HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/19/2016 06F City of Yakima Hazard Mitigation Plan Adoption I�, t€
xs 1
� ,may
s. n.
BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No. 6.F.
For Meeting of: July 19, 2016
ITEM TITLE: Resolution adopting the City of Yakima Hazard Mitigation Plan
SUBMITTED BY: Bob Stewart, Fire Chief
SUMMARY EXPLANATION:
The City of Yakima Hazard Mitigation Plan includes resources and information to assist residents,
public and private sector organizations, and others interested in participating in planning for
natural and technological hazards. The mitigation plan provides a list of activities that may assist
the City of Yakima in reducing risk and preventing loss from future hazard events. The action
items address multi - hazard issues, as well as activities for flood, landslide, severe winter storm,
windstorm, wildfire, earthquake, volcanic eruption and hazardous materials.
ITEM BUDGETED: NA
STRATEGIC PRIORITY: Public Safety
7 ere
APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL: Interim City Manager
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt resolution
BOARD /COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Upload Date Type
CI Resolution 71512016 Resolution
CI Executive Summary 7/512016 Executive Summary
Ya I F'l o annin ncil mission R ndati of 715/2016 Backup Material
D Hazard Mitigation Plan 7/5/2016 Exhibit
A RESOLUTION adopting the 2015 City of Yakima Hazard Mitigation Plan as the Official
Hazard Mitigation Plan for the City of Yakima.
WHEREAS, the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act
(Public Law 100 -707, signed into law on November 23, 1988, amended the Disaster Relief Act
of 1974, which law constitutes the statutory authority for most federal disaster response
activities especially as they pertain to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA);
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-
390), state and local governments must develop hazard mitigation plans as a condition of
federal grant assistance to receive funding for disaster relief, recovery, and some hazard
mitigation planning; and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) is charged with review and approval of Hazard Mitigation Plans
under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief Act, Emergency Assistance Act, and Disaster
Mitigation Act; and
WHEREAS, FEMA requires that local jurisdictions periodically review and update their
Hazard Mitigation Plans every five years; and
WHEREAS, the City of Yakima's previous Hazard Mitigation Plan was last approved by
FEMA, and adopted by the Yakima City Council in 2011 pursuant to Resolution No. R- 2011 -54;
and
WHEREAS, the City's Emergency Management Division presented the City's updated
2015 Hazard Mitigation Plan to the City of Yakima Planning Commission in a study session on
September 23, 2015; and
WHEREAS, at the City of Yakima Planning Commission's September 23, 2015 meeting,
the Commission requested that the Yakima Fire Department's Emergency Management
Division hold a public meeting and presentation on the Hazard Mitigation Plan, with appropriate
public notice provided; and
WHEREAS, the City of Yakima Planning Division provided appropriate public notice in
the form of a legal notice in the Yakima Herald Republic on October 9, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the City of Yakima Planning Commission held the requested public meeting
and presentation, and took additional public comment on October 14, 2015; and
WHEREAS, it is concluded that the adoption of the City Hazard Mitigation Plan 2015, a
copy of which is on file with the Yakima Fire Department's Emergency Management Division
and incorporated herein by this reference, is necessary and in the public interest; therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA:
Section 1. The City of Yakima Hazard Mitigation Plan 2015 is hereby adopted as
the official hazard mitigation plan for the City of Yakima;
Section 2. The City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized to publish such
plan and to post copies of such plan on appropriate web sites of the City of Yakima, including
but not limited to the web site of the Yakima Fire Department.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 19 day of July, 2016.
ATTEST: Avina Gutierrez, Mayor
Sonya Claar Tee, City Clerk
° F Yi ►►
is 4 7 4:4 I `I AKIMA
FAREDE.0 *EM
P ORATV
■
City of Yakima
Hazard Mitigation Plan
2015
community
4 ,e Resilience
`ya 4�i A Mitigation Preparedness
O c (g o,. �6
Emergency
E Mitigation E
Management
T .
d r 2
ca
d , , J � e
Recovery e Response
A /a rmi n g ope a`�a o0
Cool
Yakima
brgitel
of Y q
? akima
THE HEART OF CENTRAL WASHINGTON I I
2015
1994
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Authority
Section 322 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act), 42
U.S.C. 5165, as amended by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA) (P.L. 106 -390), provides for
States, Tribes, and local governments to undertake a risk -based approach to reducing risks to natural
hazards through mitigation planning. The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
4001 et seq, reinforced the need and requirement for mitigation plans, linking flood mitigation
assistance programs to State, Tribal and Local Mitigation Plans.
After a presidential major disaster declaration, mitigation funding becomes available. The amount is
based on a percentage of the total federal grants awarded under the Public Assistance and Individuals
and Households Programs for the entire disaster. Projects are funded with a combination of federal,
state, and local funds. Information on this program and application process is disseminated at public
briefings and by other means.
Section 322 of the amended Stafford Act essentially states that as a condition of receiving a disaster loan
or grant:
"The state and local government(s) shall agree that natural hazards in the areas affected shall be
evaluated and appropriate action taken to mitigate such hazards, including safe land -use and
construction practices. For disasters declared after November 1, 2004, all potential applicants (sub -
grantees) must have either their own, or be included in a regional, locally adopted and FEMA approved
all hazard mitigation plan in order to be eligible to apply for mitigation grant funds."
The regulations governing the mitigation planning requirements for local mitigation plans are published
under 44 CFR §201.6. Under 44 CFR §201.6, local governments must have a FEMA- approved Local
Mitigation Plan in order to apply for and /or receive project grants under the following hazard mitigation
assistance programs:
➢ Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)
The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) provides funds to States, Territories, Indian Tribal
governments, local governments, and eligible private non - profits (PNPs) following a Presidential major
disaster declaration.
