Rood Plain Management 



mitigation policy. The Rhode Island building Code and FEMA regulations differ as to how 

 the value of a structure is defined. Rhode Island's accounting methodology is based on 

 replacement value, while FEMA's is based on market value. Applicants have succeeded in 

 applying an "in-kind" interpretation of "replacement value" which allowed accounting for 

 replicating early building materials which now impose very significant costs. 



In Rhode Island, value is further under-represented by virtue of the fact that under 

 current state building code regulations, the cost of mechanical, electrical, and plumbing 

 systems are excluded when calculating the cost of reconstruction. 



Where less than 50 percent destruction has taken place, permits may not 

 require that reconstruction meet NFIP standards, if the standards are 

 "incompatible" witii the original strucmral design. On dunes of four "developed" barriers, 

 vertical construction is administratively permitted where alterations or additions amount to 

 less than 50 percent of the structure's value. Council review is required where proposed 

 construction would exceed the value of a structure more than 50 percent. 



No specinc state-wide authority exists to prohibit extension of public 

 infrastructure into floodplains and coastal high hazard areas, although the need 

 for such a policy has been repeatedly stressed, most recentiy by the Task force. While an 

 Executive Order discouraging extension into hazard areas was reissued by the governor in 

 1987, it most significandy impacts the location of state buildings. The language called for 

 "avoidance" of siting state facilities, or facilities funded in whole or in pan by public 

 monies, in a documented hazard zone. 



A bill requiring all coastal communities in the state to develop plans guiding 

 redevelopment after a severe hurricane was introduced by the Governor's Office in 1987, 

 but was not enacted. The bill would have required Uiat, in coastal communities, required 

 revisions of comprehensive plans must include provisions for regulation of future 

 development in hazard-prone areas as well as regulation of post-storm redevelopment in 

 these areas. The bill also attempted to address the flood data accuracy issue by requiring 

 communities to determine the areas within their jurisdiction most subject to hurricane 

 damage. Although certain municipalities are addressing post-storm development issues 

 (East Providence through its waterfront planning process and Charlestown through its 

 comprehensive planning process), most have not been aggressive in this area. 



The Salt Pond Area Hurricane Preparedness Plan proposed that CRMC adopt a set of 

 emergency procedures to ensure that applicable building codes and other standards would 

 be ac^ered to in the period immediately after a disaster, and to provide for imposition of 

 short-term post-storm building moratoria in certain areas under specified conditions. These 

 policies should be extended to all of the state's flood hazard areas. 



Recommendations to the General Assembly 



♦♦♦Amend the State Building Code to incorporate by reference the specific 

 building regulations of CRMC, as updated to reflect the most recent technical 

 guidance available regarding construction in coastal areas. 



***Revise the Rhode Island Building Code to provide that the costs of mechanical, 

 electrical, and plumbing systems be included when calculating the cost of a "substantial 



204 



