Disaster management and preservation by Dominique Segura

Disaster Management and Preservation

Dominique Segura HIPR 703 Preservation Law & Advocacy Winter 2017â&#x20AC;Š

Natural disasters and human induced disasters have damaged invaluable cultural resources all over the world and affected millions of people. Since 1990, natural disasters have affected about 217 million people every year. According to the New England Journal of Medicine, the scale of disasters has expanded, owing to increased rates of urbanization, deforestation, environmental degradation and to intensifying climate variables such as higher temperatures, extreme precipitation and more violent wind or water storms.1 A communityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s capacity to recover from a disaster has been linked in part to its cultural heritage. Cultural landmarks embody a cultureâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s identity and help communities to rebuild from a traumatizing and destructive event given from a psychological and economical aspect. International organizations like United Nations, scientific committees and political organization like the European Parliament all acknowledge this increase in natural disaster, the real risks that populations and the built environment might face and the hazard that it can induce on cultural resources. The best option for the protection of these resources and mitigation of these hazards is to prepare for disasters and emergencies. From world heritage site managers to local historic district committee, having a disaster plan with a trained staff will significantly help for a better recovery. Disaster planning is not only through documentation of the cultural resources but also through structural mitigation might it be for geological disasters or climatic disasters. In the United States the relation between disaster policy and preservation is mostly present and relevant within the Federal Emergency Management Agency created in 1979 and its Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation (EHP) program. This program integrates the protection and enhancement of environmental, historic, and cultural resources into FEMA's mission, programs and activities; ensures that FEMA's activities and programs related to disaster response and recovery, hazard mitigation, and emergency preparedness comply with federal environmental and historic preservation laws.2 The United States has over 90000 historic resources including historic districts on the National Register of Historic Places and many of these resources need to be better protected from future damage due to natural disaster. â&#x20AC;Š

Leaning, Jennifer. Natural Disasters, Armed Conflict, and Public Health New England Journal of Medicine; 369 November 7, 2013

EHP Policy. https://www.fema.gov/

I. History of disaster policy and preservation policy

The history of preservation policies and environmental policies in the United States first developed in parallel without any interaction but in the late twentieth century the preservation of historic resources integrated the discussion in environmental policies. This occurred through the implementation of important environmental provisions which defined the environment as including both an ecological and a cultural aspect. In emergency management the concern for historic resources exists and taken with serious but there are issues which are still relevant. The early roots of disaster relief policies in the United States were efforts to address threats of fire and diseases and took the form of disaster relief bills and legislation. Threats of fire and disease came about due to increasingly crowded urban areas and wooden construction used for buildings. In 1803 the Fire Disaster Relief Act was enacted and made federal funds available to help the city of Portsmouth and

Fig.1 fire after the earthquake of 1906 in San Francisco.

the state of New Hampshire recover from extensive fires. In 1906 the Great Earthquake which hit San Francisco and measured about 7.8 on the Richter scale was followed by fires devastating much of the city. The fire killed more than 3,000 people and destroyed 28,000 buildings making about 225,000 of the city's 400,000 residents homeless.3 In 1928 the Lower Mississippi Flood Control Act was passed as a means of responding to the lower Mississippi River flooding in 1927.

Fig.2 Cape Girardeau, MO in 1927 during the Mississippi flood.

Goldbaum, Ellen. Recreating San Francisco's Earthquake. Rep. University at BuďŹ&#x20AC;alo, 19 Apr. 2001. Web

This natural disaster was one of the worst in the United States history. More than 23,000 square miles of land was submerged, hundreds of thousands of people were displaced, and around 250 people died.4 Despite this legislation, federal involvement was mostly in form of providing troops and disaster relief. 5 Some important changes in disaster management occurred during the Depression era. In 1933 President Franklin Roosevelt granted the Reconstruction Finance Corporation the “authority to provide loans for the repair and reconstruction of certain public facilities that had been damaged by earthquakes.” 6 The Flood Control Act of 1936 was a major legislative provision which encouraged a more proactive

Fig.3 Concrete retaining walls constructed by the Army Engineering Corp in Johnstown, PA in 1943.

approach. It created a national flood control program and gave this responsibility to the U.S Army Corps of Engineers. This act funded project like the flood control project on the Pennsylvania river, between 1938 and 1943 the Corp constructed what was then the nation's largest flood-control system. They excavated three million cubic yards of earth and rock, and built nine miles of concrete side slopes.7 The evolution of