➢ Pre - Disaster Mitigation (PDM)
➢ Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA)
The Pre - Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Program and Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) programs provide
funds annually to States, Territories, Indian Tribal governments, and local governments. Although the
statutory origins of the programs differ, both share the common goal of reducing the risk of loss of life
and property due to natural hazards
RATIONALE
The City of Yakima Hazard Mitigation Plan includes resources and information to assist residents, public
and private sector organizations, and others interested in participating in planning for natural and
technological hazards. The mitigation plan provides a list of activities that may assist the City of Yakima
in reducing risk and preventing loss from future hazard events. The action items address multi- hazard
issues, as well as activities for flood, landslide, severe winter storm, windstorm, wildfire, earthquake,
volcanic eruption and hazardous materials. The City of Yakima referenced the 2013 Washington State
Enhanced State Hazard Mitigation Plan for state -wide hazards. For purposes of the City of Yakima HMP,
these are identified threats and hazards:
Drought
Earthquakes (6.5 or greater
Extreme Temperatures
Floods (Riverine and Streams
Severe Wind Storms' 7
Severe Winter Storms
Tornadoes
Volcanic Eruptions • •
Wildland Fires k � °R 1)
Natural Hazards in
Washington
tz t a l snow
1
,3 Landslide
Earthquake
Forest Fire f-t
r r r wwgnt
What is the Plan Mission?
The mission of the City of Yakima Hazard Mitigation Plan is to promote sound public policy designed to
protect citizens, critical facilities, infrastructure, private property, and the environment from natural and
technological hazards. This can be achieved by increasing public awareness, documenting the resources
for risk reduction and loss- prevention, and identifying activities to guide the city towards building a
safer, more sustainable community.
What are the Plan Goals?
The plan goals describe the overall direction that City of Yakima organizations and citizens can take to
work toward mitigating risk from natural and technological hazards.
The goals represent stepping- stones between the broad direction of the mission statement and the
specific recommendations outlined in the action items.
1. Protect Life, Property and Public Welfare
➢ Implement activities that assist in protecting lives by making homes, businesses, infrastructure,
critical facilities, and other property more resistant to losses from natural and technological
hazards.
➢ Reduce losses and repetitive damages for chronic hazard events while promoting insurance
coverage for catastrophic hazards. Improve hazard assessment information to make
recommendations for discouraging new development and encouraging preventive measures for
existing development in areas vulnerable to natural and technological hazards.
2. Public Awareness
Develop and implement education and outreach programs to increase public awareness of the risks
associated with natural and technological hazards.
➢ Provide information on tools, partnership opportunities, and funding resources to assist in
implementing mitigation activities.
3. Natural Systems
➢ Encourage development of acquisition and management strategies to preserve open space.
4. Partnerships and Implementation
➢ Strengthen communication and coordinate participation among and within public agencies,
citizens, non - profit organizations, business, and industry to gain a vested interest in
implementation.
➢ Encourage leadership within public and private sector organizations to prioritize and implement
local, county, and regional hazard mitigation activities.
5. Emergency Services
➢ Establish policy to ensure mitigation projects for critical facilities, services, and infrastructure.
➢ Strengthen emergency operations by increasing collaboration and coordination among public
agencies, non - profit organizations, business, and industry.
➢ Coordinate and integrate natural and technological mitigation activities, where appropriate,
with emergency operations plans and procedures
i? t .) i ' '.a COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
• Joan Davenport, AICP, Director
• r41 f Planning Division
•
/ 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor Yakima, Washington 98901
+' f .. • • �R�� _ = Phone (509) 575 -6183 • Fax (509) 575 -6105
tht, 4pf1R�-, F.11 ).
'�..,,,,,,,,, www .yakimawa.gov /services/planning
CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation for approval of the City of Yakima's Hazard Mitigation Plan by the City of
Yakima Planning Commission.
WHEREAS, the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act
(Public Law 100 -707, signed into law on November 23, 1988; amended the Disaster Relief Act
of 1974, and the Stafford Act constitutes the statutory authority for most federal disaster
response activities especially as they pertain to the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-
390), state and local governments must develop all hazard mitigation plans as a condition of
federal grant assistance to receive funding for disaster relief, recovery, and some hazard
mitigation planning; and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) is charged with review and approval of Hazard Mitigation Plans
under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief Act, Emergency Assistance Act, and Disaster
Mitigation Act; and
WHEREAS, the City of Yakima participated in the development of Yakima County's
Multi- Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan; and
WHEREAS, on August 7, 2015, FEMA approved the Yakima County Multi- Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan providing funding through the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act's hazard mitigation project grants; and
WHEREAS, FEMA requires that local jurisdictions periodically review and update their
Hazard Mitigation Plans every five years; and
WHEREAS, the City of Yakima's previous Hazard Mitigation Plan was last approved by
FEMA, and adopted by the Yakima City Council in 2011 Resolution No. R- 2011 -54; and
WHEREAS, The City of Yakima reviewed the Yakima County Multi- Jurisdictional Hazard
Mitigation plan and determined it appropriate to produce a City specific annex to the plan; and
WHEREAS, on October 17, 2014, the Yakima Valley Office of Emergency Management
took public input from a wide -range of stakeholders including City officials, Fire Department,
Police Department, schools, and the general public in the form of a distributed a survey; and
WHEREAS, the City's Emergency Management Office presented the City's updated
2015 Hazard Mitigation Plan annex to the Yakima County Multi- Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation
Yakima
1994
' • ".. ' ,+ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
�" � Joan Davenport, AICP, Director
r Planning Division
129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor Yakima, Washington 98901
'•,,'ti; ' r q�� = Phone (509) 575 -6183 • Fax (509) 575 -6105
r-° www.yakimawa.gov /services /planning
Plan 2015 to the City of Yakima Planning Commission in a study session on September 23,
2015; and
WHEREAS, at the City of Yakima Planning Commission's September 23, 2015, meeting
the Commission requested that the City's Emergency Management Office hold a public meeting
and presentation on the Hazard Mitigation Plan, with appropriate public notice provided; and
WHEREAS, the City of Yakima Planning Division provided appropriate public notice in
the form of a legal notice in the Yakima Herald Republic on October 9, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the City of Yakima Planning Commission held the requested public meeting
and presentation, and took additional public comment on October 14' 2015; and
WHEREAS, the Yakima City Planning Commission finds it in the best interest of the City
to adopt the City of Yakima's Hazard Mitigation Plan 2015 Annex, now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING COMMISSION: The City
of Yakima Planning Commission hereby recommends that the Yakima City Council approve
and adopt the City of Yakima's revised Hazard Mitigation Plan 2015 Annex as presented by
the City's Emergency Management office.
RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING COMMISSION this 14th day of
October, 2015.
