prohibit building on steep slopes or reduce the density of residential
development allowed in those areas. But many other communities merely caution against building
on steep slopes or are silent on the topic. Some communities are beginning to recognize that
vl For example, if a tree that measures 6 caliper inches is removed, it must be replaced with a total of 6 caliper inches of
new trees.
30
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
development on steep slopes can affect stormwater
volume and erosion and are adopting standards that
discourage or prohibit development on very steep slopes
(steeper than a 30 percent grade). Williston, Vermont's
steep slope development regulations reduce allowable
densities on slopes greater than 15 percent and prohibit
development on slopes greater than 30 percent in most
instances.109 Salt Lake County, Utah, has adopted similar
regulations in a more urban context, but the regulations
provide more flexibility to accommodate infill
development.110 Before adopting steep slope
development regulations, localities should reach out to
engage affected property owners during the process of
developing the regulations, since the regulations might
reduce the developable portion of certain properties. As
discussed in Sections 3.A.1 and 3.A.6 of this report, non-
regulatory approaches like transfer of development
rights programs and conservation subdivisions can
complement regulatory approaches and can also help
address landowners' concerns about reducing the
developable portion of their lands.
6. Adopt riparian and wetland buffer requirements.
Figure 16. Development on steep slopes and
poor erosion control methods can cause erosion
and increase the quantity of stormwater runoff.
Steep slope development regulations can help
prevent some of these impacts. Credit: Vermont
Stormwater Program.
Stream and wetland buffer standards require development setbacks from rivers and other water
bodies. These buffers can allow stormwater to infiltrate into the soil, reducing flood flows
downstream in more developed areas of the community and reducing erosion by stabilizing river
banks. Buffers can also remove some pollutants that would otherwise run off into local rivers.
Studies show that in more rural areas, a buffer of 100 feet can significantly reduce stormwater
runoff and improve water quality/"'111 Smaller buffers of 25 to 50 feet might be appropriate in more
developed areas if supplemented with enhanced stormwater management techniques such as
additional vegetation or underground cisterns. Effective buffer regulations typically include
vegetation requirements in riparian areas along streams and rivers. If vegetation is stripped out of
buffers, stormwater is less likely to spread and infiltrate in, and erosion will be greater.
Consequently, many local ordinances add standards to protect vegetation, such as requiring
construction fencing around buffer areas and larger trees and prohibiting storage of construction
materials in buffer areas, which compacts soils and can damage trees and lead to additional runoff.
Watershed buffer standards adopted by the town of Williston, Vermont, require a 150-foot
development setback from most lakes and streams.
v" An accepted rule of thumb is that a stream buffer should be a minimum of 50 feet wide and preferably 100 feet to remove
sediment, increase stormwater infiltration, and protect wildlife.
31
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
4. State Policy Options and Strategies to Improve Flood Resilience
While a community's flood resilience is influenced strongly by local land use decisions and local disaster
resilience planning efforts, state-level policies also affect local flood resilience. This section describes
ways that state policies influence flood resilience and outlines options that state agencies can consider
as they seek to improve local communities' abilities to enhance their flood resilience.
Recognizing that state policies might influence communities' abilities to implement flood resilience
practices, this project assessed state policies in Vermont and offered options for how those policies
might be amended or new policies created to enhance flood resilience at the local level.
Figure 17. States can support local flood recovery and long-
term flood resilience through agency policies and
coordination. Credit: Richard Amore, State of Vermont.
States influence flood resilience in a variety of
ways:
• They are often responsible for coordinating
disaster preparedness, response, and
recovery efforts.
• They often help communities develop the
capacity to prepare for, respond to, and
recover from disasters.
• They serve as a conduit for resources and
technical assistance from federal agencies
like FEMAthat provide disaster-related
planning and recovery assistance.
• They implement policies that shape the
universe of how local land use decisions
are made and, thereby, indirectly influence
communities' flood resilience.
• Finally, they make decisions about the location and type of many infrastructure investments in
communities through grants or direct provision of transportation, housing, and water and
wastewater infrastructure, all of which might affect local communities' flood resilience.
The policy options that follow are offered as a starting point from which Vermont state agencies can
begin to determine how they should proceed. Ultimately, it is up to the state to select the appropriate
policies from this list, refine them, and allocate resources accordingly. The options fall into two major
categories: A) those actions that several agencies can take together, and B) those actions that are
specific to individual agencies. These policy options were developed in consultation with Vermont state
agencies through the course of this project. A more detailed description of these options and action
steps is available in a state policy options report, Vermont State Agency Policy Options: Smart Growth
Implementation Assistance Program, Disaster Recovery and Long-Term Resilience Planning in Vermont,
that was prepared as part of this project and is available online.112 The state of Vermont is now setting
priorities for action based on these policy options, some of which are summarized below.
A. Inter-Agency Policy Options to Enhance Flood Resilience
When state agencies are considering ways to enhance communities' flood resilience, they might wish to
evaluate the prospects of potential policies in terms of their technical, administrative, fiscal, and political
feasibility. This analysis could also consider current state capacity and conditions, the potential impact of
the policies on flood resilience, the duration of the action (how long it will take to develop and
implement the approach), and other considerations such as whether implementing the policy will create
the opportunity to leverage other resources and existing policies.113'114
32
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
1. Conduct an audit of state programs.
State agencies (including those listed in Section 4.B, below) could conduct an audit of their programs
to assess the degree to which they directly or indirectly help or hinder the state's ability to improve
communities' resilience. One resource to assist with such an audit is the State Disaster Recovery
Planning Guide, developed by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's Coastal Hazards Center
of Excellence to help states develop, maintain, and implement state disaster recovery plans.115
2. Develop a comprehensive pre-event recovery plan.
State agencies could also develop a comprehensive pre-event recovery plan in advance of the next
disaster and set up periodic exercises to practice implementing the recovery plan. According to the
State Disaster Recovery Planning Guide, one of the best reasons to develop a pre-disaster recovery
plan is to prepare state agencies and others to act quickly after a disaster and to minimize the
damage that the disaster might cause. Pre-disaster recovery plans typically address issues such as
interorganizational coordination, communication, staffing, and capacity building, as well as topics
such as debris management and reconstruction, so that the state is prepared to recover quickly
should a disaster occur. State agencies could reach out to Community Planning and Capacity
Building personnel in FEMA's regional offices116 to develop approaches to enhance state and local
partners' abilities to plan for, manage, and implement disaster recovery activities.
3. Develop a post-disaster personnel plan.
State agencies can also develop a post-disaster personnel plan that describes anticipated personnel
needs should a disaster occur and identifies the resources that can be provided by a network of
partners, including federal and local officials, nonprofits, quasi-governmental organizations,
consulting firms, and other groups. These personnel plans could emphasize the pre-disaster
development of a group of trained personnel that can be prepared to assist state recovery activities
should a disaster occur. While few such personnel plans exist at the state level, several counties
have these plans. For example, Hillsborough County, Florida's personnel plan includes 17 county
agencies and major nongovernmental organizations such as the Red Cross.117
4. Map flood plains and adopt a No Adverse Impact standard.
State agencies can implement a comprehensive state corridor and flood plain protection program
guided by the principle of "No Adverse Impact." According to the Association of State Flood Plain
Managers, "No Adverse Impact flood plain management takes place when the actions of one
property owner are not allowed to adversely affect the rights of other property owners...in terms of
increased flood peaks, increased flood stages, higher flood velocities, increased erosion and
sedimentation, or other impacts the community considers important."118 The No Adverse Impact
approach is a framework of techniques and tools that communities can use to identify hazards in
their communities and identify ways to reduce those hazards, through hazard identification,
planning, infrastructure, emergency services, regulations and standards, corrective actions, and
education and outreach.119 As a first step, agencies could develop and maintain a statewide river
corridor and flood plain mapping program supported by flood and fluvial erosion hazard risk
assessments. With statewide maps in place, state agencies could integrate a development standard
of No Adverse Impact into their policies and programs. The state also could encourage municipalities
to adopt No Adverse Impact standards by providing model language that could be incorporated into
local regulations limiting development in flood-prone areas.
33
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
B. Agency-Specific Policy Options to Enhance Flood Resilience
In addition to coordinating efforts across multiple agencies, individual state agencies could take steps to
enhance flood resilience at the local level. This section includes policy options for:
1. Natural resources and environmental protection agencies.
2. Transportation agencies.
3. Emergency management agencies.
4. Commerce, community, economic development, and housing agencies.
5. Agriculture agencies.
6. Disaster recovery offices.
1. Natural resources and environmental protection agencies could:
• Ensure that river corridor, inundation, and flood plain data is available for communities and that
the process used to make decisions about river corridor and fluvial erosion hazard areas actively
engages local partners that have a deep, locally grounded understanding of flood hazard risk,
including how risks may change in light of climate change projections. Charlotte-Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina, used an inclusive, process-oriented approach to assessing flood hazard
risk that could be emulated at the state level.120
• Encourage or require communities to regulate their flood plains based on Flood Insurance Rate
Maps and river corridor maps through a combination of setbacks, fluvial erosion hazard
overlays, river corridor protection plans, best management practices, land use and Hazard
Mitigation Plans, infrastructure management initiatives, and stormwater management plans.
One community that has already taken action is Bennington, Vermont, which adopted a Fluvial
Erosion Hazard Overlay District that requires a zoning permit that limits uses in the overlay
district, prohibits certain hazardous uses, and exempts agricultural activities. This overlay district
could be used by the state as a model ordinance for other communities.121
• Take the lead in establishing state minimum "No Adverse Impact" standards that municipalities
would be encouraged or required to incorporate into local bylaws limiting development in flood-
prone areas.122
2. Transportation agencies could:
• Incorporate hazard mitigation and flood resilience practices into project design and
prioritization procedures.123 For example, transportation agencies could ensure their designs
account for flood hazard vulnerability and the effects of designs on downstream flooding and
fluvial erosion, and incorporate those parameters into documents such as the Vermont State
Design Standards. The vulnerability criteria used to shape resilient design parameters could be
developed in coordination with natural resource agencies and regional planning organizations.
• Review all infrastructure programs, including grant programs for communities, to look for
opportunities to create local incentives and prioritize projects and maintenance strategies that
reduce the risk of future flood damage in vulnerable areas. Infrastructure resilience features
include redundant systems; robustness (inherent strength/resistance); resourcefulness (capacity
to mobilize needed resources); and rapidity (speed with which disruptions can be overcome and
services restored). An example of a local grant program that can provide incentives for change is
Vermont's Flood Resilience Community Program.
• Conduct and maintain an inventory system of federal, state, and local culverts. Once the
inventory is complete, the results could be incorporated into the state Hazard Mitigation Plan
34
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
and linked to the state's strategy for reducing risks from inadequate culverts. Vermont's
transportation agency has initiated a state-wide inventory of culverts on state roads. The next
step will be to coordinate with towns and regional planning organizations to evaluate town-
owned structures. New York and Ohio have manuals for inspecting and inventorying state
culverts that could be models for other states.124'125
• Coordinate with environmental and emergency management agencies and local officials to
identify appropriate hazard mitigation measures, including those that might be eligible under
FEMA's Public Assistance 406 Program and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. Measures
might include increasing the size of inadequately sized culverts that were damaged during
extreme events, limiting upstream development, creating catchment areas, and conducting
flood engineering studies that could inform which hazard mitigation measures are appropriate.
