Proactive Planning for Resilience: Protocols for Community-Led Climate Adaptation in Virginia

Strategy Development

Reducing Risk with Infrastructure Management

All aspects of infrastructure face a growing threat from rising sea levels, as well as increasing heat. It is important to plan ahead for how each category of infrastructure is affected by climate change and how to create resilient infrastructure for the future. In the face of sea level rise, existing infrastructure that is projected to be underwater will not be fully inaccessible overnight; instead, there will be a more gradual process of increasingly frequent and significant flooding. Some areas will experience chronic and nuisance flooding, which are floods that occur due to high tide even in the absence of a storm surge or other hazardous event.1 In Virginia, this is often discussed in combination with “recurrent flooding”, which is flooding due to precipitation, tide, storm surge, or sea level rise that happens regularly in a localized area and often leads to economic losses. See, for example, the definition of “recurrent flooding” in the definitions section of the VDOT Resilience Plan. It is important to consider the different possible reactions of people to this increasing flooding, as some will have a higher tolerance than others so people will choose to leave at different times. Including this in a benefit-cost analysis that accounts for both the flooding impacts and people’s reaction to those impacts, is key to fully capturing the threat posed by increased flooding.

To gauge when people will begin leaving areas due to chronic flooding, refer to the discussion of “tipping points” in Step 1. For more information on high-tide flooding, see this NOAA fact sheet.

To effectively manage infrastructure in a way that reduces the risks associated with flooding and extreme heat, each type of infrastructure in a community should undergo an assessment and planning exercise to evaluate solutions. The following is a discussion of various types of infrastructure and approaches to assess them and plan for climate change impacts. Utilize the table of contents below for quick navigation.

Table of Contents

Transportation

Some of the most-utilized and front-facing infrastructure in Virginia is the road system. The responsibility for maintaining roadway systems is divided between the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) and localities. VDOT maintains the public secondary system of state highways in all of the counties in Virginia except Arlington and Henrico, and cities and towns maintain the urban roads within their jurisdictions with the assistance of VDOT funding.2 The responsibility for funding and conducting road maintenance is of increasing importance as more and more roads are becoming vulnerable to climate change impacts, requiring repair or replacement.

Climate change can heavily impact transportation infrastructure, as repeated flooding and extreme heat can degrade roads and bridges faster than expected. Damaged infrastructure increases risk, such as by creating dangerous conditions for travelers and increasing the impacts of natural disasters. When these roads and bridges begin to wear from flooding and heat and require continued attention, their maintenance costs increase significantly. As these risks increase and the quality of infrastructure declines, it may become difficult to provide and maintain safe access to certain areas of a locality and services such as public transportation, emergency services, and school buses may become unavailable. Once these areas become too unsafe to access and too expensive to maintain, difficult decisions will have to be made about continuing to provide services to residents there. Planning ahead for such situations enables local governments to discuss alternatives with communities and make decisions ahead of time, before emergency situations limit solutions.

For a brief overview of the issue and potential solutions regarding flooding roads in Virginia, see this information sheet developed by the Virginia Coastal Policy Center and the Virginia Institute of Marine Science for the Resilience Adaptation Feasibility Tool (RAFT) project. For an in-depth look at Virginia’s transportation resilience challenges, see this paper by the Virginia Coastal Policy Center.