Fig.4 White County Courthouse damaged by a tornado in Monticello, IN in 1974.

emergency management in the country 4

American National Red Cross, The Mississippi Valley Flood Disaster of 1927: Oﬃcial Report of the Relief Operations (1929)

David A. Moss. 1999. “Courting Disaster? The Transformation of Federal Disaster Policy since 1803,” in Kenneth A. Froot, ed. The Financing of Catastrophe Risk, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 315. 5

Drabek, T. E., Microcomputers and Disaster Responses. Disasters, 15: 186–192. (1991)

Shappee, Nathan. A History of Johnstown and the Great Flood of 1889: A Study of Disaster and Rehabilitation. Diss. U of Pittsburgh, 1940.

was encouraged by many earthquakes and hurricanes in the 60’s and 70’s. The Super Outbreak of 1974 had not been topped until 2011. The Super Outbreak of tornadoes that occurred on April 3-4, 1974 was the most intense and widespread tornado outbreak in recorded history. In total, 148 tornadoes spanned 13 states producing about 900 square miles of tornado damage in less than 18 hours.8 The Disaster Relief Act of 1974 established a process for issuing presidential declarations and established, for the first time, a permanent source of federal disaster relief funds. These funds were initially designated for the repair of local government properties. A 1951 amendment to the act provided support for emergency housing. The different acts passed in those decades directed federal agencies to take actions in planning and managing through regulations making their responsibilities more than mitigating hazards.9 In 1979 the Federal Emergency Management Agency was established to oversee and reorganize all the different federal disaster programs, the FEMA was activated by President Carter with the Executive Order 12127. For what concerns the development of preservation policy in the United States a major act which had a tremendous impact on historic preservation is the National Historic Preservation Act established in 1966. This provision legitimized and made furthermore the protection of cultural resources the responsibility of the federal government. The federal government took on a role in stewardship and actively made efforts for the preservation of historic resources across the nation. The NHPA created the National register of historic places, established State Preservation Offices and helped develop the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards which are guidelines for the preservation, rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction of historic resources. A key component of the NHPA is Section 106, this section applies to all federal agencies and obligates each agency to analyse and share with the public the potential impact of their activities on historic resources. These historic resources include the properties listed on the National Register and the ones which meet the criteria for a listing. Section 110 of the Act asks for the creation a specific program within each agency charged in part to make sure of the application of section 106 by the agency. The FEMA is a federal agency which must comply with section 106 hence this creates a legislative bound between federal emergency management, disaster relief activities and the preservation of historic resources.

Risk Management Solutions. Analysis and Reconstruction of the 1974 Tornado Super Outbreak. Rep. 2004. Print.

Furthermore the National Environmental Policy Act enacted in 1970 requires Federal agencies to use all practicable means within their authority to protect the environment, and establishes a process for analyzing and disclosing the impacts of Federal actions on the environment including historic resources. The arrival at this level of responsibility from the part of agencies was preceded by federal and local government actions which affected the built environment and historic resources. Federal projects or federally funded projects administered by local governments made great damage to the built environment of the United States, this was especially felt post World War II when large urban renewal projects were undertaken in major cities to remove blighted areas. Valuable historic

Fig.5 West End neighborhood in Boston in 1950â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s.

resources of all types and scale were demolished and communities deplored these loses. A major urban renewal project funded by the government took place in Boston in the 1950â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, the West End neighborhood was determined as being a slum by the Boston Redevelopment Authority and was completely razed to make place for new developments. The Federal government paid for two thirds of the cost of acquiring the site, while local governments paid the remaining. West End was demolished to make place for a new highway, housing high rises, government and

Fig.6 West End neighborhood cleared for the urban redevelopment.

commercial buildings.10

O'Connor, Thomas H., Building a New Boston: Politics and Urban Renewal, Northern University Press, 1993

The neighborhood was historical the home of working class and a multi ethnicity community. More than 2,700 families living in West End were displaced. This example was one of the many urban renewal project which reshaped cities across the country during the 1950s and 1960s. Occurring in the same time were actions taken on specific buildings which lead to great public outcry. An example of demolished landmark which also influenced the efforts in preservation was the Pennsylvania Station in New York City. The original monumental building was built in 1910 by McKim, Mead & White and was dismantled in 1963. The Beaux Art station towering over 150 feet high was deemed to be too costly to maintain and sold to become the site of the new Madison Square Garden. Little was made to save this building, on site protest only brought about 200 people but its loss was greatly felt and regretted by the city and public.11 These large scale decision on urbanism and individual actions on historic buildings became controversial and inspired the preservation movement which followed these decades. This stronger awareness for preservation in the country resulted in pressure on the government to create

