york flooding case study

• What's New?

York 2015: Anatomy of a Flood Disaster

York has known devastating flooding many times before and if ever there was a city used to its ravages, its residents have felt it. Time and again, the city’s defences have been improved and adjusted, as new lessons have been learned – but Christmas 2015 raised the bar once again. Over the course of a few days, York suffered its worst flooding in a generation.

Main Image:  The Ouse on December 29. Picture: Steve Carroll

Storm Eva unleashed a wave of unprecedented rainfall across the north. Coming just three weeks after  Storm Desmond , it exacerbated the ongoing situation , with saturated river catchments responding swiftly to the new deluge.

York Flood Group – made up of the City of York Council, the Environment Agency, North Yorkshire Police, North Yorkshire Fire & Rescue and Yorkshire Water – met on December 27 to discuss the worsening situation. The group usually meets only when the River Ouse levels reach, or are expected to reach, 4.2 meters above normal summer level (asl).

On Monday 28 December, the Ouse peaked at 5.2 metres above its normal summer level, just short of the all-time high of 5.4 metres, recorded in autumn 2000. However, city-wide flooding occurred due to the devastating failure of the Foss Barrier.

It was opened on Saturday 26 December after the pumping station was flooded, leading to floodwaters from the Ouse flowing back into the Foss. The primary concern was the pumps failing due to water ingress to the electrical supply.

The Environment Agency said that if the Foss Barrier were not lifted, it could have jammed in the closed position, causing even worse flooding for 1,800 properties, as water would not have been able to discharge into the River Ouse.

A s a result of the decision, huge areas were flooded for the first time in many people’s lifetimes.   Foss Islands Road was closed, Foss Bank and the river were indistinguishable, and several cars parked off Layerthorpe were almost completely submerged.

About 500 homes alongside the Ouse, the Foss, Tang Hall Beck and Osbaldwick Beck were inundated. James Street travellers’ site was also severely hit, with many distraught residents saying they had lost everything.

In total in York, 250 people were evacuated from their homes. Around 10,000 sandbags were used, with 600 military personnel, 125 mountain rescue members, York Rescue Boat teams and countless volunteers helping to rescue flood victims or to fill and distribute sandbags around the flooded areas.

By December 29, the Foss barrier was operational again. The army flew in emergency equipment the day before and repairs were carried out overnight, but by then it was too late for many.

Householders were left counting the cost and  many business owners in the city-centre said they were given no warning the barrier was being lifted.

At its height, the flooding caused major knock-on problems. 

Floodwaters swamped the basement of the BT telephone exchange, damaging electrical equipment and cutting landline and wi-fi broadband services for thousands of York customers.

People across the city lost phone and internet connections, and many mobile networks failed or struggled, with some people unable to make or receive calls. 

Many buildings in the city-centre had no internet or phone connections and most shops, pubs and cafes were able to take cash payments only, as card machines were down.

Picture courtesy of Alfio Fresta

The Jorvik Viking Centre flooded for the first time in its 31-year history, and faced a closure of up to a year .   The cells at York Magistrates Court also flooded, meaning many cases had to be moved to other courts.

North Yorkshire Fire and Rescue’s High Volume Pump from Harrogate was used at the Melrosegate Electrical Sub Station to keep it going, preventing 55,000 customers from losing power.

In the end, around 650 homes and businesses had been directly affected by flooding in the city centre. The cleanup cost the council half a million pounds, excluding damage to council assets including properties and infrastructure. It persuaded the government to pay £17m for Foss Barrier improvements and £45m for wider flood risk management improvement works across the city.

The original Foss pumping station was designed to pump about 30 tonnes of water per second from the Foss into the Ouse and was clearly unable to deal with the demand that Christmas.

The upgrade, which will include the installation of eight more powerful replacement pumps, is set to increase its capacity so it can handle at least 40 tonnes per second – securing its performance for the foreseeable future – or until climate change raises the bar again.

Future Climate Info provides a comprehensive flood risk assessment for residential properties through its suite of Environmental Risk Report s . These account for river, sea, coastal and surface water flood extents for a full, clear and effective view on any potential risks ahead of a property transaction.

Based on the assessment, Specialist flood risk services can look at flood resilience measures and a review of flood zoning with climate change allowances can give an accurate appraisal of the likelihood of flooding into the future.

For more information, contact us on 01732 755180 or email [email protected]

Try before you buy

To take advantage of a trial free order of your first environmental report, please complete the enquiry form and we will get back to you as soon as possible. We will need to take more details of the property or site and ask some more questions about your firm and the transaction.

Privacy Overview

Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.

Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.

• 0 Shopping Cart

UK Floods Case Study November 2019

The UK experienced an extreme weather event in November 2019 when exceptionally heavy rainfall caused flooding in parts of the UK. Heavy downpours across large parts of northern England led to surface water and river flooding in parts of Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire, Greater Manchester, Derbyshire and Lincolnshire.

According to the Met Office, on Thursday 7th November 2019 over half of the average rainfall for the whole of November fell in parts of the Midlands and Yorkshire.

If you have images and/or videos of flooding or an eye witness account that you would be happy to share on an interactive flood impact map we are developing please send them [email protected]

What caused flooding in the UK in November 2019?

A large area of prolonged rainfall fell on parts of the UK in November 2019. Some areas experienced the whole of Novembers average rainfall over a period of 24 hours. Sheffield experienced 84mm of rainfall. The rainfall was caused by an area low pressure stalling over the UK.

Further reading/watching: 

BBC Weather Overview 

What were the effects the extreme weather in November 2019?

About 500 homes have been flooded in Doncaster with more than 1,000 properties evacuated in areas hit by the floods.

South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue said it had declared a major incident on the evening of Friday 8th November and firefighters rescued more than 40 people from the Fishlake area, near Doncaster. Residents of Fishlake said it was the first time the village had flooded in 100 years.

Empty coffins were seen floating inside the workshop of a flooded funeral parlour in the village.