Vulnerability Assessments

In 2022, VDOT released a Resilience Plan that outlines future resiliency efforts for state transportation infrastructure. For localities, the VDOT Resilience Plan can be helpful in developing their hazard mitigation plans and their lists of projects that they submit to VDOT for funding. Within the plan, there is a process for vulnerability assessments to be conducted on transportation infrastructure using several useful tools, with more under development. The Resilience Plan includes two resources that will be used by the State to assess the vulnerability of existing road systems. These are Chapter 33 of the Structure and Bridge Manual, which outlines important factors VDOT will consider when designing bridges to be resilient to future conditions (sea level rise, increasing salinity, temperature change, and river discharges), and the VTrans Vulnerability Assessment 5.2.1, which is an assessment of the vulnerability of Virginia’s transportation system (all public roadways and VDOT-maintained structures covered in the National Bridge Inventory) to sea level rise, storm surge, and inland/riverine flooding. For sea level rise, the Assessment uses NOAA’s Year 2040 Intermediate, Intermediate High, and Extreme Scenarios. The Assessment can provide information on the vulnerability of critical roads that are part of evacuation routes or that support other emergency operations. Local governments can use the Vulnerability Assessment to educate their community members about the risks to their local transportation infrastructure, to inform development of their emergency operations plans, and to help them decide when it is necessary to develop a reliable means of access to neighborhoods with one vulnerable access road or, if that is not possible, to initiate plans for relocation of residents and businesses from unsafe areas. 

Resilience Strategies

Using the data obtained during the assessment of current and predicted risks conducted pursuant to Step 1 of this Guide, localities should conduct a vulnerability assessment of transportation infrastructure within their jurisdiction. Localities then must make a decision about how to respond to the identified risks. Three possible ways to address vulnerable roads are:

  • Existing infrastructure upgrades – the State or a local government could upgrade current road systems by providing additional support mechanisms such as creating or enlarging drainage ditches, using more heat-reflective paving material, or elevating the road itself. A local government should coordinate with the county (if it is a town), planning district commission and/or the Virginia Department of Transportation to prioritize projects that upgrade vulnerable roads. By including such projects in local hazard mitigation plans, localities can prioritize them for hazard mitigation funding when available.
  • Abandonment – the State or a locality may decide to abandon a recurrently flooding road if the maintenance costs become too great or the safety of road users cannot be guaranteed. The Code of Virginia provides that the Commonwealth Transportation Board can abandon a primary road segment when “the welfare of the public would be served best by abandoning the section,”3 and a county can abandon a secondary road segment when it deems the road “to be no longer necessary for the uses of the secondary state highway system”4 and “[c]ontinued operation of the section of highway in question constitutes a threat to the public safety and welfare,” among other requirements.5 A local government should develop a system for selecting and prioritizing which vulnerable roads to abandon and at what point, and for planning next steps when a road proposed for abandonment is the sole access alternative for a community. In addition to abandonment, discontinuance is an available but more rarely used option. VDOT can discontinue use of a roadway when it determines that the road no longer provides sufficient public benefit to warrant maintenance, but the related right of way needs to be retained.6 A locality cannot discontinue a VDOT roadway. There are separate procedures and requirements for abandonment versus discontinuance of roads, and these differ by the classification of the road. To understand which procedures must be followed, reference the Virginia Code or VDOT’s Guide to Highway System Changes (Section 2 to determine jurisdiction of the roadway, Section 3 to determine whether to abandon or discontinue, and Sections 5 and 6 for the appropriate actions). See more about the legal process to abandon or discontinue roads in this paper by the Virginia Coastal Policy Center.
  • Transfer of ownership – the State or a local government could transfer ownership and maintenance responsibilities for a vulnerable secondary roadway to a public access authority7 or a homeowners association for a neighborhood that uses the road, rather than close the road completely, if it can be maintained and used safely for limited purposes.

Funding

Case Studies

In 2012, James City County became responsible for the maintenance of Jolly Pond Road after VDOT closed it due to safety concerns. The County conducted some repairs but by 2019, it had become unsafe. The County placed notices of pending abandonment along the road, in the courthouse, and in the local newspaper. There was an alternate access road, but it was a longer route so it was not preferred by local residents. The County calculated the costs for keeping the road open and continuing to perform maintenance to keep the road in a safe condition versus the potential costs of closing the road.