3. Emergency management agencies could:
• Host statewide hazard mitigation workshops emphasizing the link between smart growth
approaches to land use policies and disaster resilience. The agency could implement this
approach in partnership with other agencies and organizations that have expertise in smart
growth approaches to development. Partners could include other state agencies, regional
planning organizations, local communities, and nonprofit organizations involved in growth and
development issues. These workshops could target a prioritized list of flood-prone towns and
involve an evaluation of existing plans, ordinances, Flood Insurance Rate Maps, river corridor
maps, drainage studies, and other relevant materials. Workshops could also evaluate each
town's land use plan (if it exists) and consider if it limits public investments in flood-prone areas
and encourages compact, mixed-use development in safer areas. As one example, Wisconsin
hosts hazards workshops, covering topics such as applying for grants, implementing mitigation
ideas, and reviewing local Hazard Mitigation Plans.126
• Strengthen state and local Hazard Mitigation Plans and ensure that they are coordinated with
local community and land use plans. The state of California's Community Planning and Hazard
Mitigation Guidebook provides information about how to incorporate land use planning and
climate change adaptation into local Hazard Mitigation Plans.127'128 FEMA's Integrating Hazard
Mitigation Into Local Planning provides information about how to integrate hazard mitigation
activities into local planning efforts.129
• Work with FEMA to develop improved guidance and protocols for FEMA's Public Assistance
Program so that interagency interactions operate more smoothly during the next disaster. For
example, one option to consider includes developing an agreed-upon protocol with FEMA to
ensure that transition meetings between incoming and outgoing FEMA staff will include state
and local officials, since federal staff rotations can complicate relationships with state and local
agencies otherwise.
4. Commerce, community, economic development, and housing agencies could:
• Conduct an audit of all economic development funding decisions in the agency to determine
whether they advance flood resilience goals. Examples of such funding programs include
Community Development Block Grants (both pre- and post-disaster) and programs addressing
community revitalization, historic preservation, tourism, business, and economic development.
• Develop a group of trained personnel who can help individuals, families, and business owners
understand grant program eligibility requirements. These personnel could work in partnership
with regional development corporations, small business development centers, Volunteer
Organizations Active in Disasters,130 professional associations, colleges and universities, and
Community Emergency Response Team members131 that are trained in post-disaster assistance.
35
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
For example, North Carolina's Small Business Technology Development Center provides training
programs and technical assistance to help businesses prepare for and recover from disasters,
including helping businesses secure federal and state disaster loans.132
• Conduct training programs targeting local homeowners, renters, and businesses that help to
inform them about steps they can take to reduce their exposure to flood hazards and better
capitalize on post-disaster recovery grant and loan programs available after disasters.
5. Agriculture agencies could:
• Partner with the Cooperative Extension Service133 and Extension Disaster Education Network134
to develop a self-assessment tool for farmers to evaluate vulnerability to floods, including steps
to mitigate the impacts of flooding on individual farms and downstream neighbors, including
farms, communities, and vulnerable infrastructure. The University of Florida Cooperative
Extension Service provides suggestions for agricultural producers preparing for floods, including
how to protect livestock during flooding events.135 Florida's Coastal Resilience Index might be
useful in shaping a resilience assessment tool for farmers.136
• Expand the role of agriculture extension agents to include hosting training programs on creating
more disaster-resilient farms before the next disaster strikes. The Texas Extension Disaster
Education Network provides information on disaster preparedness, mitigation, and recovery,
including providing information for farmers to become better prepared for disasters.137 Other
states could provide similar information.
6. Disaster recovery offices:
• State governments could also consider creating and staffing a long-term flood or disaster
recovery office, if one does not exist, that would be tasked with overseeing the development of
a state disaster recovery plan and coordinating recovery-related policies. A disaster recovery
office could lead efforts to conduct pre-disaster recovery planning, which is a core principle of
the National Disaster Recovery Framework, a FEMA guide that provides a framework and
flexible response structure for disaster-affected states, tribes, and local jurisdictions.138 The
Louisiana Recovery Authority, Louisiana's 33-member body tasked with identifying and
obtaining funding for disaster recovery activities, is one such office.139 The state of Iowa also
created a statewide disaster recovery office, the Rebuild Iowa Office, following floods in 2008.
Although the Rebuild Iowa Office closed in 2011, several of the resilience planning functions of
the office continue at the state level and with the University of Iowa.140 EPA and FEMA provided
technical assistance to several communities in Iowa in partnership with the Rebuild Iowa Office
and other state and local entities.141
36
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
5. Conclusion
While land use decisions that affect a community's flood resilience might seem to happen incrementally
or opportunistically, they are often guided by plans, policies, and regulations that shape development
over time. The experience from Vermont's recovery from Tropical Storm Irene suggests that
coordinating local and state agency policies, plans, and actions can help promote flood recovery and
encourage safer growth. This experience can serve as a model to other states and communities seeking
to enhance flood resilience in the future.
The state of Vermont and communities in the Mad River Valley have already begun to implement
several of the strategies outlined in this report.
State agency actions taken to date include the following:
• The Vermont Agency for Commerce and Community Development (ACCD) launched the
Vermont Economic Resiliency Initiative, which will help businesses and communities continue
operations and rebound quickly from future disasters. ACCD and its partners will map areas
where river flooding and other hazards overlap centers of economic activity, roads, and other
public investments. They will develop plans in five communities to help them better manage
their risks and build back stronger and safer after disasters. These plans will serve as models for
towns across the state.
• ACCD is also considering floodways when it updates certain state designation programs,
including Neighborhood Development Areas and Growth Center designations.
• The Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) has hired two additional River Engineers who
will assist with regulating stream alteration projects during emergencies and will deliver cross-
agency training to ensure emergency actions do not exacerbate future risks. ANR is also working
to improve river corridor maps and to make them more accessible to communities and
organizations for assessing risks, evaluating development proposals, and identifying projects
that will improve resilience to flooding.
• The Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans) is surveying all 60,000 culverts on state roads to
map their condition and prioritize those in need of upgrades. They are working on this effort
with ANR to take fluvial erosion hazards into account and to design culvert upgrades that allow
for fish passage. In addition, VTrans is updating its process of prioritizing projects to include
flood risk.
• The Vermont Division of Emergency Management and Homeland Security hired additional
staff to work on its FEMA-funded Public Assistance Program, and it is positioned to provide
support to towns in developing improved Hazard Mitigation Plans. They have also conducted a
series of workshops with federal, state, and local partners to better define and improve
interagency coordination.
With assistance from the Friends of the Mad River (FMR) and the Mad River Valley Planning District
(MRVPD), local actions in the Mad River Valley to date include the following:
River Corridors
• After more than 2 years of planning and development, the Town of Warren passed Fluvial
Erosion Hazard Zoning bylaws on November 12, 2013. FMR supported and assisted the Warren
Planning Commission in community outreach and advocacy related to the bylaws. Warren joins
Waitsfield, which adopted a Fluvial Erosion Hazard Overlay Zone in spring of 2011. There is more
work to be done in the Towns of Fayston, Moretown, and Duxbury.
37
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Vulnerable Settlements
• The Mad River Stream Bank Stabilization Project was completed in October 2013, which
stabilizes 425 linear feet of eroding bank upstream of Waitsfield's Covered Bridge by reinforcing
and riprapping the eroding bank and installing a riparian buffer. This stormwater
management/flood control mitigation project at the Bridge Street Marketplace was made
possible through funding from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation's
Ecosystem Restoration Program and FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.
• A historic building destroyed by Tropical Storm Irene located adjacent to Waitsfield's Covered
Bridge was purchased by the Town of Waitsfield in January 2013 in order to restrict future
development in this flood-prone location. The site is poised to become a small park.
• The Towns of Waitsfield and Moretown are in the process of moving their town offices out of
vulnerable locations, both of which experienced substantial flooding from Tropical Storm Irene.
These projects are made possible with support from HUD Community Development Block Grant-
Disaster Recovery funding.
Safer Areas
• The Town of Waitsfield is implementing a Decentralized Wastewater Loan Program, whose pilot
project is the development of wastewater capacity in a location safe from flooding.
The Whole Watershed
• To better understand the current state of stormwater management in the Mad River Valley, the
FMR hired a consultant to complete a brief study entitled: Stormwater Management Regulation
in the Mad River Valley: Review and Recommendations.142 The goal of the study was to
characterize the problems associated with stormwater in the Mad River Valley; complete a
summary review of town plans and zoning regulations with respect to stormwater; and make
some basic recommendations about how to improve stormwater regulations.
• To follow up on the recommendations of the stormwater study, FMR and the MRVPD met with
representatives from the Planning Commissions in Warren, Waitsfield, and Fayston. FMR and
MRVPD plan to continue to work with Planning Commission members to implement improved
zoning regulations.
• To address existing stormwater problems, the following actions have been taken:
o In fall 2013, the University of Vermont partnered with FMR to design and install a model
bioretention facility (a type of green infrastructure) in the Village Square shopping
center in Waitsfield, a priority area as identified in a recent stormwater assessment.
o FMR is also leading a project at Mad River Glen ski area to redesign its parking lot to
address stormwater issues. This project provides an excellent outreach opportunity.
o FMR is working with Mad River Valley road crews to address areas vulnerable to
erosion, including providing technical assistance and support with project
development. FMR completed a Road Erosion Inventory in 2011 and is working with the
towns to address priority areas.143
Communities across the state and nation can learn from the approaches that the state of Vermont and
communities in the Mad River Valley have already implemented. The Flood Resilience Checklist in
Appendix C of this report can also serve as a tool for communities to identify gaps in policies and
regulations that could help improve their flood resilience. The policies, regulations, strategies, and other
resources in this report (many of which are listed in Appendix D of this report) can then help
communities fill those gaps and enhance their flood resilience over time.
38
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Endnotes
1 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Weather Service. "Hydrologic Information Center -
Flood Loss Data." http://www.nws.noaa.gov/hic. Accessed Aug. 8, 2013.
2 Georgakakos, Aris, and Paul Fleming. National Climate Assessment, Chapter Three: Water Resources. 2013 (draft
v. 11). http://ncadac.globalchange.gov/download/NCAJanll-2013-publicreviewdraft-chap3-water.pdf.
3 Horton, Radley, and Gary Yohe. National Climate Assessment, Chapter 16: Northeast. 2013 (draft v. 11)
http://ncadac.globalchange.gov/download/NCAJanll-2013-publicreviewdraft-chapl6-northeast.pdf.
National Research Council. Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change. Washington, DC: The National Academies
Press, 2010. http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php7record id=12783.
5 Horton, Radley, and Gary Yohe. National Climate Assessment, Chapter 16: Northeast. 2013 (draft v. 11)
http://ncadac.globalchange.gov/download/NCAJanll-2013-publicreviewdraft-chapl6-northeast.pdf.
