Rebuild Iowa Office (RIO) Smart Growth Green PaperPlanning Services Department
City Hall
50 West 13~ Street
Dubuque, IA 52001-4864
(563) 589-4210 phone
(563) 589-4221 fax
(563) 589-6678 TDD
pI aiulin~@cityofdubuque. o
~,._e~ _~
THE CITY OF ~=~`
=~
11~aste~piece an the Mississippi
September 18, 2009
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Dubuque
50 W.13t" Street
Dubuque, IA 52001
RE: Rebuild Iowa Office Green Paper
Dear Mayor and City Council Members:
Introduction
This letter is being forwarded to transmit the Long Range Planning Advisory
Commission's (LRPAC) comments of the Rebuild Iowa Office Green Paper.
®i~cusaion
On September 16t", the LRPAC conducted a public hearing to review the Rebuild Iowa
Office Green Paper. No public was present. The LRPAC had the following comments in
response to the questions to consider in Appendix H of the Green Paper:
Iowa Smart Growth Principles: The City of Dubuque currently has a number of
established principles which outline sustainability concepts that guide program
development and investment decision making. Such principles are outlines in
the City of Dubuque Comprehensive Plan and Sustainable Dubuque Initiative.
Those principles are not mandatory and impacts and compliance is best
measured by Community Indicators. Community Indicators are statistical data
covering a wide range of issues gathered in conjunction with each update of the
City of Dubuque Comprehensive Plan which occurs approximately every five
years. The Community Indicators serve as a measure of success and help
identify areas of need within the community.
Plan of Action: The decision-making and public input processes that have proven
to work best are those that were used in the Vision 2000 and Envision 2010
projects. The process included receiving input from all citizens and community
stakeholders who wanted to participate. Key topics and issues were discussed
at focus groups and stakeholder meetings. With each meeting, community
members and stakeholders narrowed down issues, goals, and strategies.
Rebuild Iowa Office Green Paper
Page 2
Regional Planning: The LRPAC believes the proposed geographic regions are
too large. The issues facing communities within the same region will vary greatly,
as will the strategies to address those issues. It is very important that
implementation strategies created as a result of this effort be implemented with
the same standard for all communities on a state and regional basis.
Local Planning: The LRPAC would consider integrating additional local and
statewide hazard mitigation concepts into the Dubuque Comprehensive Plan.
Requested Acti®n:
The LRPAC is forwarding our comments to the City Council for consideration and to be
included in any future correspondence and discussions regarding the Rebuild Iowa
Office statewide planning framework.
Respectfully submitted,
,- Y`
,~-=fir'-~ ~, /
Jim Prochaska, Chairperson
Long Range Planning Advisory Commission
cc: Michael Van Milligen, City Manager
Barry Lindahl, City Attorney
Jean Schneider, City Clerk
Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager
F:\Users\djohnson\Council Items\LRPAC Rebuild Iowa Office Green Paper
RIO Smart Growth Green Paper
Page 2
Discussion
City staff from key City departments and divisions reviewed and discussed the RIO
green paper by responding to the questions outlined in Appendix H on page 34 of the
RIO green paper. (Appendix H is a compilation of the questions that appear throughout
the green paper.)
The discussion group involved staff from the Building Safety Department, Dubuque
Regional Airport, Economic Development Department, Emergency Management
Agency, Engineering Department, Fire Department, Geographic Information System
(GIS) Office, Housing and Community Development Department, Planning Services
Department, Public Works Department, Transit Division, Sustainability Office, and
Water Department.
Based on this review, Planning Services staff drafted the enclosed City position
statement on the RIO green paper for consideration at the September 21, 2009 City
Council meeting.
Recommendation
I recommend that the City Council review the enclosed City position statement, consider
any comments received from the public and the Long Range Planning Advisory
Commission, and then finalize the City's position with respect to the RIO Smart Growth
Green Paper.
Enclosures
cc: David Johnson, Assistant Planner
Response to RIO Green Paper
Iowa Smart Growth Principles (page 10)
City of Dubuque
• Does your agency/organization have established principles regarding sustainability
concepts to guide program development and investment decision-making?
Yes. The City's 2008 Comprehensive Plan includes smart growth and sustainability principles.
The City of Dubuque's commitment to smart growth and sustainability began long before
these concepts became national movements. The Dubuque City Council has made planned
and managed growth a priority since 1989, beginning with a codified definition of the
Comprehensive Plan that reflects the three pillars of sustainability models. The Dubuque
Comprehensive Plan looks at the city as a whole and the surrounding region, with goals and
objectives established for Physical, Economic, and Social elements of the community. As a
result, Dubuque's Comprehensive Plan has reflected the triple bottom line of sustainability --
environmental, economic, and social equity needs -- for more than 15 years.
In 2006, the Dubuque City Council adopted sustainability as one of their top priorities, and
then asked the community to define what sustainability means to Dubuque. Atwo-year input
process led to definition that embraces the three pillars of sustainability:
environmental/ecological integrity, economic prosperity, and social/cultural vibrancy. The
Sustainable Dubuque vision statement is: Dubuque is a viable, livable, and equitable
community. We embrace economic prosperity, social/cultural vibrancy and environmental
integrity to create a sustainable legacy for generations to come. Sustainable Dubuque has
11 principles: Community Design, Reasonable Mobility, Green Buildings, Healthy Local
Food, Community Knowledge, Healthy Air, Clean Water, Native Plants & Animals,
Resource Management, Smart Energy Use, and Regional Economy.