Dave Fonfara, Cha
Yakima
t �l� I
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
01 N
: .
C!„ 0
• .
fi
Sr `
rJfel R
t ATV.) t
City of Yakima
Hazard Mitigation Plan
2015
c,,r�rnunity �
mss? 9........i. Miri arinn Preparedness
r
- ,?
Ernergen t
FL J M Mgt tit) .
VA a nz
Rt..„cr "Response
8 OP
4. {rCS
Yakima
krited
� "�„ w cirroF Ill'Al11ii7W Cif 6 : a FY{
Ya
4Y r
1
. ... - n Elf .:11,710.41 v +hp unrMrn
■
• 2015
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 1994 1
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Blank Intentionally.
•
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 2
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction 5
Executive Summary 7
Section One: Participants and Level of Participation 11
Section Two: Community Profile 15
Geographic /Demographic Profile
Yakima County Population Density (Map)
City of Yakima Transportation Infrastructure
Section Three: Catastrophic Threats and Hazards 23
Catastrophic Impacts to the Whole Community
Section Four: Profiling Hazards 29
Natural
Drought 31
Earthquakes 39
Floods— Rivers and Streams 51
Severe Storms — Extreme Temperatures, Severe Wind, Severe Winter Weather 75
Tornadoes 85
Volcanic Eruptions 87
Wildland Fires 93
Technological
Hazardous Materials 99
Risk Assessment 101
Risk Assessment (Tool and Chart) 105
Hazard Impact on Critical /Essential Service Infrastructure 107
Section Five: National Flood Insurance Program 111
Section Six: Hazard - Specific Action Items 113
2010 -2014 Action Items /Status /Summary 113
2015 -2020 Hazard - Specific Action Items 115
2015 -2020 Hazard - Specific Action Items Annual Review and Progress 122
Appendices 128
Appendix A: Resource Directory 131
Appendix B: Definitions and Acronyms 133
Appendix C: Mitigation Actions and Ideas 137
II
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
1. Organize
Resources
,.s l : t
4.pre .
and Monitor j : -' y 2. Assess Risks
Progress ...
-1 ' 4 # 3. Develop a
b44 Mitigation Plan
•
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 4
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
INTRODUCTION
With this notice, I am pleased to officially promulgate the City of Yakima Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) dated
2015.
This plan is effective immediately and replaces previous versions. The HMP was developed in adherence to state
and federal standards. The HMP represents the framework for City disaster mitigation activities. The HMP details
authorities, functions and responsibilities to establish a mutually cooperative plan of action between City
departments, divisions, and other public and private entities in response to a disaster. The
HMP will be used to enhance the City's capability in reducing the impact from a disaster or
significant event to citizens, the environment, the economy and property. ''
Every effort has been made to assure the HMP's compatibility with the precepts of modern
emergency management, the current applicable laws and the organizational structure of the -
City of Yakima.
City department /division directors are reminded of their responsibilities concerning emergency management,
specifically to support and participate on assigned committees, attend training sessions, offer updates to the HMP
as necessary, and maintain internal department disaster plans that allow for the rapid continuation of services
during and following a disaster or significant event.
Through our collective actions, our commitment to saving lives, preserving the environment, sustaining the
economy and protecting property within the City of Yakima will be enhanced.
City Manager
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Liati
The following table represents the framework for the City' HMP. Priority Identified.
City of Yakima High � ■
Hazard Mitigation Plan Priority
Introduction Promulgation added since 2010 version
Executive Summary The 2015 City of Yakima HMP retains the same integrity in the
Executive Summary as found in the 2010 HMP.
Section One: Participants The City of Yakima HMP retains the same integrity as in the 2010
and Level of Participation HMP.
Section Two: Community ✓ Updated for 2015 based upon 2013 population estimates.
Profile Added Geographic /Demographic Profile
Added Whole Community Partners
Section Three: Catastrophic ✓ The 2015 HMP addresses these unique threats and hazards in more
Threats and Hazards detail than the 2010 version
Section Four: Profiling ✓ Added Profiling Hazards (Hazard Type /Probability /Explanation)
Hazards
Section Five: National Flood Updated for 2015.
Insurance Program
Section Six: Hazard - Specific ✓ The 2015 Yakima HMP retains the same integrity in the Multi- Hazard
Action Items Goals and Action Items, as the 2010 HMP
New tracking documents for 2015 are located in Section Six.
Appendix A: Resource The 2015 Yakima HMP retains the same integrity in the Resource
Directory Directory, as the 2010 HMP
Appendix B: Definitions and The 2015 Yakima HMP retains the same integrity in the Definitions
Acronyms and Acronyms, as the 2010 HMP
Appendix C: Mitigation The 2015 Yakima HMP retains the same integrity in the Mitigation
Actions and Ideas Projects and Initiatives, as the 2010 HMP
U
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Authority
Section 322 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act), 42 U.S.C. 5165,
as amended by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA) (P.L. 106 -390), provides for States, Tribes, and local
governments to undertake a risk -based approach to reducing risks to natural hazards through mitigation planning.
The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq, reinforced the need and
requirement for mitigation plans, linking flood mitigation assistance programs to State, Tribal and Local Mitigation
Plans.
After a presidential major disaster declaration, mitigation funding becomes available. The amount is based on a
percentage of the total federal grants awarded under the Public Assistance and Individuals and Households
Programs for the entire disaster. Projects are funded with a combination of federal, state, and local funds.
Information on this program and application process is disseminated at public briefings and by other means.
Section 322 of the amended Stafford Act essentially states that as a condition of receiving a disaster loan or grant:
"The state and local government(s) shall agree that natural hazards in the areas affected shall be evaluated and
appropriate action taken to mitigate such hazards, including safe land -use and construction practices. For
disasters declared after November 1, 2004, all potential applicants (sub - grantees) must have either their own, or
be included in a regional, locally adopted and FEMA approved all hazard mitigation plan in order to be eligible to
apply for mitigation grant funds."
The regulations governing the mitigation planning requirements for local mitigation plans are published under 44
CFR §201.6. Under 44 CFR §201.6, local governments must have a FEMA- approved Local Mitigation Plan in order
to apply for and /or receive project grants under the following hazard mitigation assistance programs:
➢ Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)
The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) provides funds to States, Territories, Indian Tribal governments,
local governments, and eligible private non - profits (PNPs) following a Presidential major disaster declaration.
