Reconstruction of Eroded Road Shoulders
Appeal Brief
Appeal Letter
Appeal Analysis
Citation: FEMA-1044-DR-CA; City of Hesperia; DSRs 25687, 25689, 25690, 25691, 95393, 96512, 96513, 96517, 96518, and 96519
Cross-Reference: Eligible Repair, Codes and Standards
Summary: As a result of the winter storms of 1995, high water runoff from the surrounding areas eroded the unpaved shoulders along selected streets in the City of Hesperia. Repair of the damaged shoulders was found eligible by FEMA. However, the eligible scope of work was limited to repair the shoulders to pre-disaster design. The subgrantee has requested that work should be performed to current codes and standards, which require the construction of paved road shoulders. FEMA has determined that the referenced standard applied only to new construction, and not to repairs such as proposed in the DSRs.
Issues: Should FEMA place asphalt concrete (AC) road shoulders or swales to repair previously unpaved shoulders?
Findings: No. The shoulders were not protected with AC pavement prior to the disaster and there is no applicable and adopted standard that would require such work. The City does not have a written and adopted standard for repairing damaged road shoulders. Funding should be limited to restore the road shoulders to pre-disaster conditions.
Rationale: For costs associated with an applicant's standards which change the pre-disaster construction of the facility, such standards must be in writing and formally adopted by the applicant prior to project approval per 44 CFR 206.226(b).
As a result of the winter storms of 1995, high water runoff from the surrounding areas eroded the unpaved shoulders along selected streets in the City of Hesperia (subgrantee). The City of Hesperia roadway system was originally designed to serve a rural community and does not contain storm drains. The majority of streets within the city have sandy road shoulders, which are easily eroded during heavy downpours. The subgrantee notes that the heavy downpours washed away the sandy shoulders undermining the asphalt concrete (AC) road edges, and that this erosion has resulted in hazards to pedestrians and vehicular traffic and a disruption to the normal function of the facility.
The subgrantee requests that the proposed repair method conform to City Resolution No. 92-62, which includes a minimum typical road section (modified San Bernardino County STD. DWG. 114a). Accordingly, the original DSRs, prepared by the FEMA inspector, proposed the following:
First Appeal
With a January 29, 1996, letter, the State transmitted the subgrantee's November 28, 1995, letter appealing the denial of work items from the DSRs listed above. The subgrantee believed the work should be eligible for funding for the following reasons:
Second Appeal
With a January 27, 1997, letter, the State transmitted the subgrantee's October 22, 1996, second appeal for the DSRs listed above to FEMA. The State's second appeal reinforces issues presented by the subgrantee. These issues include:
The primary issue of this appeal is the applicability of the minimum design standard, outlined in City Resolution 92-62, in determining the eligible scope of work for repairs to the road shoulders. The subgrantee asserts that the referenced standards meet all the criteria developed in 44 CFR 206.226(b).
The City of Hesperia adopted the San Bernardino Road Standards when it incorporated in 1988. The minimum standard road section included AC shoulder construction on high volume water carrying streets. The subgrantee notes that the majority of roads within the city are water- carrying streets. The minimum road standards were revised several times. The latest revision is the City Council Resolution No. 95-86 on September 21, 1995. The standard calls for paved shoulders and/or AC drainage swales and berms.
In accordance with FEMA regulations (44 CFR 206.226), work to restore eligible facilities on the basis of the design of such facilities as they existed immediately prior to the disaster is eligible. Funding is normally limited to restoring a facility to its pre-disaster condition. The exception to this would be if a Federal, State or local repair or replacement standard would change the pre-disaster design of the road shoulders. In accordance with 44 CFR 206.226(b) (1)-(5) to be eligible a standard must:
The Region's second appeal letter dated March 18, 1997, states that the minimum design standard applicable at the time of the disaster does not apply and the construction of the paved shoulders would result in a repair that exceeds the pre-disaster condition of the roadway facilities. The standard does not meet 44 CFR 206.226 (b) since, (1) the ordinance standards do not apply to the type of restoration required by the disaster-related damage, and (2) the ordinance cannot be uniformly applied or enforced with respect to all similar types of facilities.