Some villagers had to spend the night at a nearby pub, where staff said they had seen people crying because of the devastation.

The village church is collecting food to distribute to residents and roast dinners were delivered on Sunday to those who had remained in their homes.

Reseidents have complained that the River Don has not been dredged recently.

According to the BBC, Adrian Gill, a flood manager at the Environment Agency, said did not currently dredge the River Don “because we don’t think that’s the right thing to do” but the situation could be reviewed in the future.

Water sports enthusiast and teacher Mark Ibbotson, from Doncaster, said he, along with his 13-year-old son Logan, had rescued more than 30 people – including two babies – from a number of streets using his inflatable boat in Bentley where homes have been hit by flooding.

One of the most severely hit areas has been Bentley in Doncaster, where flooding affected many homes 12 years ago.

One resident told BBC Radio Sheffield: “The worry is our insurance policies are expensive as it is because of the 2007 floods, so now we’re all worried whether we’re going to get reinsured.”

Extensive flooding affected Rotherham , where residents were told to stay at home and not leave unless asked to do so by emergency services. Some have been taken to safety by boats.

Dozens of people were forced to spend the night in the Meadowhall shopping centre .

In Derbyshire, the River Derwent at Chatsworth reached its highest recorded level and council workers put up sandbags around Matlock and Matlock Bath, where the river was “dangerously high” .

A number of properties in Derby city centre were flooded, however, a full evacuation was not ordered as the River Derwent didn’t burst its banks to the extent emergency services believed it would.

The A52 – the main road route into Derby – was closed westbound between the city and the M1 along with a handful of smaller roads in the county.

Residents from 12 homes in Mansfield, Nottinghamshire, were unable to return home after a mudslide on Thursday led to 35 properties being evacuated .

In Nottinghamshire, residents living in mobile homes close to the River Trent in Newark were urged to move to higher ground.

On Friday, the floods claimed the life of a woman who was swept into the River Derwent at Rowsley in Derbyshire. Her body was found about two miles away in Darley Dale. She was named earlier as Derbyshire’s former High Sherriff Annie Hall .

Trains were cancelled in Yorkshire and parts of the East Midlands as rail routes were flooded.

BBC reporter Richard Cadey said some roads around Fishlake had been closed and the village was “effectively cut off because of flooding”. He said people on the ground had told him 90% of the homes there had been flooded.

The River Don, which flows through Sheffield, Rotherham and Doncaster, hit its highest recorded level at just over 6.3m (21ft), higher than it was in 2007 when it also flooded.

Sources: 

England flooding: River warnings and rail delays continue

Flooding in pictures/videos

Torrential downpours flood parts of northern England – BBC

Flooding in Yorkshire – In Pictures – The Guardian

England flooding: A tour of a flooded house in Fishlake

River Derwent Flooding – Drone Video

Helicopter captures footage of flooded South Yorkshire

What were the responses to the UK floods in November 2019?

More than 100 flood warnings were put in place across England. The Environment Agency (EA) urged people to take them seriously.

The Environment Agency took to social media to warn people about the potential impacts of flooding.

AMBER warning for flood risk today ⚠️- rain will rotate over north and north midlands bringing heavy rain on already sodden ground – take care – flood warning updates here https://t.co/K5GUW3z87V pic.twitter.com/mDDAC3uLXc — John Curtin (@johncurtinEA) November 7, 2019

The Environment Agency worked day and night to reduce the impact of flooding. The Environment Agency responded to the flood risk by working closely with police, fire and rescue, local authorities and partners to reduce the risk of flooding and keep communities safe. On the ground, Environment Agency field teams worked through the night to operate flood storage areas and pump away flood water.

A major incident was declared in South Yorkshire,

Some residents were “angry and frustrated” at Doncaster Council – claiming it had not provided sandbags early enough to prevent properties from flooding, the station reported.

Political leaders visited areas affected by floods. On the campaign trail Boris Johnson promised over £2 billion to improve flood defences.

South Yorkshire Police said it had extra officers out on patrol to “protect the evacuated areas and support those affected by the floods”.

Following a meeting of COBRA, the government’s emergency committee, Prime Minister Boris Johnson anounced the following measures :

• An extra 100 Army personnel deployed from Wednesday to support the recovery effort in South Yorkshire
• Funding for local councils where households and businesses have been affected – equivalent to £500 per eligible household
• Up to £2,500 for small and medium-sized businesses which have suffered severe impacts not covered by insurance

Six days after the heavy rain, army personnel provided support to flood-hit communities .

Environment Agency warnings

Environment Agency working day and night to reduce flood impact

How effective were the mitigation strategies introduced since the 2007 floods?

Flood defences put in place in South Yorkshire managed to significantly reduce the impact of Thursday’s floods, the Environment Agency (EA) has said.

River levels in parts of the county rose overnight to almost the same as they were in June 2007, when two people died in Millhouses and the Wicker.

Despite a major incident being declared on Thursday, the EA said the area was protected by new walls and flood gates.

The river levels around Meadowhall were high, but the EA said its defences, as well as the ones put in by Meadowhall, had lessened the damage.

Elsewhere in South Yorkshire, £3m was spent by the EA to repair and improve defences running along Ea Beck , in the villages of Toll Bar and Bentley near Doncaster.

However, people living in settlements downstream of Sheffield have complained about the impact of the recently constructed defences.  In Bentley, a low-lying neighbourhood on the north side of the River Don, forlorn terraced streets are still knee-deep in water. “You don’t have to be a hydrologist to see what’s happened,” said one man interviewed by a Guardian journalist . “Sheffield built flood defences in 2015-16. They spent about £20m protecting the lower Don. So the water has nowhere to go than the next place, Rotherham and then Doncaster.” He went on to say that residents received a “red alert” on Thursday night that there was a risk of flooding. He phoned an emergency number and requested sandbags. He was told that the council was not going to distribute them because the River Don’s banks had not been breached.

