Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Committee on Urban Flooding in the United States Program on Risk, Resilience, and Extreme Events Policy and Global Affairs Water Science and Technology Board Division on Earth and Life Studies A Consensus Study Report of
Â Â THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 Â This activity was supported by a contract between the National Academy of Sciences and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Award No. HSFE20-16-C-0211). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the view of the organization that provided support for the project. Â International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-48961-4 International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-48961-X Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/25381 Â Additional copies of this publication are available for sale from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2019 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America Â Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Framing the Challenge of Urban Flooding in the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/25381.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. Â The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president. Â The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. Â The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Â Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the studyâs statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committeeâs deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task. Â Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies. Â For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON URBAN FLOODING IN THE UNITED STATES Â Â Â Â Members Â DAVID R. MAIDMENT (Chair), University of Texas at Austin CHAD BERGINNIS, Association of State Floodplain Managers, Madison, Wisconsin LT. GEN. (RET.) THOMAS P. BOSTICK, Intrexon, Germantown, Maryland SAMUEL BRODY, Texas A&M University, College Station JEFFERY CZAJKOWSKI, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and National Association of Insurance Commissioners, Kansas City, Missouri DARA ENTEKHABI, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge HARRIET FESTING, Anthropocene Associates, Chicago, Illinois KATHERINE GREIG, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia JO ANN HOWARD, H2O Partners Inc., Austin, Texas CONOR JENSEN, Renegade Science, Oswego, Illinois ERIC TATE, University of Iowa, Iowa City CLAIRE WELTY, University of Maryland, Baltimore County JAMES L. WESCOAT, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge Â Study Staff Â LAUREN ALEXANDER AUGUSTINE, Study Director ANNE LINN, Scholar, Board on Earth Sciences and Resources ERIC EDKIN, Program Coordinator, Board on Earth Sciences and Resources Â v
Â Â Â Â Â Â Acknowledgments Â Â Â Â Â Â This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Philip Bedient, Rice University; Timothy Collins, University of Utah; Kimberly Grove, Baltimore City Department of Public Works; Eric Klinenberg, New York University; Ning Lin, Princeton University; Jay Lund, University of California, Davis; David Miller, Electric Infrastructure Security Council; Doug Plasencia, Moffatt & Nichol; and P. Kay Whitlock, Christopher B. Burke Engineering, Ltd. Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Michael Kavanaugh, Geosyntec Consultants, and David Dzombak, Carnegie Mellon University. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies. A central part of this study was stakeholder workshops, meetings, interviews, and site visits in four metropolitan areas: Baltimore, Chicago, Houston, and Phoenix. The participants in these activities are listed in Appendixes B through E, and the committee thanks them for their insights on urban flooding in their area. The committee also thanks the following individuals for making maps, compiling data, carrying out literature searches, or making other contributions to the report: Federico Antolini, University of Iowa; Oronde Drakes, University of Iowa; Wesley E. Highfield, Texas A&M, Galveston; Asif Rahman, University of Iowa; Jayton Rainey, Texas A&M, College Station; and Oliver Wing, University of Bristol. Â vii
Â Contents Â Â Â Â Â SUMMARY 1 Â Â Â 1 INTRODUCTION 9 What Is Urban Flooding?, 9 Committee Charge and Approach, 12 Organization of This Report, 13 Â 2 INSIGHTS FROM FOUR METROPOLITAN AREAS 15 Local Reflections from Baltimore, Maryland, 15 Local Reflections from Houston, Texas, 17 Local Reflections from Chicago, Illinois, 21 Local Reflections from Phoenix, Arizona, 23 Commonalities and Differences Among the Four Metropolitan Areas, 26 Â 3 MAGNITUDE OF URBAN FLOODING 29 Historical Data Assessments, 29 Flood Risk Assessments, 43 Magnitude of Flooding in the Case Study Areas, 47 Â 4 A WAY FORWARD ON URBAN FLOODING 51 Physical Dimensions of Urban Flooding, 51 Social Dimensions of Urban Flooding, 52 Information Dimensions of Urban Flooding, 58 Actions and Decision-Making Dimensions of Urban Flooding, 60 Concluding Observations, 62 Â Â Â REFERENCES 63 Â Â Â APPENDIXES A Trends Affecting Urban Flooding 69 B Baltimore Case Study 75 C Houston Case Study 79 D Chicago Case Study 83 E Phoenix Case Study 87 F Acronyms and Abbreviations 89 Â ix