|
December 2005 Domestic Policy Watch Copyright by American Planning Association Warning: Enter at Your Own Risk By W. Paul Farmer, AICP Risk. It's something that we face every day. Sometimes we knowingly take chances, even seek them out. When it comes to important, long-term decisions, however, we typically weigh risks with a greater degree of gravitas. We want to know just what situation we're getting ourselves into. Is there a risk of flood, fire, theft? People should know what risks they are likely to face by living, working, or vacationing in a particular place. The social, economic, and physical damages sustained by New Orleans and other Gulf Coast communities in the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita are vivid and compelling reminders about the need for, and value of, comprehensive plans that address natural and human-caused disasters. I was struck by comments I heard from people in the Gulf Coast region following the recent hurricanes. Several people who were asked by national news networks why they would live in such high-risk flood areas replied that they thought they were safe. I recall one woman stating that she had trusted her government. She didn't think the government would let her live somewhere that was dangerous — that posed a risk to her property or her life. We cannot afford to ignore the lessons Hurricane Katrina has taught. Ignoring the potential for risk is dangerous for our communities. Through land-use planning, communities can minimize their exposure to both natural and human-caused disasters, thereby creating places of lasting value that afford residents greater choices about how and where they work and live. Now is the time to assess community vulnerabilities to man-made and natural hazards and simultaneously implement disaster mitigation plans to reduce those risks while rebuilding. Let's put the planning tools available to good use to build solid foundations for these communities. Effective disaster prevention and response and mitigation measures can occur only with adequate and effective investment in infrastructure everywhere. The government is making landmark decisions right now. Lawmakers are wondering what risks they should weigh and where to allocate resources to mitigate those risks. Unfortunately, most of the focus right now is single-minded and concentrated on rebuilding efforts, not planning efforts and pre-disaster mitigation. Now is the time to speak up for the necessity of planning for safe communities. We need proactive solutions right now. What we don't need are more formal statements of sympathy for those affected by Hurricane Katrina. The devastation of this past hurricane season was remarkable and even unprecedented. Reactions, however, have been more of the same. Currently, we are a far cry from having the sort of federal, state, and locally implemented plans that we need to be prepared for disasters. We need to look for integrated solutions. We need comprehensive strategies in order to plan effectively for disasters and our safety. The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 takes us in the right direction by requiring that local multi-hazard plans be in place for a community to qualify for federal disaster assistance. The existing law, however, does not go far enough, because these hazard plans need not be integrated with local comprehensive plans where mainstream safety concerns are addressed. The need for communities to plan and address safety issues has never been greater. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) records, the average number of federal emergency disasters declared each year has risen from 23 (between 1980 and 1984) to 53 (between 2000 and 2004). This year alone, 43 major disasters have been declared by the agency. In March, APA adopted a Policy Guide on Security that highlights the need for comprehensive planning in hazard mitigation policies at the federal, state, and local levels. This guide has been an effective tool in advancing APA's agenda for safe growth and has served as a resource to lawmakers who work to improve disaster mitigation laws throughout the country. The policy guide stresses the need for a national strategy that sets minimum standards for the protection of all citizens while concentrating funds and energy on areas at highest risk, for the purpose of allocating scarce resources among competing funding priorities. In partnership with federal agencies, state and local governments must play a direct role in the development of an appropriate risk-assessment strategy. Federal mitigation planning assistance should be provided both before and after disasters strike. Additional public funding is needed for the further development and implementation of new technologies for security and mitigation planning, including remote sensing, visioning, scenario planning, and GIS technologies. Continued research and data collection related to hazard mitigation, including the modernization of flood maps, are integral to any sound security plan. Further, communities should include mitigation planning and emergency preparedness in local comprehensive plans. FEMA has been tasked with modernizing the nation's flood maps. The need for accurate, up-to-date maps is clear; they allow for wise, data-driven floodplain management and support a flood insurance program that is more closely aligned with actual risk. Currently, only five percent of our nation's population lives in communities that have adopted maps that meet quality standards . FEMA's goal is to raise that to 90 percent by 2009. A recent front page article in The New York Times called our attention to the fact that states across the country are now reassessing their areas of weakness in the larger context of emergency preparedness. Some states like Washington and California are susceptible to sections of weak infrastructure, while Wyoming and Idaho are in jeopardy of volcanic eruption at Yellowstone National Park. The article points out that "the devastation from the Gulf Coast hurricanes is serving as a strong reminder that possible disasters could lay waste to cities and states across the country. People are calling government offices about emergency preparedness, long-forgotten plans are being ... reassessed, and lawmakers are holding hearings about vulnerabilities and whether efforts to address them go far enough." Location, location, location. Consider that, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, 53 percent of our nation's total population lives in coastal areas, which account for only 17 percent of the total U.S. land area. In 1950, 10 percent of elderly people lived alone; by 2000, that figure had tripled. We need to look at changing trends in demographics and where people choose to live. Insurance policies and hazard mitigation plans should stay current to meet those needs. Risk must be considered when we decide where to site facilities, homes, parks, and public infrastructure. Land-use and public facility planning at the state and local levels have not had adequate financial resources to fully incorporate threats posed by both natural and human-caused disasters. Too frequently, this has resulted in costly disaster relief programs and piecemeal, ad hoc security responses — such as unattractive physical barriers — that disrupt and adversely impact Americans' physical, social, economic, and civic lives. Recovery and reconstruction in the wake of a natural or other calamity present a unique opportunity to reduce the level of risk of future damages — provided hazard mitigation strategies and elements are adopted when a community is rebuilt. Investment in prevention will save both lives and money. At a time when Congress is looking to reduce the deficit and is passing budget reconciliation packages on the order of $50 billion, it is important to mention that planning for a disaster resistant community is fiscally responsible. Flooding caused an average of $4.4 billion per year in private and public property damage between 1990 and 2003. Annual federal spending on wildfire suppression exceeds $1.6 billion. Earthquakes cause an additional $4.4 billion of damage each year. The World Bank and U.S. Geological Survey have estimated that $40 billion invested in risk reduction strategies could have saved as much as $280 billion in worldwide economic losses from disasters in the 1990s. This translates into a seven dollar return for each dollar invested. We need to advocate today for a far-sighted approach to disaster mitigation. We need to team up with our local lawmakers and with our lawmakers in Washington. Now is no time for a "business as usual" approach, but rather, it is time to think outside of the box and beyond the most recent hurricanes. Right now people are asking tough questions in New Orleans and throughout the Gulf Coast region. Should we rebuild in the same places? Should we replace all of the levees and canals? How do we avoid this type of disaster in the future? Was our evacuation plan adequate and successful? Continue to assess the state of your local planning capacity, your emergency preparedness, and the decisions that were made by your predecessors with regard to the location of people and places within your community. In order to help you assess the safety of your neighborhood, APA has made available a Safe Growth America Checklist to help you assess ways that your community can improve its plan to address safety and security. We have an opportunity here to revisit planning statutes and update plans as necessary to reflect the places where we live, work, and vacation today. You can be a part of this important process. Planning for community protection is everybody's business — not just the emergency responders and local police force. We have long recognized the need for a coordinated approach to planning for safety. You can help to reinforce this message and learn more about relevant federal policies at APA's 2006 Legislative and Policy Conference January 29-30 and Planners Day on Capitol Hill on January 31. Come to our nation's capital and tell your elected officials about how your community has integrated hazard mitigation into local solutions for safe growth and quality planning.
| |
Printer-Friendly Format