When the sandbags eventually arrived the community worked together to distribute them.

South Yorkshire flooding: Defences ‘reduce impact’

Related articles:

How do you stop flooding? 

Premium Resources

Please support internet geography.

If you've found the resources on this page useful please consider making a secure donation via PayPal to support the development of the site. The site is self-funded and your support is really appreciated.

Related Topics

Use the images below to explore related GeoTopics.

Topic Home

Next topic page, share this:.

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)

If you've found the resources on this site useful please consider making a secure donation via PayPal to support the development of the site. The site is self-funded and your support is really appreciated.

Search Internet Geography

Top posts and pages.

Latest Blog Entries

Pin It on Pinterest

• Click to share
• Print Friendly

Cookies on GOV.UK

We use some essential cookies to make this website work.

We’d like to set additional cookies to understand how you use GOV.UK, remember your settings and improve government services.

We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services.

You have accepted additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

You have rejected additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

• Environment
• River maintenance, flooding and coastal erosion

York 5 year flood plan

Sets out the options for how the Environment Agency will spend £45 million across York city centre over the next five years.

York: our 5-year flood plan

Ref: LIT 10519

PDF , 1.44 MB , 13 pages

This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.

This document was published in November 2016. The York 5 year flood plan is continuously being developed. For more up-to-date information please click here .

After the floods in December 2015, the government committed £45 million to reduce the risk of flooding and increase the level of protection to at least 2,000 homes in York’s city centre over the next five years.

Since the announcement of the additional funding, we have assessed what changes could be made to the existing flood defences within the city and what new defences could be built. The results of this have been summarised within this plan.

We will use this plan to guide our work in the city over the next 5 years. The options we are presenting in this plan are based on our ambition to achieve a consistent standard of flood protection across the city.

This plan outlines the work across 10 York communities over the next 5 years. It looks at a range of potential flood reduction measures including:

• creating storage areas
• increasing pumping capacity
• raising and building new walls
• raising land
• building embankments

The plan also updates the £17 million improvement project that is currently under way at the Foss Barrier.

A public exhibition was held in York in November 2016 for residents and businesses to discuss the options set out in the plan.

We have added a link to the updated information for the York Flood Scheme- June 2018.

Open days are now in the past

First published.

Related content

Is this page useful.

• Yes this page is useful
• No this page is not useful

Help us improve GOV.UK

Don’t include personal or financial information like your National Insurance number or credit card details.

To help us improve GOV.UK, we’d like to know more about your visit today. Please fill in this survey (opens in a new tab) .

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

New York Has $1.1 Billion to Fight Flooding. Will It Be Enough?

“It’s kind of like we’re patching the boat but it’s already filling up with water,” one climate researcher said.

By Hilary Howard

For Franco Montalto, a flooding expert and engineer, decades of research were suddenly amplified by a real-life emergency in the Adirondacks, where he and his family were on vacation this week.

In the middle of the night, they were awakened by forest rangers knocking on the door of their lakeside cabin. The house was surrounded by a foot of water, and they needed to evacuate.

“It was profound to experience these conditions firsthand,” he said.

Dr. Montalto, a professor at Drexel University in Philadelphia who is writing about flooding as a member of the New York City Panel on Climate Change , knows better than most that climate change is producing hard-to-predict and shifting weather patterns that can trigger “cascading events.”

Flooding can occur “for different reasons at different times in different places,” he said in a recent interview.

Catastrophic rainfall caused overwhelming floods in parts of the Hudson Valley and elsewhere in the country this week, leading New York officials like Gov. Kathy Hochul to warn of extreme weather that would be “our new normal.”

New York City’s chief climate officer, Rohit T. Aggarwala, gave an even more dire warning, saying that “the weather is changing faster than our infrastructure can keep up.”

Thousands of projects are in the works across the state to combat the effects of climate change, including rethinking flood-resistant housing, updating weather models and racing to manage overflow rain. But many will take decades to complete, and there are concerns over whether it will be enough.

“It’s kind of like we’re patching the boat but it’s already filling up with water,” said Jeremy Porter, the head of climate implications research at First Street Foundation , a nonprofit group in Brooklyn that studies extreme weather.

Nonetheless, New York is plunging ahead, trying to patch the boat.

Last year, Governor Hochul, a Democrat, put forth and voters approved the Clean Water, Clean Air and Green Jobs Environmental Bond Act , which dedicates $4.2 billion to community projects. There is $1.1 billion earmarked for restoration and flood risk protection.

The Department of Environmental Conservation is working with local governments on waterfront revitalization, raising flood-prone infrastructure and improving roads, dams and bridges, among other things, a spokesman for the department said.

In the Hudson Valley, a shorelines project encourages nature-based management practices along the Hudson River; a collaboration with Cornell University is developing climate-adaptive landscape designs in riverfront communities; and throughout the past decade, the state has overseen 40 resiliency projects , including backup power and floodproofing for critical facilities, now completed. Some towns and cities have started flooding task forces.

Even though parts of the Hudson Valley and Vermont were the hardest-hit places last week, some New York City officials are concerned that the five boroughs lack the natural defenses of more rural Northeast areas: ample soil drainage.

In a paved-over metropolis that has traditionally relied on its sewer system to handle storm runoff, there are not many options for handling overflow, said Edward Timbers, a spokesman for the Department of Environmental Protection. Although “hundreds of millions of dollars” are being spent to upgrade and replace some of New York’s 7,500 miles of sewage pipes, the system, he said, was not built for climate change.

Or, as Mr. Aggarwala put it: “There is no more space underground.”

So the city is also focusing on drainage projects aboveground, introducing infrastructure like thousands of rain gardens , which are small streetside greenspaces, often near an opening in the curb, that allow water to bypass the sewage system and instead be absorbed by a patch of soil, broken stones and plants.

