DOCSLIB.ORG

Town of East Haven Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2012

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

TOWN OF EAST HAVEN
HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE 2012

ADOPTED MAY 1, 2012

MMI #2731-02-1

Prepared for:

TOWN OF EAST HAVEN

Town Hall
200 Main Street
East Haven, Connecticut 06512
(203)468–3840 http://www.townofeasthavenct.org/

Prepared by:

MILONE & MACBROOM, INC.
99 Realty Drive
Cheshire, Connecticut 06410
(203) 271-1773 www.miloneandmacbroom.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

  • Section
  • Page

CONTACT INFORMATION....................................................................................................ES-1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................ES-2

  • 1.0
  • INTRODUCTION

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7
Background and Purpose ................................................................................................. 1-1 Hazard Mitigation Goals.................................................................................................. 1-4 Identification of Hazards and Document Overview ........................................................ 1-5 Discussion of STAPLEE Ranking Method.................................................................... 1-10 Discussion of Benefit-Cost Ratio................................................................................... 1-12 Documentation of the Planning Process ........................................................................ 1-12 Coordination with Neighboring Communities............................................................... 1-12

  • 2.0
  • COMMUNITY PROFILE

2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9
Physical Setting................................................................................................................ 2-1 Existing Land Use............................................................................................................ 2-1 Geology............................................................................................................................ 2-5 Climate........................................................................................................................... 2-13 Drainage Basins and Hydrology.................................................................................... 2-13 Population and Demographic Setting ............................................................................ 2-16 Development Trends...................................................................................................... 2-18 Governmental Structure................................................................................................. 2-21 Review of Existing Plans............................................................................................... 2-26
2.10 Review of Existing Regulations..................................................................................... 2-29 2.11 Critical Facilities, Sheltering Capacity, and Evacuation ............................................... 2-39

  • 3.0
  • INLAND FLOODING

3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5
Setting .............................................................................................................................. 3-1 Hazard Assessment.......................................................................................................... 3-1 Historic Record................................................................................................................ 3-5 Existing Programs, Policies, and Mitigation Measures ................................................... 3-7 Vulnerabilities and Risk Assessment............................................................................. 3-12 3.5.1 Vulnerability Analysis of Private Properties ....................................................... 3-13 3.5.2 Vulnerability Analysis of Critical Facilities ........................................................ 3-21 3.5.3 Vulnerability Analysis of Areas Along Watercourses......................................... 3-22 3.5.4 HAZUS-MH Vulnerability Analysis .................................................................... 3-23

HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE 2012 EAST HAVEN, CONNECTICUT

  • JANUARY 2012; ADOPTED MAY 1, 2012
  • TC-i

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

  • 3.6
  • Potential Mitigation Measures, Strategies, and Alternatives......................................... 3-26

3.6.1 Prevention ............................................................................................................ 3-26 3.6.2 Property Protection .............................................................................................. 3-29 3.6.3 Emergency Services............................................................................................. 3-31 3.6.4 Public Education and Awareness......................................................................... 3-32 3.6.5 Natural Resource Protection ................................................................................ 3-32 3.6.6 Structural Projects................................................................................................ 3-33

  • Summary of Recommended Mitigation Measures, Strategies, and Alternatives .......... 3-35
  • 3.7

  • 4.0
  • COASTAL FLOODING AND SHORELINE CHANGE

4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5
Setting .............................................................................................................................. 4-1 Hazard Assessment.......................................................................................................... 4-4 Historic Record................................................................................................................ 4-9 Existing Programs, Policies, and Mitigation Measures ................................................. 4-13 Vulnerabilities and Risk Assessment............................................................................. 4-16 4.5.1 Vulnerability Analysis of Coastal Area............................................................... 4-16 4.5.2 Vulnerability Analysis of Private Properties ....................................................... 4-18 4.5.3 HAZUS-MH Vulnerability Analysis .................................................................... 4-19 Potential Mitigation Measures, Strategies, and Alternatives......................................... 4-20 Summary of Recommended Mitigation Measures, Strategies, and Alternatives .......... 4-24
4.6 4.7