In 2007, the American Institute of Architects (AIA) Center for Communities by Design
selected Dubuque to receive technical assistance under the Sustainable Design
Assessment Team (SDAT) program in 2007. The Dubuque SDAT process brought together
architects and other professionals from across the country to work with local stakeholders to
help shape the community's strategy to increase sustainability. The City Council
incorporated the recommendations of the Dubuque SDAT Final Report into the Sustainable
Dubuque implementation plan that is now being developed.
The City is also finalizing a Unified Development Code that updates and merges zoning,
subdivision, historic preservation, and sign regulations into auser-friendly format that
recognizes the diverse physical characteristics of Dubuque's neighborhoods, encourages
planned and managed growth, reduces obstacles, and incorporates sustainable design.
While traditional site design is still allowed, it is now the exception. Site and subdivision
design standards have been extensively revised to promote sustainable measures.
1
State of Iowa Planning (page 15)
• What planning is currently underway throughout the state? Refer to Appendix F for a
table of planning activities. Your input is needed to complete this table.
Iowa Hazard Mitigation Plan and the GIS Flood Return on Investment Study.
• What other implementation tools would you suggest?
Statewide land use planning, statewide GIS, and a clearinghouse of planning information and
data at the state level would be beneficial.
Regional Planning (page 18)
• What are strengths and weaknesses of the recommended geographic regions?
The proposed regions are too large. The BMP's for one community will likely differ greatly from
another community, even in the same region. Communities in different regions, and sometimes
in the same region, will have different challenges, issues and resources.
• What other geographic regions should be considered; what are the strengths
weaknesses of those?
Iowa's Councils of Government (COG's) should be considered. They are more geographically
appropriate for the development and implementation of a statewide planning framework, BMP's,
and implementation strategies. COG's are already staffed, have an understanding of their
region, and have established relationships with communities.
• What topics do you address on a regional basis in your agency? What topics should be
addressed regionally but currently are not?
Topics already addressed include transportation, economic development and long range
planning.
• What do you view as the most pressing issues of regional importance?
The most pressing issue of regional importance is the equitable application and enforcement of
any additional regulations mandated as a result of any proposed planning legislation. Too often
cities, especially larger cities, are "islands of regulation in a sea of un-enforcement': Medium to
large sized cities and more urban counties typically do the most planning, regulating, and
enforcement. Smaller cities and rural, unincorporated areas typically have little, if any, planning,
regulating, or enforcement.
The City of Dubuque cannot stress enough the importance of developing regulations and
enforcing those regulations equitably in populated and rural areas. The standards for
development and enforcement are often times higher in cities than in rural unincorporated
areas. This puts cities at a disadvantage and consequently promotes sprawl, poor floodplain
management and hazard mitigation. Regulation often occurs in populated areas, but rural
3
development and farms contribute significantly to local, regional, and state water problems and
hazards. Responsibility needs to be regional, and not that just of populated cities.
Enforcement is critical on a regional level because a plan or regulations are only as good as the
ability to enforce it. This is a particular challenge for smaller communities and rural counties,
who typically lack the staff resources and funding for planning efforts.
Local Planning (page 19)
® What are your thoughts concerning integration of hazard identification and mitigation
activities in local comprehensive plans?
The City of Dubuque supports integrating hazard identification and mitigation activities by
referencing a statewide or regional document in the local comprehensive plan, rather than
incorporating the hazard mitigation plan. For example, the City of Dubuque references its Airport
Master Plan, Riverfront Plan, and Downtown Master Plan in the Comprehensive Plan. A copy of
city and counties Comprehensive Plan could also be kept on file with the state "clearinghouse"
we have proposed.
• What tools and other types of assistance would be needed to make the planning process
effective?
The most important tools needed for an effective planning process are funding, regional
coordination, enforcement and resources. A State office that provides resources such as
funding, staff expertise or interns would be important. State, regional and county data sharing
would benefit the effort.
Other Questions/Comments/Critique/Suggestions?
Who is the planning effort is aimed at? What is the benefit of regional planning to cities that
already have plans in place?
The Floodplain Management Task Force needs to address issues with the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP) and model ordinance. Any policy recommendation by the Floodplain
Management Task Force needs to consider program shortfalls such as rural Iowa counties and
small Iowa cities that do not participate in the NFIP, inaccuracies in the designated floodplain
areas often times due to outdated information, and avoiding development in Zones A and AE.
These are issues that should be addressed up front in any statewide planning framework
designed to support smart growth, floodplain management, and hazard mitigation.
4
GREEN PAPER
Recovering from the Storms, Planning for the Future:
A Safer, Smarter, Stronger Iowa
_ --- - - - _..r_ _A_~_T
In Britain, a green paper is a tentative government report of a proposal without any commitment to
specific action; the first step in changing the taw. A green paper presents a concept and serves as a
discussion document intended to stimulate debate and launch a process of consultation on a particular
topic. The State of Iowa's Rebuild Iowa Office adopted the term and intention of a green paper to
invite interested individuals and organizations to contribute views, data, and information surrounding
this title topic.