Street medians are also being redesigned to take on water runoff. Raising curbs, Dr. Montalto said, could help keep water in the streets instead of flooding buildings. When streets are repaved, he explained, curb heights often stay the same, which means it becomes easier for storm water flowing in the gutter to jump the curb.

So-called bluebelts in the city connect storm sewers to lakes and ponds, conveying excess water to these natural holding areas. This helps reduce, if not eliminate, flooding on streets and in basement apartments, Mr. Aggarwala said. He pointed to the New Creek Bluebelt, part of a larger Mid-Island Bluebelt project and one of almost 90 such ventures in Staten Island, as an example. “It’s in operation and it’s beautiful; the neighbors love it and it’s eliminated flooding in that part of Staten Island.”

Dr. Montalto added that officials are also starting to embrace a “safe-to-flood” approach in their neighborhood planning. By exploring the causes of flooding in a given neighborhood — and then building for those particular challenges — damage can be minimized.

Cloudburst infrastructure , a European concept cropping up in New York, is an example of this kind of work. Think of a sunken play area or park, which converts into a sort of water basin during a storm. This fall, construction will begin on a sunken basketball court that will be part of a public housing complex in Jamaica, Queens.

Climate-resilient affordable housing — with utilities or residences that are all located above the first floor — is a chief concern, especially because lower-income and middle-class residents are often most affected in flooding disasters, said Bernice Rosenzweig, a professor of environmental science at Sarah Lawrence College in Bronxville, N.Y.

After Hurricane Sandy in 2012, buildings in low-lying coastal areas were updated, she said, but there’s still more work to do with inland housing that is susceptible to flooding. When the remnants of Hurricane Ida came through two years ago, many affordable-housing residents in non-coastal buildings were left without heat or hot water for weeks.

Dr. Montalto, who is co-writing the flooding study with Dr. Rosenzweig, said the city had taken many impressive first steps working with researchers to track flooding . But he would like to see more sensors installed to measure flood depths and precipitation accumulations at very short time intervals.

Currently, the three major airports serving the city, as well as a hub in Central Park, are the go-to sources of precipitation data. But in an era of unpredictable and sometimes highly localized storm bursts, more measurement locations are needed, he said.

As for the rest of the state, Nicholas Rajkovich, the director of the Resilient Buildings Lab at the University at Buffalo, underscored the importance of community involvement, especially in the short term. “A lot of times we look at technical solutions, but we also need to look at social factors, social cohesion,” he said. He mentioned community resilience hubs — public gathering spaces in towns and urban neighborhoods that also serve as safe, protected areas during extreme weather.

In the meantime, New Yorkers should be in a constant state of preparation, officials and experts said.

Gov. Kathy Hochul implored New Yorkers to have an “escape route” — store flashlights, food and water and know where the high ground is — in the event of a worst-case scenario. Mr. Aggarwala’s office is focusing its efforts on making sure New Yorkers know whether they are in flood zones , distributing inflatable flood barriers to those who do, and urging people to buy flood insurance.

Because of global warming, flooding will become a more urgent issue, according to experts like Dr. Porter. Most New Yorkers, he said, might not yet be at the point of having an emergency go-bag on hand unless they live in flood zones. But they should understand the risk in their own neighborhoods and prepare appropriately.

It’s up to New Yorkers to do whatever they can to stay safe, Mr. Aggarwala said. “In our new weather patterns, you have to protect yourselves,” he continued, “while we build the infrastructure we need.”

Politics in the New York Region

Limiting Donations to Israel: Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who rarely wades into state politics, publicly backed a bill  that could strip New York nonprofits of their tax-exempt status if their funds are used to support Israel’s military or settlements.

Transgender Student-Athlete Rules: A parent group in New York City asked for a review of rules that let students play on sports teams that align with their gender identity. Democratic officials responded angrily .

Equal Rights Amendment: As Election Day approaches, the proposed amendment to the State Constitution has become a divisive culture-war issue  that encompasses abortion, discrimination and transgender athletes.

Office of Cannabis Management: The head of New York State’s cannabis agency will step down at the end of his three-year term in September as part of an overhaul of the embattled agency , Gov. Kathy Hochul said.

A Thorny Mayoral Race: Zellnor Myrie, an Afro-Latino state senator from Brooklyn known for backing progressive causes, announced that he is moving to challenge  Mayor Eric Adams in next year’s Democratic primary in New York City.

• ABC7 New York 24/7 Eyewitness News Stream Watch Now
• THE LOOP | NYC Weather and Traffic Cams Watch Now

New York City is sinking, new geological study finds

NEW YORK (WABC) -- A new geological study says New York City might be sinking.

The study says the weight of all the skyscrapers is causing portions of the city to sink about one to two millimeters a year in some areas.

That may not sound like much, but there are growing concerns that the more the city sinks, the more vulnerable the area becomes to natural disasters.

"As coastal cities grow globally, the combination of construction densification and sea level rise imply increasing inundation hazard," the study states. "The point of the paper is to raise awareness that every additional high-rise building constructed at coastal, river, or lakefront settings could contribute to future flood risk, and that mitigation strategies may need to be included."

According to the study, Lower Manhattan is at the greatest risk for floods and there are concerns for Brooklyn and Queens as well.

The key points of the study include:

-More than 8 million people live in New York City, which is observed to be sinking 1-2 mm/year, while sea level rises.

-Researchers calculate the mass of all buildings in New York City and model the subsidence caused by the pressure they exert on the Earth.

-Researchers show detailed images of observed subsidence in New York City from satellite data.

Click here to read the full study and research article.

ALSO READ | NYPD pulls off daring rescue after scare on Staten Island Ferry

* Get Eyewitness News Delivered

* More New York City news

* Send us a news tip

* Download the abc7NY app for breaking news alerts

* Follow us on YouTube

Submit a tip or story idea to Eyewitness News

Have a breaking news tip or an idea for a story we should cover? Send it to Eyewitness News using the form below. If attaching a video or photo, terms of use apply.