Fig.7 Demolition of Penn Station in New York City in early 1960s.

regulations for the safeguard of historic properties, the NHPA was enacted in 1966 and the NEPA in 1970 both requiring any federal undertaking to assess the damage on historic resources. The United Statesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; common law system is based on strong use of precedents on which courts support their rulings. This system helps legislation to evolve and allows the court to interpret laws and make sure constitutional rights are being applied. The interpretations of the statutes by the Court became more supportive of preservation efforts and favored the application of section 106. Landmark cases like PennCentral v. City of New York in 1973 when Supreme Court ruled in favor of the preservation of Grand Central Terminal established a precedent for many court cases involving preservation.12

Beschloss, Michael. "Penn Station: A Place That Once Made Travelers Feel Important." The New York Times. Jan. 2015.

12 Tyler,

Norman; Ligibel, Ted J.; Tyler, Ilene R. (2009-02-04). Historic Preservation: An Introduction to Its History, Principles, and Practice. W. W. Norton & Company

The NEPA was an important and progressive act for the environmental protection but also the built and cultural environment. This act helps in the protection and preservation of historic properties in the nation more broadly than the National Historic Preservation Act because it concerns a greater range of historic properties not solely the ones listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. This wider coverage gives a chance for any resource consider historic at a regional level or of local significance to be considered as well in federal actions. Nevertheless the NEPA or section 106 are procedural reviews and ultimately do not require from federal agencies to take actions for the best interest of the historic resources. In a situation of environmental disaster their are certain legislation which also cover the safeguard of historic resources.

II. Significance of preserving historic resources in disaster situations : preserving the cultural identity The search for identity has been the first efforts which lead the preservation movement. Private citizens of the United States sought to protect the houses of civil war leaders, politics and other important persons which had a significance in the history of events which lead to the creation of the country and the Constitution. This patriotic effort to save historic resources sought to create an identity for the Americans. Considered the birthplace of the country, Independence Hall in Philadelphia was successfully preserved in

Fig.8 Independence Hall in Philadelphia in the 1950s.

1816 . The site boundary progressively enlarged and became one of the first National Historic Park in 1947. 13 The notion that historic buildings are significant and a part of the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s identity evolved from this patriotic criteria to a much larger cultural significance embedded in most of the historic built environment. In 1935 the Civil Works Administration Act 13 Tyler,

Norman; Ligibel, Ted J.; Tyler, Ilene R. (2009-02-04). Historic Preservation: An Introduction to Its History, Principles, and Practice (Second Edition)

specifically established a policy “to preserve for public use historic sites, buildings and objects of national significance for the inspiration and benefit of the people of the United States.”14 The Historic American Historic Survey was established in 1933 with the Historic Sites Act. It’s mission statement explains that : “The survey shall cover structures of all types from the smallest utilitarian structures to the largest and most monumental. Buildings of every description are to be included so that a complete picture of the culture of the times as reflected in the buildings of the period may be put on record.”15 The relation between the built environment and a culture’s identity is a concept which scholars have explored across the world. The protection of the built environment is a part of a culture’s heritage and can be at a national scale or a local scale. In situation of disasters the protection of vernacular buildings, larger institutional buildings or other significant structures is considered an important aspect for the

Fig.9 View of the preserved tower of the Kaiser Wilhelm Church Memorial in Berlin.

survival of a culture and resilience of a community. The symbolism which these resources express is an inherent part of a community’s cultural heritage. In cases of wars, historic and cultural resources have repeatedly been targets of attacks because of their symbolism. The destruction of institutional buildings and landmarks are great losses for a community or nation. The Kaiser Wilhelm Church in Berlin was one of the many landmarks touched by bombing World War II which left about a third of the inner city in ruins. The spire of the church rising 230 feet over the western part of the city was built in 1895 by Kaiser Wilhelm II. After the bombing it was barely standing but Berliners protested any plans to demolish it. Today this landmark is nicknamed the “Hollow Tooth” and is seen by locals as a sign of prosperity and recovery post war.16

Historic Sites Act of 1935, 16 U.S.C. 461 to 467

HABS Web site, www.cr.nps.gov/ habshaer/ habs/ habshist.htm, May 1999.