Key Takeaways

  • Be aware that road abandonments could cut off the only suitable access to an area for cars, school buses, public transportation, ambulances and other emergency services. If this affects property owners’ sole access, this could expose the locality to takings claims so counsel should be consulted when considering abandonment.
  • Early notification of residents is important in decreasing pushback. In this case, the continued dialogue with the community was beneficial in maintaining a good relationship.
  • Perform a long-term benefit-cost analysis of any proposed upgrade for vulnerable roads.
  • Preservation strategies may not be sufficient for a vulnerable locality in the long term, as roads may deteriorate more than expected over that time period. Local decision makers can benefit from long-term preservation planning.
  • One method to reduce roadway flooding is to work with uphill neighboring communities to improve their stormwater management systems and reduce runoff.

See this article from the Williamsburg Yorktown Daily about the closure of Jolly Pond Road for more information

In 1979, St. Johns County in Florida took responsibility for a 1.6 mile stretch of the road known as ‘Old A1A’ as the state had built a newer route inland after repeated flooding caused erosion of the old road. In 2011, property owners along Old A1A sued the County for intentionally failing to maintain the stretch of road needed to access their properties. Between 2000 and 2005, “the county spent an average of $244,305 per year, per mile, to maintain Old A1A, as opposed to an average of $9,656 per year, per mile, for all other county roads.”1 The county stopped performing maintenance since it was becoming prohibitively expensive as the road continued to flood.

The property owners were successful in their case. The court found that the County did not have “sole authority and discretion to determine what constituted reasonable road maintenance.” Further, the court found that the County had to “reasonably maintain” and repair the road to provide “meaningful access” unless they conducted the proper abandonment procedures.2
 
Although this is a Florida state case and thus not controlling in Virginia, it provides some useful takeaways for Virginia local governments:

  • Local governments must go through the specified process in order to abandon a road; they cannot just stop maintaining it without facing the risk of a legal challenge.
  • Community engagement is a crucial aspect of dealing with the risks posed by vulnerable roads.
  • Roads to communities without alternate access will be harder to abandon, so localities need to plan ahead and make all possible efforts to avoid cutting off complete access to properties.
  • Local governments should use caution when deciding to take responsibility for a vulnerable road, assessing the maintenance costs that are and will be incurred.

1 Thomas Ruppert, “Castles – and Roads – in the Sand: Do All Roads Lead to a “Taking?,” Environmental Law Reporter 48, (2018): 10916, https://www.flseagrant.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Castles-and-Roads-In-the-Sand_2018_48_ELR_10914.pdf.
2 Jordan v. St. Johns County, No. 3:20-cv-1234 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 15, 2020), https://casetext.com/case/jordan-v-st-johns-county.

Pungo Ferry Road is one of the only connections between the eastern and western parts of an area in southern Virginia Beach, but it is often subject to flooding that renders it impassable. In 2021, the City of Virginia Beach identified the road as needing upgrading and included it in the Flood Prevention Bond Referendum. In 2024, the City received a $19 million USDOT grant through the Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost-saving Transportation (PROTECT) Program to support an elevation project, which will raise the road by four feet, allowing it to be passable even in 100-year storm events.

Key Takeaways

  • Roads without a suitable alternative can be upgraded in lieu of abandonment, through elevation or other anti-flooding measures such as improving drainage, addition of new raised pump systems, clearing or digging of new roadside ditches, or other infrastructure upgrades. If all else fails, a road can be relocated, which is an expensive and lengthy process.
  • Federal funds are available for upgrades to infrastructure but the grant process often takes years. For more information on federal grants, visit the Grants and Loans section of Step 4.

For more information on the Pungo Ferry Road Project, see the City of Virginia Beach website explainer and this article from WTKR.