➢ Pre - Disaster Mitigation (PDM)
➢ Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA)
The Pre - Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Program and Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) programs provide funds
annually to States, Territories, Indian Tribal governments, and local governments. Although the statutory origins
of the programs differ, both share the common goal of reducing the risk of loss of life and property due to
natural hazards.
0
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
RATIONALE
The City of Yakima Hazard Mitigation Plan includes resources and information to assist residents, public and
private sector organizations, and others interested in participating in planning for natural and technological
hazards. The mitigation plan provides a list of activities that may assist the City of Yakima in reducing risk and
preventing loss from future hazard events. The action items address multi- hazard issues, as well as activities for
flood, landslide, severe winter storm, windstorm, wildfire, earthquake, volcanic eruption and hazardous materials.
The City of Yakima referenced the 2013 Washington State Enhanced State Hazard Mitigation Plan for state - wide
hazards. For purposes of the City of Yakima HMP, these are identified threats and hazards:
Drought
Earthquakes (6.5 or greater
Temperatures `
Floods (Riverine and Streams _
Severe Wind Storms
Severe Winter Storms -
Tornadoes '
Volcanic Eruptions v *ri
Wildland Fires
Natural Hazards in
`ash on
io
ei
sandomisoptelow
What is the Plan Mission?
The mission of the City of Yakima Hazard Mitigation Plan is to promote sound public policy designed to protect
citizens, critical facilities, infrastructure, private property, and the environment from natural and technological
hazards. This can be achieved by increasing public awareness, documenting the resources for risk reduction and
loss- prevention, and identifying activities to guide the city towards building a safer, more sustainable community.
•
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 8
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
What are the Plan Goals?
The plan goals describe the overall direction that City of Yakima organizations and citizens can take to work
toward mitigating risk from natural and technological hazards.
The goals represent stepping- stones between the broad direction of the mission statement and the specific
recommendations outlined in the action items.
1. Protect Life, Property and Public Welfare
➢ Implement activities that assist in protecting lives by making homes, businesses, infrastructure, critical
facilities, and other property more resistant to losses from natural and technological hazards.
➢ Reduce losses and repetitive damages for chronic hazard events while promoting insurance coverage for
catastrophic hazards. Improve hazard assessment information to make recommendations for
discouraging new development and encouraging preventive measures for existing development in areas
vulnerable to natural and technological hazards.
2. Public Awareness
Develop and implement education and outreach programs to increase public awareness of the risks associated
with natural and technological hazards.
➢ Provide information on tools, partnership opportunities, and funding resources to assist in implementing
mitigation activities.
3. Natural Systems
➢ Encourage development of acquisition and management strategies to preserve open space.
4. Partnerships and Implementation
➢ Strengthen communication and coordinate participation among and within public agencies, citizens, non-
profit organizations, business, and industry to gain a vested interest in implementation.
➢ Encourage leadership within public and private sector organizations to prioritize and implement local,
county, and regional hazard mitigation activities.
5. Emergency Services
➢ Establish policy to ensure mitigation projects for critical facilities, services, and infrastructure.
➢ Strengthen emergency operations by increasing collaboration and coordination among public agencies,
non - profit organizations, business, and industry.
➢ Coordinate and integrate natural and technological mitigation activities, where appropriate, with
emergency operations plans and procedures
li
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 9
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Procedures for Additional Jurisdictions to the HMP
This procedure was developed by the City of Yakima Emergency Management Program in cooperation with the
Washington State Emergency Management Division. This procedure has been incorporated into the plan as part
of the 2015 plan update. For the purpose of this HMP, jurisdictions are the same as local government entities.
Section 201.2 of 44 CFR defines Local Government as:
any county, municipality, city, town, township, public authority, school district, special district,
intrastate district, council of governments (regardless of whether the council of governments is
incorporated as a nonprofit corporation under State law), regional or interstate government
entity, or agency or instrumentality of a local government.
1. A jurisdiction not included in this HMP and wishing to join the plan contacts the City of Yakima
Emergency Management Division with the request to become a participant of the plan.
2. The Emergency Management Division provides the jurisdiction with a copy of the approved plan,
planning requirements and any other pertinent data.
3. The jurisdiction reviews the plan and develops the portions of the plan that are specific to the
jurisdiction as directed by the Emergency Management Division staff. The portion of the plan must meet
the requirements of the current FEMA's Local Mitigation Planning Handbook, March 2013.
4. The new jurisdiction submits its portions of the plan to the Emergency Management Division and
the new jurisdiction plan is forwarded to the State Hazard Mitigation Program Manager for review
and compliance with current Local Multi- Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance.
5. The State Hazard Mitigation Program Manager reviews the new jurisdiction plan for compliance with
current Local Multi- Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance in conjunction with the Yakima Hazard
Mitigation Plan. If the new jurisdiction does not meet the required standard, the State Hazard Mitigation
Program Manager will work with the jurisdiction to resolve issues until it does.
6. The State Hazard Mitigation Program Manager forwards the new jurisdiction plan to FEMA Region X for
review and comment.
7. Upon approval from FEMA Region X, the new jurisdiction is considered part of the City of Yakima
Hazard Mitigation Plan and will comply with the update schedule.
0
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
SECTION ONE: PARTICIPANTS AND LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION
MITIGATION PLANNING WORKING GROUP
City Manager —Tony O'Rourke
City Attorney —Jeff Cutter
Fire Department —Bob Stewart, Chief
Police Department— Dominic Rizzi, Chief
Public Works —Scott Schafer, Director
Code Enforcement Division —Joe Caruso, Code Administration Manager
Community Development —Joan Davenport, Community Development Director
Economic Development —Sean Hawkins, Economic Development Manager
Planning Process Agenda
YFD Emergency Management Division facilitated a series of work sessions. Participants were presented a draft
plan for considerations. Tasks included:
➢ Review each goal and objective to determine its relevance to the changing situation in Yakima.
➢ Review the mitigation strategies in the draft plan to assure that this document reflected current hazard
analyses, development trends, code changes, and risk analyses and perceptions.
➢ Create future action plans and mitigation strategies.
