HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-05-11 - AGENDA REPORTS - NATIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLA (2)Agenda Item: -_
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
AGENDA REPORT
CONSENT CALENDAR City Manager Approval:
Item to be presented by: Adele Macpherson
DATE: May 11, 2004
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA CITY
COUNCIL IN SUPPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF A
NATURAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE FEDERAL DISASTER MITIGATION ACT OF 2000
(PUBLIC LAW 106-390)
DEPARTMENT: Parks, Recreation & Community Services
RECOMMENDED ACTION
City Council adopt a resolution in support of the development of a Natural Hazard Mitigation
Plan.
BACKGROUND
In October 2000, the President signed and enacted the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (Public
Law 106-390). This federal legislation requires that all local agencies must have a local Natural
Hazard Mitigation Plan. This plan needs to be in place within the local agency to be eligible for
both pre- and post -disaster federal funding. The Federal government is no longer willing to pay
for repetitive disaster damage or damage that can easily be averted by pre -event actions. The
local mitigation plan process places emphasis on reducing risks and ensuing effects from natural
hazards through pre -event risk identification, assessment, and mitigation.
The deadline to submit a Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan is November 1, 2004. This plan will be
developed by a team of City staff, while other cities are hiring consultants. Development of the
plan will entail several months of intensive staff time along with other community participants in
order to meet the November deadline. Public involvement will also be required in this
development process.
Failure to submit a plan by the November 2004 deadline may result in the City having to wait to
submit our plan until November 2005. Furthermore, failure to implement a Natural Hazard
Mitigation Plan may result in a devastating impact on the City in the event of a natural disaster;
the City would not be eligible for Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA)
hazard mitigation funding for any event occurring between the filing periods.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
Other action as determined by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
No fiscal impact associated with this recommended action.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution
Code of Regulations - Mitigation Planning
44 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS - PART 201- MITIGATION PLANNING
Table of Contents Sec. 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans. The local mitigation plan is the
representation of the jurisdiction's commitment to reduce risks from natural [[Page 402]]
hazards, serving as a guide for decision makers as they commit resources to reducing the
effects of natural hazards. Local plans will also serve as the basis for the State to provide
technical assistance and to prioritize project funding.
(a) Plan requirements.
(1) For disasters declared after November 1, 2004, a local government must
have a mitigation plan approved pursuant to this section in order to receive
HMGP project grants. Until November 1, 2004, local mitigation plans maybe
developed concurrent with the implementation of the HMGP project grant.
comp 1 eted (2) By November 1, 2003, local governments must have a mitigation plan
20 11-1- approved pursuant to this section in order to receive a project ant through the
2004 PP P P J � g
Pre -Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program, authorized under Sec. 203 of the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C.
5133. PDM planning grants will continue to be made available to all local
governments after this time to enable them to meet the requirements of this
section.
Doesn't (3) Regional Directors may grant an exception to the plan requirement in
apply to
U extraordinary circumstances, such as in a small and impoverished community,
when justification is provided. In these cases, a plan will be completed within
12 months of the award of the project grant. If a plan is not provided within this
timeframe, the project grant will be terminated, and any costs incurred after
notice of grant's termination will not be reimbursed by FEMA.
(4) Multi -jurisdictional plans (e.g. watershed plans) may be accepted, as
appropriate, as long as each jurisdiction has participated in the process and has
officially adopted the plan. State-wide plans will not be accepted as multi -
jurisdictional plans.
Duc f 10, 2WO (9.23pm) 1 E CODE OF FEDERAL REGUL TIONS. wpd
(b) Planning process.
An open public involvement process is essential to the development of an effective plan_ In
order to develop a more comprehensive approach to reducing the effects of natural disasters,
the planning process shall include:
Public (1) An opportunity for the public to continent on the plan during the drafting
Role
stage and pnor to plan approval;
Involve (2) An opportunity for neighboring communities, local and regional agencies
the other
agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, and agencies that have the authonty to
and regulate development, as well as businesses, academia and other private and
groups non-profit interests to be involved in the planning process; and
Use (3) Review and incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports,
existing
data and technical information.
(c) Plan content.
The plan shall include the following:
Document, (1) Documentation of the planning process used to develop the plan, including
document, how it was prepared, who was involved in the process, and how the public was
document P P
involved.
Must
make
risk a (2) A risk assessment that provides the factual basis for activities proposed in
assessment the strategy to reduce losses from identified hazards. Local risk assessments
must provide sufficient information to enable the jurisdiction to identify and
prioritize appropriate mitigation actions to reduce losses from identified
hazards. The risk assessment shall include:
Describe (i) A description of the type, location, and extent of all natural
all
hazards hazards that can affect the jurisdiction. The plan shall include
information on previous occurrences of hazard events and on the
probability of future hazard events.
