Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Recommendation:
That Council approve the following resolutions:
THAT the District of Squamish accepts the Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River
Floodplain report for finalization.
1. Objective:
Staff are seeking Council’s support to finalize the Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish
River Floodplain report by Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL). If Council passes a motion
accepting the report for finalization, KWL would finalize it (removing “draft” from report and
figures, minor text adjustments, etc.) and it would be accepted as final.
2. Background:
The District received grant funding of $178,000 under the National Disaster Mitigation Program
(NDMP) to cover 100% of the project costs to complete a Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA)
for the Squamish River Floodplain. This project builds on the extensive technical work
completed for the District’s Integrated Flood Hazard Management Plan (IFHMP), which
prepared updated floodplain mapping for each of the District’s floodplains.
The Squamish River floodplain is home to more than half of the District’s residents and the
majority of commercial activity within the District. The Squamish River floodplain also contains
critical local and regional infrastructure including the CN Rail mainline, Highway 99, BC Hydro
substation and the wastewater treatment plant. The floodplain is protected by the Squamish
River dike. However, the Squamish River still poses a significant flood risk in the event of a dike
breach which could occur for a variety of reasons (overtopping, seepage, piping, undermining,
floating debris damage, etc.).
The IFHMP evaluated the consequences of a major flood in each floodplain within the District
and prepared a comprehensive mitigation plan including land use policy, floodproofing
regulations for new development, and a dike improvement plan. The IFHMP was a ‘hazard-
based’ assessment which primarily focused on the Provincial standard 1 in 200 year return
period flood event (defined as having a 0.5% probability of occurring in any given year). Hazard-
based approaches have some inherent weaknesses including that they don’t evaluate the
potential for, and consequences of, events larger than the pre-defined hazard probability (i.e.
1:200 year flood). This QRA advances this work by evaluating ‘flood risk’ which is defined as the
product of probability and consequence for a range of flood events from small to very large
with varying probability, magnitude and consequences. QRA’s ultimately have the ability to
inform and refine flood mitigation plans by evaluating benefit-cost ratios and risk to loss of life
under a variety of dike upgrade scenarios.
3. Project Information:
Completing this QRA involved the following activities:
1) Update flood model and mapping
2) Estimate inundation probability for each location on the floodplain
3) Complete an Economic Risk Assessment evaluating total economic damage
4) Complete a Loss of Life Risk Assessment
A detailed description of each of these activities is included in Attachment 1. Results of the
assessment are as follows.
Economic Risk Assessment Results
The Economic Risk Assessment indicated Benefit-Cost (B/C) Ratios for a variety of dike upgrade
scenarios. The benefit is defined as the ‘damages avoided’ in the event of a dike upgrade. The
following table summarizes the B/C ratios:
Any dike upgrade with a B/C ratio greater than 1 indicates that damages avoided exceed the
costs of the dike upgrade. All dike upgrading options produce B/C ratios greater than 1. The sea
dike indicates a B/C ratio greater than 100 due to very frequent flooding that would occur in
the absence of dike upgrades in anticipation of expected sea level rise. The results of the
Economic Risk Assessment provide a solid business case in support of the IFHMP dike upgrade
plan and provide excellent justification for future dike-related grant applications.
Loss of Life Risk Assessment Results
Loss of life risk assessments evaluate two types of risk:
1) Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) – evaluates risk of death for the most
exposed/vulnerable person in the floodplain.
2) Probability of Death for Groups (PDG, sometimes called Societal or Group Risk) -
evaluates risk of death for all floodplain inhabitants.
The District has followed the precedent of several other jurisdictions (e.g. North Vancouver,
Canmore, Hong Kong) and adopted commonly used Risk Tolerance Criteria in our Official
Community Plan. The OCP’s risk tolerance criteria are summarized in Figure 1 below:
CAO Recommendation:
That the recommendation of the Engineering Department be approved.
Linda Glenday, CAO
Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................i
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
6. Discussion................................................................................................................ 6-1
6.1 Results for Lower and Coastal Floodplain ......................................................................................... 6-1
6.2 Results for Upper Floodplain ............................................................................................................... 6-1
6.3 Potential Implications for Provincial Policy ....................................................................................... 6-2
6.4 Key Uncertainties .................................................................................................................................. 6-2
6.5 Mitigation Opportunities ....................................................................................................................... 6-4
Figures
Figure 1-1: District of Squamish Flood Risk Management Initiatives .......................................................... 1-4
Figure 2-1: Conceptual Illustration of Internal Ponding due to Upstream Dike Breach ............................. 2-1
Figure 2-2: Model Domain and Modelled Dike Breach Locations for Squamish River Upper Floodplain 2-8
Figure 2-3: Model Domain and Modelled Dike Breach Locations for Squamish River Lower Floodplain 2-9
Figure 2-4: Preferred and Alternate Alignments for Proposed Sea Dike ................................................... 2-10
Figure 3-1: Joint Probability Concept for Dike Breach Floods...................................................................... 3-1
Figure 3-2: Relative Likelihood of Dike Breach for Upper Squamish River Dike and Mamquam River
North Dike ....................................................................................................................................... 3-8
Figure 3-3: Relative Likelihood of Dike Breach for Lower Squamish River Dike and Mamquam River
South Dike ...................................................................................................................................... 3-9
Figure 3-4: Recommended “Super Dike” Upgrade for Squamish River Dike and Mamquam River South
Dike ............................................................................................................................................... 3-10
Figure 3-5: Inundation Probability Mapping – Technical Approach ........................................................... 3-11
Figure 3-6: Conditional Probability of Inundation – Upper Floodplain Year 2100 200-Year Return Period
Flood with IFHMP “Super Dike” ................................................................................................. 3-12
Figure 3-7: Conditional Probability of Inundation – Lower Floodplain Year 2100 200-Year Return Period
Flood with IFHMP “Super Dike” ................................................................................................. 3-13
Figure 4-1: Typical Approach for Economic Damage Calculations .............................................................. 4-2
Figure 4-2: Probability-Damage Curves for Dike Breach Flooding - Squamish River Upper Floodplain 4-16
Figure 4-3: Probability-Damage Curves for Dike Breach Flooding - Squamish River Lower Floodplain 4-17
Figure 4-4: Probability-Damage Curves for Dike Breach Flooding - Squamish Coastal Floodplain ....... 4-18
Figure 5-1: Frequency-Number of Fatalities Diagram (Figure 11-2 in District of Squamish OCP) ............ 5-2
Figure 5-2: Typical Event Tree for Squamish River Floodplain Risk to Life Assessment ........................ 5-12
Figure 5-3: Mortality Zones for Upper Floodplain Dike Breach during Year 2100 200-Year Return Period
Flood – Netherlands Relationship.............................................................................................. 5-13
Figure 5-4: Mortality Zones for Lower Floodplain Dike Breach during Year 2100 200-Year Return Period
Flood – Netherlands Relationship.............................................................................................. 5-14
Figure 5-5: Mortality Zones for Sea Dike Breach during Year 2100 200-Year Return Period Flood –
Netherlands Relationship ........................................................................................................... 5-15
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Figure 5-6: Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) - Upper Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions with
IFHMP “Super Dike” – Netherlands Relationship ..................................................................... 5-16
Figure 5-7: Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) - Lower Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions with
IFHMP “Super Dike” – Netherlands Relationship ..................................................................... 5-17
Figure 5-8: Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) - Sea Dike Breach under Year 2100 Conditions –
Netherlands Relationship ........................................................................................................... 5-18
Figure 5-9: Probability of Death for Groups (PDG) and Acceptable Risk Criteria - Upper Squamish River
Floodplain – Netherlands Relationship ..................................................................................... 5-19
Figure 5-10: Probability of Death for Groups (PDG) and Acceptable Risk Criteria - Lower Squamish River
Floodplain – Netherlands Relationship ..................................................................................... 5-20
Figure 5-11: Probability of Death for Groups (PDG) and Acceptable Risk Criteria – Squamish Coastal
Floodplain, 1 m SLR – Netherlands Relationship .................................................................. 5-21
Figure 6-1: IFHMP Conceptual Flood Risk Mitigation Strategies for Squamish .......................................... 6-6
Figure 6-2: Flood Risk Management: Buying Down Flood Risk.................................................................... 6-6
Figure 6-3: Partial Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) - Lower Floodplain Year 2100 200-Year
Return Period Flood with IFHMP “Super Dike” and Intentional Outlet Breaches – Netherlands
Relationship ................................................................................................................................... 6-8
Figure 6-4: Partial Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) - Lower Floodplain Year 2100 200-Year
Return Period Flood with IFHMP “Super Dike” – Netherlands Relationship........................... 6-9
Figure 6-5: Partial Probability of Death for Groups (PDG) and Acceptable Risk Criteria – Lower
Floodplain Year 2100 200-Year Return Period Flood with and without Intentional Outlet
Breaches – Netherlands Relationship ....................................................................................... 6-10
Tables
Table 2-1: Summary of Return Period Peak Flows for QRA Hydraulic Modelling ....................................... 2-4
Table 2-2: Return Periods for Concurrent River and Coastal Floods ........................................................... 2-5
Table 2-3: Water Surface Elevations for Coastal Flood Scenarios ............................................................... 2-6
Table 3-1: Expert Panel Consensus Estimates of Floodplain-scale Conditional Failure Probability........ 3-5
Table 4-1: HAZUS-MH Flood Damage Estimates ............................................................................................ 4-4
Table 4-2: HAZUS-MH Flood Damage Adjustment Factors ........................................................................... 4-6
Table 4-3: Valuation and Damage Assumptions for Specialized Facilities .................................................. 4-8
Table 4-4: Flood-Related Loss Assumptions for Specialized Infrastructure by Floodplain ...................... 4-9
Table 4-5: Probability-Weighted Flood Damage Estimates for Squamish River Upper Floodplain ........ 4-11
Table 4-6: Probability-Weighted Flood Damage Estimates for Squamish River Lower Floodplain ........ 4-12
Table 4-7: Probability-Weighted Damage Estimates for Dike-Protected Coastal Floodplain .................. 4-13
Table 4-8: Annualized Flood Damages and Dike Upgrading Benefits by Floodplain ............................... 4-14
Table 4-9: Benefit-Cost Ratios for Dike Upgrading ...................................................................................... 4-15
Table 5-1: Typical Residential Occupancies ................................................................................................... 5-3
Table 5-2: Daily Exposure Percentages ........................................................................................................... 5-4
Table 5-3: Evacuation Success Rates .............................................................................................................. 5-4
Table 5-4: Likelihood of Implementing District-Led Evacuation ................................................................... 5-5
Table 5-5: Mortality Functions and Parameters for the Netherlands Relationship ..................................... 5-6
Table 5-6: Mortality Functions and Parameters for the New Orleans Relationship .................................... 5-7
Table 5-7: Example Calculation for Integration of River Dike Breach Probability....................................... 5-9
Table 5-8: Summary of Loss of Life Event Tree Scenarios.......................................................................... 5-10
Table 5-9: Maximum PDI for Squamish River Floodplain ............................................................................ 5-11
Table 6-1: Key Uncertainties for Squamish River Floodplain QRA............................................................... 6-3
Table 6-2: District of Squamish Flood Risk Mitigation Actions since 2006 ................................................. 6-4
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Appendices
Appendix A: Dike Breach Model Output Maps for Upper Squamish River Floodplain
Appendix B: Dike Breach Model Output Maps for Lower Squamish River Floodplain
Appendix C: Representative Inundation Depths and Extents for Coastal Floodplain
Appendix D: Conditional Dike Breach Inundation Probabilities for Upper Squamish River Floodplain
Appendix E: Conditional Dike Breach Inundation Probabilities for Lower Squamish River Floodplain
Appendix F: Mortality Zone Maps for Upper Squamish River Floodplain
Appendix G: Mortality Zone Maps for Lower Squamish River Floodplain
Appendix H: Potential Loss of Life Results for Dike Breach on Upper Squamish River Floodplain
Appendix I: Potential Loss of Life Results for Dike Breach on Lower Squamish River Floodplain
Appendix J: Potential Loss of Life Results for Coastal Floodplain Protected by Proposed Sea Dike
Appendix K: Updated NDMP Risk Assessment Information Template
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Executive Summary
The District of Squamish (District) is a fast-growing community of about 20,000 that has developed on river and
coastal floodplains at the head of Howe Sound. Historical floods caused extensive damage to the community
and resulted in the construction of the Squamish River / Mamquam River dike system. The dike system
currently provides primary flood protection for the heart of the community, including Downtown Squamish.
The District’s recently-completed Integrated Flood Hazard Management Plan (IFHMP) identified a list of
recommended dike upgrades with a capital cost of about $80 million. Proposed IFHMP dike upgrades include a
more robust design standard for the Squamish River / Mamquam River dike system as well as a new 7 km long
sea dike that will protect the community against anticipated Sea Level Rise (SLR). The IFHMP also produced
floodplain mapping and policy tools to guide future planning and development.
When the IFHMP was adopted, staff recognized the need for further analysis to support its substantial and
ongoing financial commitments. The District applied for and received National Disaster Mitigation Program
(NDMP) funding to carry out a Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) for the Squamish River floodplain.
IFHMP modelling assessed the potential effects of a river dike breach during the 200-year return period flood
under Year 2100 conditions. The QRA extends this analysis to produce additional parameters, incorporate
larger river flood events, and consider the potential effects of coastal floods. QRA results assess economic
damages and risk to life for three diking scenarios: the existing dike system; a dike system upgraded to meet
provincial standard criteria; and a dike system that meets more stringent criteria established in the IFHMP.
The location of a dike breach can have a strong influence on its consequences. The QRA assembled a panel of
experts who developed a procedure to account for the potential likelihood of dike breaches at different locations
along the dike. These probabilities were extrapolated across the floodplain to understand how the probability of
inundation changes at different locations during different river floods and in response to different dike upgrades.
Direct economic damages were estimated using HAZUS-MH and adjusted for local conditions. Calculations
account for different inundation probabilities in different parts of the floodplain. Results are integrated across a
range of flood events, producing an estimate of annualized damages for each dike upgrading scenario. The
difference in annualized damages before and after a dike upgrade is considered an economic “benefit” of that
upgrade. IFHMP cost estimates are used to produce benefit-cost ratios for each dike upgrading option.
Benefits exceed costs for all QRA dike upgrading scenarios. The benefit-cost ratio for the proposed sea dike is
over 100, reflecting the critical importance of protecting Downtown Squamish against 1 m of SLR. For areas
north of the Mamquam River, benefit-cost ratios of about two reflect the higher costs of upgrading a longer dike.
Loss of life estimates for the QRA build on IFHMP population analyses. The population at risk is adjusted by
applying simple evacuation assumptions. Mortality is estimated using three different published functions. Loss
of life estimates also account for different inundation probabilities in different parts of the floodplain.
The District’s 2018 Official Community Plan (OCP) defines acceptable risk criteria for natural hazards such as
landslides and debris flows. Based on these criteria, QRA results indicate an “Unacceptable” risk to life for
existing dike conditions. Risk to life may remain “unacceptable” even after IFHMP dike upgrades are complete.
Dike upgrades should target a level of protection that is “As Low As Reasonably Practicable” (ALARP). Risks
are considered ALARP when the cost of further mitigation becomes “grossly disproportionate” to the
corresponding reduction in risk.
Results from this QRA will inform the District’s future policy decisions on flood risk management (including both
structural and non-structural measures). Most directly, results will help the District and its partners better
understand the justification for significant ongoing expenditures on proposed dike upgrades.
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
1. Introduction
Squamish is a community of 19,500 people located in a spectacular natural setting. Its natural
advantages include rugged mountain vistas, pristine rivers and one of B.C.’s most beautiful fjords.
However, these same features also expose parts of Squamish to a range of natural hazards, including
floods and related processes. Different kinds of flood-related hazards are present in many areas of the
community, and include:
• river floods on the Squamish, Mamquam, Cheakamus, and Stawamus Rivers;
• debris flows and debris floods on the Cheekeye River and other local watersheds; and
• coastal floods and tsunamis from Howe Sound.
The District of Squamish (the District) is responsible for managing development in flood hazard areas,
as well as providing the community with appropriate flood protection. The Skwxwú7mesh Úxwumixw
(Squamish Nation) has similar responsibilities for reserve lands within the shared floodplain.
A significant portion of the Squamish community is located within the Squamish River floodplain.
Several damaging floods throughout the early and mid-20th century led to the construction of a major
diking system in the early 1980s. Extensive urbanization has occurred within the protected floodplain
since the dikes were completed. The total value of assets at risk within the Squamish River floodplain is
estimated at about $2.4 billion (2018 depreciated values).
In 2014, the District retained Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL) to complete a three-year
assessment of its flood hazards from an integrated or “systems-based” perspective. The result was the
District’s first Integrated Flood Hazard Management Plan (IFHMP). The IFHMP (KWL, 2017c) produced
updated floodplain maps for the Squamish River floodplain. It also identified physical hazards,
economic, social, and environmental consequences that could result if the Squamish River dike
breaches during the 200-year return period flood.
Flood risk mitigation strategies recommended by the IFHMP balance flood protection, community
growth, and environmental objectives. Key deliverables included a prioritized list of structural flood
protection upgrades, significant revisions to the District’s Official Community Plan, the District’s first
floodplain bylaw, and new Development Permit Area guidelines for hazard lands. The IFHMP also
recommended some $80 million in flood protection improvements.
A key District objective for the IFHMP was to reduce and share flood risk fairly. However, due to
resource constraints, the IFHMP was not able to consider all the important components of risk. For
example, the IFHMP was not able to consider the probability or location of a potential dike failure, or the
potential for floods larger than the 200-year return period event. Stakeholders raised questions about
these important issues during IFHMP community engagement activities.
Recognizing the need for further study, the District applied for and received provincial and federal
funding through the National Disaster Mitigation Program (NDMP). The NDMP project extends work
done by the IFHMP to provide a comprehensive Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) for the Squamish
River floodplain.
Results from the Squamish River floodplain QRA will inform the District’s future policy decisions on flood
risk management (including both structural and non-structural measures). Most directly, the results will
help the District and its partners better understand the justification for significant ongoing expenditures
on proposed dike upgrades.
1-1
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
1-2
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Risk
Probability of Expected Consequences
Risk is a function of hazard
probability and corresponding Hazard Low Moderate High
consequences. The table to the High Moderate Risk High Risk High Risk
left shows a simple example of
how risk depends on both Moderate Low Risk Moderate Risk High Risk
hazard and consequences. Low Low Risk Low Risk Moderate Risk
Risk assessment is the process
of evaluating a range of hazards and corresponding consequences. Consequences are often weighted
by hazard probability and combined to obtain an overall estimate of risk. Scenarios included in a risk
assessment typically span a range of consequences from negligible (frequent) to extreme (rare).
Interpreting Results
Risk may be assessed qualitatively by classifying it into descriptive categories. Risk may also be
assessed quantitatively, by providing numerical estimates of expected damages or potential fatalities.
The Squamish River floodplain QRA provides quantitative results for expected economic damages and
potential loss of life. The results are based on many detailed calculations that require a wide range of
assumptions. For example, outcomes reflect expected damages under assumed future development
conditions.
The objective of the QRA is to provide a representative overview of the District’s flood risk portfolio.
Results should not be interpreted as exact or precise at either the lot, reach, or floodplain scale. Further
discussion of key uncertainties is provided in Section 6.