In the second appeal letter dated October 22, 1996, the city reinforces that (1) "all new developments within the City are required to be designed and constructed in accordance with the city standards that provide for drainage control, including curb and gutter." And, (2) "all new developer initiated projects must comply with resolution 93-18 which adopts the County Hydrology Manual, City of Hesperia Drainage Management Design Guidelines and the Los Angeles County Flood Control District Hydraulics Manual." The scope of work outlined in the DSRs are for the rehabilitation and repair of existing road shoulders and not for the construction of new projects. The subgrantee does not provide examples where the minimum design standard (paved shoulders or swales) applies to or has been enforced for the repair and rehabilitation of existing facilities.
Further, Resolution No. 92-62 (b)(2) states that "The City of Hesperia does hereby require the use of the modified minimum standard section uniformly throughout the City where required for drainage purposes as determined by the City Engineer. sd at the discretion of the City Engineer and would not necessarily apply uniformly to all similar types of facilities. The resolution also makes no reference to repair or reconstruction of existing facilities, only to new design.
In its second appeal, the City of Hesperia sites only two additional examples (City Construction Order 6040 and 6042) where the project incorporates water-conveying designs. Both reconstruction projects are arterial streets, which are ready to go to bid. Therefore, these examples do not demonstrate that the enforcement of the standard was in effect at the time of the disaster.
The scope of work should be limited to fill and grading required to restore the road shoulders to pre-disaster condition as outlined in the DSRs. Paving of shoulders and swales are beyond the scope of work required to repair or restore the facility to pre-disaster condition and should not be funded. Additional information has not been presented by the State or the subgrantee that would overturn the decision by the Region in its response to the first appeal.
CONCLUSION
The scope of eligible work is limited to fill and grading to restore the road shoulders to pre-disaster condition. The minimum road design standards in effect at the time of 1044-DR-CA apply only to new construction or rehabilitation of an entire road and not for the rehabilitation of discrete portions of road shoulders. Therefore, the minimum standard does not apply to the restoration work outlined in the DSRs. The appeal is denied.
Appeal Brief
| Disaster | FEMA-1044-DR |
| Applicant | City of Hesperia |
| Appeal Type | Second |
| PA ID# | 071-33434 |
| PW ID# | Multiple |
| Date Signed | 1997-08-20T04:00:00 |
Cross-Reference: Eligible Repair, Codes and Standards
Summary: As a result of the winter storms of 1995, high water runoff from the surrounding areas eroded the unpaved shoulders along selected streets in the City of Hesperia. Repair of the damaged shoulders was found eligible by FEMA. However, the eligible scope of work was limited to repair the shoulders to pre-disaster design. The subgrantee has requested that work should be performed to current codes and standards, which require the construction of paved road shoulders. FEMA has determined that the referenced standard applied only to new construction, and not to repairs such as proposed in the DSRs.
Issues: Should FEMA place asphalt concrete (AC) road shoulders or swales to repair previously unpaved shoulders?
Findings: No. The shoulders were not protected with AC pavement prior to the disaster and there is no applicable and adopted standard that would require such work. The City does not have a written and adopted standard for repairing damaged road shoulders. Funding should be limited to restore the road shoulders to pre-disaster conditions.
Rationale: For costs associated with an applicant's standards which change the pre-disaster construction of the facility, such standards must be in writing and formally adopted by the applicant prior to project approval per 44 CFR 206.226(b).
Appeal Letter
August 20, 1997
Mr. Gilbert Najera
Governor's Authorized Representative
Governor's Office of Emergency Services
74 North Pasadena Avenue, West Annex, 3rd Floor
Pasadena, California 91103-3678
Dear Mr. Najera:
This letter is in response to your January 27, 1996, submittal of the City of Hesperia's second appeal of damage survey reports (DSRs) 25687, 25689, 25690, 25691, 95393, 96512, 96513, 96517, 96518, and 96519 under FEMA-1044-DR-CA. These DSRs were prepared to cover the expenses involved with the restoration of unpaved eroded shoulders along selected roads within the City of Hesperia.