Related Topics

• NEW YORK CITY

Top Stories

Police: Man hospitalized after being set on fire on the subway

• 41 minutes ago

Police uncover millions of dollars' worth of cannabis in warehouse

• 18 minutes ago

Fatal Brooklyn apartment fire being investigated as a homicide: FDNY

NYC beaches officially open for Memorial Day weekend

AccuWeather: Spotty PM T-Storm

• 37 minutes ago

Brittany Bell zooms through the sky in fly-along with the Blue Angels

Golfer Grayson Murray dies at 30, PGA Tour says

• 38 minutes ago

Bette Nash, world's longest-serving flight attendant dies at 88

Future Strategies

State Case Studies

Federal Review

Management Goals

• Holistic Approach to Coastal FRM

CONTENTS ≡

CONTENTS ✕

Coastal Management Program

Shoreline regulations, floodplain management, wetland management, building codes, community planning, stormwater and runoff management, erosion management, climate adaptation initiatives, state management capacity, alternatives to structural mitigation, long-term planning, balance of mitigation and disaster recovery, holistic management approach, new york coastal flood risk management case study.

Policies and Programs

The New York Coastal Management Program , established in 1982, is housed within the New York Department of State’s Office of Planning, Development, and Community Infrastructure . Much of the program’s legislative authority is drawn from the state Waterfront Revitalization of Coastal Areas and Inland Waterways law as well as the Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas law . The program pursues goals related to coastal resources protection and development, local waterfront revitalization, coordination of major activities affecting coastal resources, public awareness of coastal issues, and federal consistency with state coastal management policies. Within New York, the Department of State administers the program and coordinates its implementation in cooperation with the state Department of Environmental Conservation as well as other state agencies.

Coastal program boundaries extend along the coast of Long Island, New York City, Hudson River estuary, both Great Lakes that border New York, and the Niagara River. Specific landward boundaries of the coastal program vary by region and locality due to initial delineation proposals from local government agencies. All barrier and coastal islands on Long Island are included within program boundaries along with areas 1,000 feet landward of the shoreline, extending further in some cases. The New York City program boundary generally extends 500 to 1,000 feet inland from the shoreline, with select areas along major tributaries also extending further. Within the Hudson River Valley the landward boundary is generally 1,000 feet but may extend up to 10,000 feet in areas that possess high aesthetic, agricultural, or recreational value. In the Great Lakes region the boundary is also generally 1,000 feet, though urbanized areas or transportation infrastructure parallel to shore limit the boundary to 500 feet or less in some cases.

Coastal management program consistency reviews require federal actions in the state coastal zone to be consistent with the enforceable policies of the state program or the policies of an approved local waterfront revitalization program. The program also contains provisions to ensure consistency of state actions in coastal areas. Of the 44 coastal management program enforceable policies in New York, seven specifically address flooding and erosion hazards. These policies touch on a number of aspects of coastal flood risk management including the siting of buildings in coastal areas to minimize risk to property and human lives, protection of natural features that mitigate coastal flood risk, construction of erosion control structures to to meet long-term needs, prevention of flood level increases due to coastal activities or development, prevention of coastal mining or dredging from interfering with natural coastal processes, use of public funds for erosion protection structures, and use of non-structural mitigation measures when possible. Additional enforceable policies address coastal development, fish and wildlife resources, public access, recreation, historic and scenic resources, agricultural lands, energy and ice management, water and air resources, and wetlands management.

At the state level, aspects of New York’s Environmental Conservation Law , Local Waterfront Revitalization Program , and State Environmental Quality Review permitting program influence coastal zoning and development decisions. Article 34 of the Environmental Conservation Law requires the identification of coastal erosion hazard areas and rates of recession of coastal lands. Shoreline setbacks must then be implemented at a distance that is sufficient to minimize damage from erosion. Article 36 of the Environmental Conservation Law , the state Flood Plain Management Act, also addresses coastal hazards, requiring walled and roofed buildings to be sited landward of mean high tide and prohibiting mobile homes within coastal high hazard areas, among other restrictions. Article 15, Water Resources Law , regulates the placement of coastal structures such as docks or piers and also addresses the placement of fill in coastal areas. Together these elements of the Environmental Conservation Law provide much of the legal basis for zoning decisions that can affect coastal flood risk at the municipal and local level.

Participation in the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program can also influence a local government’s coastal zoning decisions. In the process of preparing and adopting a revitalization program, local governments provide a more specific implementation of the state Coastal Management Program, taking advantage of local regulatory powers such as zoning ordinances and site plan review. Upon approval of a Local Waterfront Revitalization Program, state actions must then be consistent with the local program. In this way the enforceable policies of the Coastal Management Program, including those that relate to coastal flooding and erosion, are incorporated into local zoning decisions. Elements of enforceable policies are also incorporated into environmental permitting through the State Environmental Quality Review Program, which requires state agencies and local governments to prepare an environmental impact statement for any action that may have a significant impact on the environment. If an action in a coastal area requires the preparation of an impact statement, it must also be determined that the action is consistent with any relevant coastal enforceable policies. Consistency reviews must also be applied to NYS SEQRA type 1 actions as well as unlisted actions.

Floodplain management activities within New York are primarily conducted through the National Flood Insurance Program . Any regulations developed by the state must be at a minimum as strict as those prescribed by FEMA. Beyond the state level communities may adopt more restrictive floodplain management regulations. Within the state, local communities largely regulate development within federally designated Special Flood Hazard Areas, with state assistance provided by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Local development permits govern private development within floodplains as well as development by a county, city, town, village, school district, or public improvement district, as specified in the state Environmental Conservation Law.