➢ Review the hazard mitigation plan in reference to other plan updates, such as the Critical Area Ordinance
(CAO) and Shoreline Master Program (SMP)— amended 2009; Growth Management Act — current;
Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 — adopted 12/12/06; and, International Building Codes.
The Mitigation Planning Working Group will update and make any necessary changes to the draft plan before
submitting it to the State Hazard Mitigation Officer for review.
AUTHORITIES, CODES, REGULATIONS, & PROCEDURES 2015 STATUS
International Building Codes
Chapter 16— Structural Design 2012 International Codes Continue until 6/1/16 —
Roof Snow Load All current and adopted by State and City new code version
Wind Design Data 6/1/13
Earthquake Design Data
Flood Design Data
Chapter 9 - -Fire Protection Systems
Critical Area Ordinance (CAO) and Shoreline Master Program (SMP)— Effective same
3/22/2015
Growth Management Act -- current same
li
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 11
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 — Undergoing an update same
City of Yakima Threat /Hazard Identification Risk Assessment (THIRA) 2015 Update
City of Yakima Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) 2015
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION /PUBLIC MEETINGS
Date Meeting Summary
October 17 The Yakima Valley Office of Emergency Management distributed a survey on October 17, 2014,
2014 requesting input from a wide -range of stakeholders. The YVOEM utilized its Email distribution
list. The survey form distribution within the City of Yakima included city officials, Fire
Department, Police Department, Schools and the general public. Responses validated the city's
list of hazards and recommendations. Major emphasis focused on increased education through
a variety of social media. The city will incorporate existing social media outlets with disaster
planning and mitigation.
September 23 City of Yakima Planning Commission
2015 The city's emergency management office presented to the commission the updated version of
the city's HMP. This session was video -taped using Yakima's public access TV channel and
advertised as such for viewing by the public
October 9 City of Yakima placed a public meeting notice in the Herald Republic announcing the public
2015 meeting.
October 14 City of Yakima Planning Commission
2015 The city's emergency management office presented to the public the updated version of the
city's HMP. A questionnaire was provided for their input. This session was video -taped using
Yakima's public access TV channel and advertised as such for viewing by the public. The
Planning Commission signed a formal recommendation for approval of the City of Yakima's
Hazard Mitigation Plan by the Yakima City Council.
TBA City of Yakima City Council meeting which provided yet another forum for public comment.
Monitoring, Evaluating and Updating the Plan
City of Yakima Fire Department Emergency Management Division
The Yakima Fire Chief is the Director of Emergency Management for the City of
Yakima. The Emergency Management Division has a full -time position, an
Emergency Management Specialist, since May 1, 2015. The Emergency
Management Specialist shall be responsible for monitoring, evaluating, and - ;. .
updating the Yakima Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Emergency Management 'VRE
Specialist shall work with process stakeholders, including several public agencies
in Yakima, through the Hazard Mitigation Plan update process.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 12
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Schedule
To assure that the HMP continues to provide appropriate strategies for risk reduction in Yakima, it is necessary to
regularly monitor, evaluate, and update it. The Emergency Management Specialist convenes the annual electronic
update meetings and an in- person meeting at the third year of the update cycle, all devoted to reviewing progress
of the HMP. An email precedes each annual meeting with information on the progress of action items, developed
in consultation with the responsible parties. The fourth annual meeting begins the five -year update process.
The Division of Emergency Management through the YFD Emergency Management Division shall be responsible
for:
➢ Regularly reviewing each goal and objective to determine its relevance to the changing situation in
Yakima.
➢ Monitoring and evaluating the mitigation strategies in this plan to assure that this document reflects
current hazard analyses, development trends, code changes, and risk analyses and perceptions.
➢ Assuring the appropriate implementation of the Five Year Action Plan, described below. The City of
Yakima Planning Working Group shall hear progress reports from the parties responsible for the various
implementation actions as a means of monitoring progress.
➢ Creating future action plans and mitigation strategies.
➢ Assuring a continuing role for public comment and involvement as the mitigation plan evolves.
➢ Reassessing the plan in light of any major hazard event occurrence.
➢ Review the hazard mitigation plan in reference to other plan updates, such as the Critical Area Ordinance
(CAO) and Shoreline Master Program (SMP)— amended 2009; Growth Management Act — current; Yakima
Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 — adopted 12/12/06; and, International Building Codes.
➢ After each meeting, the Mitigation Planning Working Group shall have three months to update and make
any necessary changes to the plan before submitting it to the State Hazard Mitigation Officer for review.
Implementation through Existing Programs
The City of Yakima currently utilizes several mechanisms to guide development, including the following:
• Comprehensive land use planning as required by the Washington State GMA
• Capital improvement planning
• Building codes
0
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Each of these mechanisms can also help meet the goals of the Hazard Mitigation Plan. After the city officially
adopts the Hazard Mitigation Plan, it will implement mitigation strategies into these existing processes, plans, and
codes.
Hazard mitigation for new construction is integrated into the City of Yakima planning process, which ensures that
all relevant city departments are included. At the planning meetings each department outlines requirements that
the applicant must meet to proceed with the proposal. This process ensures that the applicable codes,
ordinances, and rules are enforced in all new projects.
After adoption of the Hazard Mitigation Plan update, the city will ensure that they have addressed any newly
identified hazard risks in their comprehensive plans and land use regulations. The planning department will
continue to conduct periodic reviews of the city comprehensive plan, land use policies and analyze any plan
amendments.
Continued Public Involvement
To facilitate the goal of continued public involvement in the planning process, the Division of Emergency
Management oversees the implementation of the following steps:
➢ The plan shall be available on the city's website, which will also display an email address and phone
number the public can use for submitting comments and concerns about the plan.
➢ Public meetings shall be held as needed to provide the public with a forum for expressing concerns,
opinions, and ideas. The Division of Emergency Management sets the meeting schedules and dates and
use city resources to publicize and host this meeting. Within six months of a major disaster event,
Emergency Management Division holds a public meeting to ensure that the public can express concerns,
opinions, and ideas about the disaster event. The Emergency Management Division meets with each
neighborhood group every two years
0
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
SECTION Two: COMMUNITY PROFILE or
_ y ... • _ .-.t y . - - „...•••• mss_ •.
