INTEGRATED FLOOD MANAGEMENT IN SAMOA From Science to Policy Amataga Penaia 1, Ausetalia Titimaea 1, Jude Kohlhase 1, Filomena Nelson 1, Netatua Pelesikoti 2, Michael Bonte-Grapentin 2, Litea Biukoto 2, Allison Woodruff 2 & Darren Lumbroso 3 1 MNRE Government of Samoa, 2 SOPAC, 3 HR Wallingford
Why Flood Management? Apia the capital of Samoa is partly located on the floodplains of 5 streams High intensity rainfall causes severe flooding 1939, 1974, 1975, 1982, 1990, 1991, 2001, 2006 Extreme events likely more frequent in future (Climate Risk Profile Samoa) Costs are high e.g. 2001 direct damage of 4 Million US$, not counting frequent disruption of business and basic services ADB 2006
Why issues Health risks (waterborne diseases) Lack of coordination and integrated planning among agencies that should be responsible for flood risk reduction Lack of town planning in Apia - many commercial and residential properties are developed on floodplain Weak monitoring and early warnings to communities at risk Constraints in budgetary allocation to mitigation activities Limited capacity (staff number & skills)
Process Applied Development part of SOPAC/EDF8 Reducing Vulnerability Project Capacity Building in Flood Hydrology, River Modelling and Flood Mapping (from data capture to analysis and modelling) Development of Rainfall/Runoff and Flood Inundation Models Production of Flood Hazard Maps Evaluation of Flood Management Options Development of Policy Documents Flood Management Action Plan 2007-12 Floodplain Management Guidelines Benefit-Cost Analysis of Mitigation Options
Geographic Scope Vaisigano catchment boundary Apia Harbour 0 km Flood management process is countrywide Pilot: Vaisigano River flow records available drains into Apia, largest basin on Upolu 35 km 2 IWRM Hotspot 5 km Savai i Vaisigano catchment Pacific Ocean Upolu Apia
PART I Science
Data Constraints Only 22 years of Annual Max Flow Many gaps due to equipment failure or lost records (e.g. TC Ofa) Available flow gauging only up to 1/10 of peak flood flows Only limited intensity data available in 100+ year rainfall record High degree of uncertainty in estimated flood flows ~ ± 20%
Method Estimation of Peak Flow Statistical single site analysis (22 yrs) 1 in 100 yr (m 3 /s) Revised rating curve 656 Weir equation 181 Regional flood frequency analysis MAF based on revised rating 411 MAF assuming higher 2001 flood flow 461 MAF based on weir equation 253 MAF based on regression for Pacific basins 636 Rainfall runoff modelling HEC-HMS kinematic wave model 560 HEC-HMS SCS lumped model 564
Hydrograph and Design Storm Critical storm duration for flooding is 2-3 hrs Estimated rainfall intensities (mm/hr): Flow (m 3 /s) 600 500 400 300 200 100 Duration (hr) 1 in 10 years 1 in 50 years 1 in 100 years 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 Time (hours) 1 hour storm storm duration 2 hour storm duration 3 hour storm duration 4.5 hour storm duration 2 66 80 87 400 3 47 57 62 Sparse calibration data available from 2001 and 1974 events Flow (m 3 /s) 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 15/04/2001 19:12 15/04/2001 20:24 15/04/2001 21:36 15/04/2001 22:48 16/04/2001 00:00 16/04/2001 01:12 Date and time 16/04/2001 02:24 16/04/2001 03:36 16/04/2001 04:48 16/04/2001 16/04/2001 06:00 07:12 HEC-HMS hydrograph with Yeo rainfall Uncorrected flow at Alaoa East using revised rating HEC-HMS hydrograph with Meteorology Division rainfall Corrected flow at Alaoa East using revised rating
Flood Extent 2001 N Apia Harbour 1.2 m Cross Island Road 0.8 m 0.4 m Lelata Bridge 0 m Scale 500 m Leone 0.8 m 0.7 m 0.7 m 0.8 m Faatoia Legend Major roads 20 m contour line River The approximate area inundated during the April 2001 flood 1.1 m The depth of water above ground level during the April 2001 flood Direction of flow 20 m contour Vaisigano River 1.3 m 1.1 m Matafagatele Street after S. Yeo 2001
1D HEC-RAS Model 24.00 23.50 Estimated location and height of rock weirs Vaisig 3bridges + 4weirs Plan: 3brdge+4weir 03/08/2006 Leone Bridge Legend WS 500 m3/s Ground Bank Sta Ineff 23.00 21.50 21.00 Vaisigano Bridge 20.00 19.50 18.00 17.00 15.00 13.00 12.00 10.00 8.00 7.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 0.50
Critical River Sections
Flood Depth Maps 1 in 20 years 1 in 100 years