Describe (it) A description of the jurisdiction's vulnerability to the hazards
vulnera-
bility to described inparagraph (c)(2)(i) of this section. This description
hazards shall include an overall summary of each hazard and its impact
on the community. The plan should describe vulnerability in
terms of:
DcrrnJrzl 10, 1003 (9 23pm) 2 E Baa CODE OF FEDE0.AL REGUUTIONS wpd
Enhanced
(A) The types and numbers of existing and future
plan
only!
buildings, infrastructure, and critical facilities
g
Analyze
located in the identified hazard areas;
Enhanced
(g) An estimate of the potential dollar losses to
olan
nly!
vulnerable structures identified in paragraph
(c)(2)(i)(A) of this section and a description of
Prioritize
selected
the methodology used to prepare the estimate;
Enhanced
(C) Providing a general description of land uses
olan
nly !
and development trends within the community so
that mitigation options can be considered in
future land use decisions. [[Page 403]]
Risk (iii) For multi -jurisdictional plans, the risk assessment section
variance must assess each jurisdiction's risks where they vary from the
risks facing the entire planning area.
Develop (3) A mitigation strategy that provides the jurisdiction's blueprint for reducing
mitigation
strategy the potential losses identified in the risk assessment, based on existing
authorities, policies, programs and resources, and its ability to expand on and
improve these existing tools. This section shall include:
Describe
(i) A description of mitigation goals to reduce or avoid long -
goals
term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards.
Analyze
(ii) A section that identifies and analyzes a comprehensive range
possible
actionsof
specific mitigation actions and projects being considered to
reduce the effects of each hazard, with particular emphasis on
new and existing buildings and infrastructure.
Prioritize
selected
(iii) An action plan describing how the actions identified in
actions
paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section will be prioritized,
implemented, and administered by the local jurisdiction,
Prioritization shall include a special emphasis on the extent to
which benefits are maximized according to a cost benefit review
of the proposed projects and their associated costs.
Agency
(iv) For multi -jurisdictional plans, there must be identifiable
specific
action
action items specific to thejurisdiction requesting FEMA
P j 9 g
items
approval or credit of the plan.
Dee , 10, 3003 (9 23,.) 3 E.\44 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS.e d
(4) A plan maintenance process that includes:
Formal (5) Documentation that the plan has been formally adopted by the governing
agency
adoption body of the jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan (e.g., City Council,
County Commissioner, Tribal Council). For multi -jurisdictional plans, each
jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan must document that it has been
formally adopted.
(d) Plan review.
Submit to (1) Plans must be submitted to the State Hazard Mitigation Officer for initial
State for
review review and coordination. The State will then send the plan to the appropriate
FEMA Regional Office for formal review and approval.
(2) The Regional review will be completed within 45 days after receipt from the
State, whenever possible.
Re -submit (3) Plans must be reviewed, revised if appropriate, and resubmitted for approval
eve
f i vey within five years in order to continue to be eligible for HMGP project grant
years funding.
(4) Managing States that have been approved under the criteria established by
FEMA pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 5170c(c) will be delegated approval authonty for
local mitigation plans, and the review will be based on the criteria in this part.
Managing States will review the plans within 45 days of receipt of the plans,
whenever possible, and provide a copy of the approved plans to the Regional
Office. [67 FR 8848, Feb. 26, 2002, as amended at 67 FR 61515 Oct. 1, 2002]
Dmmbcr �,!Wl(9.3)pmJ 4 E uCODE OF FTOLRn BE6ULATIOnS .wJ
(J) A section describing the method and schedule of monitoring,
Plante-
nance
evaluating, and updating the mitigation plan within a fig e -year
cycle.
Blend
(ii) A process by which local governments incorporate the
into
other
requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning
existing
mechanisms such as comprehensive or capital improvement
plans
plans, when appropriate.
Continue
(iii) Discussion on how the community will continue public
public
participa-
participation in the plan maintenance process.
tion
Formal (5) Documentation that the plan has been formally adopted by the governing
agency
adoption body of the jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan (e.g., City Council,
County Commissioner, Tribal Council). For multi -jurisdictional plans, each
jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan must document that it has been
formally adopted.
(d) Plan review.
Submit to (1) Plans must be submitted to the State Hazard Mitigation Officer for initial
State for
review review and coordination. The State will then send the plan to the appropriate
FEMA Regional Office for formal review and approval.
(2) The Regional review will be completed within 45 days after receipt from the
State, whenever possible.
Re -submit (3) Plans must be reviewed, revised if appropriate, and resubmitted for approval
eve
f i vey within five years in order to continue to be eligible for HMGP project grant
years funding.
(4) Managing States that have been approved under the criteria established by
FEMA pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 5170c(c) will be delegated approval authonty for
local mitigation plans, and the review will be based on the criteria in this part.
Managing States will review the plans within 45 days of receipt of the plans,
whenever possible, and provide a copy of the approved plans to the Regional
Office. [67 FR 8848, Feb. 26, 2002, as amended at 67 FR 61515 Oct. 1, 2002]
Dmmbcr �,!Wl(9.3)pmJ 4 E uCODE OF FTOLRn BE6ULATIOnS .wJ