DPA News Agency, Deutsche Welle. "Rescuing Berlin's Most Famous World War II Ruin" DW.COM. Aug. 2008.

Countless number of buildings were destroyed during World War II in many countries in Europe and Asia. To prevent this from happening in the future UNESCO sponsored the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Properties in the Event of Armed Conflict in 1954. Known as the Hague Convention and signed by 28 countries in the 1950s the protocol of this convention stipulate that each state must “respect cultural property situated within their own territory as well as within the territory of other High Contracting Parties” and is prohibited from “any form of theft, pillage or misappropriation of, and any acts of vandalism directed against, cultural property”.17 During the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina in the 1990s major landmarks and cultural resources were damaged. In the old town of Mostar the Stari Most bridge which stood for 427 years and considered a unique example of islamic architecture was hit over 60 times before collapsing in 1993 by

Fig.10 Stari Most bridge after its reconstruction in 2004 in Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Croat forces during the Croat–Bosniak War. This attack was accused to have little strategic importance and a deliberate destruction of cultural property, a symbol of coexistence between muslim, christian and jewish cultures. UNESCO stated that “The Old Bridge area, with its pre-Ottoman, eastern Ottoman, Mediterranean and western European architectural features, is an outstanding example of a multicultural urban settlement” and established an international scientific committee for the reconstruction of the bridge which was rebuilt in 2004.18 The damage on cultural property during this war initiated a review of the convention in 1999 and its protocol. “The Second Protocol advances a number of essential legal, military and technical aspects of cultural heritage protection…(cultural resources) must also be protected by adequate national legislation and not used for military purposes or to shield military sites.”19 Today 128 countries have signed the Hague Convention.

UNESCO. "Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict." SpringerReference (2010)

UNESCO World Heritage Centre. "Old Bridge Area of the Old City of Mostar." 2005 http://whc.unesco.org/

UNESCO. "Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict." SpringerReference (2010)

In situation of environmental disaster the importance of preserving cultural resources also holds true. In 2013 the United Nations published a report which focused on heritage and resilience. This report made from observation and field experience around the world highlighted that “The symbolism inherent in heritage is a powerful means to help victims recover from the psychological impact of disasters. In such situations, people search desperately for identity and self-esteem”.20 Disaster is defined as a serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a society causing widespread human, material, economic or environmental losses which exceeds the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its own resources.21 There are several types of natural hazards which can lead to natural disasters, amongst the most common are meteorologic hazards like hurricanes, tornadoes, heat-waves, lightning, fire; hydrological hazards like floods, flashfloods, tsunamis; and geological hazards like volcanoes, earthquakes. Humans subject to trauma from a sudden disaster might look to traditional landmarks to identify themselves with their surroundings. It is important that resources are to be provided for their physical as well as mental well-being. The cultural properties in the local communities have an important role to

Fig.11 Hindu temple in Sri Lanka damaged by the tsunami in 2004.

play in this endeavor. 22 The tsunami which hit Sri Lanka in 2004 was an unprecedented natural disaster in the area ravaging the whole coastline of the island. When the government and planning authorities started to think about redevelopment they could not prioritize cultural resources and only considered the protection of the World Heritage site of Galle, a 16th century fortified town founded by the Portuguese. But the ICOMOS Sri Lanka (International Council on Monuments and Sites) issued a public statement within one week of the incident appealing to officials to recognize cultural properties and save them from destruction. ICOMOS Sri Lanka surveyed and documented many cultural 20

Managing Disaster Risks for Cultural Heritage. UNESCO

United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, 2002.