1-3
0463.323-300
\\bbyfs1.kwl.ca\0000-0999\0400-0499\463-323\501-Drawings\b_Figures\463323_Fig1-1_OrgChart.cdr
District of Squamish
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Floodplain
Management Bylaw
(2017)
Risk-Informed
Site-Specific
Floodplain
Engineering Input
Development
Natural Hazards
Development Permit Area
(2018)
Future OCP
Updates
IFHMP
(2017) Official Community
Plan Updates
(2018)
Squamish Floodplain
Capital Funding Dike Construction
QRA
Decisions (On-going)
(2018)
Emergency Planning
Updates
(On-going)
Figure 2-1: Conceptual Illustration of Internal Ponding due to Upstream Dike Breach
2-1
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Figure 2-2 and Figure 2-3 show the modelling domains for the upper and lower floodplains, respectively.
Model Inputs
The IFHMP model combines a calibrated one-dimensional representation of the river network with a
detailed two-dimensional representation of the floodplain. The two-dimensional floodplain is required to
simulate how water will spread out across the floodplain during a dike breach.
Development of the 1D river model is described in a 2011 report titled “Squamish River and Mamquam
River Survey and Flood Assessment” (KWL, 2011). Key data for the 2D modelling component
(including river flows, coastal water levels, topography and bathymetry, orthophotos, and GIS / cadastral
information) are described in the IFHMP Background Report (KWL, 2017a) and River Flood Risk
Mitigation Options report (KWL, 2017d).
Peak flow hydrographs based on the 2003 flood provide the upstream boundary conditions for the
coupled 1D-2D model. Inflow from the river to the floodplain is calculated automatically within the Mike
Flood model based on user-specified dike breach geometry and timing as well as the relative water
levels calculated by the model on either side of the breach. Dike breach parameters and geometry are
described in the IFHMP River Flood Risk Mitigation Options report (KWL, 2017d).
The downstream boundary condition for the upper floodplain model is the corresponding flood elevation
at the confluence of the Mamquam River and Squamish River. The downstream boundary condition for
the 1D model and lower floodplain model is a winter tide series with a peak water level that reflects a
coincident coastal flood.
Water levels within the diked floodplains are generally independent of the downstream boundary
conditions, since the flow leaving the floodplain is controlled by the confining dikes rather than the
boundary condition itself.
The downstream boundary of the lower floodplain is shown as the “alternate” alignment for the
proposed sea dike in Figure 2-4. The preferred alignment was selected as part of the IFHMP process.
The choice of sea dike alignment is not expected to have a significant impact on model results.
Model Scenarios
The IFHMP concluded that a total of eight dike breach modelling scenarios were required to provide a
reasonable representation of hazard and consequence. Four breach locations were required on each of
the upper and lower floodplain areas. These eight breach scenarios collectively provide an acceptable
representation of the general hydraulic response of the floodplain under dike breach conditions.
The four upper floodplain breach locations include Judd Slough at I.R. No.14 (“I.R. No. 14”), Judd
Slough at 1050 Depot Road (“Upper Judd Slough”), Eagle Run at Dryden Creek pump station (“Eagle
Run”), and the eastern perimeter of the Squamish Valley Golf & Country Club (“Golf Course”).
The four lower floodplain breach scenarios include Brennan Channel at the Mamquam Reunion Intake
(“Brennan Channel”), the north end of Loggers Lane east of Highway 99 (“Loggers Lane”), the south
end of CN Rail’s Mamquam River bridge (“CN Rail”), and the north end of Whittaker Slough (“Whittaker
Slough”).
Selected dike breach locations for the upper floodplain and lower floodplain are shown on Figure 2-2
and Figure 2-3, respectively.
IFHMP 2D floodplain modelling focused exclusively on assumed Year 2100 development conditions. A
detailed description of Year 2100 development assumptions can be found in the IFHMP River Flood
2-2
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Risk Mitigation Options report (KWL, 2017d). A focus on Year 2100 conditions means that the results of
the modelling will remain relevant as a target throughout the implementation of a long-term mitigation
plan. However, results may not provide an accurate picture of flood hazard under present-day
conditions. The accuracy of results may also be limited if floodplain development follows a different
path from that assumed in the IFHMP.
Software Updates
IFHMP dike breach modelling utilized the Mike Flood-FM (Flexible Mesh) program produced and
maintained by software developer DHI. Mike Flood couples together two other DHI models: the 2D
model Mike 21 FM and the one-dimensional (1D) hydrodynamic model Mike 11.
To support the additional run-time calculations required by the QRA, the software was updated from
MikeFLOOD 2014 Service Pack 3 to MikeFLOOD 2017 Service Pack 1. Coherence testing successfully
confirmed that the 2014 and 2017 software versions provided comparable results; however, the results
were not an exact match. For consistency across QRA results, all IFHMP 200-year return period flood
simulations were recomputed using the updated software. The QRA is not intended to update “official”
IFHMP results incorporated into the District’s Floodplain Bylaw and OCP.
Dike Heights
The IFHMP assumed that dikes would be raised to the 200-year return period flood level plus
appropriate freeboard. Analysis of larger flood events for the QRA required further adjustments to the
assumed dike heights.
Dike crests for the lower model were set at an elevation that would not be exceeded during the 500-year
and 1,000-year floods (except at the assumed dike breach locations).
Dike heights for much of the upper model were also raised, with three notable exceptions. At these
locations, the dike was held at “provincial standard” elevations (200-year return period flood plus
freeboard):
• along Harris Slough at the downstream end of the lower floodplain, where water from a dike breach
flows back over the dike to the river;
• along Eagle Run upstream of Seaichem I.R. No. 16, where existing and future development limits
floodplain conveyance and forces water back out over the dike during the largest dike breach
events; and
• along the Mamquam River north dike, where the IFHMP did not recommend raising the dike crest
beyond the “provincial standard” criteria.
Dike heights along Eagle Run are particularly critical. Model results suggest that a dike breach at Upper
Judd Slough could divert as much as 25 per cent of the Squamish River peak flow into Brackendale.
The two major flood routes out of Brackendale (Judd Road / Government Road and Eagle Run Drive)
are constrained by adjacent development and fill assumptions. As breach inflow increases, these routes
begin to throttle the amount of flow that reaches the Eagle Viewing Area. As much as 40 per cent of the
2-3
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
inflow from a Judd Slough dike breach could be pushed back to the river over the Eagle Run dike during
a 1,000-year flood. The trade-off between lower dike protection and reduced consequences from an
upstream dike breach should be explored further as part of dike upgrading designs in this area.
Ring Creek N/A N/A N/A • accounted for in Mamquam River flow
Mashiter Creek N/A N/A N/A • accounted for in Mamquam River flow
2-4
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
A realistic stage hydrograph was obtained by completing from a preliminary run of the dike breach
model. The boundary condition stage hydrograph assumes that the lower Squamish River dike would
breach during the flood, providing relief flow through the lower floodplain and reducing water levels at
the confluence. This assumption is considered realistic for a 1,000-year return period flood event.
2-5
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
results of a single dike breach at a specific location). For the IFHMP, these results allowed the District
to plan mitigation options at the floodplain scale. For the QRA, the composite results provide a
reasonable (but conservative) basis for interpolating results at breach locations that were not modelled.
A total of 30 composite envelope maps were produced (5 parameters of interest x 3 river flood events x
2 floodplains). Composite envelope maps for the upper floodplain are provided in Appendix A.
Composite envelope maps for the lower floodplain are provided in Appendix B.
5 years 3.60
10 years 3.69
20 years 3.77
50 years 3.87
2-6
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
2-7
0463.323-300
Path: O:\0400-0499\463-323\430-GIS\MXD-Rp\DraftReport\463323_Figure_2-2.mxd Date Saved: 11/7/2018 4:23:50 PM
Author: ASeuarz
"
/
I.R. No. 14
Dike Breach 2D Floodplain
Model Extent
"
/
Upper Judd Slough
Dike Breach
Eagle Run
Dike Breach
Upper Model
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Golf Course
Dike Breach
Mam
"
/
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
"
/
RIVE
AM
"
/ R
U
@
KK
MQ
MA
CN Railway
Whittaker Slough Dike Breach "
/
Dike Breach
"
/
Lower Model
W
IL
S
O
N
R
2D Floodplain
S
VE
L
O
U
Model Extent
G
RI
H
SH
Area tion
MI
a
serv
UA
H
UG
SQ
Co n
LO
S
T
KK
N
E
@
C
ES
CR
KK@
Modelled Alignment
of Future Sea Dike
BRIDGE
POND
NEL
AN
CH
H
G
U
D
O
IN
SL
BL
LE
O
AM
M
R
r
U
E
ve
Q
T
ou
T
M
A
nc
A
C
Va
to
uth
So
y 99
Hw
DRAFT
owe Sound
Th e IFHMPCoa s t a lFloodHa za rdMit ig a t
ion Stra t
egy
a ndFloodProt ec tion Opt ions Fina lDra ftRe port
(KWLFile No.0463. 278)re c om m e nde da s e a dike to
prot ectdownt own from c oa s t
a lfloodh a za rds .Th e Fut ure
Reference: 2013Ort
h oph ot
o from Th e Dis t
rictof Squa m is h .
Se a Dike h a s b e e n include din a lldike b re a c
h m ode lling .
Copyright Notice: Th e s e m a t e ria ls a re c opy rig h tof Ke rr WoodLe ida lAs s ocia t e s Ltd.( KWL) .
Th e Dis t rictof Squa m is h is pe rm it t e dt o re produc e th e mat e ria ls for a rch iv ing a ndfor dis t rib ut
ion
t
ot h irdpa rt ie s onlya s re quire dt oc onductb us ine s s s pe c ifica llyre la ting t ot h e Q ua ntit
at iv e Ris k Dis trict’s pre fe rre da lig nm e ntfollows T own Dike a nd
dive rg e s from t h e m ode lle da lig nm e nta ts om e loca t
ions .
As s e s s m e ntfor Squa m is h Riv e r Floodpla in.Anyot h e r us e of t he se m at e ria ls wit h outth e writ t
en
pe rm is s ion of KWLis proh ib it e d.
Proje ctNo. Da t
e
463-
323 Nove m b e r 2018
Model Domain and Modelled Dike Breach Locations
for Squamish River Lower Floodplain
400 0 400
Figure 2-3
(
m)
1:
19,
000
Legend Squamish Nation
Yekwaupsum I.R. No. 18 E
Existing Dike
Dentville
High Ground
(Landfill)
GH Study
U
O
Area tion
Area #4
L
S
a
T
serv
KK
N
Con
E
@
C
S
Study
R
ER
Sea Dike
C KK@
V
Area #3
RI
Alignment
H Downtown
Squamish
IS
M
UA
Preferred
Sea Dike
SQ
Alignment
Squamish River
Training Berm Study
Area #2
Squamish Nation
Stawamus I.R. No. 24
NEL
H
AN
G
Study
U
CH
Area #1
O
SL
D
LE
IN
O
BL
M
R
AM
U
A
Squamish
r
C
ve
Terminals
M
ou
DRAFT
A
nc
M
Va
to
uth
So
500 0 500
for Proposed Sea Dike
Figure 2-4
(m)
1:24,000
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
1
Probability
P(flood)
P(breach|flood)
P(flood) * P(breach | flood)
0
Increasing River Flood Peak Flow
3-1
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
3. A flood that would result in sustained overtopping of the earthfill dike, resulting in a very high
likelihood of failure (1,000-year return period event).
To complete a quantitative assessment of flood consequences, a specific probability of inundation must
be assigned to each part the floodplain. Many studies adopt a simple assumption that the dike will
remain intact up to its design event and fail under all greater floods. A second assumption often follows:
that the assumed failure probability can be applied to inundation of the entire floodplain. These
assumptions can be reasonable for small, flat floodplains with relatively large flood sources.
The simplified assumptions described above were applied for the coastal floodplain. However, the
simplified assumptions omit a key element of risk for long, sloping floodplains like those of the Squamish
River. On both Squamish River floodplains, downstream conveyance and internal ponding (“bathtub”)
conditions are expected to be significant.
This section describes the general approach taken to:
• define dike failure probability at the floodplain scale;
• distribute floodplain-scale failure probabilities along the dike; and
• extrapolate failure probabilities from the dike to the inundated floodplain.
The process included an assessment of relative failure likelihood, identification of dike upgrading
alternatives, definition of consensus expert opinions based on experience and engineering judgement,
validation using dike fragility theory, distribution of breach probability along each dike reach, and
development of linkages between flood hazard areas and specific breach locations.
The process resulted in a series of maps showing conditional inundation probability for each location on
the floodplain, given specific dike upgrading assumptions and background flood conditions.
The following subsections provide a detailed discussion of each of these processes.
3-2
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
3-3
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
account for the effects of dike length (i.e., in the absence of other factors, a longer dike should have a
higher probability of failure than a shorter dike).
Dike reaches are defined as follows for the purposes of estimating floodplain-scale failure probability:
• the upper Squamish River dike from Waiwakum I.R. No. 14 to the Mamquam River CN Rail
crossing (length ±6.2 km);
• the lower Squamish River dike from Highway 99 to the Squamish Spit access (length ±2.8 km);
• the north Mamquam River dike from the upstream end of the Squamish Golf Club to the CN Rail
crossing (length ±3.2 km); and
• the south Mamquam River dike from high ground near the Coast Aggregates quarry to Highway 99
(length ±1.5 km).
The dividing point between the south Mamquam River dike and lower Squamish River dike is typically
taken as the south end of the Mamquam River CN Rail crossing. However, IFHMP and QRA modelling
results show that the fill prism of Highway 99 acts as a significant east-west flow separator as far south
as about Industrial Way. This means that the majority of inundation from dike breaches east of Highway
99 will remain on the east side of Highway 99 and vice versa. To account for this, failure probabilities
must be estimated separately for areas east and west of Highway 99.
A key exception to separating effects east and west of highway 99 is the underpass at Centennial Way.
The expert panel agreed that this effect could be addressed by “crossing over” the spatially-distributed
failure probabilities assigned to the dike for a short distance upstream and downstream of Highway 99.
A crossover distance of 300 m was deemed appropriate. This implies that a dike breach within 300 m of
Highway 99 will contribute to the likelihood of inundation on the other side of the highway fill.
The expert panel produced its results through independent review and a series of three facilitated
workshops. Each expert arrived at the workshops with a set of independently-derived probabilities.
Discrepancies between the individual estimates were largely resolved by reviewing and standardizing
the basis for each party’s initial findings. Comparison of expected responses for different dikes and dike
upgrading / flood scenarios played an important role in shaping the discussions. Final compromise
adjustments required to achieve consensus were typically in the range of 5-10 per cent.
The expert panel’s consensus estimates for floodplain-scale conditional dike failure probability are
summarized below in Table 3-1.
All members of the expert panel were satisfied that the consensus conditional probabilities are suitable
for the purposes of the QRA. All members of the expert panel also affirmed that the values should be
treated as judgement-based engineering estimates and interpreted with a corresponding degree of
uncertainty.
Table 3-1 includes failure probabilities during a 100-year return period flood for the existing dike and
standard dike upgrading scenarios. Modelling did not produce data for this event; however, the expert
panel agreed that this additional point should be included in risk calculations given the known
performance deficiencies of the existing dike during the 2003 flood. IFHMP frequency analysis (KWL,
2017a) confirmed that the 2003 flood had an estimated return period less than or equal to 100 years.
Some of the deficiencies observed in 2003 have not yet been addressed, suggesting that the existing
dike should have a significant probability of failure during the 100-year return period flood.
3-4
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Table 3-1: Expert Panel Consensus Estimates of Floodplain-scale Conditional Failure Probability
Flood Scenario
Upgrading
Dike
Scenario 100-year 200-year 500-year 1,000-year
Return Period Return Period Return Period Return Period
Squamish River
Standard Dike 5% 15% 90% Note 1
(Upper)
Squamish River
(Lower) Standard Dike 5% 10% 90% Note 1
Mamquam River
(South) Standard Dike 0% 5% 15% 80%
Note 1: Water levels would significantly overtop the dike along its entire length. Multiple dike failures expected.
3-5
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
approximation, water levels were assumed to be separated by 0.6 m for each event (e.g., such that the
500-year return period water level would be at the crest level of a dike designed to have 0.6 m
freeboard above the 200-year flood). Water levels for each flood event were assumed to vary
stochastically, following a normal distribution centered on the “assumed” value and with a standard
deviation of 0.2 m (i.e., such that 99.7 per cent of possible values fall within ±0.6 m of the “assumed
value).
The subjective nature of these assumptions precludes direct application of the results. Notwithstanding
the significant assumptions, results from the fragility curves provides reasonable validation of the expert
panel’s consensus values. In particular, the approach provides useful context for validating the
consistency of results across different dike upgrading scenarios.
3-6
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
For the upper floodplain, conditional inundation probabilities for the Squamish River dike and Mamquam
River dike overlap. For the purposes of the QRA, the two failure scenarios are treated as independent
and combined at the grid cell level based on standard probability theory:
(PSquamish breach ∪ PMamquam breach) = PSquamish breach + PMamquam breach + (PSquamish breach ∩ PMamquam breach)
The lower floodplain is treated slightly differently. North of Industrial Way, probabilities were estimated
separately for areas to the east and west of Highway 99 (with appropriate allowance for the “crossover”
effect at the Centennial Way underpass).
Areas south of Industrial Way are assumed to be exposed to dike breach floods initiated both east and
west of Highway 99. However, the presence of a “crossover” effect means that a simple combination of
upstream results would double-count failure probability along several hundred metres of dike. To avoid
this, inundation probability for areas south of Industrial Way were estimated separately using combined
failure probabilities for the south Mamquam River dike and lower Squamish River dike. As a result of
this approach, conditional failure probability maps for the lower floodplain show three distinct zones.
These zones are consistent with the project team’s assumptions and expectations.
As described in Section 2 for hydraulic model results, conditional probability maps were subject to
internal consistency checks that compared results against physically-based expectations. For example:
• Different locations within each scenario were compared to confirm that inundation probabilities
increase in the downstream direction.
• Results from different dike upgrading scenarios were compared at common locations to confirm that
the “improved” dike yields lower conditional inundation probabilities.
• Results from different background floods were compared at common locations to confirm that the
larger flood yields higher conditional inundation probabilities.
Internal consistency checks provided reasonable validation for all conditional inundation probability
maps.
Examples of conditional inundation probability maps for the 200-year return period flood and “super
dike” upgrading scenario are shown in Figure 3-6 (upper floodplain) and Figure 3-7 (lower floodplain). A
full set of conditional inundation probability maps for the upper floodplain are provided in Appendix D. A
full set of conditional inundation probability maps for the lower floodplain are provided in Appendix E.
Conditional probability of inundation due to failure of the proposed sea dike does not depend on breach
location. The expert panel’s consensus estimate is applied uniformly to all locations in the coastal
floodplain.
3-7
0463.323-300
Path: \\bbyfs1.kwl.ca\0000-0999\0400-0499\463-323\430-GIS\MXD-Rp\DraftReport\463323_Figure_3-2.mxd Date Saved: 11/21/2018 2:48:41 PM
Author: ASeuarz
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!!
!!
!!!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Legend
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
mish
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
ua
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
Sq
!
!!
!!
!!!
!!
!!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
KK
!!
!!
!
@
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
Mamquam River Dike
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !!!!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
! !!!!!!!
!! !!!!
!
!
! !!
!! !
!
!
! !
!
!
!!! !
!
!!! !!
!!! !
!
!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
! !
!
!!!
!!! !!!! !!!!! !!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!! !! !
!
!!!! !!!! !!!!!!!!! !!!! !! !!
!! !
!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !!
!! !
!
! !!! !!! !
!
Mam
!
! !
!! !!! !
! !! !
!
! !!!
qu
!!!!! !!!!! !
!
!!!!! !!!!! KK@ !!!!!!!!! !
!
a
!!!!!! !!! !
!
!! !!
!
! !
!
!
! !
!
!