6 Vermont Agency of Natural Resources. "Tropical Storm Irene By the Numbers."
http://www.anr.state.vt.us/anr/climatechange/irenebythenumbers.html. Accessed Feb. 6, 2014.
7 Smart Growth Online. "Why Smart Growth?" http://www.smartgrowth.org/why.php. Accessed Jan. 23, 2014.
8 Vermont Natural Resources Council. "Land Use Planning/Smart Growth." http://vnrc.org/programs/sustainable-
communities/land-use-planningsmart-growth. Accessed Jan. 23, 2014.
9 Fluvial Erosion Hazard Areas: Frequently Asked Questions and Answers. Vermont Agency of Natural Resources.
2010. http://vtwaterquality.org/rivers/docs/rv vtfehqa.pdf.
10 FEMA. "Multi-Hazard Mitigation Planning." http://www.fema.gov/multi-hazard-mitigation-planning.
Accessed Jan. 23, 2014.
11 FEMA. "Integrating Hazard Mitigation Into Local Planning: Case Studies and Tools for Community Officials."
http://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/31372?id=7130. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
12 Integrating the Local Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan into a Community's Comprehensive Plan: A Guidebook for
Local Governments. FEMA. http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/1388432170894-
6f744a8afa8929171dc62d96da067b9a/FEMA-X-lntegratingLocalMitigation.pdf.
13 Schwab, James. Hazard Mitigation Planning: Integrating Best Practices into Planning. American Planning
Association, Planning Advisory Service. 2010. http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1739-25045-
4373/pas 560 final.pdf.
14 State of Vermont. Vermont Statutes. Title 24: Municipal and County Government, Chapter 117: Municipal and
Regional Planning and Development, Sub-Chapter 5: Municipal Development Plan, Section 4382: The Plan for a
Municipality. Effective Mar. 23,1968. http://www.leg.state.vt.us/statutes/fullchapter.cfm?Title=24&Chapter=117.
15 State of Rhode Island. General Laws. Title 45: Towns and Cities, Chapter 45-22.2: Rhode Island Comprehensive
Planning and Land Use Act, Section 45-22.2-6: Required Content of a Comprehensive Plan. Revised 2011.
http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/Statutes/TITLE45/45-22.2/45-22.2-6.HTM.
16 Resilient Communities Scorecard: A Tool for Assessing Your Community. Vermont Natural Resources Council.
2013. http://vnrc.org/resources/communitv-planning-toolbox/tools/vermont-smart-growth-score-card.
17 Smart Growth America. "Smart Growth Implementation Toolkit."
http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/leadership-institute/implementation-tools. Accessed Jan. 23, 2014.
18 Changes to the Community Rating System to Improve Disaster Resiliency and Community Sustainability. FEMA.
2013. http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1907-25045-6528/changes to crs system 2013.pdf.
19 Community Rating System. FEMA. 2012. http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1605-20490-
0645/communitvratingsystem 2012.pdf.
20 Community Rating System Communities by State. FEMA. 2012. http://www.fema.gov/media-library-
data/20130726-1830-25045-0453/crosstab bystate 4may 2012.pdf.
21 Nelson, Kevin. Essential Smart Growth Fixes for Rural Planning, Zoning, and Development Codes. U.S. EPA. 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/essential fixes.htm#part2.
39
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
22 Clark, Arielle R. Farina. Sales Tax: Earmarked for Open Space. University of Washington. 2005.
http://depts.washington.edU/open2100/pdf/3 OpenSpacelmplement/lmplementation Mechanisms/sales tax.pdf
23 Vermont Housing and Conservation Board. "VHCB Conservation Programs."
http://www.vhcb.org/conservation.html. Accessed Mar. 6, 2014.
24 Implementation Manual. Vermont Land Use Education and Training Collaborative. 2007.
http://www.vpic.info/Publications/Reports/lmplementation/OpenSpacePrograms.pdf.
25 Personal communication with Faith Ingulsrud, Planning Coordinator, Vermont Department of Housing and
Community Development, on Feb. 27, 2014.
26 State of Vermont. Vermont Statutes. Title 24: Municipal and County Government, Chapter 77: Construction,
Condemnation, Section 2804: Reserve Funds. Effective Mar. 11,1998.
http://www.leg.state.vt.us/statutes/fullsection.cfm?Title=24&Chapter=077&Section=02804.
27 State of Vermont. Vermont Statutes. Title 10: Conservation and Development, Chapter 155: Acquisition of
Interests in Land by Public Agencies, http://www.leg.state.vt.us/statutes/sections.cfm?Title=10&Chapter= 155.
28 Charlotte Land Trust. "Process of Conservation." http://www.charlottelandtrust.org/conservation.
Accessed Apr. 3, 2014.
29 Town of Charlotte, VT. Select Board Meeting Notes. August 9, 2010.
http://www.charlottevt.org/vertical/sites/%7B5618ClB5-BAB5-4588-B4CF-
330F32AA3E590/o7D/uploads/0/o7B56035679-59BD-419A-8D4E-7D23A177FD50%7D.PDF.
30 State of Vermont. Vermont Statutes. Title 24: Municipal and County Government, Chapter 131: Impact Fees,
Section 5200: Purpose. Effective Jul. 1,1989.
http://www.leg.state.vt.us/statutes/fullsection.cfm?Title=24&Chapter=131&Section=05200.
31 The Vermont River Conservancy. "Completed Project List."
http://www.vermontriverconservancy.org/completed-proiects/list. Accessed Mar. 6, 2014.
32 FEMA. "Hazard Mitigation Assistance - Property Acquisition (Buyouts)." http://www.fema.gov/application-
development-process/hazard-mitigation-assistance-propertv-acquisition-buyouts. Accessed Jan. 23, 2014.
33 Property Acquisition Handbook for Local Communities: A Summary for States. FEMA. 1998.
http://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/3117.
34 2013 National Award for Smart Growth Achievement. U.S. EPA. 2013.
http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/awards/sg awards publication 2Q13.htm#plazas.
35 State of Vermont. Vermont Statutes. Title 24: Municipal and County Government, Chapter 117: Municipal and
Regional Planning and Development, Section 4423: Transfer of Development Rights. Amended 2003.
http://www.leg.state.vt.us/statutes/fullsection.cfm?Title=24&Chapter=117&Section=04423.
36 TDR Program Overview. Department of Economic Development, Agricultural Services Division. 2006.
http://www6.montgomervcountymd.gov/content/ded/agservices/pdffiles/tdr info.pdf.
37 Pinho, Rute. Maryland's Transfer of Development Rights Programs. 2010. http://www.cga.ct.gov/2010/rpt/2010-
R-0464.htm.
38 The New Jersey Pinelands Development Credit (PDC) Program. New Jersey Pinelands Commission. 2012.
http://www.ni.gov/pinelands/infor/fact/PDCfacts.pdf.
39 Commonwealth of Virginia. Riparian forest buffer protection for waterways tax credit. Section 58.1-339.10.
http://legl.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+58.1-339.10.
40 Vermont Department of Taxes. "Current Use." http://www.state.vt.us/tax/pvrcurrentuse.shtml.
Accessed Apr. 3, 2014.
41 Duerksen, Chris, and Cara Snyder. Nature Friendly Communities: Habitat Protection and Land Use Planning.
Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2005.
42 U.S. Department of Agriculture. "Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program -Vermont."
http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/newsReleases?area=newsroom&subiect=landing&topic=pfs&newstype=prfactsheet
&type=detail&item=pf 20110214 consv en crepvt01.html. Accessed Apr. 3, 2014.
40
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
43 U.S. Department of Agriculture. "Conservation."
http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?navid=CONSERVATION. Accessed Apr. 3, 2014.
44
Ready Ag: Disaster and Defense Preparedness for Production Agriculture. Penn State Cooperative Extension.
2010. http://readyag.psu.edu/pdfs/ReadyAG DAIRYandGENERALWorkbook.pdf.
45 Extension Disaster Education Network. "Reducing the Impact of Disasters Through Education."
http://eden.lsu.edu/Pages/default.aspx. Accessed Apr. 3, 2014.
46 U.S. Government. Code of Federal Regulations. Title 44: Emergency Management and Assistance, Chapter 1:
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security, Subchapter B: Insurance and Hazard
Mitigation, Part 59: General Provisions, http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-
idx?tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title44/44cfr59 main O2.tpl.
47 U.S. Government. Code of Federal Regulations. Title 44: Emergency Management and Assistance, Chapter 1:
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security, Subchapter B: Insurance and Hazard
Mitigation, Part 60: Criteria for Land Management and Use. http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-
idx?tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title44/44cfr60 main O2.tpl.
48 Association of State Flood Plain Managers. "No Adverse Impact Floodplain Management."
http://www.floods.org/index.asp7menuID=349&fir. Accessed Apr. 3, 2014.
49 FEMA. "Definitions." http://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program/definitionstfF.
Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
50 FEMA. "Floodway." http://www.fema.gov/floodplain-management/floodway. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
51 Dolan, Kari, and Mike Kline. Municipal Guide to Fluvial Erosion Hazard Mitigation. Vermont Agency of Natural
Resources. 2011. http://www.vtwaterquality.org/rivers/docs/rv municipalguide.pdf.
"Stearns County, MN. "Zoning Districts."
http://www.co.stearns.mn.us/Environment/LandUseandSubdivision/Zoning/ZoningDistricts.
Accessed Apr. 3, 2014.
53 Minnesota Department of Agriculture. "Minnesota's Agricultural Land Preservation Statutes."
http://www.mda.state.mn.us/protecting/conservation/preservation/statutes.aspx. Accessed Apr. 3, 2014.
54 Blaine County, ID. County Code, Title 9, Chapter 6B: Resource Conservation District (RC-160). Passed Mar. 19,
2013. http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php7book id=450.
55 Town of Colchester, VT. Zoning Regulations, Table A-2 Dimensional Standards. Amended Dec. 10, 2013.
http://colchestervt.gov/PlanningZ/regs/Zoning/A-2-DimensionalReq.pdf.
56 Town of Windsor, VT. Zoning Regulations. Amended Sept. 25, 2007. http://swcrpc.org/wp-
content/uploads/2013/ll/Windsor-Zoning-Regulations-2007.pdf.
57 Town of Windsor, VT. Subdivision Regulations. Amended Sept. 26, 2006. http://swcrpc.org/wp-
content/uploads/2013/ll/Windsor-Subdivision-Regulations-2006.pdf.
58 Town of Hartford, VT. Ordinances. Jul. 25, 2013.
https://law.resource.org/pub/us/code/city/vt/Hartford.html#13455808.
59 Town of St. George, VT. Land Use Regulations. Adopted Jul. 22, 2010.
http://www.stgeorgevt.com/pdfs/Regulations%20and%20Bylaws/SGLU R(22Jul2010)lr.pdf.
60 Nelson, Kevin. Essential Smart Growth Fixes for Rural Planning, Zoning, and Development Codes. U.S. EPA. 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/essential fixes.htm#part2.