  • 5.0
  • HURRICANES AND TROPICAL STORMS

5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6
Setting .............................................................................................................................. 5-1 Hazard Assessment.......................................................................................................... 5-1 Historic Record................................................................................................................ 5-4 Existing Programs, Policies, and Mitigation Measures ................................................... 5-8 Vulnerabilities and Risk Assessment............................................................................. 5-10 Potential Mitigation Measures, Strategies, and Alternatives......................................... 5-16 5.6.1 Prevention ............................................................................................................ 5-17 5.6.2 Property Protection .............................................................................................. 5-17 5.6.3 Public Education and Awareness......................................................................... 5-18 5.6.4 Emergency Services............................................................................................. 5-19 5.6.5 Structural Projects................................................................................................ 5-19

  • Summary of Recommended Mitigation Measures, Strategies, and Alternatives .......... 5-19
  • 5.7

  • 6.0
  • SUMMER STORMS AND TORNADOES

6.1 6.2 6.3
Setting .............................................................................................................................. 6-1 Hazard Assessment.......................................................................................................... 6-1 Historic Record................................................................................................................ 6-6

HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE 2012 EAST HAVEN, CONNECTICUT

  • JANUARY 2012; ADOPTED MAY 1, 2012
  • TC-ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7
Existing Programs, Policies, and Mitigation Measures ................................................... 6-8 Vulnerabilities and Risk Assessment............................................................................. 6-10 Potential Mitigation Measures, Strategies, and Alternatives......................................... 6-11 Summary of Recommended Mitigation Measures, Strategies, and Alternatives .......... 6-12

7.0
WINTER STORMS AND NOR'EASTERS
7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6
Setting .............................................................................................................................. 7-1 Hazard Assessment.......................................................................................................... 7-1 Historic Record................................................................................................................ 7-2 Existing Programs, Policies, and Mitigation Measures ................................................... 7-6 Vulnerabilities and Risk Assessment............................................................................... 7-7 Potential Mitigation Measures, Strategies, and Alternatives........................................... 7-7 7.6.1 Prevention .............................................................................................................. 7-7 7.6.2 Property Protection ................................................................................................ 7-8 7.6.3 Public Education and Awareness........................................................................... 7-8 7.6.4 Emergency Services............................................................................................... 7-8

  • Recommended Actions.................................................................................................... 7-8
  • 7.7

  • 8.0
  • EARTHQUAKES

8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6
Setting .............................................................................................................................. 8-1 Hazard Assessment.......................................................................................................... 8-1 Historic Record................................................................................................................ 8-3 Existing Programs, Policies, and Mitigation Measures ................................................... 8-4 Vulnerabilities and Risk Assessment............................................................................... 8-4 Potential Mitigation Measures, Strategies, and Alternatives......................................... 8-12

  • 9.0
  • WILDFIRES

9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6
Setting .............................................................................................................................. 9-1 Hazard Assessment.......................................................................................................... 9-1 Historic Record................................................................................................................ 9-1 Existing Programs, Policies, and Mitigation Measures ................................................... 9-3 Vulnerabilities and Risk Assessment............................................................................... 9-3 Potential Mitigation Measures, Strategies, and Alternatives........................................... 9-5

10.0 DAM FAILURE 10.1 Setting ............................................................................................................................ 10-1 10.2 Hazard Assessment........................................................................................................ 10-1 10.3 Historic Record.............................................................................................................. 10-3

HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE 2012 EAST HAVEN, CONNECTICUT

  • JANUARY 2012; ADOPTED MAY 1, 2012
  • TC-iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

10.4 Existing Programs, Policies, and Mitigation Measures ................................................. 10-4 10.5 Vulnerabilities and Risk Assessment............................................................................. 10-5 10.6 Potential Mitigation Measures, Strategies, and Alternatives......................................... 10-6

11.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 11.1 Additional Recommendations........................................................................................ 11-1 11.2 Summary of Specific Recommendations....................................................................... 11-1 11.3 Prioritization of Specific Recommendations ................................................................. 11-8 11.4 Sources of Funding ...................................................................................................... 11-10

12.0 PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 12.1 Implementation Strategy and Schedule ......................................................................... 12-1 12.2 Progress Monitoring and Public Participation............................................................... 12-2 12.3 Updating the Plan........................................................................................................... 12-3 12.4 Technical and Financial Resources................................................................................ 12-4