!! !
!
! !
m
!
!! !
!
!! !
!
!
! !!
!
! !
!
Ri
!
! !
!
!! !
! !
r
!
!
! !
!
ve
!
! !
!!
!
! !!
!! !!!
!!!!!
DRAFT
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution to
third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the
written permission of KWL is prohibited.
400 0 400
Upper Squamish River Dike and Mamquam River North Dike
Figure 3-2
(m)
1:18,000
Path: O:\0400-0499\463-323\430-GIS\MXD-Rp\DraftReport\463323_Figure_3-3.mxd Date Saved: 11/7/2018 6:10:23 PM
Author: ASeuarz
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!! !!!!
!!!! !!!
!!!!!!
! !!
!
!
!!!! !
!
!!
! !!!
!
!!! !!!!
!
Mam
!
! !!!
!!!
! !!!!
qu
!
!!! !!! KK@
!
!! !!!!!!!!!
a
!! !!!!!!
!!!! !!!!!
!!!
! !!!
!! !!!!
!
!! !
m
! !!!
!
!
!! !!
!!
! !!
!
!! !
!
! !
Ri
!!
! !!
!
!! !!
r
!! !!!
ve
!
!! !!!
!
! !!!!
!
! !!!!
!
! !!!!!
!!
! !!!!!!!!
!! !!!!!!!!
!! !!!!!! !!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!! !!!
!!!!!!!! !!!
!!! !!!!!!
!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!
!
! !!!!!!!
!! !!!!!!!!
!
! !!!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
us R i v e r
am
Staw
KK
@
Legend
Relative Failure Likelihood
! 1 Low
DRAFT
! 2 Medium
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution to
third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
! 8 Very High
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the
written permission of KWL is prohibited.
Figure 3-3
(m)
1:18,000
sd
District of Squamish
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
17 % Chance of
Dike Failure at or
Upstream of this Point
21 % Chance of
Dike Failure at or
Upstream of this Point
33% Chance of
Dike Failure at or
Upstream of this Point Area has
v er 17 % Chance of
Ri Increasing Probability of Inundation During
Upstream Dike Failure River Flood
Area has
21 % Chance of
1
Distribute Failure Probabilities
Inundation During
Area has
33 % Chance of
Inundation During
River Flood
River Flood
Distribute expert panel’s floodplain
scale dike failure probability along dike r
ve
to estimate probability at or upstream
of each potential failure location Maximum
Water Level in
+ Ri
Breach = 9.4 m
Maximum
Water Level in
Breach = 9.1 m
Maximum
Water Level in
Breach = 8.6 m
Ri
ve
r 3
2
Establish Inundation Areas
Create Map of Inundation Probability
For each potential failure location, assigning
failure probability (STEP 1)
To corresponding innundation area (STEP 2)
Use Breach Water Levels (WL) to
Establish Inundation Area for each
Potential Failure Location
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Note:
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
ua
us R i v e r
am
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT Note:
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish. Conditional probability of inundation is the expected likelihood
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL). that a specific location on the floodplain will be inundated due
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution to an upstream dike breach, given that the specified river
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk flood is underway. See Section 3 of the report for discussion
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
of assumptions that could affect or change these results.
2. Convert inundation to building (structural) damages, usually based on data from historical floods.
4. Estimate other classes of expected monetary damages (e.g., infrastructure, indirect losses).
5. Add together all losses from a given scenario to give an estimate of total expected damages.
8. Apply an appropriate time frame and discount rate to calculate the Present Value (PV) of damages.
9. If desired, calculate the difference in PV between alternative scenarios (e.g., dike upgrading).
10. Calculate benefit-cost ratios by comparing change in PV to implementation cost for each scenario.
The process begins by estimating the inundation expected for a range of flood scenarios (Step 1). In
this case, the input data are drawn from the composite envelope flood depth maps described in Section
2 of this report.
Inundation is then converted to damage based on observations from historical floods (Step 2). The
most common approach is to utilize published curves that relate the depth of flooding to damage as a
percentage of the value of a specific type of flooding. Contents are usually assumed as a proportion of
the building’s value (Step 3).
4-1
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
The number and extent of other types of damage considered varies from study to study (Step 4). Some
studies have shown that total damage (Step 5) can be much greater than damage to buildings and
contents (e.g., for intensive agriculture areas with high-value perennial crops).
Plotting the expected value of damages versus corresponding probability (Step 6) gives a graphical
representation of the probability-damage relationship. Integrating to calculate the area under the
probability-damage curve (Step 7) effectively weights the different damage estimates by their annual
probability of occurrence to give an estimate of annualized losses. Annualized losses can be thought of
as the annual average of damages expected from a natural series of floods occurring over a very long
period.
A conceptual example of a probability-damage curve is provided in Figure 4-1. The area under the
“without flood protection” curve but above the “with flood protection curve” are the damages avoided by
implementing flood protection. Damages avoided define the “benefits” in a benefit-cost analysis for
flood protection works.
4-2
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
NRCan has incorporated extensive building data (including repair and replacement costs) into the
HAZUS model. The model does not include any information on utilities, transportation infrastructure,
critical facilities (e.g., specialized equipment and disaster response), or vehicles. As a result, HAZUS
model damage calculations provide lower-bound estimates of total expected economic losses.
Within each CDB, the NRCan building data is grouped by structure type, occupancy type, and first floor
elevation. Buildings within each group are assumed to be evenly spaced throughout the CDB
regardless of their actual location. This simplification means that the model cannot predict damages to
specific properties.
HAZUS calculates the percentage of each CDB flooded to a given depth. Because buildings are
assumed to be evenly spaced throughout the CDB, the model applies the flood depth to the same
percentage of the building inventory. For example, if 25 per cent of the CDB area is inundated to a
depth of 1 m, HAZUS assumes 25 per cent of the buildings in each building group are also inundated to
a depth of 1 m. Inundation depth is converted to economic damages (i.e., repair and replacement
costs) using FEMA depth-damage relationships specific to each type of building.
The HAZUS assessment uses flood depths from the IFHMP composite maps as a user-specified input.
The water depths shown on IFHMP composite flood hazard maps incorporate allowances for future
floodproofing fill.
4-3
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
5 years - - 98,775
10 years - - 103,413
20 years - - 107,971
50 years - - 113,123
100 years - - -
Currency Conversion
US currency was converted to Canadian currency using a factor of 1.25. This factor is within four
percent of the current exchange rate as of October 2018 (approximately 1.29), the 5-year average
exchange rate (1.26), the 20-year average (1.24), and the 30-year average (1.26). It is conservative
relative to the 10-year average exchange rate (1.15).
4-4
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Summary
Economic valuation adjustments for the Squamish River floodplain QRA are summarized in Table 4-2.
Since adjustment factors are cumulative, the individual values are combined by multiplication. To reflect
the subjective nature of some adjustment factors, the total adjustment was simplified and rounded to 3.
The final factor of 3.0 shown above was also used to adjust coastal floodplain damage assessments.
4-5
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
BC Assessment /
Future Infill (Year 2100) 1.07 1.15
KWL
4-6
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
general building stock. These values were considered too high for use as a regional scaling factor;
however, the City of Vancouver results seem to be consistent with the independent review of
adjustment factors completed for this QRA.
In lieu of the City of Vancouver’s adjustment factor, the Fraser Basin Council report adopts a regional
adjustment factor of 1.6. This factor was obtained from Marshall & Swift benchmarking data to 2014
local costs at Vancouver. Incorporating the study’s currency conversion factor of 1.1 and a slight further
adjustment to update values to 2018, the combined adjustment factor is 1.80. This value is consistent
with the comparable adjustment applied for the QRA (i.e., including factors for location, date, and
currency but excluding allowances for post-2011 development). The Fraser Basin Council regional
study had a much broader area and as such did not attempt to update the HAZUS building stock.
4-7
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Rail Tracks (per km) 2,700 1,350 1 km must be rebuilt at 50% of valuation
Railway Maintenance
5,040 2,520 Repair cost amounts to 50% of valuation
Facility
Major Road (4 lanes,
18,000 9,000 1 km must be rebuilt at 50% of valuation
per km)
Urban Road (2 lanes,
9,000 4,500 1 km must be rebuilt at 50% of valuation
per km)
Wastewater
Treatment Plant 360,000 36,000 Repair cost amounts to 10% of valuation
(Medium)
Police / Emergency
- 4,255 Repair / clean-up cost $2,600/m² x 1000 m²
Services Centre
Municipal Hall /
- 4,091 Repair / clean-up cost $2,500/m² x 1000 m²
Works Yard
Minor Lift Stations 540 270 Repair cost amounts to 50% of valuation
Major Lift Stations 1,890 945 Repair cost amounts to 50% of valuation
Dike Breaches
- 1,636 200 m must be rebuilt at $5000/m
(Repair, per breach)
Drainage Pump Based on value of major lift station
1,890 945
Stations Repair cost amounts to 50% of valuation
Allowance informed by vehicle valuation in
other studies and HAZUS manual.
Valuation at about 10% of building-related
Vehicles 17,182 8,591
losses, repairs at 50% of valuation.
Corresponds to about 1.2 cars / damaged
building and $6,250 damage to each vehicle.
4-8
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Rail Maintenance
Facility (CN Rail, $2,520 0 2 0 - 5,040 -
Heritage Park)
Urban Road
$4,500 1 0 0 4,500 - -
(Government Road)
Wastewater
$36,000 1 0 0 36,000 - -
Treatment Plant
Police / Emergency
$4,256 1 1 0 4,255 4,255 -
Operations Centre
Municipal Hall /
$4,091 1 1 1 4,091 4,091 4,091
Works Yard
Dike Breaches
$1,636 2 2 1 3,273 3,273 1,636
(Repair, per breach)
Drainage Pump
$945 3 1 1 2,835 945 945
Stations
66% of
Vehicles $8,591 - - 8,591 8,591 5,670
Lower
4-9
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
One important category of indirect loss is the economic value of lives lost. Experts define the economic
benefit of preventing a fatality using the Value of a Statistical Life (VSL). VSL represents the cost of
safety improvements that society is willing to bear to reduce the expected number of fatalities by one
life. In 2016, the US DOT estimated VSL as 9.6 million USD (12 million CAD based on the QRA
conversion rate of 1.25). As with other indirect losses, the QRA has not attempted to define a local VSL
or incorporate VSL into economic damage calculations.
4-10
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Table 4-5: Upper Floodplain Damage Estimates Weighted by Conditional Inundation Probability
River Flood Composite Envelope Dike Scenario-Specific
Exposure
Return Period Damage Estimate Upgrading Damage Estimate
Factor
(years) (000s CAD) Scenario (000s CAD)
Existing 9% 47,742
“Super Dike” 0% -
4-11
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Table 4-6: Lower Floodplain Damage Estimates Weighted by Conditional Inundation Probability
River Flood Composite Envelope Dike Scenario-Specific
Exposure
Return Period Damage Estimate Upgrading Damage Estimate
Factor
(years) (000s CAD) Scenario (000s CAD)
Existing 8% 50,546
“Super Dike” 0% -
4-12
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Table 4-7: Coastal Floodplain Damage Estimates Weighted by Conditional Inundation Probability
River Flood Estimated Scenario-Specific
Exposure
Return Period Flood Damage Diking Scenario Damage Estimate
Factor
(years) (000s CAD) (000s CAD)
Existing 100% 342,862
5 342,862
Proposed Sea Dike 0% -
4-13
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Table 4-8: Annualized Flood Damages and Dike Upgrading Benefits by Floodplain
Dike Annualized Annualized Damages Avoided by
Floodplain Upgrading Flood Damages Implementing Dike Upgrades
Scenario (000s CAD) (000s CAD)
Existing 2,969
900
Upper Standard 2,068 1,870
970
“Super Dike” 1,098
Existing 3,625
1,016
Lower Standard 2,609 2,688
1,672
“Super Dike” 937
Existing
124,524
(with 1 m SLR)
Coastal 123,360
Proposed Sea
1,164
Dike
The QRA estimates that the proposed sea dike will avoid annualized damages in excess of $123
million. This very large value represents the necessity of a sea dike to protect downtown from coastal
floods with an assumed 1 m of SLR. Over 90 per cent of these benefits (damages avoided) arise from
protecting downtown against future coastal floods with a return period of less than 50 years.
4-14
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
These estimates may be treated as present-value costs and compared to corresponding benefits
described in the preceding section. Dividing the present value of benefits (accrued over an assumed
lifespan at a specified rate of return) by costs produces a benefit-cost ratio. A value greater than 1.0
implies that the benefits of each option outweigh its costs.
A project with a high benefit-cost ratio provides a good return on investment but may not mitigate risk
enough to achieve other District objectives. Benefits and costs for individual projects may be combined
to create a portfolio of projects that collectively achieve risk mitigation targets at an acceptable overall
benefit-cost ratio.
Table 4-9 below provides example benefit-cost ratios for dike upgrading options considered in this QRA.
Results calculated using a net discount rate of 2 per cent and a 100-year lifespan. These values are
considered realistic based on present-day economic conditions and assumptions documented in this
QRA. Hazard intensities and damage estimates are assumed constant over the lifespan of the benefit-
cost assessment. Costs do not include an allowance for operation and maintenance costs, since the
District already supports an active dike maintenance program.
4-15
0463.323-300
Probability-Damage Curves for Dike Breach Flooding
Squamish River Upper Floodplain - Year 2100 Conditions
700,000
Existing Dike
600,000
Standard Dike
"Super Dike"
500,000
Flood Damage (000s CAD)
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
10,000 2,000 1,000 500 200 100 50 20 10
Flood Return Period (years)
KERR WOOD LEIDAL ASSOCIATES LTD.
DRAFT
Consulting Engineers
20181029_HazusResults_UPDATED_SEADIKE_DSellReviewed.xlsx[Upper Probability-Damage Curves]
Figure 4-2
Probability-Damage Curves for Dike Breach Flooding
Squamish River Lower Floodplain - Year 2100 Conditions
800,000
Existing Dike
700,000
Standard Dike
"Super Dike"
600,000
Flood Damage (000s CAD)
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
10,000 2,000 1,000 500 200 100 50 20 10
Flood Return Period (years)
KERR WOOD LEIDAL ASSOCIATES LTD.
DRAFT
Consulting Engineers
20181029_HazusResults_UPDATED_SEADIKE_DSellReviewed.xlsx[Lower Probability-Damage Curves]
Figure 4-3
Probability-Damage Curves for Dike Breach Flooding
Squamish Coastal Floodplain - Year 2100 Conditions
500,000
"Existing" Dike
Proposed Sea Dike
400,000
Flood Damage (000s CAD)
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
10,000 2,000 1,000 500 200 100 50 20 10 5 2
Flood Return Period (years)
KERR WOOD LEIDAL ASSOCIATES LTD.
DRAFT
Consulting Engineers
20181029_HazusResults_UPDATED_SEADIKE_DSellReviewed.xlsx[Coastal Probability-Dmg Curves]
Figure 4-4
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
5-1
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Figure 5-1: Frequency-Number of Fatalities Diagram (Figure 11-2 in District of Squamish OCP)
5-2
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
It is helpful to think of the analysis in the form of an “event tree”, where each branch describes a
scenario with a different suite of assumptions, probability of occurrence, and unique estimate of
fatalities. An example event tree for this QRA is shown in Figure 5-2.
Residential PAR
The IFHMP estimated residential PAR based on the total occupancy attributed to each type of
residential zoning (including Comprehensive Development). All other zoning types are assumed to have
zero residential occupancy.
PARs were assigned to each lot based on zoning type and standard occupancies defined in the
District’s DCC plan (KWL, 2012; as shown in Table 5-1 below). The number of dwelling units on multi-
family lots was taken from BC Assessment tax roll entries.
Manual adjustments were made to capture the expected addition of nearly 1,000 new residents at the
Squamish Oceanfront lands. The PAR analysis did not consider population demographics (age,
gender, mobility, etc.).
Employment PAR
Employment PAR for each floodplain was calculated using Year 2031 employment projections by Traffic
Analysis Zone (TAZ). These estimates were originally prepared to support the District’s 2012
Development Cost Charge bylaw (KWL, 2012).
Within each TAZ, projected total employment at Year 2031 (excluding students) was divided by the total
area of all Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional (ICI) lots. The resulting employment density was
then multiplied by lot area to produce an estimate of employment PAR for each ICI lot in the TAZ.
5-3
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
• the percentage of the PAR expected to be present on the floodplain when the dike breach occurs;
• the mitigating effects of floodproofing and shelter-in-place opportunities; and
• the potential for a portion of the PAR to evacuate the floodplain plan prior to inundation.
Floodplain PAR will change daily (e.g., as people travel to and from work or school); weekly (e.g.,
weekday versus weekend activities); seasonally (e.g., due to tourism); and gradually over time in
response to floodplain development. For this study, PAR remains constant at weekly, seasonal, and
long-term scales. The daily variation of population was based on the simple daytime / nighttime
distribution shown in Table 5-2.
Residential 90%
Daytime 10%
Employment 98%
Residential 90%
Nighttime 10%
Employment 50%*
* 50% success rate reflects the retention of critical services at 1% of daytime employment total.
5-4
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
A 90 per cent success rate for District-led evacuation of residential PAR assumes that some residents
will defy the evacuation order and remain to defend their property. The 98 per cent daytime success
rate for employment PAR allows for a small percentage of employees who remain to support essential
services. The nighttime success rate for employment PAR is much lower (50 per cent) since most of
the nighttime employment PAR is already assumed to be providing essential services.
Table 5-4 indicates an increasing probability of evacuation for larger flood events (from 50 per cent at
the 200-year return period flood to 90 per cent at the 1,000-year return period flood). This relationship
reflects the increasing likelihood that a warning of extreme flood risk from the River Forecast Centre
would result in a precautionary evacuation prior to the arrival of the flood.
Netherlands Relationship
The Netherlands relationship was developed based on data from historical dike breaches, most notably
a series of breaches that occurred in the Netherlands in 1953. The approach uses velocity, depth x
velocity, and rate of rise to subdivide the flood hazard area into three zones:
• a breach zone where high-energy flow is expected to result in building collapse and very high
mortality;
5-5
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
• a zone of rapidly-rising water where the exposed population may not have time to evacuate and
where buildings may collapse due to unbalanced hydrostatic pressure; and
• a remaining zone not subject to either of the preceding conditions.
Fatalities in the breach zone are assigned a mortality rate of 1.0. This implies that no one caught within
the breach zone when the dike breaches will survive. The remaining two zones apply lognormal
functions that use water depth to estimate mortality based on the form and parameters shown in Table
5-5.
Table 5-5: Mortality Functions and Parameters for the Netherlands Relationship
Mortality Zone Criteria Mortality Function
Mortality
Depth x Rate of
Zone Depth Velocity Standard
Velocity Rise Function Mean
(m) (m/s) Deviation
(m²/s) (m/hr)
Breach Zone ≥7 - ≥2 - FD = 1 - -
Rapidly Rising
<7 ≥ 2.1 <2 ≥ 0.5 1.68 0.37
Water Zone ln h -µN
FD =ФN
σN
Remaining
all areas not meeting above criteria 7.60 2.75
Zone
Since the QRA did not simulate a sea dike breach, depth x velocity data were not available for the
coastal floodplain. Mortality calculations for scenarios involving a breach of the proposed sea dike do
not account for a potential Breach Zone. Rate of rise was assessed based on inundation volumes and
expected inflow rates. Based on this calculation, all areas where water depth exceeds 2.1 m were
assigned to the Rapidly Rising Water Zone.
Mortality calculations for “existing dike” coastal flood scenarios assume all areas are part of the
Remaining Zone. This assumption reflects the expected slow rate of rise (<0.5 m/hr) as coastal flood
levels exceed 3.6 m geodetic elevation.