61 FEMA. "Flood Insurance Reform." http://www.fema.gov/flood-insurance-reform. Accessed Apr. 3, 2014.
62 Engineering with Nature: Alternative Techniques to Riprap Bank Stabilization. FEMA.
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/about/regions/regionx/Engineering With Nature Web.pdf.
63 U.S. Army Corps of Et
Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
64 FEMA. "Public Assista
state-tribal-and-non-profit. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
63 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. "Mission Overview." http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions.aspx.
c
64 FEMA. "Public Assistance: Local, State, Tribal and Non-Profit." http://www.fema.gov/public-assistance-local-
41
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
65 FEMA. "Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program." http://www.fema.gov/pre-disaster-mitigation-grant-program.
Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
66 FEMA. "Hazard Mitigation Grant Program." http://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-grant-program.
Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
67 FEMA. "Response and Recovery." http://www.fema.gov/response-recovery. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
68 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. "State Administered Community Development Block
Grant."
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program offices/comm planning/communitydevelopment/programs/
stateadmin. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
69 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. "Community Development Block Grant Program - CDBG."
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program offices/comm planning/communitydevelopment/programs.
Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
70 Vermont Agency of Commerce and Community Development. "Community Development Block Grant Disaster
Recovery Funds." http://accd.vermont.gov/strong communities/opportunities/funding/cdbgdr.
Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
71 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. "Community Development Block Grant Entitlement
Communities Grants."
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program offices/comm planning/communitydevelopment/programs/
entitlementtfeligibleactivities. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
72 Emergency Relief Manual. Federal Highway Administration. 2013. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/reports/erm/er.pdf.
73 FEMA. "Base Flood Elevation." http://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program/base-flood-elevation.
Accessed Feb. 27, 2014.
74 Wo Adverse Impact Floodplain Management Community Case Studies. Association of State Flood Plain Managers.
2004. http://www.floods.org/PDF/NAI Case Studies.pdf.
75 No Adverse Impact Status Report: Helping Communities Implement NAI. Association of State Flood Plain
Managers. 2002. http://www.floods.org/NoAdverselmpact/NAI Status Report.pdf.
76 Williams, Eric. Innovative Land Use Planning Techniques: A Handbook for Sustainable Development. Chapter 2.7
Flood Hazard Area Zoning. New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services. 2008.
http://des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/repp/documents/ilupt complete handbook.pdf.
77 Georgakakos, Aris, and Paul Fleming. National Climate Assessment, Chapter Three: Water Resources. 2013 (draft
v. 11). http://ncadac.globalchange.gov/download/NCAJanll-2013-publicreviewdraft-chap3-water.pdf.
78 Medlock, Sam Riley. Preparing for the Next Flood: Vermont Floodplain Management. Land Use Institute,
Vermont Law School. 2009.
http://www.vermontlaw.edu/Documents/VLS.065.09%20LAND%20USE%20PAPER PFF.pdf.
79 Personal communication with John E. Adams, Planning Coordinator, Vermont Department of Housing and
Community Development, on Mar. 11, 2014.
80 Vermont Department of Public Safety. "Code Information Sheets."
http://firesafetv.vermont.gov/resources/code sheets. Accessed Mar. 13, 2014.
81 Code Information Sheet: Permit and Licensing Requirements. Vermont Department of Public Safety.
http://firesafetv.vermont.gov/sites/firesafetv/files/pdf/Code%20lnfo%20Sheets/2012%20permit%20requirements
.pdf. Accessed Mar. 13, 2014.
82 International Code Council. "International Code Council." http://www.iccsafe.org. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
83 FEMA. "Highlights of ASCE 24-05, Flood Resistant Design and Construction (2010)."
http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=3515. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
84 International Code C<
Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
84 International Code Council. "International Green Construction Code." http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/IGCC.
42
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
85 Smart Growth for Coastal and Waterfront Communities. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S.
EPA, ICMA, and Sea Grant Rhode Island. 2009. http://coastalsmartgrowth.noaa.gov/smartgrowth fullreport.pdf.
86 Napa County, CA. "Flood Control and Water Conservation District."
http://www.countyofnapa.org/Pages/DepartmentContent.aspx?id=4294971816. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
87 Environmental Finance Center. "Environmental Finance Center." http://www.efc.umd.edu.
Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
88 Personal communication with Faith Ingulsrud, Planning Coordinator, Vermont Department of Housing and
Community Development, on Mar. 7, 2014.
89 Vermont Agency of Natural Resources. "Flood Resilience."
https://outside.vermont.gov/agency/ANR/FloodResilience/Pages/default.aspx. Accessed Mar. 13, 2014.
90 Chittenden County, VT. "Smarter Waterways." http://www.smartwaterways.org. Accessed Mar. 6, 2014.
91 Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District. "Watershed Management Plan."
http://www.northgeorgiawater.com/plans/watershed-management-plan. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
92 The Citizen's Guide to Stormwater Pollution Prevention. City of Arlington, Texas. 2010.
http://www.arlingtontx.gov/environmentalservices/pdf/CitizensStormwaterGuide.pdf.
93 Funding Stormwater Programs. U.S. EPA. 2009.
http://www.epa.gov/regionl/npdes/stormwater/assets/pdfs/FundingStormwater.pdf.
94 Vermont League of Cities and Towns. Vermont Town Road and Bridge Standards, Culverts and Bridges. 2013.
http://www.vlct.org/assets/News/Current/Town Road Bridge Standards.pdf.
95 State of Vermont. Vermont Statutes. Title 10: Conservation and Development, Chapter 111: Fish, Section 4607:
Obstructing Streams. Effective May 9,1961.
http://www.leg.state.vt.us/statutes/fullsection.cfm?Title=10&Chapter=lll&Section=04607.
96 Bates, Kozmo Ken, and Rich Kirn. Guidelines for the Design of Stream/Road Crossings for Passage of Aquatic
Organisms in Vermont. Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2009.
http://www.vtfishandwildlife.com/library/Reports and Documents/Aquatic%20Organism%20Passage%20at%20St
ream%20Crossings/ Guidelines%20for%20the%20Design%20of%20Stream Road%20Crossings%20for%20Passage
%20of%20Aquatic%20Organisms%20in%20Vermont.pdf.
97 Town of Williston, VT. Unified Development Bylaw. Chapter 29, Watershed Health. Amended Jul. 19, 2010.
http://town.williston.vt.us/vertical/Sites/%7BF506B13C-605B-4878-8062-
87E5927E49F00/o7D/uploads/0/o7B2920AC61-60E4-483B-8A02-015028396045%7D.PDF.
98 Williston, VT. "Stormwater." http://www.town.williston.vt.us/index.asp?Type=B BASIC&SEC=%7BACC6B21E-
OFDB-497F-8A5A-62CDFF871272%7D. Accessed April 3, 2014.
99 Stormwater Management Plan. Town of Rutland, VT. 2013.
http://www.vtwaterquality.org/stormwater/docs/ms4/sw TownofRutland MS4 SWMP.pdf.
100 Stormwater Management Plan. City of South Burlington, VT. 2013.
http://www.watershedmanagement.vt.gov/stormwater/docs/ms4/sw SBurlington SWMP.pdf.
101 U.S. EPA "Why Green Infrastructure?" http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/gi why.cfm.
Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
102 U.S. EPA. "Stormwater Management Best Practices."
http://www.epa.gov/oaintrnt/stormwater/best practices.htm. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
103 New York City Department of Environmental Protection. "Blue Roof and Green Roof."
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/html/stormwater/green pilot project psllS.shtml. Accessed Apr. 9, 2014.
104 Town of Williston, VT. Unified Development Bylaw. Chapter 29, Watershed Health. Amended Jul. 19, 2010.
http://town.williston.vt.us/vertical/Sites/%7BF506B13C-605B-4878-8062-
87E5927E49FO%7D/uploads/%7B2920AC61-60E4-483B-8A02-015028396045%7D.PDF.
105 Duerksen, Chris. Tree Conservation Ordinances: Land-Use Regulations Go Green. American Planning Association. 1993.
43
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
106 Currituck County, NC. Unified Development Ordinance. Section 7.2, Tree Protection. Amended Nov. 18, 2013.
http://co.currituck.nc.us/pdf/unified-development-ordinance-new/Currituck%20UDO%20Final%20-%2011-19-
2013red.pdf.
107 Folly Beach, SC. Code of Ordinances. Title XV, Section 166.01, Tree Protection. Passed Jul. 23, 2013.
http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gatewav.dll/South%20Carolina/follvbeach/follybeachsouthcarolinacodeofordinance
s?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:follybeach sc.
108 Town of Wellesley MA. Rules and Regulations Relative to the Administration of Section XVIE: Tree Preservation
and Protection. http://www.wellesleyma.gov/Pages/WelleslevMA Planning/TreeBylawRulesRegs6.27.11.pdf.
109 Town of Williston, VT. Unified Development Bylaw. Chapter 29, Watershed Health. Amended Jul. 19, 2010.
http://town.williston.vt.us/vertical/Sites/%7BF506B13C-605B-4878-8062-
87E5927E49FO%7D/uploads/%7B2920AC61-60E4-483B-8A02-015028396045%7D.PDF.
110 Salt Lake County, UT. Code of Ordinances. Title 19: Zoning, Chapter 19.72: Foothills and Canyons Overlay Zone.
http://librarv.municode.com/HTML/16602/level2/TIT19ZO CH19.72FOCAOVZO.html.
111 Mitchell, Paul. The Scientific Justification for Stream Buffers. University of Georgia Land Use Clinic. 2006.
http://www.rivercenter.uga.edu/publications/pdf/luc buffer fact sheet.pdf. Accessed Apr. 9, 2014.
Smith, Gavin, Dylan Sandier, and Mikey Goralnik. Vermont State Agency Policy Options: Smart Growth Implementation
Assistance Program, Disaster Recovery and Long-Term Resilience Planning in Vermont U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Coastal Hazards Center of Excellence, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
http://accd.vermont.gov/sites/accd/files/Documents/strongcommunities/cpr/VT-StateAgencvPolicyOptionsFINAL web.pdf.
113 Smith, Gavin, Dylan Sandier, and Mikey Goralnik. Vermont State Agency Policy Options: Smart Growth
Implementation Assistance Program, Disaster Recovery and Long-Term Resilience Planning in Vermont. U.S.
Department of Homeland Security Coastal Hazards Center of Excellence, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
http://accd.vermont.gov/sites/accd/files/Documents/strongcommunities/cpr/VT-
StateAgencyPolicyOptionsFINAL web.pdf.
114 Smith, Gavin, Dylan Sandier, and Mikey Goralnik. "Assessing State Policy Linking Disaster Recovery, Smart
Growth, and Resilience in Vermont Following Tropical Storm Irene." Vermont Journal of Environmental Law. Vol.
15 (2013). 66-102. http://viel.vermontlaw.edu/files/2013/ll/Smith.pdf.
115 Smith, Gavin, and Dylan Sandier. State Disaster Recovery Planning Guide. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Coastal Hazards Center of Excellence, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 2012.
http://coastalhazardscenter.org/dev/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/State-Disaster-Recoverv-Planning-
Guide 2012.pdf.