_L
..mss _
IMO 11,41118.4116 �--"' ter+ d .4i .,-
t i
� ! • - v. •�,.. 1 . ; Y mss-- ' e _
Geographic /Demographic Profile
Yakima County Population Density (Map)
City of Yakima Transportation Infrastructure
i ii
3 .......--
0_,____
city o
Y aki ma
..i,,,4
•
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 15
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Blank Intentionally
•
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 16
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Welcome to Yakima, Washington
opc
i f u -
H
•
3
ti ;_ -i.
•
es se
Geographic /Demographic Profile
Throughout history, the residents of the City of Yakima have dealt with the various natural and technological
hazards affecting the area. The City is subject to 32 hazards. For the purpose of this mitigation plan: Drought,
Earthquake, Extreme Temperatures, Floods — riverine and stream, Severe Wind Storms, Severe Wind Storms,
Tornadoes, Volcanic Eruption, and Wildland Fires have been identified as those representing a higher level of
concern. It is impossible to predict exactly when these disasters will occur, or the extent to which they will affect
the city. However, with careful planning and collaboration within the community, it is possible to minimize the
losses that can result from natural and technological disasters.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 17
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Yakima is located close to the center of Washington. Yakima is between the Yakima, Kittitas county. Yakima has
27.18 square miles of land area and 0.51 square miles of water area. As of 2010 -2014, the total Yakima population
is 92,806, which has grown 29.18% since 2000. The population growth rate is much higher than the state average
rate of 17.05% and is much higher than the national average rate of 11.61 %. Yakima median household income is
$40,189 in 2010 -2014 and has grown by 36.35% since 2000. The income growth rate is higher than the state
average rate of 31.72% and is higher than the national average rate of 27.36 %. Yakima median house value is
$157,300 in 2010 -2014 and has grown by 48.12% since 2000. The house value growth rate is lower than the state
average rate of 52.82% and is about the same as the national average rate of 46.91 %. As a reference, the national
Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation rate for the same period is 26.63 %. On average, the public school district that
covers Yakima is worse than the state average in quality. The Yakima area code is .
Population 92,806 (2010- 2014), rank #9
Population Growth 29.18% since 2000, rank #122
Population Density: 3,351.75/sq mi, rank #49
Median Household Income: $40,189 at 2010 - 2014 - 36.35% increase since 2000, rank #439
Median House Price: $157,300 at 2010 - 2014 - 48.12% increase since 2000, rank #418
Time Zone: Pacific GMT -8:00 with Daylight Saving in the Summer
Land Area: 27.18 sq mi, rank
Water Area: 0.51 sq mi (1.84 %), rank
State: Washington
Area: Yakima, WA
Infrastructure CenturyLink, Verizon, Sprint, ATT, T- Mobile, US
Airports Cellular, Charter, Clearwire Wireless
Yakima Airport at McAlister Field
Highways
Interstate 82, State Hwy 24, State Hwy 12
Rail
BNSF and Central Washington Railroad service the
County
Trucking
25 firms
Utilities
Power
PacificCorp (Scottish Power), Benton REA
Natural Gas
Cascade Natural Gas
Telecommunications
li
City of Yakima 2015 HMP [8
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
The cities of Selah and Union Gap lie immediately to the north and south of Yakima. In addition, the
unincorporated suburban areas of West Valley and Terrace Heights are considered a part of greater
Yakima. With these cities included in the immediate area, population within 20 miles of the city is over
123,000. Other nearby cities include Moxee, Tieton, Cowiche, Wiley City, Tampico, Gleed, and Naches in
the Upper Valley, as well as Wapato, Toppenish, Zillah, Harrah, White Swan, Parker, Buena, Outlook,
Granger, Mabton, Sunnyside, and Grandview in the Lower Valley. As of the 2013, the estimated population
of the metropolitan area is 247,044.
Bodies of Water
The primary irrigation source for the Yakima Valley, the Yakima River, runs through Yakima from its source
at Lake Keechelus in the Cascade Range to the Columbia River at Richland. In Yakima, the river is used for
both fishing and recreation. A 10 -mile (16 km) walking and cycling trail, a park, and a wildlife sanctuary are
located at the river's edge.
The Naches River forms the northern border of the city. Several small lakes flank the northern edge of the
city, including Myron Lake, Lake Aspen, Bergland Lake (private) and Rotary Lake (also known as Freeway
Lake). These lakes are popular with fishermen and swimmers during the summer.
YAKIMA CITY
174^S•1 %%111•3i4:
via .tires crae,M 1
lie .olche ... r
} '4
7
t
. fi ,... Y#�Ima _ . . • s . : ;;1 ,j . 1 F
�r..�. -.._ r te .
Wit. :T -A;%,: .* , .rg.
.-' 1. n , T11 11/4,c5. i1_: �. ua
.ia..a �. 4.. { - i.- •
�.�. .`.
y
yrr rt.
- - ' A ..• .4:1 } -.
R �-
i ,,k00.1.
' �ti. Div. R_Y. pi.f.� • ....
•111.1 al w y.
warn 4 0 6 {7V
ur*x Cam .......111S1,
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 19
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
. r . � I % -.. - - ' r F J � k A '. 1 • - +o- _ ....... YI P1 COUNTY
. } • K ' 7 lrerep4rtstiQfl
Infrastructure
• tt- 1y'Syy _ '' - 1 �1LA1's .
S . _.. �- , _ • _
�'_• ", �_, . ;` _ — •.., - ., ram
_ 1.1 Ley...
p oil la
• - 1-..:i
.._ ` ry 1 L' 7� i - I 1 '': . f i'' • _•no r,■
r � 1 E r. r „L....'11 7` r L t..4 _ 5 • � �
• h F. fr'F 5 .. � - r ..
E � 3• • 1 t %'� kima I _ ���•� , ��' .1...1,-..-... - :rt'
L ..--. 1 i
- -• _ �. • E i ' f FC3:54., 1uka.i C'uuurl
_ . ' ;. -. . , �. Huitii 31nlpar au Mai
. .�:. . t � _ ti
113 °f 7lr r Gill J s
fi i 7'.:::14?:
r 1 }, -.I 11 i .5 r 4 , . t • •
r l i ' "� .k rli t
r -- -. - - .. - - - r + :.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 20
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
— MIMI cOl1lTY
• . W .;,niece. • 0 � -
Yakima County
I . ,......5
J+ .... Pap g u n DetYrlify
,44 ..; 4 • —
% Ilit r ( c. 4
1ii E. 2010 CON, •
a- _' - -
•
'Pr- _fir - .. t i Y +' - �%
.. � , _ a Wiz' t s c . . ....C." . .. .1 7 . IL. !.m.16 • • ` i
f / 7 .11 1 -- . ..
r
Im.,,. ...'r ...0.40 . . .. .