Rebuild Iowa Office
Community and Regional Recovery Planning
July 2009, Revision 2
Table of Contents
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION 2
INTRODUCTION 2
OBJECTIVE 3
PROCESS TIMELINE 4
LESSONS LEARNED FROM LIVING WITH FLOODS 4
SECTION II: SMART GROWTH IOWA g
FRAMEWORK FOR INTEGRATED LOCAL, REGIONAL & STATE
PLANNING
9
A. Iowa Smart Growth Principles to Guide Strategy &
Polic Develo ment
9
B. Plan of Action io
C. Statewide Planning Structure & Tools 11
i. Best Practices in State Planning 11
2. Proposed Integrated Local, Regional & State Planning Structure
for Iowa
13
a. State of Iowa Planning 14
b. Regional Planning 15
i. Scope of Regional Strategy 15
2. Intergovernmental Relationships 16
3. Geographic Regions 16
c. Local Planning 18
D. Example Scenario 19
SECTION III: CONCLUSION & APPENDIX 21
CONCLUSION 21
APPENDIX
A. Rebuild Iowa Advisory Committee Recommendations to the Governor
B. Iowa Smart Growth Principles
C. Plan of Action & Strategies with Descriptions of Strategies
D. Integrated Planning System
E. Proposed Planning Regions
F. Table of Planning Activities in Iowa
G. Other State Planning System Examples
G.i. Louisiana
G. 2. Wisconsin "smart growth" Comprehensive Planning
Legislation
G.3. California for including hazard element in local comp plan
H. Questions to Consider
-1-
GREEN PAPER
Recovering from the Storms, Planning for the Future:
A Safer, Smarter, Stronger Iowa
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
INTRODUCTION
May 25 through August 13, 2008: 85 of Iowa's 99 counties were coping with what has been
documented as one of the most devastating natural disasters in the United States. Lives were
lost, homes and business destroyed, farmland and animals were laid to waste. The disruption
and loss to people, businesses, agriculture, and the economy, as well as to the infrastructure of
our communities, education, cultural, and health care systems, is still being calculated a year
later.
On June 27, 2008, governor Culver signed Executive Order Seven, which set in motion an
intense process to engage Iowans at all levels to make recommendations to the Governor on
rebuilding and recovery of the State. Immediately, the Governor named a 15-member Rebuild
Iowa Advisory Commission (RIAC) and created the Rebuild Iowa Office (RIO) to give structure,
focus, and support to this process.
While over damage assessments are estimated between $8 and $io billion dollars to date, the
focus of this green paper will not be on recovery programs. The focus will be on what the State
can do towards policy development aimed at "rebuilding a resilient Iowa that's safe, sustainable,
and economically strong for its people, reaffirming its ties to the land, rivers, environment and
rich cultural history today and tomorrow;"1 the vision that grew from RIAC members listening
to what Iowan's voiced as their need and desire for the future.
In an urgent call to action, RIAC reported priority recommendations (see Appendix A) to the
Governor and Legislature in November 2008 in its 12o-Day Report. To achieve the vision for a
safer, smarter, stronger Iowa, recommendations and strategies for implementation call for the
State of Iowa to:
• Take the lead in and provide technical assistance to support communities and regions in
developing local land use policies and practices to support flood plain management and
hazard mitigation.
1 From Rebuild Iowa Office, Apri12oo9 Quarterly Report, Letter from the Rebuild Iowa Office Executive Director, a
summary of RIO vision statement, Page 3.
-2-
• Lead in planning and establishing policy regarding incorporation of smart development
principles, green building practices, energy efficiency measures, universal design, and
livability into infrastructure and housing initiatives.
• Develop guidance and support for an integrated, regional planning process for recovery
and ongoing initiatives.
• Adopt a core or base-level land use policy to protect Iowans from the impacts of flooding,
based on current data and with involvement of local governments in the process.
Establish state policy for development and redevelopment in floodplains that is linked
with statewide floodplain and watershed management efforts, providing guidance to
individuals and developers.
• Take the lead in and provide incentives and resources for communities within watershed
regions of Iowa to convene a regional approach to flood plain planning and management.
In summary, RIAC recommendations call upon the State of Iowa to engage in integrated,
regional, and state-wide planning to address disaster recovery in such a way that mitigates
future loss, protects our resources, and adapts our economy to a changing environment. This is
the essence of a safer, smarter, and stronger Iowa.
OBJECTIVE
While the mission of the RIO is focused on recovery and rebuilding after the 2008 disasters, the
vision of the agency looks toward the future; building a resilient Iowa that is safe, sustainable,
and economically strong. It is toward this end and based upon the RIAC recommendations that
RIO is engaged in long-term planning. The objective of this green paper aims to set
forth a statewide planning framework that includes over-arching smart growth
principles, a plan of action with strategies for implementation, and a structure to
support the planning process. It summarizes important background information about
research on living with floods, discusses various planning efforts that are currently taking place
independently, and aims to prepare a debate about a shared responsibility for developing
integrated planning on a local and regional level that meets state-level standards and policy. It
presents a basic framework from which to build a planning process and structure, and suggests
various strategies, tools, and incentives for consideration.
It is clear that this must be a comprehensive effort and the RIO therefore invites
stakeholders to contribute data, knowledge, and views on the most efficient policy
instruments to reach this objective as well as debate the merit of the overall
concept. With the collective data, knowledge, and input gathered from stakeholders, a policy
proposal could be drafted recommending a smart growth planning process for the State of Iowa.