State standards for floodplain development permits in all designated special flood hazard areas require adequate anchorage and use of flood resistant material for all new construction and substantial improvement to existing structures. Utilities must also be designed in a manner that minimizes or eliminates risk of damage or failure during flood events. In areas where base flood elevation data exists, new construction or substantially improved residential structures must have the lowest floor at two feet above the BFE, including basements and cellars. Nonresidential structures may employ floodproofing to provide protection. Any enclosed areas below the base flood elevation must be designed to allow for the equalization of hydrostatic forces on exterior walls during a flood event. If no base flood elevation has been determined, new construction or substantially improved residential structures must be elevated above grade to the depth specified on the corresponding flood insurance rate map or two feet if no number is specified, with nonresidential structures again able to employ floodproofing measures. All state agency activities, whether directly undertaken, funded, or approved by an agency, must also be evaluated in terms of significant environmental impacts under the State Environmental Quality Review program, which includes a substantial increase in flooding as a criteria of significance. An environmental impact statement must be prepared if it is determined that an action may have a potential significant adverse impact.

All structures must be located landward of mean high tide levels within coastal high hazard areas, and all new construction or substantially improved structures must be elevated on pilings or columns so that the bottom of the lowest horizontal structural member of the lowest flood is elevated to or above the BFE. Pilings or column foundations must be adequately anchored, and fill is prohibited for use as a structural support for any new structure or substantial improvement. Space below the lowest floor may not contain obstructions to flood flows or otherwise be enclosed with non-breakaway walls. Any such space below the lowest structural floor may not be used for human habitation. New development or substantial improvement to structures must also not affect sand dunes in any way that increases potential flood damages.

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation is also responsible for wetland management within the state. Statutory authority for wetland regulations stems from the Tidal Wetlands Act and Freshwater Wetlands Act , part of the larger state Environmental Conservation Law . Wetlands and wetland regulations are divided into either tidal or freshwater, and wetlands are further classified within each category. State wetland inventories containing information on delineated areas and classifications are made available for public use as part of the state wetland mapping program. Activities within wetland areas are regulated through a permit system.

Tidal wetlands regulations are designed to allow uses of wetlands that are compatible with the preservation, protection, and enhancement of ecological values including flood protection and storm control. Development restrictions require that all buildings and structures in excess of 100 square feet be located a minimum of 75 feet landward from tidal wetland edges, with less stringent setbacks in place for buildings located within New York City. Similar setback requirements exist for impervious surfaces exceeding 500 square feet. On-site sewage systems must have a setback of at least 100 feet, and a minimum of two feet of soil must be between the bottom of a system and the seasonal high groundwater level.

Permit standards for activities within tidal wetlands require that any proposed activity be compatible with the overall state policy of preserving and protecting tidal wetlands, and as such any activity may not cause any undue adverse impact on the ecological value of an affected wetland area or any adjoining areas. Standards also require that any activity within tidal wetlands be compatible with public health and welfare, be reasonable and necessary, and take into account both alternative actions and the necessity of water access or dependence for the proposed action. The state also publishes compatible use guidelines for activities within wetlands based on wetland type. If any activity is presumed to be incompatible with state tidal wetland use guidelines, an applicant must overcome the presumption of incompatible use and demonstrate that the activity is compatible with the preservation, protection, and enhancement of wetland values. If a use is specifically listed as incompatible within guidelines the use is then prohibited. Permitted activities in areas adjacent to tidal wetlands must also be compatible with public health and welfare, have no undue adverse impact on wetland ecological values, and comply with use guidelines.

State flood-resistant construction requirements are listed in the International Residential Code as adopted by New York State . Regulations apply to new residential buildings and structures located fully or partially within flood hazard areas as well as any substantially improved or restored structures within flood hazard areas. Construction requirements are based on the design flood elevation, which at a minimum must be the higher of either the peak elevation of a 1% annual chance flood event or the elevation of the design flood event as adopted on community flood hazard maps. Structures within flood hazard areas must generally be designed and anchored to resist the flood forces associated with the design flood elevation, and methods and practices to minimize flood damage must also be employed.

For the purposes of determining appropriate structural elevations, the lowest floor of a structure is defined as the lowest floor of any enclosed area, including basements. Within flood hazard areas not subject to high-velocity wave action, structures must have the lowest floor elevated to two feet above the base flood elevation or design flood elevation, whichever is higher. Utility systems must also be elevated to this standard. If no depth number is specified structures must be elevated not less than three feet above the highest adjacent grade. Any enclosed area below the design flood elevation must be used only for building access, parking, or storage and must contain flood openings sufficient to equalize hydrostatic forces on exterior walls.

For buildings and structures located in coastal high-hazard areas, including both V zones and Coastal A zones, the lowest floor must be elevated so that the lowest horizontal structural members are elevated to either the base flood elevation plus two feet or the design flood elevation, whichever is higher. Any walls below the design flood elevation must be designed to break away without causing damage to the elevated portion of the building, and again may be used only for parking, building access, or storage. Structures must be elevated using adequately anchored pilings or columns, with select exceptions in Coastal A zones. The use of fill for structural support and any construction of basement floors below grade are prohibited. New buildings and any substantially improved structures in coastal high-hazard areas must be located landward of the mean high tide, and any alteration of sand dunes must not result in any increased potential for flood damage in surrounding areas.

Planning at the state level is guided by the State Smart Growth Public Infrastructure Policy Act , an article within the larger Environmental Conservation Law. The act outlines criteria for public infrastructure projects that are either approved, directly undertaken, or financed by state infrastructure agencies. Among these criteria is a requirement that future public infrastructure projects mitigate future climate risk due to sea level rise, storm surge, or flood events based on available data or predictions of future extreme weather conditions. This and other criteria must be met to a practicable extent, and if deemed impracticable an agency must provide a detailed statement of justification.

