Latest news with #floodprone
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
NJ proposes new height requirement for new construction in flood prone areas
TRENTON -- New Jersey environmental regulators have proposed rules that would raise the minimum height of new construction in flood prone areas of the state. The height rules are a foot lower than what the state originally proposed, but they would still add a significant cost to new construction. The changes, announced Monday, July 14, would also include the Jersey Shore. Chief among those changes is a reduced height requirement that is a foot less than what state environmental regulators proposed last year, when they said at least 5 feet on top of FEMA's Base Flood Elevation was necessary to protect homes in the future. "We've got to be guided by the best available science and acknowledge that science is not static," New Jersey Environmental Commissioner Shawn LaTourette. LaTourette said the reduction in New Jersey's proposed flood zone rules reflect international policy changes that experts predict will reduce carbon emissions and slow global temperature increases from previously higher projections. Under the proposal, new construction in flood areas would be at least 4 feet higher than the elevation requirement set by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA. If FEMA's Base Flood Elevation on a property is 3 feet over ground level, the new 4-foot requirement would mean a home would have to be built 7 feet over ground level, according to the draft rules. The reason for the difference is that New Jersey's proposed building standards look forward at projected changes in global temperatures, precipitation and sea level rise when factoring building elevations. In contrast, FEMA's building rules for flood zones look backward at historical flood data. Experts say sea level will rise 4.4 feet through the end of the current century, which marks a reduction from earlier estimates that predicted 5.1 feet of increase, said Jennifer Moriarty, the state's assistant commissioner for watershed and land management at the Department of Environmental Protection. "That's because global temperature increase is now projected to be 2.7 degrees, whereas at the time of the original proposal it was projected to be 3.3 degrees of warming," she said. Sea level has already climbed 18 inches since the early 1900s along the coast, according to the New Jersey Climate Change Resource Center at Rutgers University. The new amendments to New Jersey's proposed flood zone building regulations, or Resilient Environments and Landscapes (REAL) coastal flood rules, would also reduce the regions and neighborhoods that are considered to be within the "inundation risk zone" from the earlier draft, to meet the new predictions. However, even these amended rules would place neighborhoods that are not currently considered at risk into new flood zones, according to critics of the proposal. The amendments would give builders flexibility in flood zones for projects that have "dry access" during floods, so that residents could evacuate or emergency responders could enter. Some low- and moderate-income housing projects could also receive a "hardship exception" from the some of the building rules, as long as public safety is not jeopardized, according to Department of Environmental Protection officials. But waiving the flood-mitigation requirements for affordable housing projects puts vulnerable people in vulnerable areas at risk and "is just going to be very dangerous," said Ed Potosnak, executive director of the New Jersey League of Conservation Voters, an environmental advocacy organization. "Why would we build in a place we know is going to flood in a way we know will kill people… particularly for our most vulnerable (residents)," Potosnak said. "Families with limited financial ability are going to have the most difficult time escaping and finding another place of refuge. They can't just go and necessarily rent a hotel when the storm is coming." "Under no circumstances are we here at the DEP or the (Gov. Phil) Murphy Administration suggesting that folks who are in need of affordable housing should be placed in the most vulnerable areas," LaTourette said. The commissioner said the hardship exemption would only apply if builders can prove they have plans to protect health and safety in affordable housing projects in flood zones. Members of New Jersey's building industry have also been critical of the new flood rules since they were first introduced. The new building height requirement would make construction prohibitively expensive across much of the state. Despite reducing the proposed building height standard from 5 feet over Base Flood Elevation to 4 feet, potential homebuyers will still be priced out of New Jersey's housing market, said Ray Cantor, deputy chief of government affairs for NJBIA, or the New Jersey Business & Industry Association. "That 1-foot decline may not make a difference to some, but it will be cost-prohibitive to many and impossible