Flood Risk and Vulnerability Analysis Project - Atlantic Climate ...

Community Access Notes Confinement
Isolation
Report
Ranking
cross rivers
Middle Arm
Small coastal town; limited access all along
water
Moderate No 2
Mount Pearl Many options Unconfined No 0
New-wes-valley Coastal access ways; few low spots Low Yes 2
Placentia
Access roads cut by rivers, cutting off access
to hospital
Moderate No 3
Port Blandford Several access options Low Yes 2
Rocky Harbour
Few access options crossing several low
spots and streams
Confined No 3
Rushoon Singular access cut by river Confined No 3
St. John's Many access options Low Yes 2
Steady Brook Alternative access crosses stream Confined No 3
Stephenville Many road options, many cross water Low No 1
Table 5-10. Ranking for vulnerability to indirect effects of flooding
It was also noted whether or not roads crossed streams or other water bodies. Potential
isolation results in an increase to a community‟s vulnerability ranking. The rankings were
defined as follows:
Weighting Description
0 Relatively unconfined with multiple access options
1 Moderately low confinement with access options
2 Moderately high confinement or limited access options
3 Confined communities with exposed access option(s)
Table 5-11. Vulnerability to Indirect Flooding Impact Weighting
5.6 Results of Assessment and Conclusion
The physical hazard, direct vulnerability, and indirect vulnerability rankings are presented in
Table 5-12. These relative rankings can then be used to group communities into priority levels,
based on how the community ranked in each category. This is represented by the color coding
provided in the community column of Table 5-12 and Figure 5-6.
TA1112733 page 125