116 FEMA. "Community Planning and Capacity Building." http://www.fema.gov/communitv-planning-and-capacitv-
building. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
117 Hillsborough County, FL "Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan Documents."
http://www.hillsboroughcounty.org/index.aspx?nid=1795. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
118 Smith, Gavin. Planning for Post-Disaster Recovery: A Review of the United States Disaster Assistance Framework.
Gavin Smith. Island Press, 2012.
119 No Adverse Impact Status Report: Helping Communities Implement NAI. Association of State Flood Plain
Managers. 2002. http://www.floods.org/NoAdverselmpact/NAI Status Report.pdf.
120 Schwab, James C. Hazard Mitigation: Integrating Best Practices into Planning. American Planning Association.
2010. Pages 74-86. http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1739-25045-4373/pas 560 final.pdf.
121 Town of Bennington, VT. Fluvial Erosion Hazard Overlay District. Adopted Apr., 27, 2009.
http://www.benningtonplanningandpermits.com/BPC/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/fehr.pdf.
122 Association of State Flood Plain Managers. "No Adverse Impact."
http://www.floods.org/index.asp?menulD=460. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
123 Edwards, Frances L and Daniel C. Goodrich. Handbook of Emergency Management for State-Level
Transportation Agencies. San Jose State University. 2010.
http://transweb.sisu.edu/MTIportal/research/publications/documents/COOP%20COG%20l Vince 022410.pdf.
44
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
124 Culvert Inventory and Inspection Manual. New York State Department of Transportation. 2006.
https://www.dot.nv.gov/divisions/operating/oom/transportation-
maintenance/repositorv/CulvertlnventorylnspectionManual.pdf.
125 Culvert Management Manual. Ohio Department of Transportation. 2014.
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Engineering/Hydraulics/Culvert%20Management/Culvert%20Management
%20Manual/CMM%20-%20Januarv2014.pdf.
126 Wisconsin Department of Military Affairs, Division of Emergency Management. "2012 All-Hazards Mitigation
Planning Workshop Presentations and Handouts."
http://emergencymanagement.wi.gov/mitigation/Mitigation Workshop/toc.asp. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
127 California Governor's Office of Emergency Services. "Hazard Mitigation."
http://www.calema.ca.gov/hazardmitigation. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
128 California Emergency Management Agency. "Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Program (LHMP)."
http://hazardmitigation.calema.ca.gov/plan/local hazard mitigation plan Ihmp. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
129
FEMA. "Integrating Hazard Mitigation Into Local Planning: Case Studies and Tools for Community Officials."
http://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/31372?id=7130. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
130
National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster, http://www.nvoad.org. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
131 FEMA. "Community Emergency Response Teams." https://www.fema.gov/communitv-emergency-response-
teams. Accessed May 12, 2014.
132
133
Small Business Technology Development Center, http://www.sbtdc.org. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
U.S. Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture. "Cooperative Extension Offices."
http://www.csrees.usda.gov/Extension. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
134
135
Extension Disaster Education Network. http://eden.lsu.edu/Pages/default.aspx. Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
Special Considerations for Agricultural Producers-Preparing for a Flood or a Flash Flood. University of Florida
Cooperative Extension Service. 1998. http://disaster.ifas.ufl.edu/PDFS/CHAP09/D09-07.pdf.
136 Sempier, T.T., et al. Coastal Resilience Index: A Community Self-Assessment. Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant
Consortium and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2010.
http://www.southernclimate.org/documents/resources/Coastal Resilience Index Sea Grant.pdf.
137 Texas A&M AgriLife Extension. "Texas Extension Disaster Education Network." http://texashelp.tamu.edu.
Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
138 FEMA. "National Disaster Recovery Framework." http://www.fema.gov/national-disaster-recovery-framework.
Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
139 Louisiana Recovery Authority Strategic Plan: FY 2008/2009. Louisiana Recovery Authority.
http://lra.louisiana.gov/assets/docs/searchable/StrategicPlan0809.pdf.
140 University of Iowa School of Urban and Regional Planning. "RIO Iowa Project." http://rio.urban.uiowa.edu.
Accessed Apr. 9, 2014.
141 U.S. EPA. "Smart Growth Technical Assistance in Iowa." http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/iowa techasst.htm.
Accessed Apr. 8, 2014.
142 Stormwater Management Regulation in the Mad River Valley: Review and Recommendations. Watershed
Consulting Associates, LLC. 2013.
http://www.friendsofthemadriver.org/documents/MRVStormwater Scoping Study Spring 2013 .pdf.
143 Mad River Valley Erosion Study Final Report. Watershed Consulting Associates, LLC. 2012.
http://friendsofthemadriver.org/documents/MRV Road Erosion Study Report.pdf.
45
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Appendix A: About the Environmental Protection Agency's Smart
Growth Implementation Assistance Program
Smart Growth Principles
Communities around the country are looking to get
the most from new development and to maximize
their investments. Frustrated by development that
gives residents no choice but to drive long
distances between jobs and housing, many
communities are bringing workplaces, homes, and
services closer together. Communities are
examining and changing zoning codes that make it
impossible to build neighborhoods with a variety of
housing types. They are questioning the fiscal
wisdom of neglecting existing infrastructure while
expanding new sewers, roads, and services into the
fringe. Many places that have been successful in
ensuring that development improves their
community, economy, and environment have used
smart growth principles to do so (see box). Smart
growth describes development patterns that
create attractive, distinctive, and walkable
communities that give people of varying age,
wealth, and physical ability a range of safe,
convenient choices in where they live and how
they get around. Growing smart also means that
we use our existing resources efficiently and
preserve the lands, buildings, and environmental
features that shape our neighborhoods, towns, and cities.
However, communities often need additional tools, resources, or information to achieve these goals. In
response to this need, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) launched the Smart Growth
Implementation Assistance (SGIA) Program to provide technical assistance—through contractor
services—to selected communities.
The goals of this assistance are to improve the overall climate for infill, brownfields redevelopment, and
the revitalization of non-brownfield sites—as well as to promote development that meets economic,
community, public health, and environmental goals. EPA and its contractors assemble teams whose
members have expertise that meets community needs. While engaging community participants on their
aspirations for development, the team can bring their experiences from working in other parts of the
country to provide best practices for the community to consider.
For more information on the SGIA program, including reports from communities that have received
assistance, see www.epa.Qov/smartQrowth/SQia.htm.
Based on the experience of communities around the
nation, the Smart Growth Network developed a set
of 10 basic principles:
• Mix land uses.
• Take advantage of compact building design.
• Create a range of housing opportunities and
choices.
• Create walkable neighborhoods.
• Foster distinctive, attractive communities with
a strong sense of place.
• Preserve open space, farmland, natural
beauty, and critical environmental areas.
• Strengthen and direct development towards
existing communities.
• Provide a variety of transportation choices.
• Make development decisions predictable, fair,
and cost effective.
• Encourage community and stakeholder
collaboration in development decisions.
Source: Smart Growth Network. "Why Smart Growth?"
www.smartgrowth.org/why.php
A-l
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Appendix B: About the Project
This appendix describes the process by which the state and local assessments for this Smart Growth
Implementation Assistance project were completed.
A. Local Policy Assessment
The local policy assessment, funded by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
completed by consultants from SRA International,
Inc., Clarion Associates, and CSA Ocean Sciences, Inc.,
included the steps listed below. Communities seeking
to improve their flood resilience may wish to consider
these steps.
Key Planning Documents for
Flood Resilience Review
In most jurisdictions, the primary documents
that the community would review for flood
resilience include:
• Local comprehensive plans.
• Local Hazard Mitigation Plans.
• Zoning and subdivision regulations
(including flood plain development
standards).
• Building codes.
• Stormwater management ordinances.
• Regional plans.
Smaller towns and villages may not have stand-
alone building codes and instead might include
building code-type regulations in local zoning or
subdivision regulations. Likewise, if the town
does not have a comprehensive stormwater
management ordinance, some aspects of
stormwater management can be addressed in
zoning and subdivision regulations or by
standards established by state environmental or
natural resource agencies.
1. Identify and review plans, policies, codes, and
regulations that affect flood resilience.
A team of national experts in hazard mitigation,
flood recovery, land use planning, and state policy
worked with officials from the state of Vermont,
regional planning organizations, and local
municipalities to discuss flood history, flood
damage, and development and demographic
trends in the Mad River Valley and to identify key
documents for the team to review for the
communities of Moretown and Waitsfield.
Moretown and Waitsfield were chosen because
they were representative of other Vermont
communities affected by Tropical Storm Irene.
The team reviewed Moretown and Waitsfield's
codes, their local Hazard Mitigation Plans, the
regional land use plan that covered both towns,
and other relevant policies. Because Moretown and Waitsfield did not have building codes, the team
reviewed the zoning and subdivision provisions addressing building code issues.
The team then developed a framework for reviewing the documents (which eventually became the
checklist in Appendix C). The initial assessment was organized into three general categories
representing the range of options that communities can typically use to achieve safer growth:
• Protect undeveloped river corridors, including vulnerable areas, such as flood plains and
wetlands along waterways, from incompatible development.
• Protect people, buildings, and facilities in already-developed, vulnerable areas.
• Encourage new development in safer areas.
For each category, the team identified specific policies, regulations, or non-regulatory approaches
that other jurisdictions have used successfully and then determined whether Moretown or
Waitsfield had used those approaches. For example, in the category of protecting undeveloped river
corridors, the team assessed whether zoning regulations addressed development on steep slopes or
included stream buffer standards. In the category of protecting people and buildings in already-
B-l
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
developed, vulnerable areas, the team assessed whether current zoning regulations would protect
structures that are rebuilt.
2. Develop initial policy and regulatory options.
Based on the review of policies, the team prepared a detailed assessment that identified a range of
policy options and implementation tools, both regulatory and non-regulatory, that the two Mad
River Valley towns might consider to improve their flood resilience. These initial policy options were
distributed to state, regional, and local officials prior to the team's site visit to the Mad River Valley.
On October 23-25, 2012, the team, including federal and state officials, visited the Mad River Valley
to view the extent of flood damage and discuss the initial policy options with stakeholders. During
this visit, the team met with town officials in Waitsfield and Moretown, including the zoning
administrator, town manager, elected and appointed officials for each town, and representatives
from regional planning and nonprofit organizations to discuss the policy options and receive
feedback. The site visit also included a community meeting during which the team presented the
policy options to residents, business owners, local officials, and other stakeholders from the Mad
River Valley and solicited feedback on those ideas.
3. Refine the checklist and policy and regulatory options.
Based on the input gathered during the
site visit, the team revised the flood
resilience checklist and policy options to
improve flood resilience in the Mad
River Valley. The team organized these
policy options into four geographically
oriented approaches, adapted from the
original three categories:
• River Corridors: Conserve land
and discourage development in
particularly vulnerable areas
along river corridors such as
flood plains and wetlands.
Figure B-l. In October 2012, EPA, FEMA, and Vermont state
agency staff toured flood-damaged sites in the Mad River Valley.
Credit: EPA.