Wastewater Management

A lesser-known impact of rising sea levels is the threat to septic systems as elevated groundwater levels cause compromised function or complete failure of these systems. This causes dangerous pollution from sewage leaching into the ground or surface water, introducing harmful bacteria that can affect human health and water quality and add to the nitrogen pollution in the Chesapeake Bay. To see how this happens, visit this Wetlands Watch overview. In 2021, the Virginia General Assembly passed legislation requiring the Virginia Department of Health (VDH) to review and update septic regulations to consider climate change, with an emphasis on issues caused by coastal flooding.8 Local governments with a significant number of residents relying on septic systems for wastewater treatment should track the development of these revised regulations. For more information on the effort to update the regulations, see this article in the Virginia Mercury.

Vulnerability Assessments

The first step in addressing this problem is to identify all the septic systems under threat in an area. The local health department offices maintain records of septic system permits. In addition, the Center for Coastal Resources Management at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science has developed a Virginia Wastewater Data Viewer that forecasts the effects of sea level rise on septic systems and can be helpful in identifying potential at-risk areas.

Resilience Strategies

Once identified, there are several ways to lessen the harmful impact of inundated septic systems:

  • Ensure enforcement of the septic pump-out requirements of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act (CBPA) – Pump-outs allow septic systems to work properly and prevent backups. In the counties of Accomack, Essex, Gloucester, King and Queen, King William, Lancaster, Mathews, Middlesex, Northampton, Northumberland, Richmond, and Westmoreland, as well as the incorporated towns within them, the VDH is responsible for oversight of those jurisdictions’ administration of the pump-out requirements of the CBPA.9 In other localities subject to the CBPA, the Department of Environmental Quality oversees the septic pump-out requirements.
  • Use advanced onsite septic systems (AOSS) rather than conventional systems in vulnerable areas – These systems include ones that are elevated or mounded as well as those that treat the water before releasing it. They are significantly more expensive than conventional systems. This can be used as a stop-gap solution if connecting to a nearby municipal sewer system is not possible, but they are not a permanent solution if an area is subject to increasing flooding. In areas subject to severe and increasing flooding, localities should instead consider development restrictions to protect the public health and safety.
    • There is currently a pilot project in Gloucester County to test a new, elevated septic system which treats the water in an above ground system. If approved by the VDH, this type of system could be used in flood prone areas with high water tables, where conventional septic systems are failing. To learn more, see this article about the pilot program from WHRO.
  • Develop community systems – Community systems are common in rural subdivisions, where a septic system is established for multiple homes, as explained by the EPA. They can be built on nearby higher ground to replace individual homes’ failing septic systems. They can help alleviate the financial and maintenance burden on individual property owners in rural subdivisions, but they also mean that the homeowners have to pay a connection fee and monthly fee, which low income residents may not be able to afford.
  • Increase municipal sewer connections – While this is the best long-term option to avoid failing septic systems, it is the most expensive and assumes that the community will stay in place for the foreseeable future, justifying the investment.
  • Public information campaign – If a locality is able to educate property owners on the risks of not maintaining or addressing issues with their septic systems, it is more likely that they will take steps to reduce their risk. These campaigns should include information about available resources to address septic system challenges.

Innovative Solutions

  • Point-of-Sale inspections for septic systems – Some states require inspections of septic systems at the time of residential property sale. Virginia could consider such a requirement paired with a program to help fund septic repairs or sewer connection for low income residents, to prevent situations where they are unable to sell a home with a malfunctioning septic system while also being unable to afford to repair it.
  • Requiring mandatory disclosure of septic system problems upon the sale of a home – this also is an option that Virginia could consider adopting, although Virginia is a “buyer beware” state and has struggled with the concept of mandatory flood history disclosure at the time of sale of residential properties.

For a more in-depth look at innovative solutions, see this white paper on recommendations for increasing wastewater resilience by the Virginia Coastal Policy Center.