-3-
PROCESS TIMELINE
SUMMER 2oog: discuss green paper with key stakeholders and gather data, opinions,
information and knowledge to advance the concept of state-wide planning into action.
Collaborate with key stakeholders to draft proposal on local, regional, and statewide planning
processes based upon smart growth principles incorporating information learned during the
green paper discussions.
FALL 2oog: share proposal with key stakeholders and gather additional input.
October 15t -submit legislative proposal to the Governor.
In addition to the proposal, RIO, working in collaboration with other state agencies, will
be submitting policy recommendations based on related RIAC recommendations,
including:
• Floodplain Management Task Force :(HF756) requires Iowa's Water Resources
Coordinating Council (IWRCC) to submit funding and policy recommendations by
ii/15/og promoting watershed management to reduce the adverse impact of future
flooding on residents, businesses, communities, and soil and water quality.
Flood Insurance Report: (HF759) A report will be compiled by li/i5/o9 by the
commissioner of insurance, in collaboration with the Rebuild Iowa Office (RIO), the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and the Homeland Security and
Emergency Management Division (HSEMD) to include recommendations onpolicies
and incentives to expand the availability and procurement of flood insurance in the
state.
Weather Safe Rooms: (HF~oS) requires State Building Code Commissioner to
develop standards for use by property owners who wish to incorporate weather safe
rooms into public and private buildings and work with RIO, HSEMD, and DNR in
recommending best safe room practices to the governor and general assembly by
12/15/09.
LESSONS LEARNED FROM LIVING WITH FLOODS
To strengthen the connection between the 2008 flooding in Iowa and the need for integrated,
comprehensive planning even further, we turn to Dr. Gerald Galloway2, one of the county's
2 A civil engineer, public administrator and geographer, Dr. Galloway has served as a consultant to the Executive
Office of the President, and has assisted the U.S. Water Resources Council, Worid Bank, Organization of American
States, Tennessee Valley Authority, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and various other organizations in water resources
related activities. From 1989-199o Galloway was president of the Universities Council on Water Resources, an
association of nearly loo universities and colleges active in water resources research and education. He served as a
presidential appointee to the Mississippi River Commission (1988-1995) and was assigned by the White House to lead
the Interagency Flood Plain Management Review Committee (1993-1994) in assessing the causes of the 1993
Mississippi River floods and proposing along-term approach to floodplain management. He has lectured and ti~ritten
extensively on the management of water resources. He is a Professor at the University of Maryland.
-4-
economy. The challenge is to tie sustainable development principles in land use
strategies on a local, regional, state, and national level.
The Review Committee made the following recommendations.
Share responsibility and costs for flood plain management among federal, state
and local governments and impacted populace. When the federal government
took over with legislation many state and local governments and the people who
live there stepped away to let the federal government deal with the problems with
flooding. However, land use determination begins at the local and state level.
Planning must be a shared responsibility.
2. Avoid the use of the flood plain for development if you don't need to. When there
are other alternatives, use them. Often development happens in a flood plain
because the land is flat and less expensive.
3. Minimize damages to development that does occur and has occurred. This can
be done by:
• Holding more water on the land where it falls, restoring upland areas,
holding water in wetlands, and by the use of dams -- large and small.
• Flood proofing structures. This includes elevating above the 100-year flood
plain, reinforcing walls and doors, and moving critical utilities and heirlooms
to second story.
• Acquiring marginal lands; structures in these areas are not serving people
well if they are repetitively hit by floods.
• Use levees and floodwalls when justified. It makes sense to use this
method when it is economically feasible.
While levees and floodwalls may be viable options, the Committee made
the following critical observations:
The current flood damage reduction system in the Upper
Mississippi River Basin represents a loose aggregation of federal,
local, and individual levees and reservoirs. This aggregation does
not ensure the desired reduction in the vulnerability of flood plain
activities to damages.
2. Many levees are poorly sited and will fail again in the future.
Without change in current federal programs, sources of these
levees will remain eligible for post-disaster support.
3. Population centers must be protected against at least the 500-
year or greater flood.
-~-
A. State of Iowa Planning
An independent Office of State Planning and Program Coordination would be created
to carry out the following functions:
• Articulate priorities/policies (infrastructure, watershed management,
sustainability, renewable energy, etc) consistent with Iowa Smart Growth
Principles to guide planning and investment decisions.
• Work with the Legislature on state policy development and implementation.
• Coordinate state-level planning and public investment decisions to achieve
complementary and synergistic results.
• Review regional plans for horizontal consistency between regions and vertical
consistency with statewide plan; mediate conflict.
• Measure and monitor success of Iowa's progress toward achieving smart growth
goals.
• Offer technical assistance, funding, and incentives for regional and local
planning.
An Oversight Board or Smart Growth Cabinet would be created to provide oversight
for the state planning office, as well as set policy and coordinate efforts with other
state agencies. The structure of the board could be designed in various ways. One
design could be a board that represents State departments, local and regional
officials, and citizens knowledgeable about the planning and development field. A
state coordinating council would consist of department directors of state agencies
most directly involved with smart growth efforts (Department of Transportation,
Department of Economic Development, Department of Natural Resources,
Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship, Office of Energy Independence,
etc.) to ensure collaboration between state agencies.
