The Planning/History team met with Jenny Bernstein from FEMA, and Carey Feierabend from NPS. Jenny gave us some background information on the new National Disaster Recovery Framework (NDRF), and specifically her team, Natural and Cultural Resources Recovery Support. This is the first disaster to use the newly developed NDRF so they are "building the plane as they are flying it," an analogy we felt resonated well with this studio team. She recognized that there are some gaps in the process but hopefully new recommendations will come from the Sandy response and recovery process. One particular problem she commented on was the lack of recovery assistance for Natural and Cultural resources. Her team was specifically designed for long range planning, as apposed to short term recovery relief; essentially Natural and Cultural resources does not have the funding mechanism or technical expertise to help historic/culturally significant sites recover from storm damage. Their hope is the determine the level and type of damage and then connect these sites with the appropriate financial and technical support.
Currently FEMA is working to compile the significant resources in the region, much like us this reaches beyond designated sites, and is coordinating with the New York SHPO to determine which sites have damage. Moving forward their goals are to produce a damages assessment report which would lead into long range planning and preparedness strategies for the next disaster. Again, finalizing a damages assessment will also help them to provide the appropriate connections to recovery resources since FEMA as an agency does not have the funding or expertise in this field.
In terms of our work, FEMA is interested to see which undesignated resources we can identify; we can cross-reference our lists once complete. They are also very interested in our case-studies and building typologies. Determining what types of damage Sandy caused and the different strategies historic structures can and should employ is something they are also working towards as well, particularly as it pertains to the next disaster. Part of the long term planning is educating historic/culturally significant property owners with the appropriate short term recovery responses, enabling them to make the right decisions that will not harm the historic fabric of the site - much like the Bowne and Co. print shop example.
Major take-aways include some GIS resources coming our way, information sharing both directions, and also some encouragement to chose building typology case studies to include damages assessment, short term recovery strategies, and long term preparedness goals. Something else to consider besides a building focus would be the cultural landscape, this could mean a historic district or simply the setting these buildings are within, sometimes this is overlooked as something damaged or not appropriately treated in recovery response.
Feel free to add comments if you feel I missed anything - all in all, I thought this was a very valuable meeting and it seems as though we're on the same page and really working towards the same goals as FEMA which is exciting!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteEmily mentioned that FEMA was coordinating with the SHPO for eligibility determinations to catalog non-designated potentially historic resources. Denny had noted that both FEMA and the SHPO seem to be frustrated with each other. FEMA doesn't have the capacity to assemble the data themselves, but the SHPO doesn't have any additional resources to process the overwhelming amount of eligibility requests resulting from Sandy. Essentially it seems FEMA has the resources but not the expertise while the SHPO has the expertise without the resources.
ReplyDeleteAnother discouraging detail for us preservationists is how historic resources are built into the FEMA framework. Any historic sites, districts or landscapes fall under the Natural and Cultural Resources branch which covers environmental recovery issues as well as dealing with historic resources and cultural institutions. The Natural and Cultural Resources department is headed by Eric Breitkreutz, who is actually from NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration)which does not reassure us of the department's qualifications for handling historic resources. Most of the FEMA sub-groups have partnerships with other government agencies (i.e. Housing Recovery Support Functions are partnered with the Department of Housing and Urban Development) and the Natural and Cultural Resources functions are paired with the Department of the Interior. This gives FEMA the access to the expertise of the National Park Service. Carey Feierabend from NPS was only out on a two week assignment leading us to wonder if staff and resources are being used in an effective way.
While I'm sure there is a whole lot of extra information I missed, so please feel free to add to the conversation. While there is always a question of efficacy and efficiency with large Federal agencies, these shortcomings lead me to the following encouraging realizations.
-As a group of eight students and one preservation professional working part time with essentially zero resources, we have accomplished a lot in relation to FEMA.
-The work that we are doing in this studio has the potential to have a large impact as FEMA is very interested in the work that we are doing.
-FEMA works through unwieldy channels for expertise and information like NPS and the overburdened SHPO. This is our greatest strength. Through our professors and Alumni we have access to countless grassroots preservation organizations. Our past studio projects and student theses have provided invaluable information to establish potential historic resources. As a task force we have many advantages that FEMA does not. I think FEMA recognizes this and we should seize this opportunity to produce something impressive. (not that we wouldn't anyway)
Thanks Emily and Bill. The lack of coordination and readiness seems to more that just a preservation issue. As Bill notes, this is both encouraging (our studio is on the right track and is doing important work) and scary (we've learned from past disasters but haven't figured out how to implement much yet).
ReplyDeleteOne note - I thine Breitkrutz is from nps. He is not the NOAA person.
Lots to discuss tomorrow.