13.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 13-1

TABLES

Table 1-1 Table 1-2 Table 1-3 Table 2-1 Table 2-2 Table 2-3 Table 2-4 Table 2-5 Table 3-1 Table 3-2 Table 3-3 Table 3-4 Table 3-5 Table 3-6 Table 3-7 Table 3-8 Table 4-1 Table 4-2
Effects of Natural Hazards................................................................................... 1-7 Hazard Event Ranking......................................................................................... 1-8 Hazard Effect Ranking......................................................................................... 1-9 Land Cover by Area (2006)................................................................................. 2-2 Bedrock Geology ................................................................................................. 2-6 Surficial Geology............................................................................................... 2-10 Soil Classifications............................................................................................. 2-11 Critical Facilities................................................................................................ 2-40 FIRM Zone Descriptions ..................................................................................... 3-4 Inland Flooding Repetitive Loss Properties....................................................... 3-22 Critical Facilities Located Within or Adjacent to Floodplains.......................... 3-22 HAZUS-MH Flood Scenario – Basic Information ............................................. 3-23 HAZUS-MH Flood Scenario – Building Stock Damages .................................. 3-24 HAZUS-MH Flooding Scenarios – Debris Generation (Tons) .......................... 3-25 HAZUS-MH Flooding Scenarios – Shelter Requirements................................. 3-25 HAZUS-MH Estimated Direct Losses from Flooding Scenarios (x $1,000) ..... 3-26 Coastal Flooding Repetitive Loss Properties..................................................... 4-18 HAZUS-MH Flood Scenario – Building Stock Damages .................................. 4-19

HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE 2012 EAST HAVEN, CONNECTICUT

  • JANUARY 2012; ADOPTED MAY 1, 2012
  • TC-iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Table 5-1 Table 5-2 Table 5-3 Table 5-4 Table 5-5 Table 5-6 Table 5-7 Table 5-8 Table 5-9 Table 6-1 Table 6-2 Table 6-3 Table 6-4 Table 6-5 Table 7-1 Table 7-2 Table 8-1 Table 8-2 Table 8-3
Tropical Cyclones by Month Within 150 Miles of East Haven, 1851-2011 ....... 5-4 Return Period in Years for Hurricanes to Strike Connecticut............................ 5-11 HAZUS Hurricane Scenarios – Basic Information............................................. 5-12 HAZUS Hurricane Scenarios – Number of Residential Buildings Damaged .... 5-13 HAZUS Hurricane Scenarios – Total Number of Buildings Damaged.............. 5-14 HAZUS-MH Hurricane Scenarios – Essential Facility Damage........................ 5-14 HAZUS-MH Hurricane Scenarios – Debris Generation (Tons)......................... 5-15 HAZUS Hurricane Scenarios – Shelter Requirements....................................... 5-15 HAZUS Hurricane Scenarios – Economic Losses (x $1,000)............................ 5-16 Fujita Scale........................................................................................................... 6-3 Enhanced Fujita Scale.......................................................................................... 6-4 Tornado Events near East Haven......................................................................... 6-6 NOAA Weather Watches..................................................................................... 6-9 NOAA Weather Warnings................................................................................... 6-9 NESIS Categories ................................................................................................ 7-2 Reported Roof Collapse Damage, 2011............................................................... 7-4 Comparison of Earthquake Magnitude and Intensity .......................................... 8-2 Probability of a Damaging Earthquake in the Vicinity of East Haven................ 8-6 HAZUS-MH Earthquake Scenarios – Number of Residential Buildings Damaged .............................................................................................................. 8-7 HAZUS-MH Earthquake Scenarios – Total Number of Buildings Damaged...... 8-7 HAZUS-MH Earthquake Scenarios – Essential Facility Damage........................ 8-8 HAZUS-MH Earthquake Scenarios – Utility, Infrastructure, and Fire
Table 8-4 Table 8-5 Table 8-6
Damage ................................................................................................................ 8-9 HAZUS-MH Earthquake Scenarios – Debris Generation (Tons)....................... 8-10 HAZUS-MH Earthquake Scenarios – Shelter Requirements ............................. 8-10 HAZUS-MH Earthquake Scenarios – Casualty Estimates ................................. 8-11 HAZUS-MH Estimated Direct Losses From Earthquake Scenarios (x $1000).. 8-11 Wildland Fire Statistics for Connecticut.............................................................. 9-2 Dams Registered With the DEEP in the Town of East Haven .......................... 10-3 Dams Damaged Due to Flooding From October 2005 Storms.......................... 10-4
Table 8-7 Table 8-8 Table 8-9 Table 8-10 Table 9-1 Table 10-1 Table 10-2

