11 30 Org Mtg Slides

8/8/2019 11 30 Org Mtg Slides

1/33

City of Hampton ComprehensiveWaterways

Plan Development


2/33

Work Session Agenda Review Committee mission and objectives

Introduce support resources Review relationship with Community Planning Process

Review Proposed Operating Agreement

Receive Overview of Key Topics

Review Community Engagement Components Review Project Outline and Briefing Schedule

Review Past Studies

Review Arrangements for Community Listening Schedule


3/33

Plan Support Team Consultant Support to Committee

Project Support Director: Ken Dierks, Kimley-Horn and Associates(KHA)

Facilitation: URS Fred Whitley, P.E., (facilitator)

Technical Support: Karl Mertig (KHA), John Paine, (URS), RebeccaFrancese, REM, Waterways Surveys and Engineers

Public Involvement Program: Betsy McBride, Todd Solomon, HamptonRoads Center for Civic Engagement

Cooperating Partners

Virginia Institute of Marine Science Carl Hershner, Marsha Berman Hampton Roads Planning District Commission John Carlock and staff


4/33

City Council

City StaffSteering

CommitteePublic

Outside

Agencies(VIMS, COE, HRPDC)

Consultants(KHA/URS/HRCCE)

City of Hampton

Comprehensive Waterways Management Plan

Project Team Organizational Chart

Primary Points of Contact

City Staff: Pete Petersen, Lynn Allsbrook, Chuck

Fleming, Terry ONeill, Gayle Hicks

Consultants: Ken Dierks, KHA, Fred Whitley, URS,

Rebecca Francese, WSE, Betsy McBride, HRCCE

Outside Agencies: Carl Hershner, VIMS, JohnCarlock, HRPDC


5/33

Key Briefing Topics

Sea Level Rise/Changing Weather Patterns

Flooding and Flood Insurance Stormwater Management/Water Quality Compliance

Shoreline Protection

Waterways Management (Navigation/Dredging)

State and Federal Agency Perspectives (Regulation &Funding)


6/33

Draft Schedule Nov 30 - Organizational Meeting

Early January 2011: Community Listening Session

Balance of January: Topic Background Briefs Feb March 2011: Detailed discussion sessions

(subcommittee meetings)

April 2011: Steering Committee discussion on draft

recommendations Early May 2011: Community Checkpoint Meeting -

Late May 2011: Committee meetings to reviserecommendations to Council

June 2011: Committee Presentation to Council


7/33

Community Engagement

Plan


8/33


9/33


10/33

Sea-Level Rise Hampton Roads has the highest NOAA current and predicted sea

level increase on the East Coast. Estimates range from at least 2.3and possibly up to 5.2feet in the

next 100 years with 4.4 currently predicted. Substantial areas of Hampton could be inundated during storms

affecting: Life and safety Environmental quality

Flood insurance availability and cost Property habitability, values and tax base Stormwater conveyance system function - inundation Stormwater system treatment effectiveness Capital facilities priorities and budgets


11/33

Virginia

Hurricanes Only

All Tropical Cyclones

1933 Hurricane


12/33

Hurricane Stats SE Va.

Tropical Cyclones by Year

Hurricane Return Period


13/33

Storm Tide Facts Eleven of the highest tides on record have occurred during the past 10

years.

Five of the top 8 storms have occurred in the past 12 years

Any storm ranked at #8 or higher probably caused flooding of low lying

properties Onesignificant high tide in the 1970's (Apr. 1978 - rank #9)

Twosignificant high tides in the 1980's (Oct. 1982 & Apr. 1988 - ranks #17and #22)

Sixsignificant high tides in the 1990's - one ranked at #8 or higher

Seven significant high tides in the 2000's - four ranked at #8 or above


14/33

Hurricane ThreatsSTORM SURGE STORM INTENSITY

CAT 2 NNW 20 mphCAT 2 NNW 20 mph




15/33

Issue Summary Affects all other issues

Long term likelihood of increased flooding frequency and durationthroughout the City

Inundation of existing drainage systems

Will create long term capital needs for system modifications to deal withinundation and flooding

Affects flood zone designation and flood insurance

Must be factored in to any future stormwater quality improvement measures Poses hazard mitigation policy issues for recurrent flooding areas


16/33


17/33

Background Over 50% of the city is below the 8 contour and susceptible to

flooding

FEMA has updated flood plain maps which are currently outfor public comment

New maps will be adopted by Council in 2011

City has applied for the Community Rating System (CRS) toidentify measures to reduce flood loss thereby reducing floodinsurance premiums

City has just finished public hearings on new floodplainordinance.