Funding

In many cases, the responsibility for repairing septic systems falls on the homeowner, which creates significant equity concerns as disadvantaged communities make up a large percentage of septic system owners in vulnerable areas. The following are some potential funding sources for septic repair or replacement:

Case Study

Maryland’s Sustainable Growth & Agricultural Preservation Act of 2012, also known as the Septic Law, aims to limit septic systems in residential development mainly through the mapping of growth in tiers. These tiers are defined by their status as being serviced by public sewage or septic systems. Maps are created with the tiers clearly delineated, which controls where sewer lines are expanded, septic systems are placed, or neither can be done. The law lacked methods of enforcement, as a jurisdiction can create a tiered map but will not be corrected if the Septic Law is not followed properly. Key Takeaways
  • Maryland’s legislature established a state-level approach to limiting the use of septic systems, prompted by sustainable growth concerns as well as water quality. The Virginia Department of Health is in the process of revising the State’s sewage handling and disposal regulations, which could provide an opportunity to discuss the Maryland approach for water quality and flood resilience purposes.
  • There are a range of options available based on the use of the land where problems proliferate and these uses should be considered when deciding a mitigation strategy, such as not planning for or permitting significant developments reliant upon septic systems in areas that are flood prone or will soon face inundation from sea level rise.
  • Existing areas should be considered alongside new growth; the Maryland law only applied to new growth, which proved to be a problem because developments currently facing inundation were not required to be evaluated within the tiered system.
For a more in-depth look at the Maryland Septic Law, see the case study in VCPC’s ‘Reducing Septic-Reliant Households’ paper and the Maryland Septic Law Implementation page.

Wells and Water Supply

Underlying groundwater is increasingly affected by saltwater intrusion due to sea level rise and aquifer depletion in coastal regions. For households, this can result in unsafe drinking water and the corrosion of pipes which causes damage to appliances and a potential for the leaching of metals into groundwater. This also decreases the viability of soil, leading to the abandonment of agricultural land when it becomes unsuitable.

For more information, see the saltwater intrusion section of this VASEM Impact of Climate Change on Coastal Areas report starting on page 34, and a report by Virginia Cooperative Extension on saltwater intrusion into drinking water.

Vulnerability Assessments

VDH local offices and the Department of Environmental Quality maintain records of dug wells. Flood projection maps combined with regular testing of well water, which is recommended by the VDH, can help to identify wells most threatened by saltwater intrusion. 11

Resilience Strategies

  • Treating the water – Households can choose to treat their water at the point-of-use through installation of a reverse osmosis or distillation device.
  • Wetland restoration and conservation – Wetlands provide a transition zone which can prevent and slow saltwater intrusion. As saltwater continues to encroach on land, marshes will naturally migrate inland which should be enabled by planning.
  • Community well systems – These systems could allow re-siting a well on higher ground and allow more people to have access to non-saline water.
  • Importing water – Some areas, typically due to drought, resort to the importation of water from unaffected regions. This could be replicated to address demand for drinking water in areas with high salt levels in their groundwater, but it is not a preferred option.
  • Traditional flooding infrastructure – Infrastructure, such as tide gates, that prevents tidal flooding would reduce saltwater contamination of surface water.
  • Rainwater collection and gray water reuse – These are good options when potable water is not required. They can reduce the use of groundwater with elevated saltwater levels.

Case Study

In eastern Virginia, the Hampton Roads Sanitation District (HRSD) has undertaken an initiative to provide additional wastewater treatment to produce potable water to be injected into the Potomac Aquifer. The HRSD opened its SWIFT Research Center in 2018 and the project is currently in its first phase of full-scale implementation. By 2032, when the program is expected to be fully implemented, SWIFT will be able to replenish the aquifer with 100 million gallons of treated water per day. This not only will increase the amount of water supply in the aquifer and reduce the amount of nutrients going into the Chesapeake Bay, it also will increase the pressure in the aquifer and thus reduce further saltwater intrusion and land subsidence. With time and sufficient testing, hopefully this treat-and-inject approach can be expanded to other wastewater treatment facilities in vulnerable areas.