Example maps showing mortality zones for the 200-year return period flood dike breach scenario and
the Netherlands Relationship are provided in Figure 5-3 (upper floodplain), Figure 5-4 (lower floodplain),
and Figure 5-5 (coastal floodplain). A full set of upper floodplain mortality zone maps are provided in
Appendix F. A full set of lower floodplain mortality zone maps are provided in Appendix G. The coastal
floodplain mortality zones shown in Figure 5-5 were applied for all coastal flood events involving a sea
dike breach.
5-6
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
• a breach zone where high-energy flow is expected to result in building collapse and higher mortality;
and
• a remaining zone not subject to the preceding conditions.
Fatalities in the Breach Zone are assigned a mortality rate of 0.053 (5.3 per cent). This fatality rate is
much lower than for the Netherlands Breach Zone relationship; however, the New Orleans Breach Zone
is defined using less severe criteria and as a result encompasses a larger area. The Remaining Zone
applies a lognormal function that uses water depth to estimate mortality based on the form and
parameters shown in Table 5-6. The parameters indicated for the New Orleans Remaining Zone will
produce a higher number of fatalities, partially offsetting the lower fatality rate recommended for the
Breach Zone.
Table 5-6: Mortality Functions and Parameters for the New Orleans Relationship
Mortality Zone Criteria Mortality Function
Mortality
Depth x Rate of
Zone Depth Velocity Standard
Velocity Rise Function Mean
(m) (m/s) Deviation
(m²/s) (m/hr)
Remaining ln h -µN
all areas not meeting above criteria FD =ФN 5.20 2.00
Zone σN
Since the QRA did not simulate a sea dike breach, depth x velocity was not available. Mortality
calculations for scenarios involving a breach of the proposed sea dike do not account for a potential
Breach Zone.
A full set of upper floodplain mortality zone maps are provided in Appendix F. A full set of lower
floodplain mortality zone maps are provided in Appendix G. All coastal flood hazard areas were
considered part of the Remaining Zone.
The authors of the New Orleans relationship point out that their results focus on the expected loss of life
due to flooding and did not include loss of life resulting from the subsequent adverse health situation
that often follows a catastrophic flood event. For Hurricane Katrina, the authors report that post-flood
fatalities amounted to about one-third of total fatalities.
5-7
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
A broad range of fatality rates is provided for each of the above scenarios, with the extreme limits
spanning multiple orders of magnitude. The RCEM methodology also notes a third class of scenarios
where partial warning was provided. As expected, fatality rates for “partial warning” case histories are
generally less severe than case histories that had little to no warning, but more severe than case
histories with adequate warning.
For Squamish, a range of potential dike breach scenarios could result in a range of warning times. It is
possible for a dike to fail unexpectedly when the water level is below the crest, resulting in little to no
warning time. It is also possible that weather and streamflow forecasts will provide enough notice of an
impending flood to complete a full evacuation of the floodplain. There are also several logistical
challenges that could be considered, for example:
• A dike can breach as rapidly as a dam of comparable size but maintain maximum breach discharge
for longer due to the relatively unlimited quantity of upstream storage (river discharge).
• Unlike many dams, the developed area commences immediately downstream of the point of failure.
• The IFHMP showed that some dike breaches could rapidly inundate evacuation routes.
• Inundation could directly impact a large proportion of the community’s area and population.
Evacuation and sheltering of a large population in the remaining unaffected areas could be
logistically difficult.
Based on the considerations outlined above, the “partial warning” classification is most appropriate for
areas downstream of a Squamish River dike breach. The “overall upper limit” for adequate warning
scenarios (Figure 4 in USBR, 2014) was applied to generate RCEM fatality estimates. This curve
provides a relatively central fit through the RCEM’s plotted partial warning case histories. Using a more
conservative upper envelope curve for partial warning case histories would increase the RCEM fatality
rate by about one order of magnitude. Using a less conservative lower envelope curve for partial
warning scenarios would decrease the RCEM fatality rate by about one-half order of magnitude.
The RCEM relationship gives fatality rates for depth x velocity values greater than 10 m²/s. However,
the RCEM upper limit curves are well suited for linear regression below depth x velocity = 100 m²/s.
Linear regression was applied to extend the overall upper limit curve through the range of depth x
velocity values estimated for the Squamish River floodplain.
Because warning time is included in the selection of a preferred relationship, RCEM authors emphasize
that calculations should be based on the PAR rather than the exposed population (i.e., analyses should
not account for evacuation separately). The QRA’s RCEM estimates account for residential
floodproofing and occupants of multi-family developments sheltering on higher floors, but not for
systematic evacuation of the floodplain.
Depth x velocity values were not calculated for coastal flood or sea dike breach conditions. As a result,
RCEM fatality rates could not be calculated for the coastal floodplain.
5-8
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
As a simpler approach, the conditional probability maps described in Section 3.7 were used as a proxy
for determining the inundation extents of breaches at different locations along the river dike. This
approach harmonizes assumptions about inundation extents with corresponding assumptions about the
incremental probability of flooding.
Conditional probability values were assigned to each lot based on the maps presented in Section 3.7.
The process was repeated for each conditional probability map, giving each lot a unique conditional
probability value for each river flood and dike upgrading scenario.
Lot-specific conditional probability values were then used to determine which dike breach locations were
likely to inundate each lot. Lots were grouped by decile of conditional probability. The resulting 10
groups of lots define the areas that would be affected by hypothetical river dike breaches at 10 different
locations. The decile probability value defines the likelihood that each group of lots will be flooded.
Lot-by-lot fatality estimates were added together to produce a cumulative total for each breach location.
Cumulative fatality estimates were matched with their corresponding decile probability value, creating a
series of 10 paired estimates for each river flood and dike upgrading scenario. Table 5-7 provides an
example calculation for this process.
Table 5-7: Example Calculation for Integration of River Dike Breach Probability
Conditional Conditional Probability of Inundation Estimated
Number of
Probability Decile Value By Scenario Fatalities for
Lots in Group
Exceeds (Cumulative) 1
(Incremental) 2 Lots in Group
0th Percentile 100% of
7.7% 7.7% 4.34
(all lots) floodplain total
10th 90% of
17.7% 10.0% 4.34
Percentile floodplain total
20th 80% of
22.5% 4.8% 3.82
Percentile floodplain total
30th 70% of
26.9% 4.4% 3.64
Percentile floodplain total
40th 60% of
30.0% 3.1% 3.46
Percentile floodplain total
50th 50% of
33.1% 3.1% 3.29
Percentile floodplain total
60th 40% of
36.1% 3.0% 3.25
Percentile floodplain total
70th 30% of
41.8% 5.7% 3.21
Percentile floodplain total
80th 20% of
48.3% 6.5% 3.07
Percentile floodplain total
90th 10% of
55.0% 6.7% 1.42
Percentile floodplain total
Notes:
1. Decile (or cumulative) conditional probability values reflect the likelihood that lots in the group will be flooded by a
dike breach at or upstream of the current location.
2. Scenario (or incremental) conditional probability values reflect the likelihood that lots in the group will be flooded
by a dike breach “at” the current location.
3. This table is provided to illustrate the general concept of integrating dike breach probability. Values correspond to
a breach of the existing dike on the upper floodplain during a 200-year return period flood on the Squamish River.
5-9
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Sensitivity analysis confirmed that the results do not change significantly if the lots are grouped by
percentile (producing results for 100 potential breach locations) instead of by decile (producing results
for 10 potential breach locations).
A much simpler approach was adopted for potential sea dike breaches. Since a breach at any location
is assumed to inundate the entire coastal floodplain, the effects of a breach are independent of the
breach location. Estimates of potential fatalities from a coastal flood depend only on the coastal flood
and sea dike upgrading scenario.
To fully define the event tree (e.g., as shown on Figure 5-2), the process described above must be
repeated for all combinations of the QRA parameters. A complete summary of the loss of life scenarios
evaluated for the QRA is presented in the table below.
Flood Events 3 8
Floodplains 2 1
Dike Upgrading Alternatives 3 2
Breach Locations 10 1
Time of Day 2 2
Mortality Functions 3 2
Evacuation Status 2* 2
Total Number of Scenarios 1,800 128
* Two evacuation scenarios (evacuation / no evacuation) were considered for the
Netherlands and New Orleans mortality functions. One evacuation scenario (no
evacuation) was considered for the RCEM mortality function.
5-10
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Maximum PDI values for the upper and lower floodplains approach or exceed the District’s acceptable
risk thresholds even after accounting for the IFHMP’s proposed “super dike” level of protection.
Maximum PDI values for the coastal floodplain would exceed the District thresholds if 1 m of SLR
occurs before the IFHMP’s proposed sea dike is completed.
5-11
0463.323-300
O:\0400-0499\463-323\501-Drawings\b_Figures\463323_Fig5-2_Decision Tree.cdr
District of Squamish
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
Evacuation
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Night
Night
Night
Night
Night
Night
Night
Night
Night
Night
Day
Day
Day
Day
Day
Day
Day
Day
Day
Day
Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach
Location Location Location Location Location Location Location Location Location Location
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
200 - Year
Flood Event
Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach
Location Location Location Location Location Location Location Location Location Location
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
500 - Year
Flood Event
Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach Breach
Location Location Location Location Location Location Location Location Location Location
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1000-Year
Flood Event
FLOODPLAIN
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Mortality Zones
Breach Zone
Rapidly Rising Water Zone
Remaining Zone
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
us R i v e r
am
Staw
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
DRAFT
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
Mortality Zones
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish. Breach Zone
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution Rapidly Rising Water Zone
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written Remaining Zone
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
us R i v e r
am
Staw
KK
@
Legend
DRAFT
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Mortality Zones
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Rapidly Rising Water Zone
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Remaining Zone
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
us R i v e r
am
Staw
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
DRAFT
1-2
2-5
5 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 50
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL). 50 - 100
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk 100 - 10,000
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
us R i v e r
am
Staw
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
Howe Sound
2-5
5 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 50
50 - 100
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk 100 - 10,000
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
1.0E-04
UNACCEPTABLE
1.0E-05
1.0E-06 ALARP
(As Low As Reasonably
Practicable)
1.0E-07
INTENSE
SCRUTINY
BROADLY ACCEPTABLE REGION
1.0E-08
1.0E-09
1 10 100 1000 10000
N (Number of fatalities)
DRAFT
Figure 5-9
T:\0400-0499\463-323\400-Work\LossofLife\20181018_Loss_Life_Calcs_Upper_DRreviewed_filteredPDI.xlsx
Probability of Death for Groups and Acceptable Risk Criteria
Lower Squamish River Floodplain - Netherlands Relationship
1.0E-02
Existing Dike PDG
Standard Dike PDG
1.0E-04
UNACCEPTABLE
1.0E-05
1.0E-06 ALARP
(As Low As Reasonably
Practicable)
1.0E-07
INTENSE
SCRUTINY
BROADLY ACCEPTABLE REGION
1.0E-08
1.0E-09
1 10 100 1000 10000
N (Number of fatalities)
DRAFT
Figure 5-10
T:\0400-0499\463-323\400-Work\LossofLife\20181121_Loss_Life_Calcs_Lower_REV_DRreviewed_filteredPDI.xlsx
Probability of Death for Groups and Acceptable Risk Criteria
Squamish Coastal Floodplain, 1 m SLR - Netherlands Relationship
1.0E-01
PDG with "Existing" Dike
1.0E-03
UNACCEPTABLE
1.0E-04
1.0E-05
1.0E-06
ALARP
(As Low As Reasonably
Practicable)
1.0E-07
INTENSE
BROADLY ACCEPTABLE SCRUTINY
1.0E-08
REGION
1.0E-09
1 10 100 1000 10000
N (Number of fatalities)
DRAFT
Figure 5-11
T:\0400-0499\463-323\400-Work\LossofLife\20181121_Loss_Life_Calcs_SeaDike_ASBreviewed_filteredPDI__updated08mortalityzones.xlsx
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
6. Discussion
This section provides a high-level overview of the QRA results, reviews key uncertainties and their
potential effect on study outcomes and discusses the role of risk mitigation.
6-1
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
The results of the QRA have been used to update the National Disaster Mitigation Program’s Risk
Assessment Information Template (RAIT) for Squamish (Appendix K).
6-2
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
6-3
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Table 6-2: District of Squamish Flood Risk Mitigation Actions since 2006
Year
Activity
Completed
6-4
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Year
Activity
Completed
Through its IFHMP, the District has also established long-term plans looking forward for managing flood
risk (Figure 6-1) using all practicable approaches (Figure 6-2). Particular focus is given to sustainable
redevelopment of floodplain areas and implementing the “super dike” concept. The QRA confirms the
importance of these initiatives.
Even beyond the firm plans laid out in the IFHMP, the study process identified opportunities to go even
further. These opportunities have not been directly incorporated into the QRA but offer significant
potential to further reduce dike breach flood risk. Examples of these opportunities include:
• developing effective and efficient evacuation plans; and
• intentionally breaching the proposed sea dike during an upstream breach of the river dikes.
The IFHMP identified intentional outlet breaches as a potential means to reduce the “bathtub effect”
imposed by the proposed sea dike during a river dike breach scenario. The lower floodplain’s response
was modelled with assumed intentional outlet breaches at carefully-selected locations. The approach is
promising enough that it was cited as support for continuing downtown’s historical FCL exemption for
non-residential spaces.
6-5
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Figure 6-1: IFHMP Conceptual Flood Risk Mitigation Strategies for Squamish
6-6
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Since the sea dike has not yet been built, detailed plans for intentional outlet breaches are not available
and they could not be incorporated into the QRA. However, preliminary results from the IFHMP’s
assessment of intentional dike breaches can be compared to corresponding QRA results. A
comparison relying on just the 200-year return period dike breach scenario cannot provide a complete
picture of risk but can provide an indication of the degree of risk reduction that may be achievable.
Potential loss of life for the 200-year return period dike breach assessment was re-calculated by
applying the QRA process to the IFHMP’s intentional outlet breach results. Figure 6-3 shows the partial
Probability of Death to Individuals (PDI) for the 200-year return period dike breach flood achieved with
intentional outlet breaches.
Figure 6-3 cannot be directly compared to Figure 5-7, since the former is based exclusively on the 200-
year return period flood while the latter also includes the effect of the 500-year and 1,000-year events.
To support an appropriate comparison, Figure 6-4 provides a corresponding PDI results limited to the
200-year return period event but without intentional outlet breaches. As expected, the change in PDI
results is most significant in Downtown Squamish but effects extend northward through Dentville.
Figure 6-5 shows a comparison of partial Probability of Death for Groups (PDG) results for the 200-year
return period dike breach flood with and without intentional outlet breaches. As expected, results show
a noticeable reduction in risk to life associated with the intentional outlet breaches. Based on this
simple comparison, it is not possible to say whether “super dike” results for a full assessment would plot
fully within the ALARP region.
IFHMP results with intentional outlet breaches were also analyzed using HAZUS-MH. HAZUS damage
estimates were compared directly to the corresponding QRA scenario. The comparison indicates that
intentional outlet breaches would reduce direct economic damages by about one-third (32 per cent).
Overall, the simple comparison confirms the IFHMP’s conclusion that intentional outlet breaches could
help to further mitigate flood risk.
6-7
0463.323-300
Path :O: \
0400- 0499\
463-
323\
430-
GIS\
MXD-
Rp\
Draf
tRepor
t\
463323_Fig u r
e_6-
3.m xd DateS av
ed :12/
3/20182:
19:
08PM
Au th or
:AS eu ar
z
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Legend
us R i v e r
am
Dike-
Protec ted Ar
ea
Staw Existing Dike
Fu tu r
eS eaDikeAlig nm ent
KK
@
ProbabilityofDeath f
orI
nd ivid u als
(x106)
0-0.
01
0.
01-0.
1
0.
1-0.
2
0.
2-0.
5
0.
5-1
1-2
2-5
5-10
10-20
20-50
50-100
DRAFT
Reference: 2013Or
th oph oto f
rom Th eDistr
ials ar ec opy r
ig h tofKerrWood Leid alAssoc iates Ltd .( KWL) .
Howe Sound
Note:
200-
100-10,
yearr
000
Pr
ojec tNo.
463-
323
Date
Dec em ber2018 Partial Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) for Lower Floodplain
400 0 400 Year 2100 200-Year Return Period Flood with IFHMP "Super Dike" and
Intentional Outlet Breaches - Netherlands Relationship
Figure 6-3
(
m)
1:
18,
000
Path :O: \
0400- 0499\
463-
323\
430-
GIS\
MXD-
Rp\
Draf
tRepor
t\
463323_Fig u r
e_6-
4.m xd DateS av
ed :12/
3/20182:
19:
50PM
Au th or
:AS eu ar
z
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Legend
us R i v e r Dike-
Protec ted
am
Staw
Existing Dike
KK Fu tu r
eS eaDikeAlig nm ent
@
ProbabilityofDeath f
orI
nd ivid u als
(x106)
0-0.
01
0.
01-0.
1
0.
1-0.
2
0.
2-0.
5
0.
5-1
1-2
2-5
5-10
10-20
20-50
50-100
DRAFT
Reference: 2013Or
th oph oto f
rom Th eDistr
ials ar ec opy r
ig h tofKerrWood Leid alAssoc iates Ltd .( KWL) .
Howe Sound
Note:
200-
100-10,
yearr
000
Pr
ojec tNo. Date
463-
323 Dec em ber2018 Partial Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) for Lower Floodplain
400 0 400 Year 2100 200-Year Return Period Flood with IFHMP "Super Dike"
1:
18,
000
(
m)
Netherlands Relationship Figure 6-4
Partial Probability of Death for Groups and Acceptable Risk Criteria - 200-year RP Flood
Lower Floodplain with Intentional Outlet Breaches - Netherlands Relationship
1.0E-02
Existing Dike
Existing Dike with Intentional Outlet Breach
"Super Dike"
1.0E-04 "Super Dike" with Intentional Outlet Breach
UNACCEPTABLE
1.0E-05
1.0E-06 ALARP
(As Low As Reasonably
Practicable)
1.0E-07
INTENSE
SCRUTINY
BROADLY ACCEPTABLE REGION
1.0E-08
1.0E-09
1 10 100 1000 10000
N (Number of fatalities)
DRAFT
Figure 6-5
T:\0400-0499\463-323\400-Work\LossofLife\20181122_Loss_Life_Calcs_Lower_Q200_IntBreach_DRreviewed_filteredPDI.xlsx
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
7-1
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
13. GIS tools were used to extrapolate dike breach probabilities across the floodplain. The resulting
maps show the conditional probability of inundation everywhere in the floodplain under each river
flood and dike upgrading scenario.
Economic Damages
14. Economic damages were assessed at the floodplain scale using HAZUS-MH and adjusted to local
present-day values. Specialized infrastructure could not be assessed by HAZUS and was
estimated separately. Indirect losses (including the economic value associated with potential loss of
life) were not included.
15. Economic damage estimates were adjusted for dike breach probability and integrated across the full
range of flood events. This produced an annual expected value of damages for each river flood and
dike upgrading scenario.
16. The annual expected value of damages for a river dike breach on the upper Squamish River
floodplain ranges from $3.0 million for the existing dike scenario to $1.1 million for the IFHMP “super
dike” scenario.
17. The annual expected value of damages for a river dike breach on the lower Squamish River
floodplain ranges from $3.6 million for the existing dike scenario to $0.9 million for the IFHMP “super
dike” scenario. These values include the effects of the proposed sea dike.