to overcome for others," Cantor said in a statement. "Put simply, it will be devastating to many of our coastal and river communities. "The DEP is simply doing a great economic disservice to the state that will greatly add to our lack of affordability in New Jersey," he added. Jeff Kolakowski, CEO of the New Jersey Builders Association, said his organization was still reviewing the changes in the proposed regulations. "We will need to thoroughly evaluate the changes to gauge the impact on our state's planning, redevelopment, transportation, infrastructure, housing affordability and economy," he said in an email to the Asbury Park Press. "This proposal's monumental impact on the long-term future of NJ deserves more robust public engagement, better coordination amongst state agencies and priorities and at this point, should be left to the next Administration." When asked by a reporter if the amendments to the flood zone regulations were related to pressure from business and builder groups, the state environmental commissioner pushed back in a July 14 video conference with media. The reduced heights are due to the lowering of the global warming calculation and lesser sea level rise predictions, LaTourette said. Those changes coincide with nations around the world instituting policies that reduce carbon emissions, which drive climate change, he said. The commissioner added that state officials will look at those temperature and sea level rise projections every five years and re-evaluate the building rules in flood areas in response to changes. "It's important to consistently update the science," LaTourette said. "Nothing about the way the number is formulated has changed. The inputs have changed." While the proposed rules would apply to new construction, they would not affect existing buildings in areas that are already experiencing regular and occasional flooding: coastal Monmouth County, Long Beach Island and some communities around Barnegat Bay, for example. Many of the homes in these areas were elevated after superstorm Sandy, but some neighborhoods where the worst flooding happens are routinely cut off from dry land during coastal storms and king tides. Others face the risk of flooding during heavy rains or summer deluges. LaTourette said these communities will require more than one solution to address flooding in the coming years. These areas cannot just elevate buildings; rather, they must reimagine stormwater drainage systems, collaborate on flood prevention projects with state and federal partners and take advantage of state programs that buy out the most flood-prone properties, he said. In some places, levees and tidal gates may also be necessary, he said. "The resilience menu is large, but you have to invest in each course for it to be effective," LaTourette said. The proposed Resilient Environments and Landscapes (REAL) coastal flood rules will be published in the New Jersey Register on July 21. A 60-day public comment period will follow. A public hearing will be held at a date to be announced in September. Amanda Oglesby is an Ocean County native who covers education and the environment. She has worked for the Press for more than 17 years. Reach her at @OglesbyAPP, aoglesby@ or 732-557-5701. This article originally appeared on Asbury Park Press: New Jersey proposal would lift construction 4 feet over FEMA standard
Yahoo
09-07-2025
- Climate
- Yahoo
Kerr County authorities discussed warning systems at least 20 times since 1987
Since 2016, the topic of a "flood warning system" for Kerr County has come up at 20 different county commissioners' meetings, according to minutes. The idea for a system was first introduced by Kerr County Commissioner Thomas Moser and Emergency Management Coordinator Dub Thomas in March 2016. Moser noted that neighboring counties had much more advanced flood warning systems than Kerr County, "even though this is probably one of the highest flood-prone regions in the entire state." Kerr County's existing water monitoring mechanisms were not "flood control or flood warning systems," Thomas explained, adding, "I think we need a system that can be operated or controlled by a centralized location." MORE: 'We are very flood prone': Local Texas officials spent years discussing potential warning system Following the March 2016 meeting, the flood warning system was discussed at 10 more commissioners' meetings that year. But after the county failed to secure FEMA grant funding to implement the system, it appeared to fall off the agenda. In a November 2020 discussion of a new FEMA emergency alert program, Thomas noted, "We've been trying to get a new Flood Warning System here. We haven't been able to do it." The last time commissioners mentioned the flood warning system was in July 2021, meeting minutes show. But since then, other local government bodies in Kerr County have discussed the possibility of a new flood warning system for the area. In April, the Upper Guadalupe River Authority, a government body that manages the watershed, convened a special