State agencies would continue to be responsible for long-term planning and decision
making regarding public investment (infrastructure, etc.) within their respective
fields. The State Planning Office would foster greater collaboration between state
agencies to help ensure that all state agency plans are horizontally consistent and
support Iowa Smart Growth Principles. The Oversight Board would not oversee all
actions of other state agencies.
Possible tools to assist with implementation:
Technical Assistance
Provided to communities and regions to assist them in designing and
implementing a planning process, incorporating smart growth principles,
reviewing codes and ordinances for consistency with smart growth principles,
providing education about green building and infrastructure practices, etc.
• Develop reports on best practices and important issues.
• Smart Growth Scorecard
Used to assess progress on smart growth concepts within a region and/or
community, highlight areas in need of improvement (which could be eligible for
-i4-
of addressing such issues currently in Iowa. In essence, people and communities
do not live in a vacuum and must make decisions that consider impacts on those
around them.
Additionally, the people of Iowa demand that government services be
streamlined. Many government services, such as mass transit, energy and other
utilities, economic development initiatives, among others are best delivered more
effectively and efficiently via regional collaboration and cooperation. A key
benefit of a regional strategy is leveraging the resources of multiple locations for
the benefit of the entire region. For instance, unique assets along a stretch of
highway running through multiple towns could be developed into a tourist
destination. Or a group of communities could combine efforts on a new
economic development initiative aimed at the bio-technology industry.
This proposal would produce regional strategies that address objectives and
implementation steps regarding issues of regional importance. These strategies
need to align with State priorities and principles. Such sections may include:
• Regional Vision & Goals
• Demographic Analysis & Population Forecast
• Housing
• Transportation
• Watershed & Flood Plain Management
• Energy, Utilities, & Services (including methods of increasing reliance on
renewable energy)
• Economic Development (including cultural resources, community facilities &
recreation)
• Agriculture
• Natural Resources
• Intergovernmental Cooperation & Collaboration
• Implementation & Connection to Iowa Smart Growth Principles
Each of the above sections would address hazard identification and mitigation.
Regional plans could be developed by councils of government or metropolitan
planning organizations, or some other entity(s) already in existence or created in
the region. These organizations would review local plans to ensure horizontal
consistency of local plans with neighboring jurisdictions, and vertical consistency
with the regional and state plans. These regional organizations may also
complete local comprehensive plans within their regions and offer other planning
technical assistance.
2. Intergovernmental Relationships
Regional field staff would play an integral part in a state-wide planning system by
offering direct technical assistance in the application of state standards on a local
level and coordinating regional issues for the maximum benefit. Regional staff
would also ensure horizontal consistency between regions.
-i6-
Questions:
• What are strengths and weaknesses of the recommended geographic regions?
• What other geographic regions should be considered; what are the strengths
weaknesses of those?
• What topics do you address on a regional basis in your agency? What topics
should be addressed regionally but currently are not?
• What do you view as the most pressing issues of regional importance?
C. Local Planning
A local community's or county's comprehensive plan is the blueprint by which the
local government outlines a vision for the future, as well as steps to make that vision
a reality. The comprehensive plan generally includes sections devoted to
demographic analysis, current and future land use, economic development,
transportation, and others. While this document typically focuses on the positive, for
it to be meaningful, it must also realistically address challenges. It is not realistic to
ignore natural hazards and the need to mitigate their potential impact. Natural
disasters can torpedo otherwise viable community goals faster than almost any other
event. Hazard identification and mitigation is a necessary component of proper land
use decision-making.
Across Iowa and most of the United States, it is common for emergency managers or
councils of government to complete local hazard mitigation plans with minor
involvement from land use planners or with little direct consideration of the plan's
impact on land use and economic development decisions. Some communities take
the hazard mitigation planning and implementation process very seriously; others do
the minimum amount of work necessary, do not adequately implement mitigation
activities, and view the hazard mitigation plan as independent of other planning
initiatives and land use decisions. The floods of 2008 vividly illustrated that the
latter situation is no longer acceptable. The hazard mitigation plans are completed
primarily to ensure public assistance funding from FEMA should a natural disaster
occur, are updated every five years, and must be approved by FEMA. Additionally,
hazard mitigation planning costs are often fully covered by FEMA through the Pre-
Disaster Mitigation Grant Program (PDM) or Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
(HMGP) following a disaster. As a result, the hazard mitigation planning process is
often the most robust planning activity many smaller communities ever conduct.
Embedding hazard mitigation goals in local comprehensive plans with clearly
established responsibilities for implementation is the most effective way to guarantee
both visibility for those goals and the desired results. In addition, the hazards
section should reference other elements of the comprehensive plan that are clearly
implicated in specific mitigation goals, and those should link back to the hazards
section. Virtually all other elements of the plan have potential linkages to hazard
mitigation goals.
This proposal would produce local and/or county comprehensive plans that would
consider the following concepts:
• Public Participation Process & Results
• Community Vision & Goals
-i8-
• Demographic Analysis & Population Forecast
• Hazards Identification & Mitigation (perhaps also including a strategy for post-
disaster recovery)
• Housing
• Transportation
• Energy, Utilities, & Services (including methods of increasing reliance on
renewable energy)
• Economic Development
• Agricultural & Natural Resources
• Cultural Resources, Community Facilities & Recreation
• Current & Future Land Use & Community Design
• Intergovernmental Cooperation & Collaboration
• Implementation & Connection to Iowa Smart Growth Principles
The plans would look many years into the future (for instance, 20 years).