• Vulnerable Settlements: Where
development already exists in
vulnerable areas, protect
people, buildings, and facilities to reduce future flooding risk.
• Safer Areas: Plan for and encourage new development in areas that are less vulnerable to
future flooding events.
• The Whole Watershed: Implement enhanced stormwater management techniques to slow,
spread, and infiltrate floodwater.
These policy options, summarized in this report, are described in more detail in a policy memo for
Moretown and Waitsfield and a guidance document for the state of Vermont, available at:
http://accd.vermont.ciov/stronci communities/opportunities/planninci/resiliencv/sciia.
B-2
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
B. State Policy Assessment
The state policy assessment, led by faculty and staff from the University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill's Department of Homeland Security Coastal Hazards Center of Excellence (the Coastal Hazards
Center team) and funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), followed a
parallel process:
1. Analyze state policies from a flood resilience perspective.
The Coastal Hazards Center team analyzed relevant state policies from a variety of state-level
organizations in Vermont, including the Agency of Natural Resources; Agency of Transportation;
Division of Emergency Management and Homeland Security; Agency of Commerce and
Community Development; Agency of Agriculture, Food, and Markets; and the Irene Recovery
Office. The team assessed these agencies' policies in terms of their ability to encourage flood
resilience at the local level.
2. Participate in a site visit to the Mad River Valley.
The Coastal Hazards Center team participated in the October 2012 site visit to the Mad River Valley.
During the visit, the team talked with state agency officials to learn how state activities and policies
might influence flood resilience at the local level, both in the Mad River Valley communities that
were the focus of this project and in other communities throughout the state.
3. Draft, review, and finalize policy options for state-level organizations.
Following the site visit, the Coastal Hazards Center team drafted initial policy options and presented
these policy options to state agency representatives at a follow-up meeting on July 24, 2013. After
this meeting, the team refined and finalized a memo on policy options for Vermont agencies to
consider and delivered it to the state agencies.
A detailed report on the state policy assessment and suggested policy options is available at
http://accd.vermont.Qov/stronQ communities/opportunities/planning/resiliency/sgia. Some
material from that report is included in Section 4 of this document.
B-3
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Appendix C: Flood Resilience Checklist
Is your community prepared for a possible flood? Completing this flood resilience checklist can help you
begin to answer that question.
What is the Flood Resilience Checklist?
This checklist includes overall strategies to improve flood resilience as well as specific strategies to
conserve land and discourage development in river corridors; to protect people, businesses, and
facilities in vulnerable settlements; to direct development to safer areas; and to implement and
coordinate stormwater management practices throughout the whole watershed.
Who should use it?
This checklist can help communities identify opportunities to improve their resilience to future floods
through policy and regulatory tools, including comprehensive plans, Hazard Mitigation Plans, local land
use codes and regulations, and non-regulatory programs implemented at the local level. Local
government departments such as community planning, public works, and emergency services; elected
and appointed local officials; and other community organizations and nonprofits can use the checklist to
assess their community's readiness to prepare for, deal with, and recover from floods.
Why is it important?
Completing this checklist is the first step is assessing how well a community is positioned to avoid
and/or reduce flood damage and to recover from floods. If a community is not yet using some of the
strategies listed in the checklist and would like to, the policy options and resources listed in this report
can provide ideas for how to begin implementing these approaches.
FLOOD RESILIENCE CHECKLIST
Overall Strategies to Enhance Flood Resilience
(Learn more in Section 2, pp. 9-11)
1. Does the community's comprehensive plan have a hazard element
or flood planning section?
a. Does the comprehensive plan cross-reference the local Hazard
Mitigation Plan and any disaster recovery plans?
b. Does the comprehensive plan identify flood- and erosion-
prone areas, including river corridor and fluvial erosion hazard
areas,
if applicable?
c. Did the local government emergency response personnel,
flood plain manager, and department of public works
participate in developing/updating the comprehensive plan?
2. Does the community have a local Hazard Mitigation Plan approved
by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the
state emergency management agency?
a. Does the Hazard Mitigation Plan cross-reference the local
comprehensive plan?
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GNO
DNO
DNO
GNO
DNO
GNO
C-l
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
FLOOD RESILIENCE CHECKLIST
b. Was the local government planner or zoning administrator
involved in developing/updating the Hazard Mitigation Plan?
c. Were groups such as local businesses, schools,
hospitals/medical facilities, agricultural landowners, and
others who could be affected by floods involved in the Hazard
Mitigation Plan drafting process?
d. Were other local governments in the watershed involved to
coordinate responses and strategies?
e. Does the Hazard Mitigation Plan emphasize non-structural pre-
disaster mitigation measures such as acquiring flood-prone
lands and adopting No Adverse Impact flood plain regulations?
f. Does the Hazard Mitigation Plan encourage using green
infrastructure techniques to help prevent flooding?
g. Does the Hazard Mitigation Plan identify projects that could be
included in pre-disaster grant applications and does it expedite
the application process for post-disaster Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program acquisitions?
3. Do other community plans (e.g., open space or parks plans)
require or encourage green infrastructure techniques?
4. Do all community plans consider possible impacts of climate
change on areas that are likely to be flooded?
5. Are structural flood mitigation approaches (such as repairing
bridges, culverts, and levees) and non-structural approaches (such
as green infrastructure) that require significant investment of
resources coordinated with local capital improvement plans and
prioritized in the budget?
6. Does the community participate in the National Flood Insurance
Program Community Rating System?
Conserve Land and Discourage Development in River Corridors
(Learn more in Section 3. A, pp. 14-19)
4. Has the community implemented non-regulatory strategies to
conserve land in river corridors, such as:
a. Acquisition of land (or conservation easements on land) to
allow for stormwater absorption, river channel adjustment, or
other flood resilience benefits?
b. Buyouts of properties that are frequently flooded?
c. Transfer of development rights program that targets flood-
prone areas as sending areas and safer areas as receiving
areas?
d. Tax incentives for conserving vulnerable land?
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GNO
GNO
GNO
GNO
GNO
GNO
GNO
GNO
GNO
GNO
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
G No
G No
G No
G No
C-2
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
FLOOD RESILIENCE CHECKLIST
e. Incentives for restoring riparian and wetland vegetation in
areas subject to erosion and flooding?
5. Has the community encouraged agricultural and other landowners
to implement pre-disaster mitigation measures, such as:
a. Storing hay bales and equipment in areas less likely to be
flooded?
b. Installing ponds or swales to capture stormwater?
c. Planting vegetation that can tolerate inundation?
d. Using land management practices to improve the capability of
the soil on their lands to retain water?
6. Has the community adopted flood plain development limits that
go beyond FEMA's minimum standards for Special Flood Hazard
Areas and also prohibit or reduce any new encroachment and fill in
river corridors and Fluvial Erosion Hazard areas?
7. Has the community implemented development regulations that
incorporate approaches and standards to protect land in
vulnerable areas, including:
a. Fluvial erosion hazard zoning?
b. Agricultural or open space zoning?
c. Conservation or cluster subdivision ordinances, where
appropriate?
d. Other zoning or regulatory tools that limit development in
areas subject to flooding, including river corridors and Special
Flood Hazard Areas?
Protect Peoole. Buildings, and Facilities in Vulnerable Settlements
(Learn more in Section 3.B, pp. 19-26)
1. Do the local comprehensive plan and Hazard Mitigation Plan
identify developed areas that have been or are likely to be
flooded?
a. If so, does the comprehensive plan discourage
development in those areas or require strategies to reduce
damage to buildings during floods (such as elevating heating,
ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems and flood-
proofing basements)?
b. Does the Hazard Mitigation Plan identify critical facilities and
infrastructure that are located in vulnerable areas and should
be protected, repaired, or relocated (e.g., town facilities,
bridges, roads, and wastewater facilities)?
2. Do land development regulations and building codes promote
safer building and rebuilding in flood-prone areas? Specifically:
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
G No
G No
G No
G No
G No
G No
G No
G No
G No
G No
GYes
GYes
GYes
G No
G No
G No
C-3
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
FLOOD RESILIENCE CHECKLIST
a. Do zoning or flood plain regulations require elevation of two or
more feet above base flood elevation?
b. Does the community have the ability to establish a temporary
post-disaster building moratorium on all new development?
c. Have non-conforming use and structure standards been
revised to encourage safer rebuilding in flood-prone areas?
d. Has the community adopted the International Building Code or
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) standards that
promote flood-resistant building?
e. Does the community plan for costs associated with follow-up
inspection and enforcement of land development regulations
and building codes?
3. Does the community require developers who are rebuilding in
flood-prone locations to add additional flood storage capacity in
any new redevelopment projects such as adding new parks and
open space and allowing space along the river's edge for the river
to move during high-water events?
4. Is the community planning for development (e.g., parks, river-
based recreation) along the river's edge that will help connect
people to the river AND accommodate water during floods?
5. Does the comprehensive plan or Hazard Mitigation Plan discuss
strategies to determine whether to relocate structures that have
been repeatedly flooded, including identifying an equitable
approach for community involvement in relocation decisions and
potential funding sources (e.g., funds from FEMA, stormwater
utility, or special assessment district)?
Plan for and Encourage New Development in Safer Areas
(Learn more in Section 3.C, pp. 26-27)
1. Does the local comprehensive plan or Hazard Mitigation Plan
clearly identify safer growth areas in the community?
2. Has the community adopted policies to encourage development in
these areas?
3. Has the community planned for new development in safer areas to
ensure that it is compact, walkable, and has a variety of uses?
4. Has the community changed their land use codes and regulations
to allow for this type of development?
5. Have land development regulations been audited to ensure that
development in safer areas meets the community's needs for off-
street parking requirements, building height and density, front-
CD Yes
GYes
GYes
DYes
GYes
DYes
GYes
DYes
D No
D No
D No
D No
D No
D No
D No
D No
GYes
GYes
DYes
DYes
GYes
DNO
DNO
DNO
DNO
DNO
C-4
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
FLOOD RESILIENCE CHECKLIST
yard setbacks and that these regulations do not unintentionally
inhibit development in these areas?
6. Do capital improvement plans and budgets support development
in preferred safer growth areas (e.g., through investment in
wastewater treatment facilities and roads)?
7. Have building codes been upgraded to promote more flood-
resistant building in safer locations?
Implement Stormwater Management Techniques throughout the
Whole Watershed
(Learn more in Section 3.D, pp. 27-31)
1. Has the community coordinated with neighboring jurisdictions to
explore a watershed-wide approach to stormwater management?
2. Has the community developed a stormwater utility to serve as a
funding source for stormwater management activities?
3. Has the community implemented strategies to reduce stormwater
runoff from roads, driveways, and parking lots?
4. Do stormwater management regulations apply to areas beyond
those that are regulated by federal or state stormwater
regulations?
5. Do stormwater management regulations encourage the use of
green infrastructure techniques?
6. Has the community adopted tree protection measures?
7. Has the community adopted steep slope development regulations?
8. Has the community adopted riparian and wetland buffer
requirements?