FIGURES

Figure 2-1 Figure 2-2 Figure 2-3 Figure 2-4 Figure 2-5
Location Map....................................................................................................... 2-2 2006 Land Cover.................................................................................................. 2-4 Bedrock Geology ................................................................................................. 2-7 Surficial Geology................................................................................................. 2-9 Subregional Watersheds..................................................................................... 2-14

HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE 2012 EAST HAVEN, CONNECTICUT

  • JANUARY 2012; ADOPTED MAY 1, 2012
  • TC-v

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Figure 2-6 Figure 2-7 Figure 2-8 Figure 2-9 Figure 3-1 Figure 3-2 Figure 3-3 Figure 3-4 Figure 3-5 Figure 4-1 Figure 4-2 Figure 6-1
Population Density............................................................................................. 2-17 Elderly Population ............................................................................................. 2-19 Disabled Population........................................................................................... 2-20 Critical Facilities................................................................................................ 2-41 FEMA Flood Zones with Critical Facilities......................................................... 3-2 FEMA Flood Zones – Upper Farm River.......................................................... 3-14 FEMA Flood Zones – Central Farm River ........................................................ 3-15 FEMA Flood Zones – Lower Farm River.......................................................... 3-16 FEMA Flood Zones – Morris Creek & Tuttle Brook ........................................ 3-20 FEMA Flood Zones along Long Island Sound.................................................... 4-5 Hurricane Surge Inundation Areas and Critical Facilities................................... 4-6 Anatomy of a Tornado......................................................................................... 6-2
Figure 10-1 Dams Registered with the DEEP....................................................................... 10-2

Recommended publications
  • Climatology, Variability, and Return Periods of Tropical Cyclone Strikes in the Northeastern and Central Pacific Ab Sins Nicholas S

    Climatology, Variability, and Return Periods of Tropical Cyclone Strikes in the Northeastern and Central Pacific Ab Sins Nicholas S

    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School March 2019 Climatology, Variability, and Return Periods of Tropical Cyclone Strikes in the Northeastern and Central Pacific aB sins Nicholas S. Grondin Louisiana State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Climate Commons, Meteorology Commons, and the Physical and Environmental Geography Commons Recommended Citation Grondin, Nicholas S., "Climatology, Variability, and Return Periods of Tropical Cyclone Strikes in the Northeastern and Central Pacific asinB s" (2019). LSU Master's Theses. 4864. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/4864 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CLIMATOLOGY, VARIABILITY, AND RETURN PERIODS OF TROPICAL CYCLONE STRIKES IN THE NORTHEASTERN AND CENTRAL PACIFIC BASINS A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in The Department of Geography and Anthropology by Nicholas S. Grondin B.S. Meteorology, University of South Alabama, 2016 May 2019 Dedication This thesis is dedicated to my family, especially mom, Mim and Pop, for their love and encouragement every step of the way. This thesis is dedicated to my friends and fraternity brothers, especially Dillon, Sarah, Clay, and Courtney, for their friendship and support. This thesis is dedicated to all of my teachers and college professors, especially Mrs.
  • Hurricane and Tropical Storm