18. The annual expected value of damages from a coastal flood with 1 m SLR given an “existing” dike
at 3.6 m crest elevation is $125 million. This very large value is largely the result of damages from
less extreme but more frequent floods.
19. Constructing the proposed sea dike decreases the annual expected value of coastal flood damages
to $1.1 million.
20. The difference in expected damage estimates between two dike upgrading scenarios represents the
damages avoided by implementing that dike upgrade. These “benefits” were combined with IFHMP
cost estimates to calculate the following benefit-cost ratios:
• Upgrading the upper floodplain’s existing dikes to IFHMP “super dike” status produces a
benefit-cost ratio of 2.0.
• Upgrading the lower floodplain’s existing dikes to IFHMP “super dike” status produces a
benefit-cost ratio of 9.6.
• Implementing the IFHMP’s proposed sea dike produces a benefit-cost ratio in excess of 100
because of the potential flood damages from SLR.
Risk to Life
21. The District’s OCP defines acceptable risk thresholds for loss of life due to landslide, debris flow
and debris flood hazards. This study extended these risk thresholds to flood hazards.
22. IFHMP assumptions about floodplain population were adopted to define the Population at Risk
(PAR). The PAR was then adjusted for exposure by accounting for time of day, shelter-in-place
opportunities, and District-led evacuation.
23. Potential loss of life within the exposed PAR was estimated using three independent published
formulae that use flood characteristics to define a mortality rate. Calculations were performed at the
7-2
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
lot scale for each flood and dike upgrading scenario to incorporate the site-specific probability of
inundation during a dike breach event.
24. Results from a total of 1,800 river flood dike breach scenarios and 128 coastal flood / sea dike
breach scenarios were integrated to provide an overall estimate of potential risk to life on each
floodplain.
25. Maximum values for individual risk (PDI) on the upper and lower floodplains approach or exceed the
District’s acceptable risk thresholds even after accounting for the IFHMP’s proposed “super dike”
level of protection. Risk to life is higher for the upper floodplain than for the lower floodplain.
26. Maximum values for individual risk (PDI) on the coastal floodplain would exceed the District
thresholds if 1 m of SLR occurs before the IFHMP’s proposed sea dike is completed.
27. Societal risk (Probability of Death for Groups or PDG) results for the upper floodplain and lower
floodplain exceed the District’s acceptable risk thresholds for all mortality functions and dike
upgrading assumptions.
28. PDG results for the “existing dike” coastal floodplain scenario exceed the District’s acceptable risk
thresholds by a wide margin. This further demonstrates the necessity of the proposed sea dike to
protect against future sea levels.
29. After accounting for the IFHMP’s proposed sea dike, societal risk (PDG) estimates for the coastal
floodplain drop about two orders of magnitude toward (but do not completely fall below) the District’s
acceptable risk thresholds.
Analysis
30. The results of the QRA confirm that there are complex trade-offs between the economic necessity
of a new sea dike to protect against SLR and the exacerbating effect the dike will have on the
consequences of an upstream breach on the river dikes.
31. The IFHMP’s recommended “super dike” upgrades on the upper and lower floodplain clearly fall
within the scope of reasonable actions to mitigate flood risk to a level that is ALARP.
32. Benefit-cost ratios for the required upgrades would increase if VSL and other indirect damages were
incorporated.
33. The QRA process is considered rigourous and meets the standards for NDMP “Class A” confidence
level (very high degree of confidence).
34. The results of the QRA demonstrate that the IFHMP’s risk mitigation measures will have a net
benefit to the community and have been used to update the NDMP’s RAIT for Squamish.
35. While rigorous, QRA results still incorporate a range of uncertainties. Results should not be viewed
as defining a conclusive threshold for whether or not any specific risk mitigation decision is justified.
36. In some situations, improvements beyond the IFHMP “super dike” will be required to achieve
ALARP status. A dam with a similar risk profile would have to be able to withstand the PMF, a
theoretical maximum flood event much greater than the 1,000-year return period event.
37. One promising opportunity for further flood risk mitigation involves intentionally breaching
downstream dikes (particularly the proposed sea dike) to limit floodplain inundation depths.
7-3
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
7.2 Recommendations
Building on the results of this QRA, it is recommended that the District pursue the following actions:
A. Submit this summary report, including the updated RAIT, to fulfill the requirements of the project’s
funding partners.
B. Proceed with implementation of the IFHMP’s prioritized upgrades to the local dike system as
resources permit.
C. Provide the results of this QRA to potential funding partners as justification for funding of dike
upgrades.
D. Review trade-offs for target dike crest elevations when considering “super dike” upgrades between
Judd Slough and Seaichem I.R. No. 16 as well as along Harris Slough on Kowtain I.R. No. 17.
E. Review flood-related aspects of the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP),
particularly with respect to evacuation protocols in the event of a possible, imminent, or ongoing
dike breach.
F. Evaluate and make provision for intentional outlet dike breaches in the CEMP’s flood annex.
7-4
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Closure
Prepared by:
KERR WOOD LEIDAL ASSOCIATES LTD.
Reviewed by:
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Glossary of Acronyms
ALARP As Low As Reasonably Practicable
CAD (000s CAD) Quantities expressed in (thousands of) Canadian dollars
CDB Census Dissemination Block
CEMP Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
DFL Designated Flood Level
ICI Industrial, Commercial and Institutional
IFHMP Integrated Flood Hazard Management Plan
KWL Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd.
NDMP National Disaster Mitigation Program
NRCan Natural Resources Canada
OCP Official Community Plan
PAR Population At Risk
PDG Probability of Death for Groups
PDI Probability of Death for an Individual
QRA Quantitative Risk Assessment
RAIT Risk Assessment Information Template
RCEM (US Bureau of) Reclamation Consequence Estimation Methodology
SLR Sea Level Rise
USD Quantities expressed in United States Dollars
VSL (Economic) Value of a Statistical Life
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
References
BC MFLNRO (British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations). 2017.
Downstream Consequence of Failure Classification Interpretation Guideline. Revised March 2017. 20pp.
BC MFLNRORD (British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural
Development). 2018. Flood Hazard Area Land Use Management Guidelines. As amended by BC
MFLNRORD January 2018.
Defra (United Kingdom Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) and EA (Environment Agency).
2007. Performance and Reliability of Flood and Coastal Defences. R&D Technical Report FD 2318/TR1.
August 2007.
District of Squamish. 2018. #squamish2040 - Official Community Plan. Bylaw 2500,2017. Bylaw Schedule A.
Engineers and Geoscientists BC. 2018. Professional Practice Guidelines – Legislated Flood Assessments in a
Changing Climate in BC. Version 2.1 published August 2018.
Jonkman, S.N., J.K. Vrijling, and A.C.W.M. Vrouwenvelder. 2008. Methods for the estimation of loss of life due
to floods: a literature review and a proposal for a new method. Natural Hazards 46: 353-389.
Jonkman, S.N., B. Maaskant, E. Boyd, and M.L. Levitan. 2009. Loss of Life Caused by the Flooding of New
Orleans After Hurricane Katrina: Analysis of the Relationship Between Flood Characteristics and
Mortality. Risk Analysis 29(5): 676-698.
KWL (Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd.). 2011. Squamish River and Mamquam River Survey and Flood
Assessment. Revised Final Report dated July 2011. KWL file no. 0463.186-300.
KWL (Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd.). 2012. Development Cost Charge Bylaw Update. Final report dated
May 2012. KWL file no. 0463.229-300.
KWL (Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd.). 2017a. Integrated Flood Hazard Management Plan – Background
Report. Final report dated September 2017. KWL file no. 0463.278-300.
KWL (Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd.). 2017b. Integrated Flood Hazard Management Plan – Coastal Flood
Risk Mitigation Options. Final report dated September 2017. KWL file no. 0463.278-300.
KWL (Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd.). 2017c. Integrated Flood Hazard Management Plan – Final Report.
Final report dated October 2017. KWL file no. 0463.278-300.
KWL (Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd.). 2017c. Integrated Flood Hazard Management Plan – Final Report.
Final report dated September 2017. KWL file no. 0463.278-300.
NHC (Northwest Hydraulic Consultants). 2016. Lower Mainland Flood Management Strategy Project 2:
Regional Assessment of Flood Vulnerability. Final report prepared for Fraser Basin Council. NHC ref.
no. 3000149.
US DOT (U.S. Department of Transportation). 2016. Memorandum to Secretarial Officers and Modal
Administrators from M.J. Moran and C. Monje Re: Guidance on the Treatment of the Economic Value of a
Statistical Life (VSL) in U.S. Department of Transportation Analyses – 2016 Adjustment dated August 8,
2016. 13pp.
USBR (United States Department of the Interior – Bureau of Reclamation). 2014. RCEM – Reclamation
Consequence Estimating Methodology. Interim Guidelines for Estimating Life Loss for Dam Safety Risk
Analysis. 55pp.
0463.323-300
DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH
Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain
Draft Report
November 2018
Statement of Limitations
This document has been prepared by Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL) for the exclusive use and benefit of District of Squamish for
the Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. No other party is entitled to rely on any of the conclusions, data, opinions,
or any other information contained in this document.
This document represents KWL’s best professional judgement based on the information available at the time of its completion and as
appropriate for the project scope of work. Services performed in developing the content of this document have been conducted in a manner
consistent with that level and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the engineering profession currently practising under similar
conditions. No warranty, express or implied, is made.
Copyright Notice
These materials (text, tables, figures, and drawings included herein) are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL). District of
Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution to third parties only as required to conduct business
specifically relating to Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Revision History
Revision # Date Status Revision Author
0463.323-300
Dike Breach Model Output Maps for
Upper Squamish River Floodplain
List of Figures
Figure A-1: Composite Maximum Water Surface Elevation for Upper Floodplain Dike Breach Scenarios - Year 2100 200-Year Return Period Flood
Figure A-2: Composite Maximum Water Surface Elevation for Upper Floodplain Dike Breach Scenarios - Year 2100 500-Year Return Period Flood
Figure A-3: Composite Maximum Water Surface Elevation for Upper Floodplain Dike Breach Scenarios - Year 2100 1000-Year Return Period Flood
Figure A-4: Composite Maximum Water Depth for Upper Floodplain Dike Breach Scenarios - Year 2100 200-Year Return Period Flood
Figure A-5: Composite Maximum Water Depth for Upper Floodplain Dike Breach Scenarios - Year 2100 500-Year Return Period Flood
Figure A-6: Composite Maximum Water Depth for Upper Floodplain Dike Breach Scenarios - Year 2100 1000-Year Return Period Flood
Figure A-7: Composite Maximum Velocity for Upper Floodplain Dike Breach Scenarios - Year 2100 200-Year Return Period Flood
Figure A-8: Composite Maximum Velocity for Upper Floodplain Dike Breach Scenarios - Year 2100 500-Year Return Period Flood
Figure A-9: Composite Maximum Velocity for Upper Floodplain Dike Breach Scenarios - Year 2100 1000-Year Return Period Flood
Figure A-10: Composite Maximum “Depth x Velocity” for Upper Floodplain Dike Breach Scenarios - Year 2100 200-Year Return Period Flood
Figure A-11: Composite Maximum “Depth x Velocity” for Upper Floodplain Dike Breach Scenarios - Year 2100 500-Year Return Period Flood
DRAFT
Figure A-12: Composite Maximum “Depth x Velocity” for Upper Floodplain Dike Breach Scenarios - Year 2100 1000-Year Return Period Flood
Figure A-13: Composite Maximum Rate of Rise for Upper Floodplain Dike Breach Scenarios - Year 2100 200-Year Return Period Flood
Figure A-14: Composite Maximum Rate of Rise for Upper Floodplain Dike Breach Scenarios - Year 2100 500-Year Return Period Flood
Figure A-15: Composite Maximum Rate of Rise for Upper Floodplain Dike Breach Scenarios - Year 2100 1000-Year Return Period Flood
Path: \\bbyfs1.kwl.ca\0000-0999\0400-0499\463-323\430-GIS\MXD-Rp\DraftReport\2019-01-18\AppendixA\463323_Figure_A-1.mxd Date Saved: 1/29/2019 12:35:40 PM
Author: jkaur
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Notes:
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Notes:
1. Results represent an envelope of the effects
expected from a single dike breach event ocurring
at any location along the dike.
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Notes:
1. Results represent an envelope of the effects
expected from a single dike breach event ocurring
at any location along the dike.
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area
Existing
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Notes:
1. Results represent an envelope of the effects
expected from a single dike breach event ocurring
at any location along the dike.
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area
Existing Dike
Notes:
1. Results represent an envelope of the effects
expected from a single dike breach event ocurring
at any location along the dike.
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area
Existing Dike
Notes:
1. Results represent an envelope of the effects
expected from a single dike breach event ocurring
at any location along the dike.
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Notes:
1. Results represent an envelope of the effects
expected from a single dike breach event ocurring
at any location along the dike.
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area
Existing Dike
Notes:
1. Results represent an envelope of the effects
expected from a single dike breach event ocurring
at any location along the dike.
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
2
Max "Depth x Velocity" (m /s)
0.00 - 0.20 3.61 - 3.80
0.21 - 0.40 3.81 - 4.00
0.41 - 0.60 4.01 - 4.20
0.61 - 0.80 4.21 - 4.40
0.81 - 1.00 4.41 - 4.60
1.01 - 1.20 4.61 - 4.80
1.21 - 1.40 4.81 - 5.00
1.41 - 1.60 5.01 - 5.20
1.61 - 1.80 5.21 - 5.40
1.81 - 2.00 5.41 - 5.60
2.01 - 2.20 5.61 - 5.80
2.21 - 2.40 5.81 - 6.00
2.41 - 2.60 6.01 - 6.20
2.61 - 2.80 6.21 - 6.40
2.81 - 3.00 6.41 - 6.60
3.01 - 3.20 6.61 - 6.80
3.21 - 3.40 6.81 - 7.00
3.41 - 3.60 > 7.00
Notes:
1. Results represent an envelope of the effects
expected from a single dike breach event ocurring
at any location along the dike.
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
2
Max "Depth x Velocity" (m /s)
0.00 - 0.20 3.61 - 3.80
0.21 - 0.40 3.81 - 4.00
0.41 - 0.60 4.01 - 4.20
0.61 - 0.80 4.21 - 4.40
0.81 - 1.00 4.41 - 4.60
1.01 - 1.20 4.61 - 4.80
1.21 - 1.40 4.81 - 5.00
1.41 - 1.60 5.01 - 5.20
1.61 - 1.80 5.21 - 5.40
1.81 - 2.00 5.41 - 5.60
2.01 - 2.20 5.61 - 5.80
2.21 - 2.40 5.81 - 6.00
2.41 - 2.60 6.01 - 6.20
2.61 - 2.80 6.21 - 6.40
2.81 - 3.00 6.41 - 6.60
3.01 - 3.20 6.61 - 6.80
3.21 - 3.40 6.81 - 7.00
3.41 - 3.60 > 7.00
Notes:
1. Results represent an envelope of the effects
expected from a single dike breach event ocurring
at any location along the dike.
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
2
Max "Depth x Velocity" (m /s)
0.00 - 0.20 3.61 - 3.80
0.21 - 0.40 3.81 - 4.00
0.41 - 0.60 4.01 - 4.20
0.61 - 0.80 4.21 - 4.40
0.81 - 1.00 4.41 - 4.60
1.01 - 1.20 4.61 - 4.80
1.21 - 1.40 4.81 - 5.00
1.41 - 1.60 5.01 - 5.20
1.61 - 1.80 5.21 - 5.40
1.81 - 2.00 5.41 - 5.60
2.01 - 2.20 5.61 - 5.80
2.21 - 2.40 5.81 - 6.00
2.41 - 2.60 6.01 - 6.20
2.61 - 2.80 6.21 - 6.40
2.81 - 3.00 6.41 - 6.60
3.01 - 3.20 6.61 - 6.80
3.21 - 3.40 6.81 - 7.00
3.41 - 3.60 > 7.00
Notes:
1. Results represent an envelope of the effects
expected from a single dike breach event ocurring
at any location along the dike.
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Notes:
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Notes:
1.Results reflect the maximum increase in water
levels expected over a one-hour period. Water
levels may increase more quickly over
shorter time periods.
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Notes:
1. Results reflect the maximum increase
in water levels expected over a one-hour period.
Water levels may increase more quickly over
shorter time periods.
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
Legend
Stud yAre aBound ary
ua
Existing Dike
Sq
<4.
00 7.
51-8.
00
@
4.
01-4.
50 8.
01-8.
50
4.
51-5.
00 8.
51-9.
00
5.
01-5.
50 9.
01-9.
50
5.
51-6.
00 9.
51-10.
00
6.
01-6.
50 10.
01-10.
50
6.
51-7.
00 10.
51-11.
00
7.
01-7.
50 >11.
00
Notes:
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Reference: 2013Orthop hoto from The Distric tof Squam ish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: The se m ate rialsare c op yrightofKe rr Wood Le id alAssoc iate sLtd .( KWL) .
The Distric t ofSquam ish isp e rm itte d to re p rod uc e the m ate rialsfor arc hiving and for d istrib ution
to third p artie sonlyasre quire d to c ond uc tb usine sssp e c ific allyre lating to the Quantitative Risk
Asse ssm e ntfor Squam ish Rive r Flood p lain.Anyothe r use ofthe se m ate rialswithoutthe writte n
p e rm ission ofKWLisp rohib ite d .