Peninsula Hazard Mitigation Plan is being updated

City about to hire Hazard Mitigation staff


18/33

July 14, 2010 FIRM Map Update

Net Change from Maps 1,740

properties with a house or structure added to the new AEzone

2,734 properties with land affected by the new AE zone without

touching the main structure on the property

2,568 properties with a house or structure left out of the new AE

zone

212 properties in the new floodway


19/33

Issue Summary Public has expressed strong and clear concerns about

restricting building in the 100 year floodplain

City will need to adjust offset above Base Flood Elevation inthe future

Sea level rise will require other changes in the zoningordinance for development in the flood zone

City will need to identify flooding threats to HAZMAT sitesand key municipal infrastructure

Likely long term demand on City resources to implementhazard mitigation program

Potential shrinking federal support for flood protection andhazard mitigation


20/33


21/33

Stormwater Management

Regulations MS-4 Permit Renewal Stringent new conditions anticipated

for discharge of stormwater from municipal storm sewers.Currently being negotiated with DCR & EPA

Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Loading (TMDL) pollution diet requiring stormwater reduction and treatmentthrough Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPS) in 2011.

State Stormwater Regulation Amendments new stormwaterquality discharge requirements affecting new development and

requiring local administration of Stormwater General PermitProgram.


22/33

Challenges Estimated TMDL compliance costs for Chesapeake Bay

TMDL exceed 1.1 billion (HRPDC)

Public infrastructure/property will bear a disproportionate

burden of water quality retrofits due to limitedredevelopment demand in future.

Huge demand on capital budget lack of adequatefunding sources. Federal funding may shrink.

Challenge to effectively regulate but not chase away newdevelopment

City will inherit management of stormwater general

permit program including program costs


23/33


24/33

Shoreline ManagementChallenges (Ownership) Bay Fronting Shoreline ~ 8.3 Miles

(South tip of Fort Monroe to North End Point)

Federal - Fort Monroe (29%) Public Buckroe, Salt Ponds, Grandview Nat Pre (44%)

Private Thimble Shoals Court, Malo Beach, WhiteMarsh, Grandview (27 %)

Fort Monroe and the Nature Preserve (59%) are roughly thesame length at opposite ends of the shoreline.

Central 41% of the shoreline is interspersed private and publicownership with an inlet segmenting the reach.


25/33


26/33

Shoreline ManagementChallenges (Feasibility/Cost Benefit)

Limited Federal Funding for shoreline projects

Even more limited State Funding

Public Dollars Public Property In the past Thimble Shoals and Malo Beach residents have

been highly resistant to grant access easements for shorelineprotection projects. (They receive secondary benefits frompublic projects ie. beach re-nourishment.)

Grandview residents may have more incentive, but in the pastB/C ratios for projects on that reach have been minimal.

In terms of B/C ratios - Recreation and Habitat aresecondary to Storm Damage and Flooding Protection.


27/33

Shoreline ManagementGoals Storm Protection/Damage Reduction

Flood Protection / Damage Reduction

Recreation Habitat Preservation/Enhancement

The priority may vary depending on the individual reach.


28/33

Shoreline ManagementCant physically stop storm tides and sea level rise so we

have to plan and manage for the affects.

StrategiesHold the Line

Hard shoreline alternatives seawalls and revetment

Enhanced Dunes (geotube or rock cores)

Shoreline Buffers

Beach re-nourishment and living shorelines

Hydrodynamic Alterations breakwaters, groins, jetties

Possibly near shore reefs/near shore disposal

Composite Strategies

Combination of strategies


29/33


30/33

Dredging and Navigation

Maintenance

City has Major claim on capital budget for long termmaintenance

2007 estimate for 9 largest projects was $30M in new andnext maintenance dredging not counting out year costs

Hampton River, Back River, Salt Ponds, are major focus

Salt Ponds maintenance cost $1.1M since June 2003

City currently bearing all the cost with no off-setting tax

source other than General Fund Economics of dredging often dont work (no positive

B/C ratio)


31/33

Issue Summary Need long term navigation maintenance plan

Identify new sources of funding for long term navigationmaintenance (waterfront property tax increases, navigationmaintenance districts, cost sharing, TIF zones etc.)

Require future new projects to demonstrate a positive B/Cratio

Investigate long term sites for dredge material disposal


32/33

State and Federal Environmental Regulations

Affect any work in wetlands and waters of the US

Require public interest review for most types of work inaquatic systems

Constrain drainage modification solutions

Must be factored into any response to the issues discussed

City should consider partnering with agencies on long termstrategies for dealing with sea level rise, flooding,stormwater management and shoreline stabilization.

Federal funding may be available for some improvements


33/33

Documents

11 30 Org Mtg Slides