    Hurricane and Tropical Storm

    State of New Jersey 2014 Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5. Risk Assessment 5.8 Hurricane and Tropical Storm 2014 Plan Update Changes The 2014 Plan Update includes tropical storms, hurricanes and storm surge in this hazard profile. In the 2011 HMP, storm surge was included in the flood hazard. The hazard profile has been significantly enhanced to include a detailed hazard description, location, extent, previous occurrences, probability of future occurrence, severity, warning time and secondary impacts. New and updated data and figures from ONJSC are incorporated. New and updated figures from other federal and state agencies are incorporated. Potential change in climate and its impacts on the flood hazard are discussed. The vulnerability assessment now directly follows the hazard profile. An exposure analysis of the population, general building stock, State-owned and leased buildings, critical facilities and infrastructure was conducted using best available SLOSH and storm surge data. Environmental impacts is a new subsection. 5.8.1 Profile Hazard Description A tropical cyclone is a rotating, organized system of clouds and thunderstorms that originates over tropical or sub-tropical waters and has a closed low-level circulation. Tropical depressions, tropical storms, and hurricanes are all considered tropical cyclones. These storms rotate counterclockwise in the northern hemisphere around the center and are accompanied by heavy rain and strong winds (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] 2013a). Almost all tropical storms and hurricanes in the Atlantic basin (which includes the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea) form between June 1 and November 30 (hurricane season). August and September are peak months for hurricane development.
  • P3.4 the Distribution of Precipitation Over the Northeast Accompanying Landfalling and Transitioning Tropical Cyclones

    P3.4 the Distribution of Precipitation Over the Northeast Accompanying Landfalling and Transitioning Tropical Cyclones

    20th Conf. on Weather Analysis and Forecasting Seattle, WA, 11–15 January 2004 P3.4 The Distribution of Precipitation over the Northeast Accompanying Landfalling and Transitioning Tropical Cyclones David P. DeLuca*, Lance F. Bosart, Daniel Keyser University at Albany, State University of New York, Albany, New York and David R. Vallee National Weather Service Forecast Office, Taunton, Massachusetts 1. INTRODUCTION United States. Approximately 3500 surface stations were analyzed for each storm period (currently: 1950– Landfalling and transitioning tropical cyclones 1991) by Ron Horwood of NWS WFO Taunton, MA. pose a significant heavy precipitation forecast challenge Obvious erroneous data were removed to obtain the most over the northeastern United States. The forecast accurate analyses possible. challenge is heightened because the heavy rainfall distribution associated with these tropical cyclones can A subset of eight storms (Fig. 1) where the be modulated significantly when the poleward-moving precipitation distribution is possibly influenced by storms interact with mobile midlatitude upper-level coastal frontogenesis was chosen from well–documented troughs and coastal fronts over regions of complex or famous cases. Detailed analyses were conducted terrain. The purpose of this paper is to document the using the four times daily (0000, 0600, 1200 and 1800 large spatial and temporal variability of heavy UTC) NCEP/NCAR reanalysis dataset (Kalnay et al. precipitation that accompanies landfalling and 1996; Kistler et al. 2001) and archived DIFAX surface transitioning tropical cyclones, and to determine the charts in an attempt to elucidate both synoptic and physical basis for the observed rainfall distribution. mesoscale processes. 2. METHODOLOGY 3. RESULTS A 38-storm dataset (Fig.
  • The 2005 Atlantic Hurricane Season Is the Most Active on Record

    The 2005 Atlantic Hurricane Season Is the Most Active on Record

    ｄｒ WORLD METEOROLOGICAL ORGANIZATION RA IV HURRICANE COMMITTEE THIRTY-SIXTH SESSION CANCUN, MEXICO (7 to 10 April 2014) FINAL REPORT 1. ORGANIZATION OF THE SESSION At the kind invitation of the Government of Republic of Mexico, the thirty-sixth session of the Regional Association (RA) IV Hurricane Committee was held in Cancun, Mexico from 7 to 10 April 2014. The inauguration ceremony for the Meeting took place early Monday afternoon 7 April, and it included the following participants: 1. Lic. Roberto Borge Angulo. Gobernador Constitucional del estado de Quinta Roo 2. Dr. David Korenfeld Federman. Director General de la Comisión Nacional del Agua 3. M. en C. Juan Manuel Caballero González. Coordinador General del Servicio Meteorológico Nacional de la Comisión Nacional del Agua 4. Dr. Richard Knabb. Chairman of the RA-IV Hurricane Committee 5. Sr. Taoyong Peng. Jefe del Departamento de Ciclones Tropicalesde la Organización Meteorológica Mundial 6. Almirante C.G. DEM Juan Ramón Alcalá Pignol. Comandante de la Quinta Región Naval. 7. Lic. Paul Carrillo de Cáceres. Presidente Municipal Benito Juárez 8. C. P. Roberto Pinzón Álvarez. Director General del Organismo de Cuenca Península de Yucatán 9. QFB José Luis Blanco Pajón. Director Local en Quintana Roo de la Comisión Nacional del Agua 10. Lic. Luis Carlos Rodríguez Hoy. Director General de Protección Civil en el Estado de Quintana Roo . 1.1 Opening of the session 1.1.1 Mr Juan Manuel Caballero Gonzalez, Coordinating Director of the Mexican Meteorological Services of CONAGUA and Permanent Representative of Mexico with WMO made welcome remarks. He reviewed the unusual number of hurricanes that hit Mexico last year, which resulted in severe damages to the country.
  • Virginia HURRICANES by Barbara Mcnaught Watson