Key Takeaways

  • Forward-thinking options such as adding treatment to wastewater to make it potable can also provide a source of water to replenish an aquifer, which also helps to prevent further land subsidence. In addition to vision, such an approach requires planning, state approvals and significant funding.
  • Extensive years of testing and opportunity for community feedback built public trust for a science-heavy project that a community might otherwise have been apprehensive about.

For a more in-depth look, visit SWIFT Home | HRSD or see this New York Times article about the initiative.

 

Saltwater Intrusion and Agriculture

A study by the University of Maryland12 investigated the loss of coastal farmland on the Delmarva Peninsula and found that there is accelerating salt patch expansion onto farmland which is affecting yields, resulting in profit losses. There are several strategies farmers can pursue to mitigate the effects of saltwater intrusion on their cropland in the short term. Primarily, they may focus on addressing the salt content directly through setting up irrigation systems to remove salt from the soil or increasing additives such as gypsum.13

In the long term, it is likely that farmers in vulnerable coastal areas will have to transition their fields to different crops that are more salt-resistant such as soybean, sorghum, and barley, as corn is very sensitive to the salt content of the soil.14 A field can remain productive with salt-resistant crops and grasses that can be grown for biomass and other value-added crops. Eventually farmers can choose to convert their flood prone fields to marshland and provide a natural flood buffer, placing them under conservation easements that can provide tax benefits.15 Localities can support agriculture in their communities by working with Virginia Extension and the local soil and water conservation district to conduct education about saltwater intrusion impacts and alternative, saltwater-tolerant crops.

Stormwater Management

Coastal and riverine flooding greatly challenge stormwater infrastructure, as drainage systems can be overwhelmed, leading to worsening flood conditions. In extreme cases, water may even flow up a storm drainage system. The greatest exacerbating factors in excessive stormwater flooding are a significant increase in heavy rainfall, the growing percentage of impervious surfaces, and a lack of capacity by the drainage system – particularly older ones – to handle the combination of these two.16

Vulnerability Assessments

The U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit’s Adapting Stormwater Management for Coastal Floods can be used to produce a report on how past and future flooding can affect local stormwater management systems. Combined with flood maps, it can be helpful in assessing vulnerabilities of current stormwater drainage systems. The highest priority areas for adaptation and mitigation measures should be those that are especially flood prone, incorporating those that are uphill from a flooding community as this has the ability to provide a double benefit. The most comprehensive rainfall prediction method is the NOAA Atlas 14 National Precipitation Frequency Standard, which is set to be updated by 2027.

Resilience Strategies

  • Decrease the amount of impervious surfaces to allow absorption of rainfall
    • Use natural or nature-based features to help reduce stormwater flow
    • Provide incentives and education to businesses and homeowners for methods to reduce their impervious cover, including rain gardens and rain barrels
    • Revisit locality parking mandates, reducing the number of required parking spots whenever possible
    • Consider incentivizing or requiring the use of permeable pavement and pervious concrete in flood prone areas
  • Examine rainfall and flood prediction data and maps, and expand existing infrastructure and public works design manuals as needed

Funding

Case Studies

Following the devastation from Hurricane Matthew in Virginia Beach in 2016, the City hired the consulting firm Dewberry to conduct an evaluation of rainfall data from Norfolk Airport dating back to the early 1900s. They found that increased rainfall trends and an unprepared drainage system were the primary reasons for the flooding. In the Windsor Woods neighborhood, the lack of sufficient drainage systems led to flooding which damaged hundreds of homes. While the area was not labeled as critically threatened by flood maps, residents had raised concerns for years as maintenance on the drainage system fell behind.

See this Virginian Pilot article about the impacts to Windsor Woods.

To remedy this, Virginia Beach updated its Public Works Design Manual to adjust the drainage system design requirements, based on observed and anticipated increases in precipitation. The City also has undertaken a number of major projects to prevent future inundation of the area. One is a traditional approach, the construction of a new tide gate to prevent flooding in the surrounding neighborhoods. Another is a large stormwater park which will replace Bow Creek Golf Course to become a recreational area that has retention ponds to capture excess stormwater.