Meier, Hans Rudolf. “Cultural Heritage and Natural Disasters”. ICOMOS, 2007.

resources which were added to redevelopment plans for the reconstruction of townships. The Sri Lanka authorities acknowledged the role cultural properties could play in the minds of the returning victims of the tsunami. 23 In the United States several historic resources were lost to flood or wind damage. The Old Blenheim Bridge in New York was built in 1855, it was a National Historic Landmark and the world’s longest single span covered bridge at 228 feet. The bridge was destroyed by Hurricane Irene and its related

Fig.12 Old Blenheim Bridge in New York before it was washed away in 2011.

flood in 2011. 24 Numerous historic properties in Mississippi and Louisiana, listed on the National Register of Historic Places were destroyed by Hurricane Katrina in 2005. New Orleans which has 14 historic districts saw its architectural legacy dangerously threatened by the storm. After the storm, the National Trust for Historic Preservation pledged to help New Orleans rehabilitate iconic structures that had sustained damage. Over $100 million of gross equity and debt was placed in to help National Register–listed

Fig.13 Saenger Theatre in New Orleans after its restoration reopened in 2013.

sites, according to the National Trust Community Investment Corporation.25 The Saenger Theatre built in the 1920s had been closed since it was swamped by Hurricane Katrina and reopened on Sept. 27, 2013. The reopening of the old movie palace represented a symbolic touchstone in New Orleans' continued recovery. To mitigate damage from any future flooding, electrical and mechanical systems were relocated

Meier, Hans Rudolf. “Cultural Heritage and Natural Disasters”. ICOMOS, 2007.

NRHP

Doug MacCash, "The Saenger Theatre Symbolizes Continued Post-Katrina Recovery." Nola . 27 Sept. 2013

from the basement.26 There are ethical issues arising with emergency management; in time of destress at a time when attention should be devoted to saving lives. It is without a doubt that priority should be given to the protection, safety of people and evacuation from hazardous properties. In a second phase and with as much rapidity as possible, documentation, surveying and stabilization of cultural resources should be an integrate part of the recovery phase. What most international and national studies on the subject concluded is that preparedness and management of the historic resource is the most effective tool. In recent years a strong tendency to invest into preventive and mitigation preparedness measures has been apparent and promoted. Each country has different programs and systems put in place for the risk-preparedness of cultural heritage. For example the government of Switzerland has taken particular interest in developing an integrated set of policies, tools and mechanisms to improve emergency management. A series of preparedness manuals and training courses were established and cultural properties are inventoried on detailed maps, with properties in both urban and rural settings.27 Non-structural solutions are preferred for the protection of cultural heritage but there are possibilities for innovative solutions or techniques. III. Disaster preparedness, recovery and government implication

An report published by the University of Kentucky and the University of Colorado in 2016 provided an analysis on how much disaster management is integrated into state preservation plans and vice versa. Two-thirds of the states explicitly mentioned emergency preparedness in their preservation plans, and 25 states included specific policies, initiatives, and plan objectives. But 60% of all states lack specific preservation strategies in their hazardmitigation plans. And only 13 states included specific goals and strategies that mentioned protecting historic resources.28 Retrofitting historic structure for seismic prevention has been applied for several decades in the United States especially in California which is prone to earthquakes and which has previously experienced damage to its built environment. Requirements for rehabilitation and change of use in buildings can trigger a retrofitting to comply with city codes. Careful attention, consideration for the structural elements chosen and decisions on any modifications are essential to not compromise the buildingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s features. There are 26

Doug MacCash, "The Saenger Theatre Symbolizes Continued Post-Katrina Recovery." Nola . 27 Sept. 2013

DrdĂĄckĂ˝, M. Protecting the Cultural Heritage from Natural Disasters. European Parliament's committee on Culture and Education. Feb 2007

Douglas Appler and Andrew Rumbach ,Building Community Resilience Through Historic Preservation, Journal Of The American Planning Association Vol. 82 , Iss. 2,2016 28

technical and practical issues which arise with the application of emergency management on historic preservation. Historic buildings are appreciated and of interest because they have retained their historic character. Modifying such property can have an impact on their characteristic thus before actions can be undertaken on the property the best option should be considered and possible alternatives researched. Accommodating for new functions and for life safety requires to find creative design solutions with new technologies while still retaining the historic character and

Fig.14 Sam Kee Laundry Building front facade damaged during the 2014 South Napa earthquake.

minimizing alternations to the historic features. This can become a challenge but there have been successful projects. There are technical assistance established by the government for recovery after a disaster and financial aid available for prevention rehabilitation in the form of tax incentives. The State Historical Building Code of California regulates any action taken on historic properties and assures that any demolition or modification be approved by authorities like the Division of the State

Fig.15 Masonry on the side of the building with added tension ties withstood the earthquake.