Proje c tN o. Date
463-323 Fe b ruary
,2019 Composite Maximum Water Surface Elevation for
400 0 400 Lower Floodplain Dike Breach Scenarios
(
m)
1:
18,
000
Year 2100 200-Year Return Period Flood Figure B-1
Path: \\bbyfs1.kwl.ca\0000-0999\0400-0499\463-323\430-GIS\MXD-Rp\DraftReport\2019-01-18\AppendixB\463323_Figure_B-2.mxd Date Saved: 1/28/2019 4:52:41 PM
Author: jkaur
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
Legend
Study Area Boundary
ua
Existing Dike
Sq
Notes:
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
Legend
Study Area Boundary
ua
Existing Dike
Sq
Notes:
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
Study Area Boundary
mish
Existing Dike
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
Legend
Study Area Boundary
ua
Existing Dike
Sq
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
Legend
Study Area Boundary
ua
Existing Dike
Sq
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
Legend
Study Area
ua
Existing Dike
Sq
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
2
Max "Depth x Velocity" (m /s)
0.00 - 0.20 2.41 - 2.60 4.81 - 5.00
KK
@
Notes:
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
2
Max "Depth x Velocity" (m /s)
0.00 - 0.20 2.41 - 2.60 4.81 - 5.00
KK
@
Notes:
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
2
Max "Depth x Velocity" (m /s)
0.00 - 0.20 2.41 - 2.60 4.81 - 5.00
KK
@
Notes:
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
0.51 - 1.00
1.01 - 1.50
1.51 - 2.00
2.01 - 2.50
2.51 - 3.00
3.01 - 3.50
3.51 - 4.00
>4.00
Notes:
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
0.51 - 1.00
1.01 - 1.50
1.51 - 2.00
2.01 - 2.50
2.51 - 3.00
3.01 - 3.50
3.51 - 4.00
> 4.00
Notes:
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
Study Area
Existing Dike
ua
0.51 - 1.00
1.01 - 1.50
1.51 - 2.00
2.01 - 2.50
2.51 - 3.00
3.01 - 3.50
3.51 - 4.00
> 4.00
Notes:
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
Legend
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
Dike-Protected Area
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
Legend
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
Dike-Protected Area
us R i v e r
m
a
Staw
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Legend
Sq
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
Dike-Protected Area
Notes:
us R i v e r
the District of Squamish Integrated Flood Hazard
Management Plan.
m
a
Staw
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Howe Sound
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Probability of Dike Breach Inundation
0.002 - 0.025 0.501 - 0.525
0.026 - 0.050 0.526 - 0.550
0.051 - 0.075 0.551 - 0.575
0.076 - 0.100 0.576 - 0.600
0.101 - 0.125 0.601 - 0.625
0.126 - 0.150 0.626 - 0.650
0.151 - 0.175 0.651 - 0.675
0.176 - 0.200 0.676 - 0.700
0.201 - 0.225 0.701 - 0.725
0.226 - 0.250 0.726 - 0.750
0.251 - 0.275 0.751 - 0.775
0.276 - 0.300 0.776 - 0.800
0.301 - 0.325 0.801 - 0.825
0.326 - 0.350 0.826 - 0.850
0.351 - 0.375 0.851 - 0.875
0.376 - 0.400 0.876 - 0.900
0.401 - 0.425 0.901 - 0.925
0.426 - 0.450 0.926 - 0.950
0.451 - 0.475 0.951 - 0.975
0.476 - 0.500 0.976 - 1.000
Notes:
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Notes:
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Notes:
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Probability of Dike Breach Inundation
0.002 - 0.025 0.501 - 0.525
0.026 - 0.050 0.526 - 0.550
0.051 - 0.075 0.551 - 0.575
0.076 - 0.100 0.576 - 0.600
0.101 - 0.125 0.601 - 0.625
0.126 - 0.150 0.626 - 0.650
0.151 - 0.175 0.651 - 0.675
0.176 - 0.200 0.676 - 0.700
0.201 - 0.225 0.701 - 0.725
0.226 - 0.250 0.726 - 0.750
0.251 - 0.275 0.751 - 0.775
0.276 - 0.300 0.776 - 0.800
0.301 - 0.325 0.801 - 0.825
0.326 - 0.350 0.826 - 0.850
0.351 - 0.375 0.851 - 0.875
0.376 - 0.400 0.876 - 0.900
0.401 - 0.425 0.901 - 0.925
0.426 - 0.450 0.926 - 0.950
0.451 - 0.475 0.951 - 0.975
0.476 - 0.500 0.976 - 1.000
Notes:
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Probability of Dike Breach Inundation
0.002 - 0.025 0.501 - 0.525
0.026 - 0.050 0.526 - 0.550
0.051 - 0.075 0.551 - 0.575
0.076 - 0.100 0.576 - 0.600
0.101 - 0.125 0.601 - 0.625
0.126 - 0.150 0.626 - 0.650
0.151 - 0.175 0.651 - 0.675
0.176 - 0.200 0.676 - 0.700
0.201 - 0.225 0.701 - 0.725
0.226 - 0.250 0.726 - 0.750
0.251 - 0.275 0.751 - 0.775
0.276 - 0.300 0.776 - 0.800
0.301 - 0.325 0.801 - 0.825
0.326 - 0.350 0.826 - 0.850
0.351 - 0.375 0.851 - 0.875
0.376 - 0.400 0.876 - 0.900
0.401 - 0.425 0.901 - 0.925
0.426 - 0.450 0.926 - 0.950
0.451 - 0.475 0.951 - 0.975
0.476 - 0.500 0.976 - 1.000
Notes:
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area
Existing Dike
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Probability of Dike Breach Inundation
0.002 - 0.025 0.501 - 0.525
0.026 - 0.050 0.526 - 0.550
0.051 - 0.075 0.551 - 0.575
0.076 - 0.100 0.576 - 0.600
0.101 - 0.125 0.601 - 0.625
0.126 - 0.150 0.626 - 0.650
0.151 - 0.175 0.651 - 0.675
0.176 - 0.200 0.676 - 0.700
0.201 - 0.225 0.701 - 0.725
0.226 - 0.250 0.726 - 0.750
0.251 - 0.275 0.751 - 0.775
0.276 - 0.300 0.776 - 0.800
0.301 - 0.325 0.801 - 0.825
0.326 - 0.350 0.826 - 0.850
0.351 - 0.375 0.851 - 0.875
0.376 - 0.400 0.876 - 0.900
0.401 - 0.425 0.901 - 0.925
0.426 - 0.450 0.926 - 0.950
0.451 - 0.475 0.951 - 0.975
0.476 - 0.500 0.976 - 1.000
Notes:
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Notes:
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Probability of Dike Breach Inundation
0.002 - 0.025 0.501 - 0.525
0.026 - 0.050 0.526 - 0.550
0.051 - 0.075 0.551 - 0.575
0.076 - 0.100 0.576 - 0.600
0.101 - 0.125 0.601 - 0.625
0.126 - 0.150 0.626 - 0.650
0.151 - 0.175 0.651 - 0.675
0.176 - 0.200 0.676 - 0.700
0.201 - 0.225 0.701 - 0.725
0.226 - 0.250 0.726 - 0.750
0.251 - 0.275 0.751 - 0.775
0.276 - 0.300 0.776 - 0.800
0.301 - 0.325 0.801 - 0.825
0.326 - 0.350 0.826 - 0.850
0.351 - 0.375 0.851 - 0.875
0.376 - 0.400 0.876 - 0.900
0.401 - 0.425 0.901 - 0.925
0.426 - 0.450 0.926 - 0.950
0.451 - 0.475 0.951 - 0.975
0.476 - 0.500 0.976 - 1.000
Notes:
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
ua
us R iv er
am
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
ua
us R iv er
am
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
ua
us R iv er
Management Plan.
am
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
ua
us R iv er
am
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
ua
Notes:
us R iv er
Hazard Management Plan.
am
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
ua
us R iv er
am
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
Dike-Protected
Existing Dike
ua
us R iv er
Management Plan.
am
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
Dike-Protected
Existing Dike
ua
us R iv er
Hazard Management Plan.
am
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
ua
Notes:
us R iv er
Management Plan.
am
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
Dike-Protected
Existing Dike
ua
Notes:
us R iv er
Management Plan.
am
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
Legend
mish
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
ua
Notes:
us R iv er
Integrated Flood Hazard Management Plan.
am
Staw
KK
@
DRAFT
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Mortality Zones
Breach Zone
Rapidly Rising Water Zone
Remaining Zone
Note:
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Mortality Zones
Breach Zone
Rapidly Rising Water Zone
Remaining Zone
Note:
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Mortality Zones
Breach Zone
Rapidly Rising Water Zone
Remaining Zone
Note:
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Mortality Zones
Breach Zone
Remaining Zone
Note:
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
Mortality Zones
Breach Zone
Remaining Zone
Note:
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area
Existing Dike
Mortality Zones
Breach Zone
Remaining Zone
Note:
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
us R i v e r
am
Staw
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
Mortality Zones
DRAFT
Breach Zone
Rapidly Rising Water Zone
Remaining Zone
Note:
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish. Mortality zones determine the applicable
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL). mortality function for estimating loss of life
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution based on a specified set of relationships.
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk Refer to Section 5 of the QRA report for
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written additional details.
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
us R i v e r
am
Staw
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
Mortality Zones
DRAFT
Breach Zone
Rapidly Rising Water Zone
Remaining Zone
Note:
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish. Mortality zones determine the applicable
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL). mortality function for estimating loss of life
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution based on a specified set of relationships.
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk Refer to Section 5 of the QRA report for
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written additional details.
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
us R i v e r
am
Staw
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
Mortality Zones
DRAFT
Breach Zone
Rapidly Rising Water Zone
Remaining Zone
Note:
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish. Mortality zones determine the applicable
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL). mortality function for estimating loss of life
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution based on a specified set of relationships.
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk Refer to Section 5 of the QRA report for
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written additional details.
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
us R iv er
am
Staw
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
DRAFT
Mortality Zones
Breach Zone
Remaining Zone
Note:
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish. Mortality zones determine the applicable
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL). mortality function for estimating loss of life
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution based on a specified set of relationships.
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk Refer to Section 5 of the QRA report for
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written additional details.
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
us R iv er
am
Staw
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
DRAFT
Mortality Zones
Breach Zone
Remaining Zone
Note:
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish. Mortality zones determine the applicable
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL). mortality function for estimating loss of life
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution based on a specified set of relationships.
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk Refer to Section 5 of the QRA report for
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written additional details.
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
us R iv er
am
Staw
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
Mortality Zones
DRAFT
Breach Zone
Remaining Zone
Note:
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish. Mortality zones determine the applicable
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL). mortality function for estimating loss of life
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution based on a specified set of relationships.
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk Refer to Section 5 of the QRA report for
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written additional details.
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Existing Dike
!
River
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
Ri
r
ve
DRAFT
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
1.0E-04
UNACCEPTABLE
1.0E-05
1.0E-06 ALARP
(As Low As Reasonably
Practicable)
1.0E-07
INTENSE
SCRUTINY
BROADLY ACCEPTABLE REGION
1.0E-08
1.0E-09
1 10 100 1000 10000
N (Number of fatalities)
DRAFT
Figure H-10
T:\0400-0499\463-323\400-Work\LossofLife\20181129_Loss_Life_Calcs_Upper_DRreviewed_filteredPDI_withVSL.xlsx
Probability of Death for Groups and Acceptable Risk Criteria
Upper Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions - New Orleans Relationship
1.0E-02
Existing Dike PDG for F-N Curve
Standard Dike PDG for F-N Curve
1.0E-04
UNACCEPTABLE
1.0E-05
1.0E-06 ALARP
(As Low As Reasonably
Practicable)
1.0E-07
INTENSE
SCRUTINY
BROADLY ACCEPTABLE REGION
1.0E-08
1.0E-09
1 10 100 1000 10000
N (Number of fatalities)
DRAFT
Figure H-11
T:\0400-0499\463-323\400-Work\LossofLife\20181129_Loss_Life_Calcs_Upper_DRreviewed_filteredPDI_withVSL.xlsx
Probability of Death for Groups and Acceptable Risk Criteria
Upper Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions - RCEM Relationship
1.0E-02
Existing Dike PDG for F-N Curve
Standard Dike PDG for F-N Curve
1.0E-04
UNACCEPTABLE
1.0E-05
1.0E-06 ALARP
(As Low As Reasonably
Practicable)
1.0E-07
INTENSE
BROADLY ACCEPTABLE SCRUTINY
REGION
1.0E-08
1.0E-09
1 10 100 1000 10000
N (Number of fatalities)
DRAFT
Figure H-12
T:\0400-0499\463-323\400-Work\LossofLife\20181129_Loss_Life_Calcs_Upper_DRreviewed_filteredPDI_withVSL.xlsx
Potential Loss of Life Results for Dike Breach on Lower Squamish
River Floodplain
List of Figures
Figure I-1: Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) - Lower Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions with Existing Dike - Netherlands Relationship
Figure I-2: Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) - Lower Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions with Existing Dike - New Orleans Relationship
Figure I-3: Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) - Lower Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions with Existing Dike - RCEM Relationship
Figure I-4: Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) - Lower Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions with Standard Dike - Netherlands Relationship
Figure I-5: Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) - Lower Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions with Standard Dike - New Orleans Relationship
Figure I-6: Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) - Lower Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions with Standard Dike - RCEM Relationship
Figure I-7: Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) - Lower Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions with IFHMP Super Dike - Netherlands Relationship
Figure I-8: Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) - Lower Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions with IFHMP Super Dike - New Orleans Relationship
Figure I-9: Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) - Lower Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions with IFHMP Super Dike - RCEM Relationship
Figure I-10: Probability of Death for Groups and Acceptable Risk Criteria - Lower Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions - Netherlands Relationship
Figure I-11: Probability of Death for Groups and Acceptable Risk Criteria - Lower Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions - New Orleans Relationship
Figure I-12: Probability of Death for Groups and Acceptable Risk Criteria - Lower Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions - RCEM Relationship
Path: \\bbyfs1.kwl.ca\0000-0999\0400-0499\463-323\430-GIS\MXD-Rp\DraftReport\2019-01-18\AppendixI\463323_Figure_I-1.mxd Date Saved: 2/4/2019 11:58:15 AM
Author: jkaur
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
us R iv er 0.5 - 1
am
Staw
1-2
KK 2-5
@
5 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 50
50 - 100
>100
Notes:
DRAFT
risk threshold of 0.0001 for existing
developments subject to landslide hazards,
which is equivalent to100 x10 -6 and would
appear as 100 on this figure.
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish. conditions.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution 4. This map is intended to identify areas of
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk higher and lower risk rather than providing
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written a precise estimate of risk at any given location.
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
us R iv er 0.5 - 1
am
Staw
1-2
KK 2-5
@
5 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 50
50 - 100
>100
Notes:
DRAFT
developments subject to landslide hazards,
which is equivalent to100 x10 -6 and would
appear as 100 on this figure.
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish. conditions.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL). 4. This map is intended to identify areas of
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
higher and lower risk rather than providing
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written a precise estimate of risk at any given location.
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike
us R iv er 0.5 - 1
am
Staw
1-2
KK 2-5
@
5 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 50
50 - 100
>100
Notes:
DRAFT
developments subject to landslide hazards,
which is equivalent to100 x10 -6 and would
appear as 100 on this figure.
Howe Sound
conditions.
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL). 4. This map is intended to identify areas of
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution higher and lower risk rather than providing
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
a precise estimate of risk at any given location.
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike
Notes:
DRAFT
risk threshold of 0.0001 for existing
developments subject to landslide hazards,
which is equivalent to100 x10 -6 and would
appear as 100 on this figure.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
Staw
1-2
KK
@ 2-5
5 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 50
50 - 100
>100
Notes:
DRAFT
risk threshold of 0.0001 for existing
developments subject to landslide hazards,
which is equivalent to100 x10 -6 and would
appear as 100 on this figure.
Howe Sound
conditions.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk 4. This map is intended to identify areas of
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written higher and lower risk rather than providing
permission of KWL is prohibited. a precise estimate of risk at any given location.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
us R iv er
0.2 - 0.5
am
0.5 - 1
Staw 1-2
KK
@ 2-5
5 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 50
50 - 100
>100
Notes:
DRAFT
risk threshold of 0.0001 for existing
developments subject to landslide hazards,
which is equivalent to100 x10 -6 and would
appear as 100 on this figure.
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish. conditions.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution 4. This map is intended to identify areas of
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk higher and lower risk rather than providing
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written a precise estimate of risk at any given location.
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
us R iv er
0.2 - 0.5
am
0.5 - 1
Staw 1-2
2-5
KK
@
5 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 50
50 - 100
>100
Notes:
DRAFT
risk threshold of 0.0001 for existing
developments subject to landslide hazards,
which is equivalent to100 x10 -6 and would
appear as 100 on this figure.
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish. lot basis under assumed future floodplain
conditions.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution 4. This map is intended to identify areas of
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written higher and lower risk rather than providing
permission of KWL is prohibited. a precise estimate of risk at any given location.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
us R iv er
0.2 - 0.5
am
0.5 - 1
Staw 1-2
2-5
KK
@
5 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 50
50 - 100
>100
Notes:
DRAFT
risk threshold of 0.0001 for existing
developments subject to landslide hazards,
which is equivalent to100 x10 -6 and would
appear as 100 on this figure.
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
conditions.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution 4. This map is intended to identify areas of
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk higher and lower risk rather than providing
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written a precise estimate of risk at any given location.
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike
Staw
1-2
KK
@ 2-5
5 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 50
50 - 100
>100
Notes:
DRAFT
risk threshold of 0.0001 for existing
developments subject to landslide hazards,
which is equivalent to100 x10 -6 and would
appear as 100 on this figure.
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish. conditions.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution 4. This map is intended to identify areas of
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk higher and lower risk rather than providing
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written a precise estimate of risk at any given location.
permission of KWL is prohibited.
1.0E-04
UNACCEPTABLE
1.0E-05
1.0E-06
ALARP
(As Low As Reasonably
Practicable)
1.0E-07
INTENSE
BROADLY ACCEPTABLE SCRUTINY
REGION
1.0E-08
1.0E-09
1 10 100 1000 10000
N (Number of fatalities)
DRAFT
Figure I-10
T:\0400-0499\463-323\400-Work\LossofLife\20181121_Loss_Life_Calcs_Lower_REV_DRreviewed_filteredPDI.xlsx
Probability of Death for Groups and Acceptable Risk Criteria
Lower Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions - New Orleans Relationship
1.0E-02
Existing Dike PDG for F-N Curve
Standard Dike PDG for F-N Curve
1.0E-04
UNACCEPTABLE
1.0E-05
1.0E-06
ALARP
(As Low As Reasonably
Practicable)
1.0E-07
INTENSE
BROADLY ACCEPTABLE SCRUTINY
REGION
1.0E-08
1.0E-09
1 10 100 1000 10000
N (Number of fatalities)
DRAFT
Figure I-11
T:\0400-0499\463-323\400-Work\LossofLife\20181121_Loss_Life_Calcs_Lower_REV_DRreviewed_filteredPDI.xlsx
Probability of Death for Groups and Acceptable Risk Criteria
Lower Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions - RCEM Relationship
1.0E-02
Existing Dike PDG for F-N Curve
Standard Dike PDG for F-N Curve
1.0E-04
UNACCEPTABLE
1.0E-05
1.0E-06
ALARP
(As Low As Reasonably
Practicable)
1.0E-07
INTENSE
BROADLY ACCEPTABLE SCRUTINY
REGION
1.0E-08
1.0E-09
1 10 100 1000 10000
N (Number of fatalities)
DRAFT
Figure I-12
T:\0400-0499\463-323\400-Work\LossofLife\20181121_Loss_Life_Calcs_Lower_REV_DRreviewed_filteredPDI.xlsx
Potential Loss of Life Results for Coastal Floodplain Area Protected by
Proposed Sea Dike
List of Figures
Figure J-1: Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) for Coastal Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions with “Existing” Dike - Netherlands Relationship
Figure J-2: Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) for Coastal Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions with “Existing” Dike - New Orleans Relationship
Figure J-3: Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) for Coastal Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions with Proposed Dike - Netherlands Relationship
Figure J-4: Probability of Death for Individuals (PDI) for Coastal Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions with Proposed Dike - New Orleans Relationship
Figure J-5: Probability of Death for Groups and Acceptable Risk Criteria - Coastal Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions - Netherlands Relationship
Figure J-6: Probability of Death for Groups and Acceptable Risk Criteria - Coastal Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions - New Orleans Relationship
Path: \\bbyfs1.kwl.ca\0000-0999\0400-0499\463-323\430-GIS\MXD-Rp\DraftReport\2019-01-18\AppendixJ\463323_Figure_J-1.mxd Date Saved: 2/4/2019 1:28:43 PM
Author: jkaur
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
us R iv er
0.2 - 0.5
am
0.5 - 1
Staw 1-2
KK
@ 2-5
5 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 50
50 - 100
>100
Notes:
DRAFT
risk threshold of 0.0001 for existing
developments subject to landslide hazards,
which is equivalent to100 x10 -6 and would
appear as 100 on this figure.
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
lot basis under assumed future floodplain
conditions.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution 4. This map is intended to identify areas of
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
higher and lower risk rather than providing
permission of KWL is prohibited. a precise estimate of risk at any given location.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
us R iv er
0.2 - 0.5
am
0.5 - 1
Staw 1-2
KK 2-5
@
5 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 50
50 - 100
>100
Notes:
DRAFT
risk threshold of 0.0001 for existing
developments subject to landslide hazards,
which is equivalent to100 x10 -6 and would
appear as 100 on this figure.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
us R iv er
0.2 - 0.5
am
0.5 - 1
Staw 1-2
KK
@ 2-5
5 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 50
50 - 100
>100
Notes:
DRAFT
risk threshold of 0.0001 for existing
developments subject to landslide hazards,
which is equivalent to100 x10 -6 and would
appear as 100 on this figure.