Key Takeaways

  • Addressing community concerns early can prevent more expensive and pressing disasters in the future. Locality staff should prioritize the need for community drainage and stormwater management upgrades in areas with inadequate infrastructure.
  • A combination of strategies is likely to be most effective in addressing a stormwater management problem long-term, especially if current infrastructure is inadequate.

For a more comprehensive outline of Virginia Beach’s adaptation strategy, see the City’s Sea Level Wise Adaptation Strategy (2020), which includes the analysis from Dewberry on page 39, as well as the City’s Sea Level Wise website overview and Virginia Beach Public Works Design Standards Manual – Sea Level Rise and Precipitation Adjustments for Stormwater Management Design | Adaptation Clearinghouse.

Parking lots are a large source of impervious surface conversion, especially with the burden of parking spot minimum expectations for developers. According to the Parking Reform Network, they take up about 24% of land in downtown Norfolk and 36% of Virginia Beach’s resort area.1 In Hampton Roads, the planning district commission is taking another look at the design of parking lots for a way to turn them from a hindrance to water drainage into an asset, along with a reevaluation of parking spot minimum requirements. Rather than a conventional design, parking lots could be designed using pervious concrete that allows water to flow through or permeable pavers, with runoff being directed to a designated retention area with plants. The planning district commission is renovating its own office parking lot to use permeable pavers or porous concrete to reduce runoff and absorb heat from sunlight, and adding a bio-retention basin in the middle.

Key Takeaways

  • Evaluating the prevalence and necessity of impervious surfaces in the risk and vulnerability assessment stage can open up new avenues to increase initial stormwater absorption and decrease the strain on existing drainage systems.
  • Surfaces can serve the same purposes they do now, but new approaches can offer a more resilient design and function.

For more information, see this WHRO article about the discussion of new parking lot designs in Hampton Roads.

1 “Parking Lot Map,” Parking Reform Network, https://parkingreform.org/resources/parking-lot-map/.

Emergency Services and Healthcare

Emergency services and healthcare workers are often the first to respond when disasters strike, but the supporting infrastructure for these efforts are increasingly at risk themselves. It is important for localities to consider these risks and manage them accordingly. Local governments need to mitigate the risks to their emergency infrastructure, such as hospitals, emergency shelters, and fire and police stations, so they are able to support residents during major disasters.

All critical infrastructure for emergency services, such as hospitals, fire stations, or police stations, are subject to the same threat of flooding as other types of infrastructure in a community, and should undergo a site risk assessment using flood maps and rainfall and sea level rise predictive data. Special consideration should be given to the risks faced by those individuals working in emergency services, especially when flooding becomes chronic. Localities also should begin planning for the possibility that some areas may not be able to receive emergency services in the future if the risks to first responders become too great.

Case Study

In 2017, Hurricane Harvey’s rainfall caused at least 25% of Harris County to flood, causing hospitals to deal simultaneously with flooding to their own facilities, disaster response, and their typical operations. Following years of infrastructure improvements in the aftermaths of other storms, many of the hospitals fared well during the storm and avoided major flooding issues. Other major contributors to this flood prevention success were effective advanced planning simulations, hospital staff dedication, and regular collaboration between hospitals and partner organizations. This regular communication created an established relationship which was useful in emergency response, as materials and volunteers could be mobilized on an accelerated timeline.

Major challenges included mobility and access for employees, a lack of understanding of the severity of the storm, and staff shortages due to inability to travel due to flooded roads. Financial issues and the lack of independent utilities servicing the hospitals were also cited as barriers to flood risk mitigation.1

Key Takeaways

  • Infrastructure outside of FEMA-designated special flood hazard areas should still be prepared for the possibility of flooding during extreme weather events, as over 30% of the flooded hospitals during Harvey were not within such SFHAs.
  • The ability to provide emergency services and healthcare was diminished when areas became too flooded to travel, as patient transport and employees coming to work were affected.