Communities could choose to create their own plan or partner with their respective
counties. Counties would develop plans for areas not located within municipal
boundaries. Plans should be internally consistent with local ordinances (such as
zoning ordinances), horizontally consistent with neighboring communities and/or
counties, and vertically consistent with regional and state plans. Plans would be
updated regularly (for instance, every 1o years) and approved by the regional
planning office or field staff. City councils and/or county boards of supervisors
would be required to approve the plan before it becomes official policy, thus
investing the legislative body in the implementation process. It is important to note
that the local jurisdictions would implement local comprehensive planning, with
technical (and potentially financial) assistance from State and regional entities.
Questions
What are your thoughts concerning integration of hazard identification and
mitigation activities in local comprehensive plans?
What tools and other types of assistance would be need to make the planning
process effective?
E. Example Scenario
Consider the issue of watershed and flood plain management. What are the goals
and objectives? What are the current risks, and what level of risk is deemed
acceptable? Who are the stakeholders? What policies currently exist? What are the
gaps and shortcomings of existing policies? How do current policies and standards
measure against the proposed Iowa Smart Growth Principles? How are current
policies implemented on a local level and what are impacts regionally? How could
current policies and guidelines bestrengthened - or scrapped and rewritten - to
achieve the stated goals and objectives? What changes regarding implementation
and coordination are necessary to meet stated goals and objectives? How is
mitigation planning tied to the management of flood plains? Who holds the
responsibility to address all of these questions? Who coordinates these efforts?
Answering these questions (and many others not listed) would require collaboration
between multiple state agencies, regional and local stakeholders, and other
-19-
interested entities to achieve a truly comprehensive solution. This collaboration and
coordination does not currently exist in Iowa. The framework presented in this
document -once finalized via input from all interested stakeholders -attempts to fill
this void and answer those questions, producing a safer, smarter, stronger Iowa.
-20-
SECTION III: CONCLUSION & PEN ICES
CONCLUSION
The challenge before us is to tie sustainable development principles and land use strategies to
reduce damages from natural disasters, protect and enhance our natural environment, and
manage future growth while adapting our economy to a changing environment. This green
paper lays out a pathway to meet that challenge based upon the premise that it is a shared
responsibility of impacted individuals, communities, regions, the state and federal entities to
participate in developing and implementing such strategies. Additionally, it is emphasized that
a comprehensive approach to addressing these challenges is necessary. Iowa has experienced
multiple "500+ year" flood events in just 15 years. The uncertainty of climate change and its
potential impacts on Iowa's economy and resources compounds the situation. The status quo
methods for addressing these challenges are no longer acceptable.
This green paper is a call to action, as articulated by the Rebuild Iowa Advisory Commission.
This document outlines proposed Iowa Smart Growth Principles to guide planning and decision-
making; acomprehensive Plan of Action, including strategies; and a framework for an
integrated state-regional-local planning system. RIO invites input, critique, and suggestions on
this framework to move this concept forward in an innovate manner.
This paper intentionally does not address the costs of implementing the proposed strategy to
focus on developing the overall framework; costs will be estimated once input has been obtained
and the framework becomes more formalized. However, all costs of the new strategy must be
weighed against costs incurred by the status quo: repetitive repair to infrastructure and public
and private property; economic disruption caused by physical damage to businesses, displaced
businesses and residents, road closures, and general uneasiness of doing business in Iowa due to
reputation for flooding; poor land use decisions; lack of coordination of public investment and
services, resulting in higher costs; and many other tangible and intangible costs.
How many more $8 to $io billion dollar disasters must Iowa experience before we enact
meaningful, systematic change? It is RIO's intention that this paper facilitates meaningful
discussion leading to innovative reform, laying the foundation for greater economic growth
opportunities.
-21-
PC
z
.~
O
U
O
Fri
rro
`.J
c~
^^o
F"ti
.O
O
.~
~a--~
v 1
C-~~~
.®
^^$~-1~
F~~-1
W
^~
?~i
^^®
F~+~
i
i ~
i
~~
~~
~~
~~
~~
~~
i
~',
i ~
,~
~-~+
~a o
~~; C7
i ~
~~
~~
~~
'O
a,
-------~
~~
~~
i ~+
i ,~
~z
~~
o
:~
~U
i ~ ~
i ~ ~
iW ~
i p
~~ ~
i0
'a
~~
i
i'~
i0
i'~
is
i
'---•-°-
i
i
~~
:~
'~
~~ N
i ti--i
i ~ C~
i ~
~ ° ti
~H
I ~
'~ a
~~
~ ~ U
i ~
~A ~
i "~' w
i ~
i ~'+
~~ ~
'~~ ~
~,O ~
~~ A
a~
U
`~
°
0
.~
.~
O
U
Cl~
''d
.,.,
O
:~
O
~/~
W
b
,~
~
b U
~
U
~
a Q+
~~ .~
~
~ 0.i ~
~a ° °
~tx ...~ ago
~
~~o v~~~~~~'e'°~ ~ .