GYes
GYes
GNO
GNO
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GYes
GNO
GNO
GNO
GNO
GNO
GNO
GNO
GNO
C-5
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Appendix D: Flood Resilience Resources
The following resources, many of which are discussed in this report, might be helpful as your community
assesses its flood resilience and begins implementing the strategies described in this report. The
resources are organized according to the sections of the report:
• Overall Strategies to Enhance Flood Resilience
• River Corridors: Conserve Land and Discourage Development
• Vulnerable Settlements: Protect People, Buildings, and Facilities
• Safer Areas: Plan for New Development
• The Whole Watershed: Manage Stormwater
• State Policy Resources
• Selected Federal Resources
Overall Strategies to Enhance Flood Resilience
Smart Growth and Flood Resilience Checklists and Resources
Coastal Resilience Index: A Community Self-Assessment. Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Consortium and National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2010.
http://www.southernclimate.org/documents/resources/Coastal Resilience Index Sea Grant.pdf.
Essential Smart Growth Fixes for Rural Planning, Zoning, and Development Codes. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA). 2012. http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/essential fixes.htm#part2.
Preparing for the Next Flood: Vermont Floodplain Management. Land Use Institute, Vermont Law School. 2009.
http://www.vermontlaw.edu/Documents/VLS.065.090/o20LAND0/o20USE%20PAPER PFF.pdf.
Resilient Communities Scorecard: A Tool for Assessing Your Community. Vermont Natural Resources Council. 2013.
http://vnrc.org/resources/communitv-planning-toolbox/tools/vermont-smart-growth-score-card.
Smart Growth for Coastal and Waterfront Communities. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S.
EPA, ICMA, and Sea Grant Rhode Island. 2009. http://coastalsmartgrowth.noaa.gov/smartgrowth fullreport.pdf.
Smart Growth Implementation Toolkit. Smart Growth America, http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/leadership-
institute/implementation-tools.
Integrating Hazard Mitigation Plans and Comprehensive Plans
Hazard Mitigation Planning: Integrating Best Practices into Planning. American Planning Association, Planning
Advisory Service. 2010. http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1739-25045-4373/pas 560 final.pdf.
Integrating Hazard Mitigation Into Local Planning: Case Studies and Tools for Community Officials. Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2013. http://www.fema.gov/media-
library/assets/documents/31372?id=7130.
National Flood Insurance Program Community Rating System
Changes to the Community Rating System to Improve Disaster Resiliency and Community Sustainability. FEMA.
2013. http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1907-25045-6528/changes to crs system 2013.pdf.
Community Rating System. FEMA. 2012. http://www.fema.gov/media-librarv-data/20130726-1605-20490-
0645/communitvratingsystem 2012.pdf
D-l
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
River Corridors: Conserve Land and Discourage Development
Land Acquisition/Buyouts
Charlotte Land Trust. "Process of Conservation." http://www.charlottelandtrust.org/conservation/.
FEMA. "Hazard Mitigation Assistance - Property Acquisition (Buyouts)." http://www.fema.gov/application-
development-process/hazard-mitigation-assistance-propertv-acquisition-buyouts.
Napa County, CA. "Flood Control and Water Conservation District."
http://www.countyofnapa.org/Pages/DepartmentContent.aspx?id=4294971816.
Property Acquisition Handbook for Local Communities: A Summary for States. FEMA. 1998.
http://www.fema.gov/media-librarv/assets/documents/3117.
Town of Charlotte, VT. Selectboard Meeting Notes. August 9, 2010.
http://www.charlottevt.org/vertical/sites/%7B5618ClB5-BAB5-4588-B4CF-
330F32AA3E590/o7D/uploads/0/o7B56035679-59BD-419A-8D4E-7D23A177FD50%7D.PDF.
Transfer of Development Rights
Maryland's Transfer of Development Rights Programs. 2010. http ://www. cga. ct.gov/2010/rpt/2010- R-0464. htm.
The New Jersey Pinelands Development Credit (PDC) Program. New Jersey Pinelands Commission. 2012.
http://www.ni.gov/pinelands/infor/fact/PDCfacts.pdf.
TDR Program Overview. Department of Economic Development, Agricultural Services Division. 2006.
http://www6.montgomervcountymd.gov/content/ded/agservices/pdffiles/tdr info.pdf.
Tax Strategies: Sales Taxes, Tax Credits, and Current Use Taxation
Commonwealth of Virginia. Riparian forest buffer protection for waterways taxcredit. Section 58.1-339.10.
http://legl.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+58.1-339.10.
Sales Tax: Earmarked for Open Space. University of Washington. 2005.
http://depts.washington.edU/open2100/pdf/3 OpenSpacelmplement/lmplementation Mechanisms/sales tax.pdf.
Vermont Department of Taxes. "Current Use." http://www.state.vt.us/tax/pvrcurrentuse.shtml.
Disaster Mitigation for Agricultural and Other Landowners
Extension Disaster Education Network. "Extension Disaster Education Network."
http://eden.lsu.edu/Pages/default.aspx.
National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster. "National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster."
http://www.nvoad.org/.
Ready Ag: Disaster and Defense Preparedness for Production Agriculture. Penn State Cooperative Extension. 2010.
http://readyag.psu.edu/pdfs/ReadyAG DAIRYandGENERALWorkbook.pdf.
Small Business Technology Development Center. "Small Business Technology Development Center."
http://www.sbtdc.org.
Special Considerations for Agricultural Producers-Preparing for a Flood or a Flash Flood. University of Florida
Cooperative Extension Service. 1998. http://disaster.ifas.ufl.edu/PDFS/CHAP09/D09-07.pdf.
Texas A&M AgriLife Extension. 'Texas Extension Disaster Education Network." http://texashelp.tamu.edu.
D-2
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
No Adverse Impact Flood Plain Management
Association of State Flood Plain Managers. "No Adverse Impact Floodplain Management."
http://www.floods.org/index.asp7menu I D=349&f ir.
No Adverse Impact Floodplain Management Community Case Studies. Association of State Flood Plain Managers.
2004. http://www.floods.org/PDF/NAI Case Studies.pdf.
Wo Adverse Impact Status Report: Helping Communities Implement NAI. Association of State Flood Plain Managers.
2002. http://www.floods.org/NoAdverselmpact/NAI Status Report.pdf.
Fluvial Erosion Hazard Zoning
Municipal Guide to Fluvial Erosion Hazard Mitigation. Vermont Agency of Natural Resources. 2011.
http://www.vtwaterquality.org/rivers/docs/rv municipalguide.pdf.
Town of Bennington, VT. Fluvial Erosion Hazard Overlay District. Adopted Apr., 27, 2009.
http://www.benningtonplanningandpermits.com/BPC/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/fehr.pdf.
Agricultural/Open Space Zoning
Blaine County, ID. County Code, Title 9, Chapter 6B: Resource Conservation District (RC-160). Passed Mar. 19, 2013.
http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php7book id=450.
Minnesota Department of Agriculture. "Minnesota's Agricultural Land Preservation Statutes."
http://www.mda.state.mn.us/protecting/conservation/preservation/statutes.aspx.
Stearns County, MN. "Zoning Districts."
http://www.co.stearns.mn.us/Environment/LandUseandSubdivision/Zoning/ZoningDistricts.
Town of Colchester, VT. Zoning Regulations, Table A-2 Dimensional Standards. Amended Dec. 10, 2013.
http://colchestervt.gov/PlanningZ/regs/Zoning/A-2-DimensionalReq.pdf.
Conservation/Cluster Subdivision Ordinances
Town of Hartford, VT. Ordinances. Jul. 25, 2013.
https://law.resource.org/pub/us/code/city/vt/Hartford.html#13455808.
Town of St. George, VT. Land Use Regulations. Adopted Jul. 22, 2010.
http://www.stgeorgevt.com/pdfs/Regulations%20and%20Bylaws/SGLU R(22Jul2010)lr.pdf.
Town of Windsor, VT. Subdivision Regulations. Amended Sept. 26, 2006. http://swcrpc.org/wp-
content/uploads/2013/ll/Windsor-Subdivision-Regulations-2006.pdf.
Town of Windsor, VT. Zoning Regulations. Amended Sept. 25, 2007. http://swcrpc.org/wp-
content/uploads/2013/ll/Windsor-Zoning-Regulations-2007.pdf.
Vulnerable Settlements: Protect People. Buildings, and Facilities
Streambank Stabilization
Engineering with Nature: Alternative Techniques to Riprap Bank Stabilization. FEMA.
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/about/regions/regionx/Engineering With Nature Web.pdf.
Elevating Above Base Flood Elevation
Innovative Land Use Planning Techniques: A Handbook for Sustainable Development. Chapter 2.7 Flood Hazard
Area Zoning. New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services. 2008.
http://des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/repp/documents/ilupt complete handbook.pdf.
No Adverse Impact Floodplain Management Community Case Studies. Association of State Flood Plain Managers.
2004. http://www.floods.org/PDF/NAI Case Studies.pdf.
D-3
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Wo Adverse Impact Status Report: Helping Communities Implement NAI. Association of State Flood Plain Managers.
2002. http://www.floods.org/NoAdverselmpact/NAI Status Report.pdf.
Building Code Upgrades
Code Information Sheet: Permit and Licensing Requirements. Vermont Department of Public Safety.
http://firesafetv.vermont.gov/sites/firesafetv/files/pdf/Code%20lnfo%20Sheets/2012%20permit%20requirements
.pdf.
FEMA. "Highlights of ASCE 24-05, Flood Resistant Design and Construction (2010)."
http://www.fema. gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=3515.
International Code Council. "International Code Council." http://www.iccsafe.org.
International Code Council. "International Green Construction Code." http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/IGCC.
Vermont Department of Public Safety. "Code Information Sheets."
http://firesafety.vermont.gov/resources/code sheets.
Safer Areas: Plan for New Development
Identifying Safer Locations for Development in Vermont
Vermont Agency of Natural Resources. "Flood Resilience."
https://outside.vermont.gov/agency/ANR/FloodResilience/Pages/default.aspx.
The Whole Watershed: Manage Stormwater
Watershed-Wide Approaches
Chittenden County, VT. "Smarter Waterways." http://www.smartwaterways.org/.
Mad River Valley Erosion Study Final Report. Watershed Consulting Associates, LLC. 2012.
http://friendsofthemadriver.org/documents/MRV Road Erosion Study Report.pdf.
Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District. "Watershed Management Plan."
http://www.northgeorgiawater.com/plans/watershed-management-plan.
Stormwater Management Regulation in the Mad River Valley: Review and Recommendations. Watershed
Consulting Associates, LLC. 2013.
http://www.friendsofthemadriver.org/documents/MRVStormwater Scoping Study Spring 2013 .pdf.
Stormwater Utilities
Funding Stormwater Programs. U.S. EPA. 2009.
http://www.epa.gov/regionl/npdes/stormwater/assets/pdfs/FundingStormwater.pdf.