.. -:.•: '',... b .. ;.•;? 14 fit :4 . .• • . i wtht, a Lew)
• y.i� l j � " 1 M.••.. , W "'�`- • '� s . �` t _ 2. , '� •. / r gilirA Ali �i■
• i a . ' .�, limp hum
r t .::: ...
... �.' _ ..
I... If f it bona. { n
x ... ..r•
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 21
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Blank Intentionally
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 22
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
SECTION THREE: CATASTROPHIC THREATS AND HAZARDS
Technological
Human - Caused
Resulting from acts of nature Involves accidents or the failure of systems and structures caused
by the intentional actions of an adversary
Drought Air pollution
Epidemic, human Business interruption
Dam /levee failure Critical infrastructure (building /structure) collapse
Earthquake Critical infrastructure (building /structure) fire /explosion
Fire, rural /urban Cyber attack
Flood, flash Ecological terrorism
Flood, riverine /stream Economic emergency
Flood, urban Energy emergency
Heat, extreme Fuel shortage
Landslide HM accident, fixed facility (EPA - regulated chemicals)
Thunderstorm HM accident, transportation routes (Roadways, Railroads, Pipelines)
Tornado Power outage
Volcano Riot /demonstrations /violent protest /illegal assembly
Water shortage Transportation accident, aircraft
Wind Weapons of Mass Destruction: CBRNE /aircraft
Winter storms Workplace violence: business /industry and schools
State Wide /Regional Acts of Nature
Massive influx of displaced disaster - victims.
! PIM
r us, L
Illt
' ,..v ..,t , -,, N It.k -
. / .
�.
—
r - , - -
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 23
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
-- Earthquake Planning Scenario --
ShaKeMap fcr SaddleMtn7.35 Scenari
Scenario Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 12 00:00 GM M 7.3 N45.79 W1 Depth: 0.7km
1 4„ 1..7 X
47.5' �!. .
. 1 t= B .. r
.". . .461: • •'. 'I N . ' - - - . :s ' 71 -
w
i
err •
1 iii - I
• %....- ', Wesi vow 4 r `�`` .1
I •
46.5' � - >M'� �
.1 �N
r . • Itin
* i�,
�_-. • - I - % 46 ` " • � : 4 •- ti � � � / .‘,\Itili
,, 4 , �
-121° -120° -119`
PLANNIN3 SCENARIO ONLY -- Map Version 4 Processed Wed Mae 6, 2030 11:01:46 PI;1 I:1E'T
PERCEIYEa Nottett Weak Ugh Maderaie Strong Very strong Severe Vio[art B..treme
SHAKING 9 - 9 rY n9
13°-it GIE Wane none none Very fight Ugh Moderat~ Moderate�'Heav Heavy Very Heave
PEAK JCC4a,.q) t.17 .17-1.4 1.4 -3.P .3.P-9.2 P2 -18 18 -34 34-65 65-124 >124
PEAK YELjam. .C.1 01 -1.1 1.1 - 3.4 3.4 - 8.1 8.1 -16 16 -3 1 31 -60 d0 -115 .116
INSTRLMENTAL I I1III IV V VI VII VIII
INTENSITY
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 24
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
CATASTROPHIC IMPACTS TO THE WHOLE COMMUNITY
1. Catastrophic Impacts;
• Street /road disruptions, e.g., debris, power lines, water;
• Utility —line disruptions, e.g., power lines, water mains, etc.;
• Need for evacuations, e.g., life- hazard occupancies;
• Health /medical concerns, e.g., health /medical care facilities;
• Emergency response disruptions, e.g. fire, police, ambulance;
• Continuity of government service interrupted, e.g. day -to -day business;
• Private - sector business interruption, e.g. normal business activities; and
• Communication disruptions, e.g. landlines, cell phones, radio linkages.
2. Community Impacts
Within the community, there are special population centers. These facilities, i.e. disabled,
hospitalized, elderly, institutionalized, incarcerated, have special evacuation requirements. These
sites are within the high -risk impact. The City of Yakima has identified these special population
centers.
3. Government /Private Sector Disruption Impacts
• Physical damage to a building /buildings
• Damage to or breakdown of machinery, systems or equipment
• Restricted access to a site or building
• Interruption of the supply chain including failure of a supplier or disruption of
transportation of goods from the supplier
• Utility outage, e.g., electric power outage
• Damage to, loss or corruption of information technology including voice and data
communications, servers, computers, operating systems, applications, and data
• Absenteeism of essential employee
Local Private
Government sector
UNDERSTAND
Government al 1 t Cornrr rur hies THE WHALE
COMMUNITY
Skate, Tribal, •sngoverr►mental fir'
Territorial, and organizations
Insular Area
Governmen Individualsr ENGAGE Famlltes, and LEVERAGE
IIGUSG'IbldS ALL PARTS
EXISTING OF THE
WhOl e STRENGTHS COMMUNITY
it I
mu
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 25
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
x,
�
-
•
W S. • ..... . . ' . ,._ ,. .0;& . — . .. , OS •:?- ex_ 4,
- ... .41% • . - ....- ". I' o . ...7" • '
a w V.• . sr Y+�'$'T' or - I f
Au.
I .
.. low .. . ._ r, ._ •
1 r - RM' `
) __
. IP - .! . r
. , ,
-. _.! .- ,.,.._...3,0. , ........ _, ... .
• .4 ' . :' .
ke A i c i .0 1 : _ Y '
.may` . 1 .
.er .) - • A
r J f -..art s
• . • F 4
- t 7'2. - L f .:
1 .,
_iGr. .ate -. � !. Y -_ •
Pe .
� l a . .e-i .
• a.,
. •-• - - 1
',
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 26
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Whole Community Partners
a 1 14" ‘,I1) 1
p mg `1_9---_,r-iii
r "f Yakima County {.