Way
v~ .+r, ~~+ Fr+ U ~ ~ ~ O o2S
.~ tU.,~-+ ~ N Uc-+ b~jp ~ U ~ ,~ ~ ..i~ P-~ ~
Q' '~ ~ ~ ``~' o ~ N ~ U ~ b~A ~ ~ ~ ~
N ~ ,.~ is ~".i h ~ ~ V1 ,i~+~~,i w '.~' + ~ ~
o?So2S
~
~ W ~ ~ ~A'~
~ ~ a~
~
,
~~ ~;~'°~'
~ ~ ~ .
.~ o ~ °a G
F, ~
° o
p,
°
~x~~a ~a~ ~A~wv~ wA~~
~ ~aa~Aw wC7x w ~; ~ a
a
.~
~~~
v~
~
~
~
~
w
r
y
~
y
ti N ^
.
..~ U ~i
U .,V.w
~
,
tM~~ ~ U
~ W ~ U ~
~
p ~ U U ''
~ U
d
o~° ~W
~ .S
W '~
021o2S
w~ ~
~~ a~~
o~
~
~~ a
v~j QfY1U AW w C7
ty"
~ a
~ °
iii C~
~ ~
~
~
~
~ CC$
~ ~
~
•
~ ~, a~
a~ r
U w
~
~ U
p ~ U U
b
~ °~W
o
o'2~ o~$
(~
~ y
. ~
~ ~ ~
~
~ ~
~i try 3-~
M H b a
/
-~
~ ~traC~AW
.~
a
a~
,o
U
_~
-~
-~
N
b
bA
''Cf
~"i
v
b
~ ~
o ~
s,,, O
~ N
~ ~
U
~ ~
m °
o °+~'
'~ .~
~ ~
° ~
~ o
o
~ ~
a~ ~
~ ~
'~
~ ~
~ ~
U
b ~
~ ~
~ °
~ ~
.~
~w
0
_~ ~
U ~,'
~ ~
.~, O
..
~ •U
N
~ ,~
$"ii . n
r~i-i
b
~ ~
° ~
3 °
~ ~
N
'~
cd
~--~
PROPOSED PLAN OF ACTION -SMART GROWTH STRATEGY DESCRIPTIONS APPENDIX C
A. Manage Flood Plains
Provide for the systematic reduction in flood damage by applying modern flood plain management
techniques at the watershed and basin level. Regional cooperation is essential. Understand and utilize
natural systems whenever feasible; build levees and floodwalls when justified and economically feasible.
Do not allow development in the 500-year flood plain unless needed. Move structures out of the 500-
year floodplainwhen feasible. Elevate and take other flood proofing measures when structures cannot
be moved or must be constructed in 500-year flood plain.
B. Hold Water Where it Falls
Water is a precious resource. Infiltration, which mimics Iowa's historic landscape, rather than piping
away water is the preferred method to managing storm water runoff. Improved filtration will assist in
times of water abundance by slowing the path to rising rivers, as well as times of drought by recharging
aquifers and groundwater supplies.
C. Integrate Local Hazard Mitigation Plans
The development of hazard mitigation plans is the most intensive - or only -planning process in which
many areas of Iowa ever participate. However, these plans are often not considered in development
decisions. Hazard mitigation plans, which are funded by FEMA, may serve as the foundation for
developing an integrated comprehensive community and regional planning process and structure in
Iowa.
D. Indentify & Measure Risk
Before risk can be mitigated, it must be identified and understood. Once risks are understood, an
assessment of consequences can be conducted. Government entities and property owners should
determine the level of risk that can be tolerated and take steps to ensure protection to that level.
Development decisions should be intricately linked to risks. Systematic updating of flood plain maps is
one tool used to identify risk.
Prepare & Educate
Government entities and individuals share a responsibility to prepare for disasters. Serious
implementation of the hazard mitigation plan and process is the first step in protecting communities and
citizens. These plans should be integrated with future land use decisions and planning on a community
and regional level. Public/private partnerships should be created to develop and implement educational
opportunities regarding natural disasters, risks, and response. Establish early warning systems.
Participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is one way communities and property
owners can prepare for and more easily recovery from floods. Iowa communities with flood hazard
areas within their borders are now required to participate in NFIP. Individual property owners are
encouraged to participate.
Acquire Environmentally Sensitive Lands
This concept is related to utilizing natural systems for flood protection via conservation easements or
other means. The concept also includes protecting areas that are unsuitable for development (due to
grading issues, high water table, etc), wetlands, historic and cultural landscapes, unique and scenic
areas, habitats for rare plants and animals, and other valued landscapes. Structures in these areas are
not serving people well if they are repeatedly flooding.
G. Preserve Prime Agricultural Lands
Rich, productive farmland is one of Iowa's greatest assets. While future development on the fringe of
communities will be necessary to accommodate economic and population growth, infill development
and other efforts should be implemented to protect this vital aspect of Iowa's economy and culture to
the extent possible.
H. Implement Green Building & Infrastructure Techniques
Green building techniques are a necessary component of community sustainability. Such developments
produce healthier living and working environments, reduce urban heat island effects, reduce energy
consumption and costs, and other benefits. Green infrastructure techniques, particularly those dealing
with storm water runoff, reduce flash-flooding risks, improve water quality, mimic natural infiltration,
and reduce grey system infrastructure costs.
I. Develop Distinctive, Healthy Communities with a Strong Sense of Place
A thriving economy requires communities that attract workers and residents by their high quality of life.
Communities that recognize, protect, and enhance their unique qualities produce authentic, dynamic
neighborhoods and town centers.