Architect, the State Fire Marshal and the State Building Standards Commission who must determine that the activity respects the building standards.29 The Code declares that â&#x20AC;&#x153;properties and structures of historical or architectural significance are an essential public resource and that it is necessary and essential that cities and counties be authorized to make long-term, low interest loans to finance the rehabilitation of

Health and Safety Code, Division 13, Part 2.7, Section 18958. California's State Historical Building Code, 2003.

properties of historic or architectural significance.” 30 The code clarifies however that “nothing shall be construed to prevent authorized building or fire officials from the performance of their duties when in the process of protecting the public health, safety, and welfare”.31 In August 2014 an earthquake of 6.0 magnitude hit the South Napa area. The earthquake was the largest earthquake to strike the greater San Francisco Bay Area since 1989. An analysis of the data provided by structural engineers who inspected and tagged damaged buildings after the earthquake was made by a geophysicist with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The 165 red tags (prohibited access) and 1,707 yellow tags (restricted access) stretched across the city of Napa but were primarily concentrated within a residential section including the historic downtown area. The analysis shows that the most severe damage correlates to the age of the buildings and their location on the sedimentary basin. Pre-1950 structures suffered the most damage from the earthquake, brick and stone masonry buildings are vulnerable to earthquakes. USGS geophysicist commented that “this data should spur people to retrofit older homes”.32 The city has regulations requiring the retrofitting of older buildings and while damage still occurred in both retrofitted and un-retrofitted buildings in Napa, no retrofitted buildings collapsed.33 Flooding due to storm and heavy rain fall is another natural hazard which has made great damage in the country. The researchers of the University of Kentucky and the University Colorado also mapped out historic sites that were vulnerable to flooding in Kentucky and Florida. They found that 15% of the 3,380 historic sites listed for Kentucky are located in the state’s 100year or 500-year floodplain, and 25% of the 1,700 sites in Florida are found inside 100-year and 500-year floodplains.34 The National Flood

Fig.16 Covington,KY during the 1997 flood.

Health and Safety Code, Division 10, Part 1, Section 37601. California's State Historical Building Code, 2003.

Health and Safety Code, Division 13, Part 2.7, Section 18957. California State Historical Building Code. 2003

Seismological Research Letters, Seismological Society of America. Volume 86, March 2015

Phillip Fiorini, California quake points to research advancements in retrofitting older buildings, NEES, Sept 2014

Douglas Appler and Andrew Rumbach ,Building Community Resilience Through Historic Preservation, Journal Of The American Planning Association Vol. 82 , Iss. 2,2016 34

Insurance Program created in 1968 is a federal program administered by the FEMA which integrates significantly preservation in terms of hazard mitigations and recovery assistance for historic properties. The FEMA will make flood insurance coverage available in a community provided that it adopts and enforces floodplain management regulations that meet or exceed the minimum requirements of the NFIP.35 The NFIP allows to a designated historic structure to “obtain the benefit of subsidized flood insurance through the NFIP even if it has been substantially improved or substantially damaged so long as the building maintains its historic designation”36 The insurance premium is much lower than for a new construction, furthermore NFIP gives relief to historic structures from NFIP floodplain management requirements like the ones imposed on new construction. These incentives favors the designation of properties as historic resources. The ability to obtain flood insurance coverage is also important to ensuring that historic structures can be repaired and restored after a flood event. Flood insurance compensates for all covered losses and is the best form of financial protection against the devastating effects of floods. Flood mitigation measures should be a consideration to minimize flood damages when rehabilitating a historic structure or repairing a damaged historic structure.37 FEMA has developed a series of mitigation planning “how-to” guides for the purpose of assisting communities in developing an effective hazard mitigation plan. These guides have been developed by FEMA to give an overview on organizing resources, assessing risks, developing a mitigation plan, implementing the plan and monitoring progress.38 It is important that everything must be documented to get any aid from the Federal Emergency Management Authority for this reason being prepared in case of disaster is crucial, like having access to records. FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) Program administers several programs that provide grant funding for hazard mitigation projects that reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from natural hazards and their effects. All mitigation projects must be cost effective and technically feasible, and meet Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation requirements in accordance with HMA Program requirements. 39

National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 44 CFR §60.3

National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4015

National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 44 CFR §60.3

Integrating Historic Property and Cultural Resource Considerations Into Hazard Mitigation Planning, FEMA 386-6, May 2005

39 “Appendix

A Sources of FEMA Funding." Engineering Principles and Practice (2015): 167-85. FEMA