Managing Roads, Driveways, and Parking Lots
Guidelines for the Design of Stream/Road Crossings for Passage of Aquatic Organisms in Vermont. Vermont
Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2009.
http://www.vtfishandwildlife.com/library/Reports and Documents/Aquatic%20Organism%20Passage%20at%20St
ream%20Crossings/ Guidelines%20for%20the%20Design%20of%20Stream Road%20Crossings%20for%20Passage
%20of%20Aquatic%20Organisms%20in%20Vermont.pdf.
Vermont Town Road and Bridge Standards, Culverts and Bridges. 2013.
http://www.vlct.org/assets/News/Current/Town Road Bridge Standards.pdf.
D-4
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Using Green Infrastructure in Stormwater Regulations
Stormwater Management Plan. City of South Burlington, VT. 2013.
http://www.watershedmanagement.vt.gov/stormwater/docs/ms4/sw SBurlington SWMP.pdf.
Stormwater Management Plan. Town of Rutland, VT. 2013.
http://www.vtwaterquality.org/stormwater/docs/ms4/sw TownofRutland MS4 SWMP.pdf.
Town of Williston, VT. Unified Development Bylaw. Chapter 29, Watershed Health. Amended Jul. 19, 2010.
http://town.williston.vt.us/vertical/Sites/%7BF506B13C-605B-4878-8062-
87E5927E49F00/o7D/uploads/0/o7B2920AC61-60E4-483B-8A02-015028396045%7D.PDF.
U.S. EPA. "Stormwater Management Best Practices."
http://www.epa.gov/oaintrnt/stormwater/best practices.htm.
U.S. EPA. "Why Green Infrastructure?" http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/gi why.cfm.
Williston, VT. "Stormwater." http://www.town.williston.vt.us/index.asp?Type=B BASIC&SEC=%7BACC6B21E-
OFDB-497F-8A5A-62CDFF871272%7D.
Tree Protection
Folly Beach, SC. Code of Ordinances. Title XV, Section 166.01, Tree Protection. Passed Jul. 23, 2013.
http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gatewav.dll/South%20Carolina/follvbeach/follybeachsouthcarolinacodeofordinance
s?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:follybeach sc.
Town of Wellesley MA. Rules and Regulations Relative to the Administration of Section XVIE: Tree Preservation and
Protection. http://www.wellesleyma.gov/Pages/WelleslevMA Planning/TreeBylawRulesRegs6.27.11.pdf.
Steep Slope Development Regulations
Salt Lake County, UT. Code of Ordinances. Title 19: Zoning, Chapter 19.72: Foothills and Canyons Overlay Zone.
http://library.municode.com/HTML/16602/level2/TIT19ZO CH19.72FOCAOVZO.html.
Town of Williston, VT. Unified Development Bylaw. Chapter 29, Watershed Health. Amended Jul. 19, 2010.
http://town.williston.vt.us/vertical/Sites/%7BF506B13C-605B-4878-8062-
87E5927E49FO%7D/uploads/%7B2920AC61-60E4-483B-8A02-015028396045%7D.PDF.
Stream and Wetland Buffer Regulations
Mitchell, Paul. The Scientific Justification for Stream Buffers. University of Georgia Land Use Clinic. 2006.
http://www.rivercenter.uga.edu/publications/pdf/luc buffer fact sheet.pdf.
State Policy Resources
Background/Overview of State Policy Issues
Smith, Gavin. Planning for Post-Disaster Recovery: A Review of the United States Disaster Assistance Framework.
Gavin Smith. Island Press, 2012.
Smith, Gavin, and Dylan Sandier. State Disaster Recovery Planning Guide. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Coastal Hazards Center of Excellence, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 2012.
http://coastalhazardscenter.org/dev/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/State-Disaster-Recovery-Planning-
Guide 2012.pdf.
Smith, Gavin, Dylan Sandier, and Mikey Goralnik. "Assessing State Policy Linking Disaster Recovery, Smart Growth,
and Resilience in Vermont Following Tropical Storm Irene." Vermont Journal of Environmental Law. Vol. 15 (2013).
66-102. http://viel.vermontlaw.edu/files/2013/ll/Smith.pdf.
Smith, Gavin, Dylan Sandier, and Mikey Goralnik. Vermont State Agency Policy Options: Smart Growth
Implementation Assistance Program, Disaster Recovery and Long-Term Resilience Planning in Vermont. U.S.
D-5
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
Department of Homeland Security Coastal Hazards Center of Excellence, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
http://accd.vermont.gov/sites/accd/files/Documents/strongcommunities/cpr/VT-
StateAgencyPolicyOptionsFINAL web.pdf.
State-Level Initiatives and Resources
California Emergency Management Agency. "Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Program (LHMP)."
http://hazardmitigation.calema.ca.gov/plan/local hazard mitigation plan Ihmp.
California Governor's Office of Emergency Services. "Hazard Mitigation."
http://www.calema.ca.gov/hazardmitigation.
Culvert Inventory and Inspection Manual. New York State Department of Transportation. 2006.
https://www.dot.nv.gov/divisions/operating/oom/transportation-
maintenance/repositorv/Culvertlnventorylnspection Manual.pdf.
Culvert Management Manual. Ohio Department of Transportation. 2014.
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Engineering/Hydraulics/Culvert%20Management/Culvert%20Management
%20Manual/CMM%20-%20Januarv2014.pdf.
Handbook of Emergency Management for State-Level Transportation Agencies. San Jose State University. 2010.
http://transweb.sisu.edu/MTIportal/research/publications/documents/COOP%20COG%20l Vince 022410.pdf.
Louisiana Recovery Authority Strategic Plan: FY 2008/2009. Louisiana Recovery Authority.
http://lra.louisiana.gov/assets/docs/searchable/StrategicPlan0809.pdf.
University of Iowa School of Urban and Regional Planning. "RIO Iowa Project." http://rio.urban.uiowa.edu/.
Wisconsin Department of Military Affairs, Division of Emergency Management. "2012 All-Hazards Mitigation
Planning Workshop Presentations and Handouts."
http://emergencymanagement.wi.gov/mitigation/Mitigation Workshop/toc.asp.
State Statutes for Integrating Flood Resilience into Comprehensive Plans
State of Rhode Island. General Laws. Title 45: Towns and Cities, Chapter 45-22.2: Rhode Island Comprehensive
Planning and Land Use Act, Section 45-22.2-6: Required Content of a Comprehensive Plan.
http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/Statutes/TITLE45/45-22.2/45-22.2-6.HTM.
State of Vermont. Vermont Statutes. Title 24: Municipal and County Government, Chapter 117: Municipal and
Regional Planning and Development, Sub-Chapter 5: Municipal Development Plan, Section 4382: The Plan for a
Municipality, http://www.leg.state.vt.us/statutes/fullchapter.cfm?Title=24&Chapter=117.
Selected Federal Resources
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Changes to the Community Rating System to Improve Disaster Resiliency and Community Sustainability. FEMA.
2013. http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1907-25045-6528/changes to crs system 2013.pdf.
FEMA. "Community Emergency Response Teams." https://www.fema.gov/communitv-emergency-response-teams.
Community Rating System. FEMA. 2012. http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1605-20490-
0645/communitvratingsystem 2012.pdf.
Community Rating System Communities by State. FEMA. 2012. http://www.fema.gov/media-library-
data/20130726-1830-25045-0453/crosstab bystate 4may 2012.pdf.
FEMA. "Community Planning and Capacity Building." http://www.fema.gov/communitv-planning-and-capacity-
building.
FEMA. "Flood Insurance Reform." http://www.fema.gov/flood-insurance-reform.
D-6
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
National Flood Insurance Program. "Floodsmart." https://www.floodsmart.gov/floodsmart/.
FEMA. "Hazard Mitigation Assistance - Property Acquisition (Buyouts)." http://www.fema.gov/application-
development-process/hazard-mitigation-assistance-propertv-acquisition-buyouts.
FEMA. "Hazard Mitigation Grant Program." http://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-grant-program.
FEMA. "Multi-Hazard Mitigation Planning." http://www.fema.gov/multi-hazard-mitigation-planning.
FEMA. "National Disaster Recovery Framework." http://www.fema.gov/national-disaster-recovery-framework.
FEMA. "Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program." http://www.fema.gov/pre-disaster-mitigation-grant-program.
Property Acquisition Handbook for Local Communities: A Summary for States. FEMA. 1998.
http://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/3117.
FEMA. "Public Assistance: Local, State, Tribal and Non-Profit." http://www.fema.gov/public-assistance-local-state-
tribal-and-non-profit.
Reducing Damage from Localized Flooding: A Guide for Communities, http://www.fema.gov/media-
library/assets/documents/1012?id=1448.
FEMA. "Response and Recovery." http://www.fema.gov/response-recovery.
U.S. Department of Agriculture
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). "Conservation."
http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?navid=CONSERVATION.
USDA, Forest Service. "Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program -Vermont."
http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/newsReleases?area=newsroom&subiect=landing&topic=pfs&newstype=prfactsheet
&type=detail&item=pf 20110214 consv en crepvt01.html.
National Institute of Food and Agriculture. "Cooperative Extension Offices."
http://www.csrees.usda.gov/Extension/.
USDA. "USDA Rural Development Programs." http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/programsandopportunities.html.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Vermont Agency of Commerce and Community Development. "Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery
Funds." http://accd.vermont.gov/strong communities/opportunities/funding/cdbgdr.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). "Community Development Block Grant Entitlement
Communities Grants."
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program offices/comm planning/communitydevelopment/programs/
entitlementtfeligibleactivities.
HUD. "Community Development Block Grant Program - CDBG."
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program offices/comm planning/communitydevelopment/programs.
HUD. "Pre-Disaster Planning for Permanent Housing Recovery."
http://www.huduser.org/portal/publications/pre disasterplanning.html.
HUD. "State Administered Community Development Block Grant."
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program offices/comm planning/communitydevelopment/programs/
stateadmin.
U.S. Department of Transportation
Emergency Relief Manual. Federal Highway Administration. 2013. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/reports/erm/er.pdf.
D-7
-------
Planning for Flood Recovery and Long-Term Resilience in Vermont
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. EPA. "Adaptation Strategies Guide for Water Utilities."
http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecurity/climate/upload/epa817kll003.pdf.
U.S. EPA. "BASINS 4 Climate Assessment Tool." http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/global/recordisplay.cfm?deid=203460.
U.S. EPA. "Climate Ready Water Utilities." http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecurity/climate/index.cfm.
U.S. EPA. "Climate Resilience Evaluation and Awareness Tool."
http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecurity/climate/creat.cfm.
U.S. EPA. "National Stormwater Calculator." http://epa.gov/nrmrl/wswrd/wq/models/swc/.
U.S. EPA. "Smart Growth Program." http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth.
U.S. EPA. "Smart Growth Program Climate Page." http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/climatechange.htm.
U.S. EPA. "Smart Growth Technical Assistance in Iowa." http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/iowa techasst.htm.
U.S. EPA. "Stormwater Management Best Practices."
http://www.epa.gov/oaintrnt/stormwater/best practices.htm.
U.S. EPA. "Vulnerability Self Assessment Tool."
http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecurity/techtools/vsat.cfm.
U.S. EPA. "Why Green Infrastructure?" http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/gi why.cfm.
D-8
-------
------- |