J. Engage in Integrated Local, Regional & State Planning
The decisions of one community can have a dramatic impact on its neighbor. Many issues and services
are most efficiently and effectively addressed or provided via collaboration with neighboring
communities. Regional planning and approaches can reduce costs, bureaucracy, liability and risk, and
facilitate equitable decision-making across multiple jurisdictions.
K. Ensure Fair, Equitable & Efficient Decision-Making Processes
Fair, equitable, and efficient decision-making processes are necessary to ensure that stakeholders come
to the table and trust that their views and concerns will be heard. The interests of all impacted and
interested entities should be balanced, all parties should be treated equally, and processes streamlined
and easily understood.
L. Utilize Transparent and Meaningful Public Input Processes
Residents and business owners should feel empowered to be active in community change and decision-
making. Government processes should be clearly and easily understood, public information and input
activities should take place in readily accessible areas, and information should be easily obtained.
Activities, programs, and decision-making processes should strive for inclusiveness and representation
that mirrors the impacted population.
W
A
3
0
H
•~
5
•-~i
R{
a
O
a~
H
3
0
c
ao
L
U
v
O
N
O
.j
U
t0
hA
C
C O
C ~
(B ~
~ ,~
d ~
~ ~
a..+ U
~ N
~s
co ,.,
L
O '
~ ~
G ~
O =
O ~
~ ~`.'
4"'
Q' O
N `~
L ~
v ~
}J
3 •~
~ a
C
~ N
N ~
N ~
~ ~
C
~C +O+
C N
~ Q.
Q ~
"a O
N U
~..:
O
v ~
C ~
c ~„
~~
O O
N ~
'~
fl. f6
O L
~ U
d1 ~
N ~'
~~
~~
~ o
o ~
c Y
d
~ ~
o ~ ~
v ~
V u ~ O ~
~
3~ "-
~
L
.G
i L ~
'O V
i
Gl t4 ~ O O
O' ~ ~,
~ 4l
Q. ~ ~ ~
`_
.{d
~
M z z
C
U
7
U ~ ~
~ y_
~
~ + (6
O a
~
Q. ~ 4
- ~
~ C
C
~ C ~
C
~ Y
~ O i~-+
~ ~ A ~
O C ~ +,,
3 O O ~
N
~ N O
v O O
~ ~+ ~ 4J ~
~ O
O1 ~ N v
N -p .F,
C v N
~ ~ "~
~
O N ~ N
L
~ ~ ~
~ N
40
Q N
N
~ N -
L 0
~ ~ p ~ ~
E ~ '
a, a 4
7 - _
~ ~ 'F'~
= U L
O y0„ ~ - C
~- p O
O ~ N
~,
•L i ~
v
~ ~ ~n N vi
Q) ~ ~
V
~ Y ~ ~
~ ~
D L
J 'a
U 'a t
N
N
.
1-+
~ ~
}a
v
;~ ~
U ~ ~+
E O
L
O L
O v
v
~ W
U
CJ .
C
N ~
> d
~
C
d ~
O
~ ~
d ~
~.
v
-a
C
~ ~ C
O ~ ~
~
a ~ a =
bA
G
.~
c
~a
a
U
J
_
~
a
~°
i
~
O
v °;
3
o a~`~
L
.Q
d ~
L_
•
3 Q
~ Vl Z
L U
~ Q
s.. f0 ~
s
~ ~ i
.+
~
O
J O
~ U N
t ~ ~
4- (0 C
O
~ ~
~
O
v ~
C ~ ~
C ~ Q.
0 N O
a-+
.~
~
O
Q1 ~
O
~
co C O
d ~ ~
O U N
U ~ ~
~ V
~ ~ 'c
Q ~ p
H
O
~ a,
s
L
~
~
O
~ _
tO ~
~ ~ N N
N
i
.y
N ~ ~
_ ~
~ 'a L ~
~ U coo ~ ~
d ~
L. O
~ j a0
~ > U
o ~. L +• O
Q. ~+
v cv ra U
*= oc
-°
c a
i
~ Z
CG W U
N
R
C
v
c
~ f6
~
a v
bA
G
._
a
m
c
0
.~
d
_
~
a~
~ V o0
U ~ CJ
c0 G
3 ~, ~
N
o a`,
. ,~ a
-a
~ o
~
a~ m
~' ~
. o
_
~ Q.
a
~ y N
}
N
s
a
-+ ~
N ~
L
~ ~
s
v 3
s +~
+~ •-
o v
c ~'
o >
~ U
~ ~
7
~ ~
~ ~
v ~
'O vi
C ~
~ O
W
D q0
A
~ ~
~ .N
M
~~+ N
+
'
~
N
L. (p
41 L
~ N
C ~
~ ~
N }+ C
(0 "~ C
C ~
_ ~ ~ fi+
~ N
to Q1 tN/f
Q. ~ [0 ~
.i .L t}
N N
Gl ~' fa
d1 ~
~ N ~
GJ ~
~
. ~ ~ ~
v
~ ~
~
~
Q ~
~
N 'i ~ ca
.
N ++ ~ ~ ~ ~
V
(6
~ W c
S N W G
G
O
a
-+
(6
h0
a
~
-
c=o 3 m
a ~ a
bA
C
.~
C
R
a
a~
~a
~3
v
m
N