As explained in the enclosed analysis, review of the documentation submitted shows that the scope of work required in the reconstruction of the road shoulders or swales should be limited to restoring the facilities to pre-disaster conditions. Although placement of asphalt concrete shoulders is a sound engineering practice and would limit similar damage in a future storm event, the city does not have a written, adopted standard for the repair of damaged road shoulders or swales. The standards provided are for new construction or development. Therefore, I have denied this appeal. Please refer to the enclosed appeal analysis.
Please inform the applicant of this determination and their right to submit a third appeal pursuant to 44 CFR 206.206(e).
Sincerely,
/S/
Lacy E. Suiter
Executive Associate Director
Response and Recovery Directorate
Enclosure
Mr. Gilbert Najera
Governor's Authorized Representative
Governor's Office of Emergency Services
74 North Pasadena Avenue, West Annex, 3rd Floor
Pasadena, California 91103-3678
Dear Mr. Najera:
This letter is in response to your January 27, 1996, submittal of the City of Hesperia's second appeal of damage survey reports (DSRs) 25687, 25689, 25690, 25691, 95393, 96512, 96513, 96517, 96518, and 96519 under FEMA-1044-DR-CA. These DSRs were prepared to cover the expenses involved with the restoration of unpaved eroded shoulders along selected roads within the City of Hesperia.
As explained in the enclosed analysis, review of the documentation submitted shows that the scope of work required in the reconstruction of the road shoulders or swales should be limited to restoring the facilities to pre-disaster conditions. Although placement of asphalt concrete shoulders is a sound engineering practice and would limit similar damage in a future storm event, the city does not have a written, adopted standard for the repair of damaged road shoulders or swales. The standards provided are for new construction or development. Therefore, I have denied this appeal. Please refer to the enclosed appeal analysis.
Please inform the applicant of this determination and their right to submit a third appeal pursuant to 44 CFR 206.206(e).
Sincerely,
/S/
Lacy E. Suiter
Executive Associate Director
Response and Recovery Directorate
Enclosure
Appeal Analysis
BACKGROUNDAs a result of the winter storms of 1995, high water runoff from the surrounding areas eroded the unpaved shoulders along selected streets in the City of Hesperia (subgrantee). The City of Hesperia roadway system was originally designed to serve a rural community and does not contain storm drains. The majority of streets within the city have sandy road shoulders, which are easily eroded during heavy downpours. The subgrantee notes that the heavy downpours washed away the sandy shoulders undermining the asphalt concrete (AC) road edges, and that this erosion has resulted in hazards to pedestrians and vehicular traffic and a disruption to the normal function of the facility.
The subgrantee requests that the proposed repair method conform to City Resolution No. 92-62, which includes a minimum typical road section (modified San Bernardino County STD. DWG. 114a). Accordingly, the original DSRs, prepared by the FEMA inspector, proposed the following:
- Provide fill and grading to restore the road shoulders to pre-disaster conditions.
- Construction of paved shoulders/drainage swales and berms.
First Appeal
With a January 29, 1996, letter, the State transmitted the subgrantee's November 28, 1995, letter appealing the denial of work items from the DSRs listed above. The subgrantee believed the work should be eligible for funding for the following reasons:
- The estimates for the cost of repairing the facilities to the minimum standards are eligible under 44 CFR and the Stafford Act.
- The city has adopted and enforced a minimum standard for water carrying roads.
- All criteria listed under 44 CFR 206.226 (b) 1,2,3,4 and 5 have been met.
- Paved shoulders, versus unpaved shoulders, are effective for reducing damage from future flood/storm events.
Second Appeal
With a January 27, 1997, letter, the State transmitted the subgrantee's October 22, 1996, second appeal for the DSRs listed above to FEMA. The State's second appeal reinforces issues presented by the subgrantee. These issues include:
- City Resolution 92-62 was in place during disasters 935-DR-CA and 979-DR-CA. The subgrantee contends that Resolution 92-62 is the current minimum design standard for street design and new projects are designed to meet or exceed this current minimum standard.