Assessing Flood Hazard Floodwater depth (m) x water velocity (m/s) (m 2 /s) Degree of hazard Description Less than 0.75 Low Caution Flood zone with shallow flowing water or deep standing water 0.75 to 1.25 Moderate Dangerous for some (i.e. children) Danger: Flood zone with deep or fast flowing water 1.25 to 2.5 Significant Dangerous for most people Danger: Flood zone with deep fast flowing water Greater than 2.5 Extreme Dangerous for all Extreme danger: Flood zone with deep fast flowing water
1 in 20 years Flood Hazard Maps 1 in 100 years
Assessing Flood Risks Estimate impacts to people and infrastructure Return period People @ risk Buildings @ risk 1 in 2 1139 244 1 in 5 1382 296 1 in 20 1536 329 1 in 50 1596 342 1 in 100 1634 350 Benefit-Cost Analysis
Assessing Mitigation Options Structural : Flood walls and embankments. By-pass channel. Upstream flood storage. Increasing channel conveyance. Flood proofing of houses Improving channel maintenance. Pumping. Non-Structural Floodplain zoning & Development control Flood forecasting and warning Flood insurance Flood preparedness and response plans Public Awareness Land use change
Flood walls Location of flood embankments Leone bridge
Flood embankments or walls 1 2 2 m 2 1 1 2 2 m 2 1 Return period (years) Average height of the embankment (m) Left bank Right bank 1 in 2 0.96 0.61 1 in 5 1.72 1.35 1 in 20 2.54 2.13 1 in 50 2.83 2.40 1 in 100 3.24 2.81
Diversion channel
Diversion channel 2 Top width of channel varies depending on the flow to be carried 2 2 1 1 30 m Return period (years) Capacity of the channel (m 3 /s) Depth of channel (m) Top width of channel (m) 1 in 2 74 0.9 33.6 1 in 5 183 2.0 38.0 1 in 20 318 2.1 38.4 1 in 50 370 2.4 39.6 1 in 100 450 2.7 40.8
Flood proofing of buildings The design and construction of buildings with appropriate water-resistant materials. Raised floor levels above a flood with a specified return period (annual probability of occurrence). 1in 50 year flood level (2% annual probability of occurrence)
Flood Forecasting Forecasting flood levels several hours in advance is difficult owing to nature of catchment Possible to issue flood warnings based on flash flood guidance estimates and scenarios. Requires access to a weather prediction model (Australian) that provides hourly rainfall estimates
Flood Warnings Establish a mechanism to warn communities in the lower Vaisigano River even if a flood occurs in the middle of the night Develop a series of staged flood warnings Establish a process (e.g. an advertising campaign in the media) to ensure that communities understand what each different warning means.
Conclusions - Mitigation Measures Pumping, Catchment Management and Channel Maintenance have only limited effects on flood flows in Samoa Reduce uncertainty in data (hydrological, topographical etc) for more accurate assessments Update models, maps and Action Plan as more accurate data becomes available
PART II Policy
Recall the Process Capacity building and information development and management flood hydrology river modelling flood plain mapping Flood Plain Guidelines and Action Plan policy review consultation mitigation options Cost Benefit Analysis of flood plain mitigation options
Floodplain management guideline Floodplain Responsible management for land is concerned use planning both and with land use planning and flood management planning flood plain planning Guideline Development Objectives: assessment and consent 1. before Objectives a building of guidelines permit could is to: be issued by the Ministry of Works, Transport and 2. Infrastructure Raise awareness (MWTI) of floodplain management issues 3. Provide guidance on floodplain management to reduce flood risks within the present legislative context for land use planning and flood management in Samoa.
Development assessment Development control is concerned with whether or not developments should be allowed/constructed in areas that can flood and, where developments are permitted, the conditions or controls attached to the development of defined areas. Such controls are aimed at, for example: reducing the risk of buildings and other assets being flooded. reducing the resulting damage when above floor flooding occurs. avoiding increases in flood risk elsewhere.