    Virginia HURRICANES by Barbara Mcnaught Watson

    Virginia HURRICANES By Barbara McNaught Watson A hurricane is a large tropical complex of thunderstorms forming spiral bands around an intense low pressure center (the eye). Sustained winds must be at least 75 mph, but may reach over 200 mph in the strongest of these storms. The strong winds drive the ocean's surface, building waves 40 feet high on the open water. As the storm moves into shallower waters, the waves lessen, but water levels rise, bulging up on the storm's front right quadrant in what is called the "storm surge." This is the deadliest part of a hurricane. The storm surge and wind driven waves can devastate a coastline and bring ocean water miles inland. Inland, the hurricane's band of thunderstorms produce torrential rains and sometimes tornadoes. A foot or more of rain may fall in less than a day causing flash floods and mudslides. The rain eventually drains into the large rivers which may still be flooding for days after the storm has passed. The storm's driving winds can topple trees, utility poles, and damage buildings. Communication and electricity is lost for days and roads are impassable due to fallen trees and debris. A tropical storm has winds of 39 to 74 mph. It may or may not develop into a hurricane, or may be a hurricane in its dissipating stage. While a tropical storm does not produce a high storm surge, its thunderstorms can still pack a dangerous and deadly punch. Agnes was only a tropical storm when it dropped torrential rains that lead to devastating floods in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia.
  • Feasibility Study: NC 12 Ocracoke Island Hot Spot Ocracoke Island, Hyde County

    Feasibility Study: NC 12 Ocracoke Island Hot Spot Ocracoke Island, Hyde County

    Feasibility Study: NC 12 Ocracoke Island Hot Spot Ocracoke Island, Hyde County Prepared for: North Carolina Department of Transportation, Project Development and Environmental Analysis Prepared by: WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Raleigh, NC December 2016 Table of Contents 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................ 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 2-1 2.1 Project History ..................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Funding ................................................................................................................. 2-1 2.3 Problem Statement and Purpose of Study...................................................... 2-2 2.4 Project Limits ....................................................................................................... 2-2 3.0 COASTAL CONDITIONS ......................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Shoreline and Erosion Studies ......................................................................... 3-1 3.1.1 Definition of Vulnerability and Methods for Evaluation .................. 3-1 3.1.2 Setback ...................................................................................................... 3-2 3.1.3 Background Erosion Rates ..................................................................... 3-3 3.1.4 Baseline Conditions................................................................................
  • Hazard Mitigation Plan

    Hazard Mitigation Plan

    Hazard Mitigation Plan THE EASTERN SHORE OF VIRGINIA Eastern Shore Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee Accomack-Northampton Planning District Commission THE EASTERN SHORE OF VIRGINIA 2011 Hazard Mitigation Plan This report was funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency through the Virginia Department of Emergency, via grant agreement number FMA 2009-001-022 for $54,800 Accomack-Northampton Planning District Commission P.O. Box 417, 23372 Front Street, Accomac, Virginia 23301 Phone 757.787.2936 • Fax 757.787.4221 Foreword Hurricane Irene – August 28, 2011 During the final stages of the completion of the 2011 update to the Eastern Shore of Virginia Hazard Mitigation Plan, the Eastern Shore was impacted by Hurricane Irene. The Eastern Shore narrowly missed a direct hit from Irene as the eye of the storm passed just offshore of the seaside sparing the Shore from the strongest winds on the storms eastern side. Initial forecasted models predicted a Category 3 or 4 storm making a direct hit on North Carolina before tracking northward directly up the Chesapeake Bay. This scenario is the worst-case scenario for the Eastern Shore and likely would have resulted in catastrophic and devastating conditions. The Eastern Shore was truly spared from this dire scenario, but the impacts of a nearly direct hit from the Category 1 storm still caused widespread and severe impacts on the Eastern Shore. Top of Page: Satellite image of Hurricane Irene shortly after landfall at the Outer Banks of North Carolina (image from NOAA). Above: Images of destruction of crab houses at Harborton (left) and Tangier (center) and a fallen tree damaging a house in Accomack County (right) (photos courtesy of Accomack County).
  • Town of Guilford Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan

    Town of Guilford Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan

    TOWN OF GUILFORD NATURAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN ADOPTED JUNE 4, 2012 MMI #2426-10-4 Prepared for: TOWN OF GUILFORD Town Hall 31 Park Street Guilford, Connecticut 06437 (203) 453-8015 http://www.ci.guilford.ct.us/default.htm The preparation of this report has been financed in part through funds provided by the Connecticut Department of Energy & Environmental Protection under a grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The contents of this report reflect the views of the Town of Guilford and do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Connecticut Department of Energy & Environmental Protection. The report does not constitute a specification or regulation. Prepared by: MILONE & MACBROOM, INC. 99 Realty Drive Cheshire, Connecticut 06410 (203) 271-1773 www.miloneandmacbroom.com TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page CONTACT INFORMATION ....................................................................................................ES-1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................ES-2 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background and Purpose ................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Hazard Mitigation Goals .................................................................................................. 1-5 1.3 Identification of Hazards and Document Overview ........................................................ 1-6 1.4 Discussion of STAPLEE Ranking Method...................................................................

  • An Analysis of Hurricane Seasons in the Pre-Hurdat Era (1751-1850)

    AN ANALYSIS OF HURRICANE SEASONS IN THE PRE-HURDAT ERA (1751-1850) A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE MASTER OF SCIENCE BY STEVEN A. LAVOIE DR. JILL COLEMAN, ADVISOR BALL STATE UNIVERSITY JULY 2011 AN ANALYSIS OF HURRICANE SEASONS IN THE PRE-HURDAT ERA (1751-1850) A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE MASTER OF SCIENCE BY STEVEN A. LAVOIE Committee Approval: __________________________________________________ _______________ Committee Chairperson Date __________________________________________________ _______________ Committee Member Date __________________________________________________ _______________ Committee Member Date Departmental Approval: __________________________________________________ _______________ Departmental Chairperson Date __________________________________________________ _______________ Dean of Graduate School Date BALL STATE UNIVERSITY MUNCIE, INDIANA JULY 2011 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank the dedicated educators in the geography department at Ball State University for providing me with new skills to further my career and assist me in reach my personal career goals. I would also like to thank the former and current members of my committee, Dr. Matthew Wilson, Dr. Kevin Turcotte, Dr. Petra Zimmermann, and advisor Dr. Jill Coleman for making me work out my initial methodological issues and helping me redirect my thesis. I am grateful to my entire committee for pointing out the flaws that I refused to accept in the proposal stage of my thesis thus avoiding major issues in the future. Most importantly, I would like to acknowledge my thesis advisor Dr. Jill Coleman who, over the course of just two years, also served as my mentor, my professor, and my employer. I hope to make you all proud one day and yes, I still aspire to become director of the National Hurricane Center.
  • Hurricane Barbara, 1953 R

    Hurricane Barbara, 1953 R

    AUQUST 1963 MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW 255 HURRICANE BARBARA, 1953 R. P. JAMES AND C. F. THOMAS WBAN Analysis Center, U. S. Weather Bureau, Washington, D. C. INTRODUCTION northward on the12th and 13th the storm increased slowly in intensity. A central sea level pressure of 29.15 The second hurricane of the 1953 season, “Barbara”, inches and winds slightly above 100 m. p. h. were reported developed during the night of August 11 a short distance a short time before the storm passed inland. northeast of the Bahama Islands from an easterly wave that had been under observation by the Miami Hurricane Forecast Office for several days. On the morning of the STEERING 12th, aerial reconnaissance located the center still in the As noted earlier, the Low at 700 mb. wasmoving formative stage near 29’ N., 76’ W. The storm moved northward on the 10th and 11th. Because of the poorly on a northerly course until it crossed the North Carolina defined circulation aloft at this time it wasdifficult to coastline the night of August 13. Then it began to curve determine the steering level until about 0300 GMT of the slowly to the north-northeast, re-entering theAtlantic 12th. According to information supplied by the Miami the morning of the 14th. It passed south of New Eng- Forecast Office, 30,000 ft. seemed to be the best level from land and Nova Scotia, and thence into Laborador (fig. 1). which to computesteering at that time. By 1500 GMT In comparison to earlier tropical storm tracks, as repro- of the 13th, winds at 40,000 ft.
  • Examining Planetary, Synoptic, and Mesoscale Features That Enhance Precipitation Associated with Tropical Cyclones Making Landfall Over North Carolina