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish.
conditions.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution 4. This map is intended to identify areas of
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk higher and lower risk rather than providing
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written
a precise estimate of risk at any given location.
permission of KWL is prohibited.
Mam
qu
KK@
a
m
!
Ri
r
ve
Squamish River Dike
River
!
mish
ua
Sq
KK
@
Legend
Dike-Protected Area
Existing Dike
Future Sea Dike Alignment
Staw
1-2
KK
@ 2-5
5 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 50
50 - 100
>100
Notes:
DRAFT
risk threshold of 0.0001 for existing
developments subject to landslide hazards,
which is equivalent to100 x10 -6 and would
appear as 100 on this figure.
Howe Sound
Reference: 2013 Orthophoto from The District of Squamish. conditions.
Copyright Notice: These materials are copyright of Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (KWL).
The District of Squamish is permitted to reproduce the materials for archiving and for distribution 4. This map is intended to identify areas of
to third parties only as required to conduct business specifically relating to the Quantitative Risk higher and lower risk rather than providing
Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain. Any other use of these materials without the written a precise estimate of risk at any given location.
permission of KWL is prohibited.
1.0E-03
UNACCEPTABLE
1.0E-04
1.0E-05
1.0E-06
ALARP
(As Low As Reasonably
Practicable)
1.0E-07
INTENSE
BROADLY ACCEPTABLE SCRUTINY
1.0E-08
REGION
1.0E-09
1 10 100 1000 10000
N (Number of fatalities)
DRAFT
Figure J-5
T:\0400-0499\463-323\400-Work\LossofLife\20181121_Loss_Life_Calcs_SeaDike_ASBreviewed_filteredPDI__updated08mortalityzones.xlsx
Probability of Death for Groups and Acceptable Risk Criteria
Coastal Floodplain Year 2100 Conditions (1 m SLR) - New Orleans Relationship
1.0E-01
Existing Dike PDG for F-N Curve
1.0E-03
UNACCEPTABLE
1.0E-04
1.0E-05
ALARP
1.0E-06 (As Low As Reasonably
Practicable)
1.0E-07
INTENSE
BROADLY ACCEPTABLE SCRUTINY
1.0E-08 REGION
1.0E-09
1 10 100 1000 10000
N (Number of fatalities)
DRAFT
Figure J-6
T:\0400-0499\463-323\400-Work\LossofLife\20181121_Loss_Life_Calcs_SeaDike_ASBreviewed_filteredPDI__updated08mortalityzones.xlsx
Updated NDMP Risk Assessment Information Template
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program (NDMP)
Risk Assessment Information Template
Provide the start and end dates of the selected event, based on
Start and End Date Start Date: End Date:
historical data.
N/A - The Squamish River Floodplain Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) used computer
Provide details about the risk, including: models to determine the damage and loss of life resulting from various hypothetical dike
• Speed of onset and duration of event; breach scenarios during events equal to or larger than the provincial standard 200-year
Severity of the Risk Event • Level and type of damaged caused; return period flood.
• Insurable and non-insurable losses; and
• Other details, as appropriate. October 2003 was the largest observed flood on record in Squamish with 369 mm of rain
in 4 days. The Squamish River and Cheakamus River flooded. Minor dikes in rural areas
were breached and the main Squamish River dike was nearly overtopped at the Eagle
Viewing Area (proposed study area for this project). The flood resulted in District
evacuations and damaged the BC Rail line (now operated by CN). Subsequent analyses
determined that the flood was less than a 100-year return period event.
While coastal floods from Howe Sound have not caused any significant damage during
recent events, near-miss events occurred in December 2014 and again in December
2018. In both cases, water levels rose to within centimetres of overtopping the coastal
perimeter into Downtown Squamish.
Speed of onset and duration of a river flood could range from hours to weeks depending
on severity. A coastal flood would have a duration of hours, but could recur on the next
high tide if dikes are compromised. Damage would include environmental, economic
(direct and indirect losses) and fatalities. If dikes breach on both floodplains, river flood
losses could exceed $1.2B. Losses from a future coastal flood could exceed $400M.
Question is geared towards a past event, however neither the Squamish River dike nor
the non-standard sea dike (Town Dike) have breached. In a flood event the District would
Provide details on how the defined geographic area continued its engage in emergency response in accordance with our Emergency Response Plan.
Response During the Risk Event
essential operations while responding to the event.
The main river dikes were not overtopped during the October 2003 flood of record, tso he
majority of flooding occurred within low density, rural areas that do not have essential
municipal infrastructure. The District responded by setting up an Emergency Operations
Centre and fulfilling necessary emergency response activities such as issuing evacuation
orders, monitoring the diking system, setting up dewatering pumps, providing temporary
shelter and supplies, etc.
Page 1 of 25
The local dikes have not breached and so the area has not had to undergo a recovery.
Key activities would include repair of essential infrastructure, clean up and ongoing social
Recovery Method for the Risk support.
Provide details on how the defined geographic area recovered.
Event
Even without a major dike breach, the October 2003 flood cause significant damage to
private property and dike infrastructure. Recovery activities primarily focused on repairing
and upgrading dike and drainage infrastructure based on observed deficiencies during the
flood event.
The local dikes have not breached and as a result there are no recovery costs. The
Provincial Emergency Program provided approximately $3 million dollars in recovery
Recovery Costs Related to the Provide details on the costs, in dollars, associated with implementing funding following the 2003 flood, despite the fact that no dikes were breached.
Risk Event recovery strategies following the event.
Normal operations resumed within days of the October 2003 flood event, however dike
and pump station upgrades were completed over a period of several years following the
Recovery Time Related to the Provide details on the recovery time needed to return to normal event.
Risk Event operations following the event.
Full recovery from a major dike breach flood would almost certainly require multiple years.
Page 2 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
The geographic area is the District of Squamish, in the Province of British Columbia. The District of
Squamish is located in a beautiful but hazardous location where mountain five rivers flow towards the
sea. Much of the community is located within flood hazard areas, including historic Downtown
Provide a qualitative description of the defined geographic area, including:
Squamish. Many people outside of the community depend on regional transportation links that cross
• Watershed/community/region name(s);
through the floodplain.
• Province/Territory;
• Area type (i.e., city, township, watershed, organization, etc.);
The District lies within traditional territory claimed by the Skwxwú7mesh Úxwumixw (Squamish
• Population size;
Nation). Ten reserves located in the floodplain create a shared interest in flood protection. The
• Population variances (e.g., significant change in population between summer and winter
District also lies within traditional territory claimed by the Tsleil-Waututh Nation.
months);
• Main economic areas of interest;
The total year-round population within the area is about 20,000 people, including first nations
• Special consideration areas (e.g., historical, cultural and natural resource areas); and an
reserves. Due to the close proximity to both Vancouver and Whistler, the District has a large
• Estimate of the annual operating budget of the area.
commuter population (about 44% of workers) relying on Highway 99.
Forestry has traditionally been the main industry in the area, however tourism is now a large part of
the District's economy due to the district's proximity to, and promotion of, outdoor recreational
opportunities. Other industries include film, construction, education, health care, manufacturing, and
retail. Regionally important transportation routes pass through the river floodplain, including the CN
Rail mainline and Highway 99 to Whistler, BC.
A special consideration area within the District is the eagle viewing area within the community of
Brackendale along the Squamish River, one of North America's largest populations of bald eagles.
The District of Squamish maintains an Annual Operating budget of $20,000,000. Squamish Nation
has a separate operating budget for management of Nation lands.
Page 3 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
The processes described have all been completed as part of the District's Integrated Flood Hazard
Management Plan and Squamish River Quantitative Risk Assessment between 2014 and present.
The IFHMP was completed in 2017. The QRA was completed in 2019 (this document). The IFHMP
Provide the year in which the following processes/analyses were last completed and state the
and QRA have addressed the following components and methodologies:
methodology(ies) used:
- Hazard identification - Identified by reviewing past studies, published literature, hydrometric records,
• Hazard identification;
hydraulic models (including river and dike breach models), and field observations. Hazards were
• Vulnerability analysis;
updated to reflect changes in policy (e.g., climate change) and the availability of advanced tools such
• Likelihood assessment;
as 2D hydraulic models that can simulate dike breach conditions. In particular, the IFHMP identified a
• Impact assessment;
hazard for diked floodplains both north and south of the Mamquam River, where the presence of
• Risk assessment;
downstream dikes can trap water in the floodplain and increase flood depths during a dike breach.
• Resiliency assessment; and/or
-Vulnerability analysis - The IFHMP assessed a variety of vulnerabilities for dike breach scenarios.
• Climate change impact and/or adaptation assessment.
Physical hazard to exposed persons were assessed using the European concept of Hazard Rating
Note: It is recognized that many of the processes/analyses mentioned above may be included
(HR). The IFHMP also assessed environmental and social consequences. Social vulnerability was
within one methodology.
based on Masters research conducted through UBC's School of Community And Regional Planning.
Environmental vulnerability is based on sensitivity of habitat areas and mobilization of contaminants.
The QRA extended these analyses to include potential loss of life.
-Likelihood assessment - Frequency analyses for Squamish River and tributary floods were assessed
as part of the IFHMP. During the subsequent QRA, KWL prepared a full likelihood assessment that
included calculation of the probability of dike breach, and the conditional probability that each
location on the floodplain would be affected by a dike breach during the 200-year, 500-year, and
1000-year return period flood event. Other parameters that contributed to the likelihood assessment
included occupancy and evacuation.
-Impact Assessment - Dike breach scenarios at various locations along the Squamish River and
Mamquam River were modeled. Selection of these dike breach locations was based on engineering
judgment. The dike breaches and river and coastal flooding were modeled using MIKE FLOOD, a
two-dimensional flood routing software that provides information on area inundated, flow velocity and
flow depth at various time steps. Maps including maximum water depths and maximum water
velocities were included to demonstrate where the District will be impacted. Impacts assessed for
the QRA included economic damages (using NRCan's HAZUS-MH model) and potential loss of life.
-Risk Assessment - The QRA used a relatively detailed approach to assess economic damages
across a variety of events, producing an annualized expected value of damage avoided by upgrading
the dike. Cost benefit ratios were generally greater than 3.0. Loss of life models show that risks to
groups of people exceed District targets for acceptable risk. The 2017 IFHMP also included an
assessment of social consequences (based on combining hazard intensity, population exposure and
vulnerability). A parallel approach was taken to classify environmental risks.
Resiliency Assessment - The IFHMP proposed over 100 tools to mitigate risk and improve resiliency.
Climate Change - The IFHMP and QRA modeled river flows with an additional 10% above the 1:200
year event to account for increased flows, as per EGBC guidelines. Both studies also assumed the
sea level would rise 1 m by Year 2100 (as per provincial guidelines). Page 4 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
Hazard Mapping
See attached IFHMP hazard maps for the upper Squamish River floodplain showing:
- Composite Maximum Water Surface Elevations
- Composite Maximum Water Depths
- Composite Maximum Water Velocities
- Composite Maximum Hazard Ratings [HR = d * (v + 0.5) + debris factor]
- Social Consequence Mapping.
Maps are excerpted from IFHMP River Flood Risk Mitigation Options Report (September 2017).).
1 - Squamish River/Mamquam River Dike Breach (upper and lower floodplain) - over 10,000 people
Provide a rationale for each prioritization and the key information sources supporting this displaced from their homes, over 1,400 buildings destroyed, and over $1 billion in direct economic
rationale. loss (building, inventory and infrastructure damage). Loss of life could exceed the District's tolerance
for acceptable risk. Disruption could affect the CN Rail mainline and/or Highway 99.
2 - Coastal Flood - saltwater inundation of Downtown Squamish and other areas, including residential
neighbourhoods. Thousands of peple displaced from their homes and over $400 million in direct
economic loss. Loss of life could exceed District risk tolerance. CN Rail and Highway 99 affected.
3 - Cheekye River debris flow - major debris flow could cause the Cheekye River to avulse (change
course). Debris, afterflow,(and potentially runoff from new river alignment could reach the community.
4 - Urban stormwater flooding - Drainage pump stations currently manage dike seepage and urban
runoff when high river levels restrict gravity drainage. Loss of a pump station could cause flooding.
Page 5 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
Squamish River floods, particularly floods that could overtop and/or breach the Squamish River dike.
Identify the name/title of the risk. An example of a risk event name or title is: "A one-in-one Coastal floods and Sea Level Rise, particularly floods that could overtop the existing or proposed
hundred year flood following an extreme rain event." coastal flood defence perimeter.
Secondary hazards
Widespread evacuation of areas outside the floodplain may be required due to loss of critical
Describe any secondary effects resulting from the risk event community services to flood damage (e.g., electrical substations, fire protection, wastewater
(e.g., flooding that occurs following a hurricane). transport and treatment)
District of Squamish
Identify the primary organization(s) with a mandate related to a key element of a natural disaster Squamish First Nation (for reserve lands)
emergency, and any supporting organization(s) that provide general or specialized assistance in Squamish-Lillooet Regional District (rural areas outside the municipal boundary)
response to a natural disaster emergency. Emergency Management British Columbia (EMBC)
Description of risk event, including risk statement and cause(s) of the event
Page 6 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
Floods are the most widespread and most harmful geohazard on Earth in terms of economic cost
Provide a baseline description of the risk event, including: and loss of life. Practice in British Columbia has been to estimate the discharge of a 200-year flood
• Risk statement; and design protection to defend against the associated flood. The IFHMP identified key risks from
• Context of the risk event; overtopping and/or breaching of the Squamish River dike as one of the most critical flood risks facing
• Nature and scale of the risk event; the District. The IFHMP also confirmed the need for major upgrades and extensions to existing
• Lead-up to the risk event, including underlying cause and trigger/stimulus of the risk event; and coastal flood protection works as Sea Level Rise approaches the Provincial planning target of 1 m.
• Any factors that could affect future events. Dike breach flooding could cause over 10,000 people to be displaced and damage or destroy over
Note: The description entered here must be plausible in that factual information would support 1,400 buildings, including critical infrastructure such as the Fire Station, Squamish Wastewater
such a risk event. Treatment Plant, Municipal Hall, the local Emergency Operations Centre, a local BC Hydro substation,
CN rail line and Highway 99 to Whistler/Vancouver. A river dike breach flood could cause over $1
billion in damage to buildings, inventory and infrastructure. A breach of the coastal flood defences
under assumed sea level rise conditions could cause over $400 million in damages.
Additionally, physical hazards to exposed persons are well beyond the danger threshold even for
trained emergency response personnel. Dike breaches could result in fatalities that exceed the
District's recently-adopted thresholds for acceptable risk.
To account for climate change, increase in infrastructure and urban densification, modeling was
completed for conditions representative of the year 2100. River peak flows were increased by 10% in
accordance with EGBC Professional Practice Guidelines, Sea Level Rise was assumed at 1 m in
accordance with provincial guidelines for flood hazard area land use, and the District's master plan
was used to assume land use and infrastructure changes. To the greatest extent possible, the
District has attempted to incorporate allowances for additional floodplain development that may occur
as climate change continues.
Page 7 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
Location
The area impacted by the flood risk is located entirely within the District of Squamish in the Province
of British Columbia and includes contiguous reserves belonging to the Squamish Nation and adjacent
Provide details regarding the area impacted by the risk event such as:
rural areas administered by the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District.
• Province(s)/territory(ies);
Neighbourhoods affected include Brackendale, Eagle Run, the Eagle Viewing Area, Garibaldi Estates,
• Region(s) or watershed(s);
North Yards, Brennan Park / Loggers Lane, the Squamish Industrial Park, Dentville, and Downtown
• Municipality(ies);
Squamish. Areas within the District affected by related flood hazards not considered in the QRA
• Community(ies); and so on.
include Paradise Valley, Cheekeye, Valleycliffe, and Woodfibre.
Squamish Nation reserves within the QRA study area include Waiwakum I.R. No. 14, Aikwucks I.R.
No. 15, Seaichem I.R No. 16, Kowtain I.R. No. 17, and Yekwaupsum I.R. No. 18.
The QRA study area is located along the east (left) bank of the Squamish River as it approaches
Howe Sound. Major tributary Cheakamus River joins the Squamish River a short distance upstream
of the study area. Another major tributary, Mamquam River, joins the Squamish River in the middle of
the study area, separating the Squamish River floodplain into "upper" and "lower" portions.
Page 8 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
Meteorological conditions
Unlike many other B.C. communities, the spring freshet (typically in late May, June, and early July)
has not been a major cause of flooding on local rivers. Rather, Squamish River floods are driven by
prolonged high-intensity rainfall events. These events typically occur between October and
December. Rain falling on a thin, ripe early-season or late-season snowpack can increase melt rates
Identify the relevant meteorological conditions that may influence the outcome of the risk event.
and increase potential flood magnitudes.
The most extreme coastal floods on Howe Sound typically occur when winter storms correspond
with a period of perigean spring tides (commonly referred to as "king tides").
Page 9 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
Seasonal conditions
The flood risk in Squamish has strong seasonal variations. Most historical flooding has taken place
between October and December. Major floods have also taken place in August.
Howe Sound coastal floods typically occur during winter storms that coincide with high tides, most
Identify the relevant seasonal changes that may influence the outcome of the risk assessment of commonly (but not exclusively) during the month of December.
a particular risk event.
The population density in Squamish varies by neighbourhood, ranging from less than 10 to nearly
1,700 persons / km². The character of development on the upper floodplain varies from rural
residential to mixed-use urban. The Garibaldi Estates neighbourhood has the highest population
density on the upper floodplain at over 1,500 persons / km². The character of development on the
lower and overlapping coastal floodplain varies from rural residential to the community's intensively-
developed multi-use downtown core. The Dentville neighbourhood has the highest population
density on the lower floodplain, also at over 1,500 persons / km².
Document key elements related to the affected population, including: If a dike breach along the Squamish River were to occur, many of the most densely populated areas ,
• Population density; including Garibaldi Estates, Dentville, and Downtown Squamish, would be inundated. A dike breach
• Vulnerable populations (identify these on the hazard map from step 7); along the coastal perimeter would also affect Dentville and Downtown Squamish. In either case, the
• Degree of urbanization; extent of flooding would affect a significant proportion of the community's residents, businesses, and
• Key local infrastructure in the defined geographic area; services such that it would be challenging for the community to recover quickly.
• Economic and political considerations; and Other vulnerable populations would include five Squamish Nation reserves (Waiwakum I.R. No. 14,
• Other elements, as deemed pertinent to the defined geographic area. Aikwucks I.R. No. 15, Seaichem I.R. No. 16, Kowtain I.R. No. 17, and Yekwaupsum I.R. No. 18). As
such, a key political consideration with response to a dike breach would be the coordination between
the District and Squamish Nation. The Squamish Nation has known concerns about historically
uncompensated loss of land to river erosion. The Nation believes their land loss was "locked in"
when the Province of BC built the dike along its current alignment in the 1980s.
Critical Infrastructure impacted by a dike breach include the Fire Station, Squamish Wastewater
Treatment Plant, major and minor sewage lift stations, four drainage pump stations, the District's
operations yard, CN rail mainline, Highway 99 to Whistler, Government Road, a BC Hydro substation,
Squamish Municipal Hall, the District's Emergency Operations Centre. Several schools may also be
affected, rendering them unusable as emergency shelters. Most of the community's essential
commercial activities (groceries, gasoline, etc.) would also be affected.