Con t.. Typical development control requirements may include for example: identification of areas where building may and may not be permitted. minimum floor levels. The safety of people during a flood event is important in the development of areas that are at risk from flooding. Evacuation can be very hazardous if safe evacuation routes are available
Floodplain Management Guidelines Provide generic background into management of floodplains Planning Tool Provide guidance/checklist for development assessment in floodplains according to level of risk Guide for integrating flood risk assessment into EIA process
Defined floods and flood risk zones Floodwater depth (m) x water velocity (m/s) (m 2 /s) Degree Flood risk area Description of hazard (rate 1 in of 1,000 rise year of annual water, probability flood warning time and 1 flood in 100 duration) year annual probability flood Less than 0.75 Low Caution (a) Defined floods Flood zone with shallow flowing Little or no Low to water or deep standing Low to water Little or no flood risk medium 0.75 to 1.25 Moderate High risk Dangerous for some medium flood risk (i.e. children) risk Danger: Flood zone risk with deep or fast Non-functional Non-functional flowing water floodplain Functional floodplain floodplain 1.25 to 2.5 Significant Dangerous for most people Danger: Flood zone with deep fast Floodway flowing water Greater than 2.5 Extreme Dangerous for all Extreme danger: Flood zone with (b) Flood risk zones deep fast flowing water
1. Examples of landuse on flood zones Notes: Degree of risk Little/ Medium High none (1) Return Should be operational Nonfunctionafunctional floodplain in a Non- flood. Functional period Compensation (years) works needed floodplain: floodplain: to avoid an Developed Undeveloped/ increase in flood risk elsewhere. sparse Land River <1 1000 1 in 1000 >1 in 100 >1 in 100 >1 in 100 use (2) flooding Assuming appropriate to 1 in 100 flood defenses Open space/recreation are provided. Essential transport and (1) (1) (1) utilities Residential (3) Limited developments (2) permitted (3) in Commercial (2) (3) Industrial certain circumstances. (2) Public institutions Hospitals (4) Not main school buildings and access Schools (4) Police routes. Emergency services
Action Plan Provides Background of Flood Mitigation Options (Vaisigano/Samoa) Identifies 48 Actions for Integrated Flood Management, incl. responsible agencies and target dates Goals: 1. Flood Risk Reduction 2. Strengthen Flood Preparedness and Early Warning Systems 3. Capacity Building in Flood Management 4. Technological Information Management 5. Sustainable Watershed Management 6. Flood Governance
Purpose of Economic Analysis Ensures efficient use of resources allocated to disaster management sector by implementing flood management measures with greatest net benefits Advocacy tool- demonstrates the longterm savings that result from being proactive by investing in flood management measures in the short-term
Flood management measures Priority flood management measures identified by stakeholders in March 2007: Structural measures Floodwalls/embankments By-pass/diversion channel Non-structural measures Improved flood forecasting system Development control- elevated floor heights
Damages Associated with Flooding Flooding imposes significant costs on households and businesses in the lower Vaisigano: Direct Damages Damage to houses Damage to household contents Damage to shops/offices Damage to business stock Damage to infrastructure (roads, power, water) Damage churches and schools Indirect Damages Lost household income Household clean-up costs Business clean-up costs Lost revenues
Impact of Flooding Sources of data -Household and business surveys - SOPAC flood maps - Stage-damage curves Flood events - 1 in 5, 1 in 20, 1 in 50, 1 in 100 Annual average damage estimated to be approximately WST$620,000 per year
Economic Pay-off from Investing in Selected Flood Management Measures Flood measure Best case Floodwalls 0.64 Diversion channel 0.09 Improved forecasting system 1.92 Elevated floor heights: Existing homes New homes 8.07 44.38 E.g. Estimated for every tala invested in constructing homes with raised floor heights, a maximum of WST$44 is avoided in future flood damages
Conclusions and Recommendations Structural flood management options generally not costeffective due to high construction and maintenance costs Improved flood forecasting system should be implemented, however this must be done in conjunction with improved warning systems and public awareness campaigns Economic pay-off from raised floor heights in new homes very high Economic analysis can assist with prioritizing which flood measures should be implemented and assist with leveraging funding for implementing the most cost-effective measures