    Examining Planetary, Synoptic, and Mesoscale Features That Enhance Precipitation Associated with Tropical Cyclones Making Landfall Over North Carolina

    EXAMINING PLANETARY, SYNOPTIC, AND MESOSCALE FEATURES THAT ENHANCE PRECIPITATION ASSOCIATED WITH TROPICAL CYCLONES MAKING LANDFALL OVER NORTH CAROLINA Meredith S. Croke*, Michael L. Kaplan and Lian Xie North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina Kermit Keeter NOAA National Weather Service, Raleigh, North Carolina 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 2. MOTIVATION AND HYPOTHESIS Forecasting heavy rain associated with a landfalling North Carolina’s geographic location makes it a prime tropical cyclone (TC) is a difficult task that can be made target for TCs that recurve in the Atlantic Ocean, near even more complicated when external features exist the U.S. Forecasting precipitation totals from landfalling that may enhance the precipitation preceding or during TCs is made even more complicated by their landfall. The damage of inland freshwater floods can interactions with midlatitude systems. It is believed that often exceed the coastal damage of these life- a paradigm can be created to determine the potential of threatening storms (Rappaport 2000). In the United enhanced precipitation due to the interaction of the TC States, inland flooding is the predominant cause of with other meteorological features as early as 72 hours deaths associated with TCs (Elsberry 2002). The most prior to landfall. This paradigm would give forecasters recent example of this was during Hurricane Floyd an indication of the potential for an enhanced (1999) when inland floods claimed 50 lives in the United precipitation event. Features may exist at different States. Another 1400 people were saved from Floyd’s temporal and spatial scales (i.e. planetary, synoptic, floodwaters, thanks to a massive rescue mission meso-α and meso-β) and intensify as landfall is (Rappaport 2000; J.
  • Inland Flooding from Tropical Cyclones UCAR Award No.: S04-44684

    Inland Flooding from Tropical Cyclones UCAR Award No.: S04-44684

    COMET Outreach Program Final Report University: North Carolina State University Name of University Researcher Preparing Report: Lian Xie NWS Office: Raleigh Forecast Office Name of NWS Researcher Preparing Report: Kermit Keeter Project Title: Inland Flooding from Tropical Cyclones UCAR Award No.: S04-44684 Date: February 1, 2006 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF OPERATIONAL FORECASTING ADVANCES AS A RESULT OF THIS STUDY Due to the inherent characteristics of tropical cyclones, heavy rain for a given location is typically assured provided that the storm’s track is favorable; however physical mechanisms for exceptionally heavy rainfall such as that which occurred over inland North Carolina during Hurricane Floyd are not completely understood, which provides a great deal of challenges for forecasters. This study not only led to improved scientific understanding of tropical cyclone precipitation and inland flooding processes, but also addresses the goals of the COMET project from a forecaster’s “need to know” perspective and the project’s impact upon improving river flood warning and flash flood warning capabilities for central and eastern North Carolina. The scientific results obtained from the physical processes portion of this project as summarized in Section 2 were exceedingly enlightening for forecasters. For some time forecasters have known that when tropical cyclones interact with mid latitude meteorological disturbances, the potential exists for enhanced rainfall greater than what would otherwise be expected; however the details as to why and the supporting conceptual models alerting forecasters to the potential of exceptionally heavy rain have been in part lacking. This research has shown that enhanced rainfall producing hurricanes such as Hurricane Floyd interact with meteorological features on a variety of scales.