meeting of its Board of Directors. The board voted unanimously to select a firm called Kisters "to develop a Flood Warning System in Kerr County." Meeting minutes show the company was slated to receive a contract worth up to nearly $73,000 as part of the proposed system, the status of which is currently unclear. MORE: Kerr County plan labeled flash flooding 'highly likely' with 'major' impact on public safety When the area flooded on Friday, Ingram City Council Member Ray Howard got three flash flood alerts from the National Weather Service, but none from Kerr County authorities, he told ABC News. "The river came up so fast," Howard said. "There's nothing you can do about that, but there should be early warning systems to get something, a warning, faster." Howard noted that money has been a barrier to implementing such a system. "We need to get funding for that," he added, "for sirens or something that's going to help out the community." But 2016 meeting minutes show there was also opposition to a flood warning system among some commissioners, with one saying, "the thought of our beautiful Kerr County having these damn sirens going off in the middle of [the] night, I'm going to have to start drinking again to put up with y'all." Another commissioner voted against submitting a grant application for the warning system, saying he thought "this whole thing is a little extravagant for Kerr County." Instead, several county officials argued that the county's informal system of "river calling" — essentially a phone tree to warn camps of imminent flooding — was sufficient. Howard disagrees: "Obviously calling from one place to another isn't fast enough," he told ABC News.
Yahoo
09-07-2025
- Climate
- Yahoo
Kerr County authorities discussed warning systems at least 20 times since 1987
Since 2016, the topic of a "flood warning system" for Kerr County has come up at 20 different county commissioners' meetings, according to minutes. The idea for a system was first introduced by Kerr County Commissioner Thomas Moser and Emergency Management Coordinator Dub Thomas in March 2016. Moser noted that neighboring counties had much more advanced flood warning systems than Kerr County, "even though this is probably one of the highest flood-prone regions in the entire state." Kerr County's existing water monitoring mechanisms were not "flood control or flood warning systems," Thomas explained, adding, "I think we need a system that can be operated or controlled by a centralized location." MORE: 'We are very flood prone': Local Texas officials spent years discussing potential warning system Following the March 2016 meeting, the flood warning system was discussed at 10 more commissioners' meetings that year. But after the county failed to secure FEMA grant funding to implement the system, it appeared to fall off the agenda. In a November 2020 discussion of a new FEMA emergency alert program, Thomas noted, "We've been trying to get a new Flood Warning System here. We haven't been able to do it." The last time commissioners mentioned the flood warning system was in July 2021, meeting minutes show. But since then, other local government bodies in Kerr County have discussed the possibility of a new flood warning system for the area. In April, the Upper Guadalupe River Authority, a government body that manages the watershed, convened a special meeting of its Board of Directors. The board voted unanimously to select a firm called Kisters "to develop a Flood Warning System in Kerr County." Meeting minutes show the company was slated to receive a contract worth up to nearly $73,000 as part of the proposed system, the status of which is currently unclear. MORE: Kerr County plan labeled flash flooding 'highly likely' with 'major' impact on public safety When the area flooded on Friday, Ingram City Council Member Ray Howard got three flash flood alerts from the National Weather Service, but none from Kerr County authorities, he told ABC News. "The river came up so fast," Howard said. "There's nothing you can do about that, but there should be early warning systems to get something, a warning, faster." Howard noted that money has been a barrier to implementing such a system. "We need to get funding for that," he added, "for sirens or something that's going to help out the community." But 2016 meeting minutes show there was also opposition to a flood warning system among some commissioners, with one saying, "the thought of our beautiful Kerr County having these damn sirens going off in the middle of [the] night, I'm going to have to start drinking again to put up with y'all." Another commissioner voted against submitting a grant application for the warning system, saying he thought "this whole thing is a little extravagant for Kerr County." Instead, several county officials argued that the county's informal system of "river calling" — essentially a phone tree to warn camps of imminent flooding — was sufficient. Howard disagrees: "Obviously calling from one place to another isn't fast enough," he told ABC News.