The Office of Planning, Development, and Community Infrastructure within the Department of State administers several programs involved in community planning. The New York Rising Community Reconstruction Program provides recovery and resiliency planning assistance to communities affected by severe storm events, including hurricanes Sandy and Irene. The program is operated through the Governor’s Office of Storm Recovery and involves collaborations between state teams and community members to develop reconstruction plans and strategies to increase physical, economic, and social resilience, often including elements related to mitigating future flood risk. State Waterfront Revitalization Programs are also involved in community redevelopment planning. These programs establish land and water use policies and identify revitalization projects at a local level to allow for sustainable use of coastal resources, including planning for coastal flood risk resilience. Local Waterfront Revitalization Programs can also be a conduit for technical assistance and grant funding to facilitate climate change adaptation through the New York State Environmental Protection Fund grant program , a permanent fund addressing a broad range of environmental and community development needs.

The majority of stormwater regulations in New York focus on water quality issues as part of the State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System , a state program that has been approved by the EPA as part of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System . The program regulates point source discharges to both groundwater and surface waters and also conducts permitting for stormwater runoff from industrial activities, municipal sewer systems in urbanized areas, and construction activities. The program is administered by the state Department of Environmental Conservation.

While water quality is the focus of stormwater programs within the state, the state stormwater design manual lists best practices that include measures to reduce overbank flooding in order to maintain pre-development peak discharge rates for two and ten-year frequency storm events following development. The design manual also addresses risks due to potential floodplain expansion following development as well as green infrastructure strategies. These green infrastructure strategies are presented as a means to meet runoff reduction standards, which require that post-development conditions replicate pre-development hydrology. Stormwater projects, like all activities undertaken, funded, or approved by state agencies, are also under the purview of the State Environmental Quality Review Act , which requires preparation of an environmental impact statement if a project is likely to cause a significant increase in flood risk.

Coastal erosion in New York is managed within designated coastal erosion hazard areas. Areas are designated as per requirements of the state Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas Act , part of the larger state Environmental Conservation Law. Regulatory programs within identified hazard areas are administered by the state Department of Environmental Conservation. Programs may also be established at a local level if minimum state standards and criteria are met. The objectives of the program, as outlined in the state administrative code, are to ensure that activities in coastal areas subject to flooding minimize or prevent damage to property and natural features, that structures are placed at a safe distance from hazard areas to prevent premature damage to both structures and natural features, that public investment likely to encourage development within erosion hazard areas is restricted, and that publicly financed structures are only used when necessary and effective. Sections of the state administrative code also describe the erosion protection functions of natural protective features in order to guide the review of permit applications.

Coastal erosion management permits are required for any regulated activity conducted within a designated coastal erosion hazard area. Coastal erosion management permit standards require that any proposed activity be reasonable and necessary, with consideration of proposed alternatives, and that an activity will not likely lead to a measurable increase in erosion at the proposed site or other locations. Standards also require activities to prevent or minimize adverse effects to natural protective features, existing erosion protection structures, or natural resources such as fish and wildlife habitat.

Regulations within structural hazard areas allow for placement of movable structures, with construction restrictions, if a permit has been granted. Construction or placement of nonmovable structures is prohibited. Any public utility systems within structural hazard areas also require a coastal erosion management permit. Additional restrictions on regulated activities are present within natural protective feature areas, including nearshore areas, beaches, bluffs, primary dunes, and secondary dunes. Construction of erosion protection structures is allowed within such areas provided the structure meets permitting requirements and is designed to prevent or minimize damage to property and natural features in a cost-effective manner. Structures must be designed to control erosion on site for a minimum of 30 years.

New York has put forth several climate adaptation measures at the state level, led primarily by the state Department of Environmental Conservation. Sea-level rise projections for threatened coastal areas are currently published within the state administrative code, a recommendation from the previously convened NYS Sea Level Rise Task Force . The projections formally establish sea-level rise levels throughout Long Island, New York City, and the Hudson River, providing information based on five risk scenarios and extending out to 2100. The Department of Environmental Conservation has also formally acknowledged its role in climate change adaptation through Commissioner’s Policy 49: Climate Change and DEC Action . The policy outlines methods by which climate change considerations may be integrated into current DEC activities and programs, including making greenhouse gas reductions a primary goal, creating specific mitigation objectives for existing and future programs, incorporating adaptation strategies into programs and activities, considering climate change implications in daily department activities, and identifying specific actions to further climate change goals and objectives as part of annual planning processes. The policy goes on to establish mitigation and adaptation objectives as well as departmental responsibilities and implementation procedures.

The 2014 Community Risk and Resiliency Act (CRRA) forms the basis for a number of climate adaptation initiatives within New York from a legislative standpoint. The previously mentioned sea-level rise projections were a product of the CRRA, as the act amended the state Environmental Conservation Law to include a requirement that the DEC adopt science-based projections. The CRRA also amended additional sections of the Environmental Conservation Law to require applicants for identified funding and permitting programs to demonstrate that risk due to sea-level rise, storm surge, and flooding have been considered in project design and requires the DEC to incorporate similar considerations into facility-siting regulations. The sea-level rise, storm surge, and flood risk mitigation components of the Smart Growth Public Infrastructure Policy Act are also tied to the CRRA. The CRRA also directs the Department of State and Department of Conservation to develop model local laws that consider data-based future risk due to sea-level rise, storm surge, and flooding as well as guidance on the use of natural resources and natural processes to enhance community resilience to such hazards.