IV. The Federal Emergency Management Agency

The Federal Emergency Management Agency was created in 1978 and transferred previous existing federal disaster programs from other agencies. For example the Fire Prevention and Control Administration from the Department of Commerce, the National Flood Insurance Program and the Federal Disaster Assistance Administration from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. These programs were reorganized and the FEMA insured assistance for all agencies in the preparedness and application of their specific responsibilities attributed in case of emergency. In 2006 the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act reorganized FEMA by redefining its mission, consolidating its emergency management functions, and granting it greater autonomy. The FEMA coordinates pre-disaster planning and facilitates post-disaster response and recovery. However Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act is applied if substantial undertakings are made by a federal agency and as a federal agency the FEMA is also subject to Section 106. FEMA is required to evaluate its actions and assess potential environmental impact and affect on historic resources. Some undertakings are exempt from Section 106 in certain situations. In situation of a disaster the agency must determine if its actions need to be executed immediately or can be delayed. In the first case where actions are taken to save people or properties from destruction the actions are exempt from section 106. For example, an immediate threat for an earthquake may exist if aftershocks could cause further damage to a structure or threaten the safety of the structure's occupants. If in other situations the actions can be delayed they are not exempt from complying with Section 106 procedures. The Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation program was put in place to verify and assist in the FEMAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s compliance with Section 106. Some of the actions taken by FEMA which might trigger Section 106 are debris removal, emergency protective measures, repair to pre disaster condition, new construction ground disturbance, modification or expansion and mitigation. An important point to highlight is that the emergency situation provisions of the Section 106 regulations apply for 30 days after the disaster or emergency has been formally declared by the appropriate authority or, in the case of other immediate threats to life or property, within 30 days after such an event occurs. 40 Unfortunately 30 days is a long time for historic properties to be further damaged. Prior planning can save time and resources during the response action to a disaster or emergency situation. Some agreement guiding the disaster or emergency response actions might be done between the FEMA and State Historical Preservation Office or other 40

Section 106 Procedure and Compliance. https://www.fema.gov/

relevant authority. These agreements called Programmatic agreement are the preferred tool currently used by FEMA to integrate FEMA's Section 106 responsibilities into its mission and programs as these would assure a more effective response action phase and timing. According to FEMA, the total damage for Katrina is estimated at $108 billion. This makes it the "costliest hurricane in US history.â&#x20AC;? The hurricane hit Louisiana on August 29, 2005 its after-effects killed almost 2000 people, left more than 500,000 homeless, devastated about 260,000 square kilometers of land. The levee of the city of New Orleans failed and 80% of the urban area was under as much as 26 feet of water. Thanks to their

Fig.17 Shotgun house in New Orleans.

higher elevation the French Quarter and the Garden District remained relatively undamaged, whereas other historic neighborhoods such as the Ninth Ward, Midtown and Treme with their large stock of one-story wood frame shotgun houses from the 19th and 20th centuries were badly destroyed. Thus a large proportion of the total of the approximately 37,000 buildings within the listed historic districts in Louisiana were adversely affected.41 The FEMA, the State of Louisiana and the city of New Orleans put in

Fig.18 Circle Food Store in Treme district, opened in 1939 as the first African-American-owned grocery store in New Orleans.

place a Programmatic Agreement which gave guidance for recovery and reconstruction to state official and local authorities, for example this agreement covers national registered building and expedites the process and decision on demolition if they lost their historical integrity because too damage which determines that they are non eligible for listing on the national register and are in publicâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s way. The agreement also

Falser, Michael. Rebuilding New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, 2015 https://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/

make sure that any of the buildings listed will be documented and the SHPO will be given enough time for commenting and advising the FEMA. If the SHPO does not have time to agree on a decision the FEMA will not take action against the property.42 The federal government as developed disaster policies which have been put to test in multiple situations across the country but recovery after the disaster have been long and uneasy. A stronger preparedness is the best tool for preservation of historic resources, it is important that preservationist and the official authorities do not treat natural disaster as a minimum chance but rather take action in a preventive way. It might be that some historic resources are in a 100-year or 500-year floodplain which give them 1% or 0.25% chance of experiencing a potentially damaging flooding per year. Although this might not encourage to make taking measures a priority it would be tragic to lose a cultural resource to something that could have been prevented. There are tools and resources that have been developed but need more refinement and better application, review processes could become faster through the implementation of more programmatic agreements between the FEMA and SHPO on a state by state basis. Louisiana is the only state with such agreement unfortunately because of Hurricane Katrina and the scale of the damage it made. Disaster management measures cannot possibly be made to completely block damage for historic resources but seismic retrofit will save a building from collapsing or floodproofing will avoid a property from being washed away and in worst cases losing irreversibly their historical integrity.