- All new developer initiated projects must comply with Resolution 93-18 which adopts the County Hydrology Manual, City of Hesperia Drainage Management Design Guidelines and the Los Angeles County Flood Control District Hydraulics Manual.
- All new development within the city are required to be designed and constructed in accordance with the city standard that provides for drainage control, including curbs and gutters.
The primary issue of this appeal is the applicability of the minimum design standard, outlined in City Resolution 92-62, in determining the eligible scope of work for repairs to the road shoulders. The subgrantee asserts that the referenced standards meet all the criteria developed in 44 CFR 206.226(b).
The City of Hesperia adopted the San Bernardino Road Standards when it incorporated in 1988. The minimum standard road section included AC shoulder construction on high volume water carrying streets. The subgrantee notes that the majority of roads within the city are water- carrying streets. The minimum road standards were revised several times. The latest revision is the City Council Resolution No. 95-86 on September 21, 1995. The standard calls for paved shoulders and/or AC drainage swales and berms.
In accordance with FEMA regulations (44 CFR 206.226), work to restore eligible facilities on the basis of the design of such facilities as they existed immediately prior to the disaster is eligible. Funding is normally limited to restoring a facility to its pre-disaster condition. The exception to this would be if a Federal, State or local repair or replacement standard would change the pre-disaster design of the road shoulders. In accordance with 44 CFR 206.226(b) (1)-(5) to be eligible a standard must:
- apply to the type of repair or restoration;
- be appropriate to the pre-disaster use of the facility;
- be in writing and formally adopted prior to project approval;
- apply uniformly to all similar types of facilities within the applicant's jurisdiction; and
- must be enforced if such a standard was in place prior to the disaster.
The Region's second appeal letter dated March 18, 1997, states that the minimum design standard applicable at the time of the disaster does not apply and the construction of the paved shoulders would result in a repair that exceeds the pre-disaster condition of the roadway facilities. The standard does not meet 44 CFR 206.226 (b) since, (1) the ordinance standards do not apply to the type of restoration required by the disaster-related damage, and (2) the ordinance cannot be uniformly applied or enforced with respect to all similar types of facilities.
In the second appeal letter dated October 22, 1996, the city reinforces that (1) "all new developments within the City are required to be designed and constructed in accordance with the city standards that provide for drainage control, including curb and gutter." And, (2) "all new developer initiated projects must comply with resolution 93-18 which adopts the County Hydrology Manual, City of Hesperia Drainage Management Design Guidelines and the Los Angeles County Flood Control District Hydraulics Manual." The scope of work outlined in the DSRs are for the rehabilitation and repair of existing road shoulders and not for the construction of new projects. The subgrantee does not provide examples where the minimum design standard (paved shoulders or swales) applies to or has been enforced for the repair and rehabilitation of existing facilities.
Further, Resolution No. 92-62 (b)(2) states that "The City of Hesperia does hereby require the use of the modified minimum standard section uniformly throughout the City where required for drainage purposes as determined by the City Engineer. sd at the discretion of the City Engineer and would not necessarily apply uniformly to all similar types of facilities. The resolution also makes no reference to repair or reconstruction of existing facilities, only to new design.
In its second appeal, the City of Hesperia sites only two additional examples (City Construction Order 6040 and 6042) where the project incorporates water-conveying designs. Both reconstruction projects are arterial streets, which are ready to go to bid. Therefore, these examples do not demonstrate that the enforcement of the standard was in effect at the time of the disaster.
The scope of work should be limited to fill and grading required to restore the road shoulders to pre-disaster condition as outlined in the DSRs. Paving of shoulders and swales are beyond the scope of work required to repair or restore the facility to pre-disaster condition and should not be funded. Additional information has not been presented by the State or the subgrantee that would overturn the decision by the Region in its response to the first appeal.
CONCLUSION
The scope of eligible work is limited to fill and grading to restore the road shoulders to pre-disaster condition. The minimum road design standards in effect at the time of 1044-DR-CA apply only to new construction or rehabilitation of an entire road and not for the rehabilitation of discrete portions of road shoulders. Therefore, the minimum standard does not apply to the restoration work outlined in the DSRs. The appeal is denied.
Last updated