Elements of Policy Goals/Management Principles

• State management capacity is bolstered by the New York Coastal Management Program’s federal consistency review process, which requires that federal activities within the state coastal zone be consistent with the program’s enforceable policies. The New York program has 44 enforceable policies in total, with 7 specifically addressing flood and erosion hazards.
• Local governments can implement the state Coastal Management Program at a smaller scale through the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program, extending the influence of state program goals and enforceable policies.
• The enforceable policies of the state coastal management program address the protection of natural features that mitigate coastal flood risk and the use of non-structural mitigation measures where feasible.
• Shoreline setbacks must be established within identified coastal erosion hazard areas, and setbacks must be at a distance sufficient to minimize damage from erosion considering the rate of recession of coastal lands.
• Floodplain management regulations require that any new development or substantial improvement to structures in coastal areas not affect sand dunes in any way that might increase potential flood damages.
• Wetland management regulations require that structures be located a minimum of 75 feet landward from the edges of tidal wetlands, preserving natural flood risk mitigation functions.
• Sections of the state administrative code related to erosion management include descriptions of the erosion protection functions of natural features to guide permit applications, and permit standards require that erosion management activities prevent or minimize adverse impacts on natural protective features.
• The state stormwater management design manual includes information on green infrastructure strategies, which are presented as a means to meet runoff reduction standards and maintain pre-development hydrology for project areas.
• The state building code requires structures not subject to wave action to have the lowest floor elevated a minimum of one foot above the base flood elevation. This rule applies to the lowest horizontal structural members of structures that are subject to wave action.
• State regulations require that erosion protection structures in coastal areas be designed to control erosion on site for a minimum of 30 years.
• Public infrastructure projects approved, undertaken, or financed by state agencies must account for and mitigate risk due to future climate risk factors such as sea-level rise, storm surge, and flood events. Mitigation efforts must be based on available data as well as projections of future conditions.
• The state has published sea-level rise projections for threatened coastal areas within the state administrative code, formally establishing risk based on five scenarios and extending to 2100.
• Commissioner’s Policy 49: Climate Change and DEC Action identifies ways that climate change considerations could be incorporated into current state programs and activities and defines departmental responsibilities and procedures for implementing the climate adaptation goals of the policy.
• The state Community Risk and Resiliency Act formally establishes a number of climate adaptation initiatives within the state, including the requirement that the state Department of Environmental Conservation adopt science-based sea-level rise projections and that applicants to funding and permitting programs demonstrate that climate risk has been incorporated into the siting of facilities.
• The enforceable policies of the state coastal management program address the siting of buildings in coastal areas to reduce risk and well as restrictions on the use of public funds for erosion protection structures.
• One of the objectives of the state erosion management program as described in the state administrative code is to restrict public investment that could encourage development within coastal erosion hazard areas. An additional objective is to use publicly financed erosion control structures only when necessary and effective.
• The New York Rising Community Reconstruction program works to develop reconstruction plans and strategies to increase coastal community resilience following severe storm events, often involving the mitigation of future flood risk.
• The New York Coastal Management Program lists coordination of major activities affecting coastal resources as one of the program goals, and multiple state agencies are involved in implementing the program’s broad suite of enforceable policies.
• If an action requires preparation of an environmental impact statement as part of the State Environmental Quality Review Program it must also be consistent with the enforceable policies of the state coastal program, including policies related to coastal hazards.
• State wetland regulations are based on the preservation, protection, and enhancement of ecological values as opposed to acreage, with flood control and storm protection listed among the functions provided.
• The State Environmental Quality Review Program includes the potential for a substantial increase in flooding as a criteria of significance, which then triggers the preparation on an environmental impact statement for state agency activities.
• State Waterfront Revitalization Programs establish land and water use policies that incorporate coastal resilience into revitalization projects and community redevelopment planning.

View the other State Coastal Flood Risk Management Case Studies:

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov

A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS

A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. .

New York: Kissena Corridor Cloudburst Hub Project Addresses Flooding in Queens

Queens uses nature-based solutions to address chronic neighborhood flooding

Flushing, New York: $50 million

Project Description

To address chronic flooding in the Kissena Corridor in Queens, the New York City Department of Environmental Protection, with support from the Mayor's Office of Climate and Environmental Justice, will implement the Kissena Corridor Cloudburst Hub project.

The Flushing neighborhood near Kissena Corridor Park is vulnerable to flooding during cloudburst events. This is due to its location in a historical riverbed, surcharging in the sewer system, local topography and its designation as a disadvantaged community by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.

The project aims to install a nature-based and climate-adaptive drainage solutions to mitigate damage and disruption from stormwater flooding during high intensity rain events.

New York City is sinking, study says: Huge buildings, rising seas contribute to subsidence

Areas that are of concern to researchers include lower manhattan, brooklyn and queens, according to the study..

The pressure from New York City’s massive buildings and skyscrapers is making the city more vulnerable to sink lower into the ocean, according to new research.  

Three University of Rhode Island oceanologists and a researcher from the U.S. Geological Survey found that New York City , home to more than 8 million people, is sinking at a rate of 1 to 2 millimeters a year while sea level rises.

With more than 1 million buildings amassing nearly 1.7 trillion pounds, some areas in the metropolis were found to be subsiding much faster when scientists modeled the subsidence caused by the pressure that these structures exert on the Earth.

Parts of lower Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens and Long Island all showed signs of subsidence, the study said.

“As coastal cities grow globally, the combination of construction densification and sea level rise imply increasing inundation hazard,” a summary of the research said. “The point of the paper is to raise awareness that every additional high-rise building constructed at coastal, river, or lakefront settings could contribute to future flood risk, and that mitigation strategies may need to be included."

Sea level rise and increasing storm intensity also contribute to the gradual sinking of land.

New York earthquake: Mild earthquake rattles just outside of New York City; magnitude measured at 2.2

Shifting temps, trends: Is it time to change the Spring turkey season in New York state?

Sea levels 'a clear threat to coastal cities'

Subsidence on the Eastern Seaboard of the United States is generally attributed to deglaciation, but the study's researchers say that building mass can be factored into measurements, too.

Some areas of the city were found to have significantly greater subsidence rates compared to measurements that are closer to normal for the region’s post-glacial deformation. 

“This deformation is consistent with internal consolidation of artificial fill and other soft sediment that may be exacerbated by recent building loads, though there are many possible causes,” a statement said.

Global sea level projections show "a clear threat to coastal cities," the study states, with an expected increase worldwide of 7.9 to 23.6 inches by 2050.

On U.S. coastline, sea levels are projected to rise 10-12 inches , on average, by 2050, according to a 2022 report released by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

“ New York is emblematic of growing coastal cities all over the world that are observed to be subsiding, meaning there is a shared global challenge of mitigation against a growing inundation hazard.”