1 / 25

Meeting Objective & Agenda

Building Standards Code Update Project Mitigating the Consequences of Flooding Presentation to the Central Valley Flood Protection Board Ricardo Pineda, P.E., CFM, Floodplain Management Branch Chief Brian Walker, P.E., BSCUP Project Engineer. Meeting Objective & Agenda.

ita
Télécharger la présentation

Meeting Objective & Agenda

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Building Standards Code Update Project Mitigating the Consequences of FloodingPresentation to the Central Valley FloodProtection BoardRicardo Pineda, P.E., CFM, Floodplain Management Branch ChiefBrian Walker, P.E., BSCUP Project Engineer

  2. Meeting Objective & Agenda • Purpose: To Provide the Board an Update on Project and Schedule • Highlights of Building Standards Code Update Project (BSCUP) • Schedule • NRA and CBSC Submittal Packages • Identify Next Steps

  3. Health and Safety Code §50465 50465. (a) On or before January 1, 2009,the Department of Water Resources shall propose for adoption and approval by the California Building Standards Commission updated requirements to the California Building Standards Code for construction in areas protected by the facilities of the Central Valley Flood Protection Plan where flood levels are anticipated to exceed three feet for the 200-year flood event. The amendments to the California Building Standards Code shall be sufficient to reduce the risk of flood damage and protect life, safety, and the construction in those areas. (b) Before the department proposes the amendments to the California Building Standards Code required pursuant to subdivision (a), the department shall consult with the Central Valley Flood Protection Board, the Division of the State Architect, and the Office of the State Fire Marshal.

  4. Collaboration & Engagement The DWR Building Code Team has Briefed and Obtained input from: Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) members in 5 Meetings FloodSAFE Executive Management Team 5 Times Central Valley Flood Protection Board twice The Public - 4 Workshops Five State Agencies

  5. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Participants FMA(Floodplain Management Association) USACE(U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) NFPC(National Flood Proofing Committee) NFIP(National Flood Insurance Program) MWHConsulting PBS&J Consulting IWC(Inter-West Consulting) CSBC (City of Stockton Building Division) SJBD (San Joaquin Building Department) Other organizations and agencies were contacted CVFPB (Central Valley Flood Protection Board) DSA (Division of the State Architect) SFM(Office of the State Fire Marshal) HCD (Department of Housing and Community Development) BSC (Building Standards Commission) SWRCB(State Water Resources Control Board) CBIA(California Building Industry Association) AIA(American Institute of Architects California Council) SEAOC (Structural Engineers Association of California) OSHPD (Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development)

  6. BSCUP Highlights • PROJECT DEVELOPMENT FLOW CHART (IN BRIEF) • FLOOD THREATS TO PEOPLE • OCCUPANCY GROUPS RELATED TO PEOPLE • FINAL PROPOSED CODE UPDATE

  7. Prioritization for 2009 Code Cycle

  8. Flood Threats to People The proposed Code update for the upcoming Code cycle primarily increases public safety for persons who cannot or do not evacuate region prior to flood Future Code updates should address damage reduction of buildings more completely

  9. Flood Threats to People (2) Four “Chief Threats” were previously identified to be addressed this Code cycle BC Team determined that #1 and #2 can be accomplished now Chief Threats #3 and #4 require significant coordination and input or research. Recommend addressing next cycle 1 2 3 4 (from Process Flow Chart)

  10. Occupancy Groups Related to People Building Occupancy Groups are selected to best address risk of vulnerable & dependent persons. These groups are Educational, Residential & Institutional Additional benefit to “average” homeowner in Residential buildings DWR can expand scope in future Code cycles R-3 (& R-3.1) and E are the appropriate OGs to propose as Mandatory Code to address risk of vulnerable & dependent persons and maximize adoption of proposal to Code (from Process Flow Chart)

  11. What Types of Buildings are Included? • Mandatory • Schools (Group E) • Single family homes (Group R-3) • Residential care facilities with 6 or fewer clients (Group R-3.1) • Voluntary • Medical, care facilities, and assisted living facilities (Group I) • Remainder of Group R, such as hotels and apartments

  12. 2009 Proposed Code Update The proposal, if adopted, will minimize likely and mortal danger to persons who otherwise may not have a Flood Evacuation Location The Flood Evacuation Location requirements are: Designed to allow flexibility and creativity (see examples) Appropriately restrictive (e.g. minimum sizing, egress, etc) Consistent with existing Code requirements regarding accessibility (i.e., ADA) requirements Cost Conscious

  13. Example 1 Single Story Residential with Five Options, Depending on Flood Water Depth. (There is only 1 Water Depth at a Particular Site) WSEL200 “WSEL200” represents the Water Surface Elevation for the “200-year” Flood Event. Design Options Available will Always depend on Flood Depth.

  14. Example 2Evacuation Location on Residential Roofs or Attics

  15. Example 3: Use FEMA/NFIP Approach “Elevate” one-story home above a garage or storage space. Technically, this is a two-story. This approach is required if in the FEMA mapped 100-year floodplain Significantly minimizes threat to persons (who could not evacuate region & had to be home) and home damage.

  16. Example 4 The owner may feel more comfortable evacuating to a flat terrace or balcony than on rooftop or in attic. This rooftop Evacuation Location can often serve as amenity.

  17. Example 5:If a Single-Story is Desired but it Would Be Fully Inundated • If local Building Official and other necessary officials (e.g., RD or LD manager) sign off on Alternate Means of Protection plan offered by Owner/Developer of a Single-Story Planned Community, for example, then a Multi-Story Community Center may serve as the Evacuation Location. • Some Considerations: • Planned Community is Not Close to Levee • Homes are Close to Community Center • Robust Hazard (Flood) Warning System in Place

  18. Example 6

  19. ScheduleMust Submit toCBSC byJuly 1, 2009

  20. SCHEDULE - BUILDING STANDARDS CODE UPDATED PROJECT The CBSC 2009 Annual Code Adoption Cycle Begins July 1, 2009. Proposals that are Adopted Become Effective January 1, 2011.

  21. Natural Resource Agency (NRA)&California Building Standards Commission(CBSC)Submittal Packages

  22. NRA & CBSC Submittal Packages The Submittal Packages are Identical and Include: DWR Director’s Decision Memo Proposed Code Update (“Express Terms”), 3 Parts (by Occupancy Group) Narrative Document to Explain Code “Initial Statement of Reasons” “9-Point Criteria” Supporting Documentation: Example Illustrations of Buildings Meeting Proposed Requirements

  23. Next Steps The BC Team to Submit Packages to: NRA on Wednesday, May 20th CBSC by May 27th (Courtesy Review) CBSC by June 30th (Official Submittal) Beginning July 1, 2009, the BC Team Continues Carrying Proposal in the CBSC Code Adoption Cycle.

  24. Questions or Comments? For more information: http://www.water.ca.gov/floodsafe http://www.water.ca.gov/BuildingCodeUpdate

  25. Mitigating the Consequences of Flooding California Building Standards Code Update Project THANK YOU

More Related