For more information, see the full case study.

1 Emmanuelle Hines and Colleen E. Reid, “Hospital Preparedness, Mitigation, and Response to Hurricane Harvey in Harris County, Texas,” Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness 17, (2021), https://doi.org/10.1017%2Fdmp.2021.146.

Energy and Communication Networks

Natural disasters pose a risk to energy and communication networks, whether they are buried or overhead. As flooding becomes chronic, these risks become more commonplace and maintenance of these systems can become more costly. Similar to emergency services, there may be a point where sending crews to repair certain networks is either too dangerous or the cost of doing so outweighs the benefit.

Planning ahead is critical for these networks, as establishing rebuilt infrastructure when needed could lead to a loss of service in the short or long term for certain areas. If a locality or utility company determines that an area can no longer receive service, a plan must be made to address this with residents in the area with appropriate warning, discussion, and development of alternative option.

Citations for This Page

1 William V. Sweet et al. “Patterns and Projections of High Tide Flooding Along the U.S. Coastline Using a Common Impact Threshold,” NOAA Technical Report NOS CO-OPS 086, (2018): vii, https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/publications/techrpt86_PaP_of_HTFlooding.pdf.
2 Va. Department of Transportation, “VDOT’s transportation system: Highways,” last modified June 11, 2024, https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/about/our-system/highways/#:~:text=Virginia’s%20cities%20are%20independent%20of,toll%20roads%20maintained%20by%20others.
3 Va. Code § 33.2-902.D, https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title33.2/chapter9/section33.2-902/.
4 Va. Code § 33.2-909.A, https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title33.2/chapter9/section33.2-909/.
5 Ibid. § 33.2-909.D(3).
6 “Abandonment and Discontinuance of Highways and Roads,” Va. Code §§ 33.2-900 to 33.2-934, https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title33.2/chapter9/.
7 “Middle Peninsula Chesapeake Bay Public Access Authority Act,” Va. Code §§ 15.2-6600 to 15.2-6625 https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title15.2/chapter66/. See also “Northern Neck Chesapeake Bay Public Access Authority Act,” Va. Code §§ 15.2-6626 to 15.2-6651, https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title15.2/chapter66.1/. The legislature also authorized the counties of Accomack and Northampton on the Eastern Shore of Virginia to establish a public access authority but they have not done so to-date. See “Eastern Shore Water Access Authority,” Va. Code §§ 15.2-7400 to 15.2-7425, https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title15.2/chapter74/.
8 Va. Code § 32.1-164 16, https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title32.1/chapter6/section32.1-164/.
9 Va. Code § 32.1-164 L, https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title32.1/chapter6/section32.1-164/. See also “Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act,” Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:67 to 62.1-44.15:79, https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title62.1/chapter3.1/section62.1-44.15:67/.
10 Va. Code § 32.1-164.1:01, https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title32.1/chapter6/section32.1-164/.
11 Virginia Department of Health, “Private Well Water Testing,” https://www.vdh.virginia.gov/environmental-health/water-testing/.
12 Pinki Mondal et al., “The spread and cost of saltwater intrusion in the US Mid-Atlantic,” Nature Sustainability 6, (2023): 1352-1362, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-023-01186-6.
13 U.S. Department of Agriculture Northeast Climate Hub, “Saltwater Intrusion: A Growing Threat to Coastal Agriculture,” https://www.climatehubs.usda.gov/hubs/northeast/topic/saltwater-intrusion-growing-threat-coastal-agriculture.
14 Pinki Mondal et al., 2023 (See 14).
15 Ibid.
16 City of Virginia Beach, “Sea Level Wise Adaptation Strategy,” 38-43, https://pw.virginiabeach.gov/stormwater/sea-level-wise.

Scroll to Top