Secondary Programmatic Agreement, FEMA 2006

FIGURES Fig.1 Courtesy of Associated Press Images Fig.2 Courtesy of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, http://www.noaa.org/ Fig.3 Courtesy of the Johnstown Area Heritage Association, http://www.jaha.org/ Fig.4 Courtesy the Monticello Herald and Journal Fig.5 Courtesy of West End Museum, http://thewestendmuseum.org/ Fig.6 Courtesy of West End Museum, http://thewestendmuseum.org/ Fig.7 Norman McGrath, photographer Fig.8 Courtesy of Independence National Historical Park Fig.9 Courtesy of Meros, http://meros.org/ Fig.10 Courtesy of SCCA pro.ba, http://pro.ba/ Fig.11 http://www.coloradanmagazine.org/ Fig.12 Harold Stiver, photographer Fig.13 Will Crocker, photographer Fig.14 Architectural Resources Group Fig.15 James Gunn, photographer Fig.16 J Barry Maynard, photographer Fig.17 https://hashtagarchitecture.com Fig.18 Courtesy of Associated Press Images

SOURCES Aguilar, Antonio. ”Preservation Brief 41: The Seismic Retrofit of Historic Buildings: Keeping Preservation in the Forefront.” National Park Service, August 2016 American National Red Cross, The Mississippi Valley Flood Disaster of 1927: Oﬃcial Report of the Relief Operations, 1929 “Appendix A Sources of FEMA Funding." Engineering Principles and Practice (2015): 167-85. FEMA Beschloss, Michael. "Penn Station: A Place That Once Made Travelers Feel Important." The New York Times. Jan. 2015 David A. Moss. 1999. “Courting Disaster? The Transformation of Federal Disaster Policy since 1803,” in Kenneth A. Froot, ed. The Financing of Catastrophe Risk, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 315.

Douglas Appler and Andrew Rumbach ,Building Community Resilience Through Historic Preservation, Journal Of The American Planning Association Vol. 82 , Iss. 2, 2016 DPA News Agency, Deutsche Welle. "Rescuing Berlin's Most Famous World War II Ruin" DW.COM. Aug. 2008 Drabek, T. E., Microcomputers and Disaster Responses. Disasters, 15: 186–192, 1991

FEMA. 2010. FY2011 Hazard Mitigation Assistance Unified Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program,Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program, Flood Mitigation Assistance Program, Repetitive Flood Claims Program, Severe Repetitive Loss Program. (HMA Unified Guidance). June 1, 2010. http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=3649 Goldbaum, Ellen. Recreating San Francisco's Earthquake. Rep. University at Buﬀalo, 19 Apr. 2001 “Historic Buildings and the National Flood insurance Program” Floodplain Management Bulletin: Historic Structures, FEMA P-467-2 Hurricane Katrina in the Gulf Coast, Mitigation Assessment Team Report, Building Performance Observations, Recommendations, and Technical Guidance, FEMA 549, July 2006 Integrating Historic Property and Cultural Resource Considerations Into Hazard Mitigation Planning, FEMA 386-6, May 2005 Meier, Hans Rudolf. “Cultural Heritage and Natural Disasters”. ICOMOS, 2007 O'Connor, Thomas H., Building a New Boston: Politics and Urban Renewal, Northern University Press , 1993 Phillip Fiorini, California quake points to research advancements in retrofitting older buildings, NEES, Sept 2014 Risk Management Solutions. Analysis and Reconstruction of the 1974 Tornado Super Outbreak, 2004 Shappee, Nathan. A History of Johnstown and the Great Flood of 1889: A Study of Disaster and Rehabilitation. Diss. U of Pittsburgh, 1940 Spenneman, Dirk and David C. Look, eds. Disaster Management Programs for Historic Sites. National Park Service, 1998 Tyler, Norman; Ligibel, Ted J.; Tyler, Ilene R. Historic Preservation: An Introduction to Its History, Principles, and Practice (Second Edition) W. W. Norton & Company, 2009 UNESCO. "Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict." SpringerReference, 2010