Page 10 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
Asset inventory
Identify the asset inventory of the defined geographic area, including: Critical Assets:
• Critical assets; -The District of Squamish Wastewater Treatment Plant
• Cultural or historical assets; -Squamish Fire and Rescue
• Commercial assets; and -Mamquam Elementary
• Other area assets, as applicable to the defined geographic area. -Sewage lift stations (1 major, 4 minor)
-Drainage pump stations (3 major, 1 minor)
Key asset-related information should also be provided, including: -CN/CP rail line
• Location on the hazard map (from step 7); -Highway 99 to Whistler
• Size; -BC Hydro substation
• Structure replacement cost; -Municipal Hall
• Content value; -Emergency Operations Centre
• Displacement costs; Infrastructure listed above is generally distributed throughout the at-risk area. The QRA estimates
• Importance rating and rationale; that replacement value for the current building inventory on and adjacent to the upper Squamish River
• Vulnerability rating and reason; and floodplain is about $1.2 billion. A separate but comparable amount of exposure exists for the lower
• Average daily cost to operate. Squamish River floodplain (south of Mamquam River), which is not part of the proposed study area.
The IFHMP notes that the entire Squamish River valley has cultural and historical significance for the
A total estimated value of physical assets in the area should also be provided. Squamish Nation. Similarly, the community has endeavoured to protect natural habitat for aquatic
and terrestrial species. Environmentally sensitive areas are scattered throughout the floodplain.
A full listing of assumptions and related uncertainties is provided in the QRA report. Key aspects are
Identify any assumptions made in describing the risk event; define details regarding any areas of summarized below.
uncertainty or unpredictability around the risk event; and supply any supplemental information, as - Location of Dike breaches. As part of the IFHMP, engineering judgment was used to select the
applicable. most critical locations for a dike breach. These locations may not be representative for an actual dike
breach. However, the IFHMP also developed a GIS-based process to generalize the results to
approximate the local effects of a dike breach at any location along the dike system. This approach
was incorporated into the subsequent QRA.
- Climate change impact on return period- It was estimated that climate change would increase flows
by 10% by the year 2100 and raise sea levels by 1 m. This value may vary.
- Use of composite envelope results. A single dike breach analysis cannot provide useful results for
risk management and mitigation planning. The IFHMP and QRA combined results from all possible
dike breach locations to produce a portfolio of "worst case" maps. These are referred to as
"composite envelope" maps, where "composite" refers to combinations of multiple scenarios and
Page 11 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
"envelope" refers to the selection of the most severe outcome at each location. Any single dike
breach would be expected to flood less than the composite envelope results. Thus the composite
envelope results may overestimate impacts for any single dike breach.
- Multiple dike breaches: multiple dike breaches may occur if a flood exceeds the design limits of a
dike system. Multiple dike breach scenarios were not reviewed for the Squamish IFHMP or QRA.
Thus the composite envelope results may underestimate the impacts of multiple dike breaches.
- Development at Year 2100: To reduce the potential for "creeping" flood risk mitigation requirements,
the IFHMP and QRA attempt to account for development that may occur between present day and
Year 2100. This involves multiple assumptions that may or may not be reflected in actual
development patterns.
- Spatial probability of inundation: The Squamish River floodplain QRA solicited consensus opinions
on the spatial probability of dike breach from a panel of three of British Columbia's most distinguished
hydrotechnical engineers. While some of the factors are subjective, it also represents the best
approach available without recourse to extremely detailed and cost-prohibitive geotechnical analysis.
- HAZUS assessment of economic damages: HAZUS-MH uses a simplified procedure for estimating
flood damage to building contents and inventory. The process calculates damage at the Census
Dissemination Block level, assuming the building inventory is evenly distributed throughout each CDB.
The building inventory is based on the 2011 census and damage is valued as a percentage of US
National average replacement costs in 2006 USD. KWL applied factors to adjust the HAZUS results
for inflation, local costs (Vancouver), currency exchange, infill development since 2011, specialized
infrastructure not included in the HAZUS General Building Stock, and additional foreseeable infill
development to Year 2100.
- Occupancy, evacuation and mortality assumptions for loss-of-life calculations: The QRA made
simple assumptions about occupancy and evacuation to reflect the available budget. Mortality
functions were drawn from the published literature. Each of these has significant elements of intrinsic
uncertainty.
Page 12 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
The IFHMP outlined a comprehensive, District-wide strategy for managing and mitigating flood risks.
It drew on strategies of Protect, Accommodate, Avoid, Retreat, and Accept Risk to produce a list of
Identify existing risk treatment measures that are currently in place within the defined geographic over 100 specific risk mitigation tools. Tools are grouped into seven broad categories: Land Use
area to mitigate the risk event, and describe the sufficiency of these risk treatment measures. Management, Site-Specific Measures (e.g., Building Code), Structural Flood Protection Works (e.g.,
dikes), Watershed and River Management, Emergency Response, Public Outreach and Education,
and Flood Insurance.
Building on the IFHMP, the District has already implemented a number of the key recommendations
through extensive updates to its Official Community Plan, designation of a new Development Permit
Area for natural hazards, and adoption of its first Floodplain Bylaw. In addition to policy measures,
the District has developed a capital plan to complete tens of millions of dollars in upgrades to the
local dike system over the coming decades.
These measures represent a very significant commitment of resources for a small community like
Squamish. The QRA provides additional objective justifiction for implementing the difficult but
necessary risk management recommendations made in the IFHMP and subsequently adopted by the
District. The QRA suggests that the benefits will exceed costs for dike upgrades that exceed the
provincial standard, and that further dike upgrades may be required to achieve an acceptable level of
residual risk. The QRA did not identify a need for refining or reprioritizing IFHMP recommendations.
Page 13 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
Likelihood Assessment
Return Period
Period of interest
Applicants are asked to determine and identify the likelihood rating (i.e. period of interest) for the risk event described by using the likelihood rating scale within the table below.
5 The event is expected and may be triggered by conditions expected over a 30 year period.
4 The event is expected and may be triggered by conditions expected over a 30 - 50 year period.
3 The event is expected and may be triggered by conditions expected over a 50 - 500 year period. 3
2 The event is expected and may be triggered by conditions expected over a 500 - 5000 year period.
1 The event is possible and may be triggered by conditions exceeding a period of 5000 years.
There is no set period over which the event is expected. Rather, the event has an Annual Exceedance Probability of 1/200 or 0.5%.
This means that there is a 14% chance of the event occurring within the next 30 years, 22% chance of the event occurring within
Provide any other relevant information, notes or comments relating the next 50 years, and 92% chance of the event occurring at least once over the next 500 years.
to the likelihood assessment, as applicable.
Page 14 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
Impacts/Consequences Assessment
There are 12 impacts categories within 5 impact classes rated on a scale of 1 (least impacts) to 5 (greatest impact). Conduct an assessment of the impacts associated with the risk event, and
assign one risk rating for each category. Additional information may be provided for each of the categories in the supplemental fields provided.
Risk Assigned
Definition
Rating risk rating
5 Could result in more than 50 fatalities
Injuries, illness and/or psychological disablements cannot be addressed by local, regional, or provincial/territorial
5
healthcare resources; federal support or intervention is required
Injuries, illnesses and/or psychological disablements cannot be addressed by local or regional healthcare resources;
4
provincial/territorial healthcare support or intervention is required.
Injuries, illnesses and/or psychological disablements cannot be addressed by local or regional healthcare resources additional
Injuries 3 4
healthcare support or intervention is required from other regions, and supplementary support could be required from the province/territory
Injuries, illnesses and/or psychological disablements cannot be addressed by local resources through local facilities; healthcare support
2
is required from other areas such as an adjacent area(ies)/municipality(ies) within the region
Any injuries, illnesses, and/or psychological disablements can be addressed by local resources through local facilities; available resources
1
can meet the demand for care
Supplemental information Human vulnerability to flooding depends on numerous factors, such as the effects of emergency planning measures, water temperature, ability to swim, health of the
(optional) individual, presence of debris or contaminants in the water, and whether the people outside buildings are on foot or inside vehicles. However, the extent of flooding as a
Page 15 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
proportion of the community, the inundation of electrical and contaminant sites within the floodplain, correlation with the potential number of fatalities, and the lack of nearby
support all suggest that provincial assistance would be required.
Risk Assigned
Definition
Rating risk rating
5 > 15% of total local population
B) Environmental impacts
Page 16 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
> 75% of flora or fauna impacted or 1 or more ecosystems significantly impaired; Air quality has significantly deteriorated; Water quality is
5 significantly lower than normal or water level is > 3 meters above highest natural level; Soil quality or quantity is significantly lower (i.e.,
significant soil loss, evidence of lethal soil contamination) than normal; > 15% of local area is affected
40 - 74.9% of flora or fauna impacted or 1 or more ecosystems considerably impaired; Air quality has considerably deteriorated; Water
4 quality is considerably lower than normal or water level is 2 - 2.9 meters above highest natural level; Soil quality or quantity is moderately 5
lower than normal; 10 - 14.9% of local area is affected
10 - 39.9% of flora or fauna impacted or 1 1 or more ecosystems moderately impaired; Air quality has moderately deteriorated; Water quality is
3 moderately lower than normal or water level is 1 - 2 meters above highest natural level; Soil quality is moderately lower than normal; 6 - 9.9 % of
area affected
Page 17 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
< 10 % of flora or fauna impacted or little or no impact to any ecosystems; Little to no impact to air quality and/or soil quality or quantity;
2 Water quality is slightly lower than normal, or water level is less than 0.9 meters above highest natural level and increased for less than 24
hours; 3 ‐ 5.9 % of local area is affected
Little to no impact to flora or fauna, any ecosystems, air quality, water quality or quantity, or to soil quality or quantity; 0 ‐ 2.9 % of local
1
area is affected
A flood would result in significant environmental consequences due to the mobilization and dispersion of contaminants stored within the floodplain to environmentally sensitive
areas, significantly impairing the ecosystems. In some parts of the floodplain, water depths exceed 6 m. In other areas, velocities could be as high as 5.5 m/s resulting in
significant soil loss due to erosion. Major sources of potential contaminants include gas stations and the Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Supplemental information
(optional)
Risk Assigned
Definition
Rating risk rating
5 > 15 % of local economy impacted
Page 18 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
Risk Assigned
Definition
Rating risk rating
Local activity stopped for more than 72 hours; > 20% of local population affected; lost access to local area and/or delivery of crucial
5
service or product; or having an international level impact
Local activity stopped for 48 - 71 hours; 10 - 19.9% of local population affected; significantly reduced access to local area and/or delivery
4
of crucial service or product; or having a national level impact
Local activity stopped for 25 - 47 hours; 5 - 9.9% of local population affected; moderately reduced access to local area and/or delivery of crucial
Transportation 3 5
service or product; or having a provincial/territorial level impact
Local activity stopped for 13 - 24 hours; 2 - 4.9% of local population affected; minor reduction in access to local area and/or delivery of crucial
2
service or product; or having a regional level impact
Local activity stopped for 0 - 12 hours; 0 - 1.9% of local population affected; little to no reduction in access to local area and/or delivery of
1
crucial service or product
Flooding would impact critical transportation networks such as the Highway 99 and CN Rail Lines, potentially for days to weeks, depending on whether road access to
Squamish has been affected at other locations. Road and rail access across the Mamquam River (and other local rivers) may not be possible until flood levels subside, and
may take much longer to restore if bridges are damaged. Internal travel within the community would be severely disrupted.
Supplemental information
(optional)
5 Duration of impacts > 72 hours; > 20% of local population without service or product; or having an international level impact
4 Duration of impact 48 - 71 hours; 10 - 19.9% of local population without service or product; or having a national impact
Energy and Utilities 3 Duration of impact 25 - 47 hours; 5 - 9.9% of local population without service or product; or having a provincial/territorial level impact 5
2 Duration of impact 13 - 24 hours; 2 - 4.9% of local population without service or product; or having a regional level impact
Local activity stopped for 0 - 12 hours; 0 - 1.9% of local population affected; little to no reduction in access to local area and/or delivery of
1
crucial service or product
Page 19 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
The District of Squamish's wastewater treatment plant could potentially be inundated for several weeks, causing the District's population to be without wastewater treatment
services for several weeks. BC Hydro's substation in Downtown Squamish may also be offline for an extended period while flood damage is repaired.
Supplemental information
(optional)
5 Service unavailable for > 72 hours; > 20 % of local population without service; or having an international level impact
Information 4 Service unavailable for 48 ‐ 71 hours; 10 ‐ 19.9 % of local population without service; or having a national level impact
and
3 Service unavailable for 25 ‐ 47 hours; 5 ‐ 9.9 % of local population without service; or having a provincial/territorial level impact 3
Communications
Technology 2 Service unavailable for 13 ‐ 24 hours; 2 ‐ 4.9 % of local population without service; or having a regional level impact
1 Service unavailable for 0 ‐ 12 hours; 0 ‐ 1.9 % of local population without service
Buried infrastructure in the inundation area may be affected where not protected against floodwaters. However, the population affected is relatively small in absolute numbers
and communication may be restored or maintained via the cellular network.
Supplemental information
(optional)
Inability to access potable water, food, sanitation services, or healthcare services for > 72 hours; non‐essential services
5
cancelled; > 20 % of local population impacted; or having an international level impact
Inability to access potable water, food, sanitation services, or healthcare services for 48‐72 hours; major delays for nonessential
4
services; 10 ‐ 19.9 % of local population impacted; or having a national level impact
Inability to access potable water, food, sanitation services, or healthcare services for 25‐48 hours; moderate delays for nonessential
Health, Food, and Water 3 5
services; 5 ‐ 9.9 % of local population impacted; or having a provincial/territorial level impact
Inability to access potable water, food, sanitation services, or healthcare services for 13‐24 hours; minor delays for nonessential;
2
2 ‐ 4.9 % of local population impacted; or having a regional level impact
Inability to access potable water, food, sanitation services, or healthcare services for 0‐12 hours; 0 ‐ 1.9 % of local population
1
impacted
Page 20 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
The District of Squamish's wastewater treatment plant could potentially be inundated for several days, causing the District's population to be without wastewater treatment
services for several weeks. The District's potable water source is located outside the floodplain but watermains could be affected.
Supplemental information
(optional)
> 20 % of local population impacted; loss of intelligence or defence assets or systems for > 72 hours; or having an international level
5
impact
10 ‐ 19.9 % of local population impacted; loss of intelligence or defence assets or systems for 48 – 71 hours; or having a national level
4
impact
5 ‐ 9.9 % of local population impacted; loss of intelligence or defence assets or systems for 25 – 47 hours; or having a
Safety and Security 3 5
provincial/territorial level impact
2 ‐ 4.9 % of local population impacted; loss of intelligence or defence assets or systems for 13 – 24 hours; or having a regional level
2
impact
1 0 ‐ 1.9 % of local population impacted; loss of intelligence or defence assets or systems for 0 – 12 hours
Over 10,000 people could be displaced by a Squamish River dike breach. This represents about half of the local population. Effects could be much more widespread in the
likely event that flooding disrupts essential community services (such as power, fire protection and wastewater treatment) and necessitates a broader evacuation.
Due to rapid inundation and limited lead times, a successful evacuation would have to commence in advance of a dike breach. This creates the possibility of "false positives"
where evacuation procedures are initiated proactively but no dike breach develops. The frequency of evacuation impacts will therefore be higher than the frequency of the
Supplemental information risk event.
(optional)
Page 21 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
Risk Assigned
Definition
Rating risk rating
Sustained, long term loss in reputation/public perception of public institutions and/or sustained, long term loss of trust and confidence in
5
public institutions; or having an international level impact
Significant loss in reputation/public perception of public institutions and/or significant loss of trust and confidence in public institutions;
4
significant resistance; or having a national level impact
Some loss in reputation/public perception of public institutions and/or some loss of trust and confidence in public institutions; escalating
3 4
resistance
2 Isolated/minor, recoverable set‐back in reputation, public perception, trust, and/or confidence of public institutions
Historical flooding and flood-related issues (e.g., loss of land due to river erosion) along the Squamish Nation reserves has already lead to loss of trust and confidence and has
impacted local First Nations relations. A large proportion of the community is located in the floodplain and fully relies on the dikes for flood protection. Flooding from a dike
breach along the Squamish River could undermine the public's trust in the dike system, causing severe, extensive, and sustained impacts for affected neighbourhoods in the
Supplemental information local community.
(optional)
Page 22 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
Confidence Assessment
Based on the table below, indicate the level of confidence regarding the information entered in the risk assessment information template in the “Confidence Level Assigned” column.
Confidence levels are language‐based and range from A to E (A=most confident to E=least confident).
Page 23 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
Moderate confidence
Risk assessment used to inform the risk assessment information template was moderately evidence‐based from a considerable
amount of knowledge of the natural hazard risk event; leveraged a considerable quantity of data that was quantitative and/or
qualitative in nature; leveraged a considerable amount of data and information including from historical records, geospatial and
C
other information sources; and the risk assessment and analysis processes were completed by a moderately sized
multidisciplinary team, incorporating some subject matter experts (i.e., a wide array of experts and knowledgeable individuals on
the specific natural hazard and its consequences)
Assessment of impacts considered a large number of potential mitigation measures
Low confidence
Risk assessment used to inform the risk assessment information template was based on a relatively small amount of knowledge of
the natural hazard risk event; leveraged a relatively small quantity of quantitative and/or qualitative data that was largely historical
in nature; may have leveraged some geospatial information or information from other sources (i.e., databases, key risk and
D A
resilience methodologies); and the risk assessment and analysis processes were completed by a small team that may or may not
have incorporated subject matter experts (i.e., did not include a wide array of experts and knowledgeable individuals on the
specific natural hazard and its consequences).
Assessment of impacts considered a relatively small number of potential mitigation measures
The IFHMP (KWL 2017) completed an initial assessment of consequences of a dike breach during the 200-year return period flood. IFHMP results
were significantly expanded by the Squamish River floodplain QRA, which reviewed additional return periods and component probabilities with the
Provide the rationale for the selected explicit goal of providing a defensible quantitative assessment of flood risk. The QRA specifically updated calculations for economic damage and loss
confidence level, including any references or of life.
sources to support the level assigned.
Page 24 of 25
UNCLASSIFIED
National Disaster Mitigation Program
Risk Assessment Information Template
Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. - District of Squamish Integrated Flood Hazard Management Plan (October 2017, unclassified
- attached to this submission)
Identify all supporting documentation and information sources for Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. - District of Squamish IFHMP River Flood Risk Mitigation Options Report (September 2017,
qualitative and quantitative data used to identify risk events, develop unclassified)
the risk event description, and assess impacts and likelihood. This
ensures credibility and validity of risk information presented as well as Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. - District of Squamish IFHMP Background Report (September 2017, unclassified)
enables referencing back to decision points at any point in time.
Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. - Quantitative Risk Assessment for Squamish River Floodplain (forthcoming 2019, unclassified)
Clearly identify unclassified and classified information.
Each of the above references includes a full bibliography. All IFHMP reports are available online through squamish.ca. The QRA
report will be forthcoming in early 2019.
District of Squamish:
- David Roulston, P.Eng. - Manager of Municipal Infrastructure (over 10 years experience)
- Matt Gunn, RPP, MCIP - Municipal Planner (over 10 years experience)
Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. (Lead consultant for Squamish IFHMP and Squamish River Floodplain QRA)
List and describe the type and level of experience of each - David Roche, M.A.Sc., P.Eng., Senior Water Resources Engineer (over 18 years experience)
individual who was involved with the completion of the risk - Alisson Seuarz, M.Eng., EIT - Modelling Engineer (over 10 years experience)
assessment and risk analysis used to inform the information - David Sellars, M.Sc., P.Eng., Senior Water Resources Engineer (over 40 years experience)
contained within this risk assessment information template.
Arlington Group Planning + Architecture (Planning subconsultant for Squamish IFHMP)
- Graham Farstad, M.A., MCIP (over 40 years experience)
Page 25 of 25