.;; ,.; Emergency Mt4Jical Services
Corr pre/rinsive
• qtr,.,... •
• American .. Lic ‘s -4
il k
Red Cross s ,
..... _
4 YkimaRegiional
Medical & Cardiac Center
4641EIS4ORIAL - lealthy Yakima. 14e of th y You.
YILRI146 'track-tor 1.1 mi aa.a L IIrYhMI! L
Kali R Ly y
ti•ri 7r.F7irTril'P91 If.fJTri;;;= _
A
• ZIP Y.1-‘ K]MA SCHOOL DISTRICT
. . . - _ . , .: .c , .; 4 TV T.•ISCNGI [ HOW:A=10N
ri VISITOR INFORMATION _
• ..)' I>
M Ya kimaVaIIeyTourism.com { • City of Yakima 2015 HMP 27
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
I t :1 . - .
um -
R ATERYAKfL *Ror * r
-- P.: - --
II1l! YAK! MA COUNTY
wpSHlhlGiOti
711Q, a
'Washington State A f-
E
Get Connected Ge Answers.
W: zhriglan I,fcrrnaban Newark 411
c ,- ,... FIESILIFNTGOM#dUNr.ES Community resilience
''''
I C)
Th Bare strong refietirirsripsbetweertw@mil/ itm requires building
Ogaiimlionsar ITa;y and inaparcd neighbor to neighbor
�a •espari and 'Kola'
0 reliance and
Tharez-re enclugh valurteers .a help In a dbaste
organizational
Pcaplc aln rely or cad) o�,r• (neigh Dort* nalghba1 C O n n e C 11011
'ndividualOmili =_s °av=- the k1o.rledge
to pre and iepui.1 Lu disas.di
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 28
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
SECTION FOUR: PROFILING HAZARDS
_, =.s+ ,i.-i•,,_ ?4,rC — - - -1,---_ t t ��.:'M+ - -.-'as - ma y. ' - • 1111:17 .1.
A.
y
.. %. 'rte. ad. s - 4 _ u. "
Natural
Drought
Earthquakes
Floods— Rivers and Streams
Severe Storms — Extreme Temperatures, Severe Wind, Severe Winter Weather
Tornadoes
Volcanic Eruptions
Wildland Fires
Technological
Risk Assessment
Risk Assessment (Tool and Chart)
Hazard Impact on Critical /Essential Service Infrastructure
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 29
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Blank Intentionally
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 30
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Drought Profile
Drought (D)
A drought is a period of unusually constant dry weather that persists long enough to cause deficiencies in
water supply (surface or underground). Droughts are slow onset hazards, but, over time, they can severely
affect crops, municipal water supplies, recreational resources, and wildlife. If drought conditions extend
over a number of years, the direct and indirect economic impacts can be significant. High temperatures,
high winds, and low humidity can worsen drought conditions and also make areas more susceptible to
wildfire. In addition, human actions and demands for water resources can accelerate drought - related
impacts. (Reference: Appendix D)
A drought directly or indirectly affects all people and all areas of the state. A drought can result in farmers
not being able to plant crops or the failure of the planted crops. This results in loss of work for farm
workers and those in related food processing jobs. Other water or electricity- dependent industries
commonly shut down all or a portion of their facilities, resulting in further layoffs. A drought can spell
disaster for recreational companies that use water (e.g., swimming pools, water parks, and river rafting
companies) and for landscape and nursery businesses because people will not invest in new plants if water
is not available to sustain them. Also, people could pay more for water if utilities increase their rates.
With much of Washington's energy coming from hydroelectric plants, a drought can mean more expensive
electricity from other resources than dams and probably higher electric bills.
How will droughts affect us?
➢ Less summer water for farms, cities and forests.
➢ Less water for irrigation due to earlier high river flows and decreasing soil moisture.
➢ Less water for city municipal water sources, affecting industries, businesses and homeowners.
➢ With a 3.6 degree warming, droughts will occur more frequently:
• what have been historic 50 -year droughts will now occur every 10 years
• what have been historic 10 -year droughts will now occur about every 2
years.
➢ Increased forest fires. Dry and dying trees are a set -up for forest fires. Large forest fires (more than
500 acres) have increased from an average of six per year in the 1970's to 21 per year in the early
21st century. Forest fires release greenhouse gases and destroy the trees that can absorb CO2
from the air
Sources: Impacts of Climate Change on Washington's Economy (University of Oregon)
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 31
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Comparing the Droughts of 1977 and 2001
The Northwest typically has a dry summer with very little summer rainfall. In Seattle, the average
rainfall for July is less than one inch while it is nearly six inches in November. Most of the state's
annual precipitation occurs during the winter. Precipitation in the Cascade Mountains is normally
stored as snow that slowly melts during the spring and summer, maintaining stream and river flows.
This is the primary source of water for irrigation and municipal use. The major causes of droughts in
Washington are either low snow accumulations from either low precipitation or warm winter
temperatures; or by warm weather in the late winter -early spring that causes early melt of the
snowpack.
Where the snow falls affects the nature of a drought. The Columbia River provides most of the energy
for hydroelectric power and irrigation for the Columbia Basin Project and farms in the basin. The
Columbia receives large amounts of its flow from mountainous areas in British Columbia. In the
southern Cascade Mountains of Washington, the Yakima River basin is particularly influenced by
fluctuating snow levels.
The 1977 drought was the worst on record, but the 2001 drought came close to surpassing it in some
respects. The table below has data on how the two droughts affected Washington by late September of
their respective years.
Table 1. Comparison of Impacts of 1977 Drought and 2001 Drought Event
1977 Drought 2001 Drought
Precipitation received at most Precipitation was 56 to 74
locations ranged from 50 to 75 percent of normal. US Bureau
percent of normal levels, and of Reclamation — Yakima
in parts of Eastern Washington Project irrigators received only
as low as 42 to 45 percent of 37 percent of their normal
normal. entitlements.
Precipitation
At the end of the irrigation
season, the U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation's five reservoirs
stored only 50,000 acre -feet
of water compared with
300,000 acre -feet typically in
storage.
1,319 wildland fires burned 1,162 wildland fires burned
10,800 acres. 223,857 acres.
Wildland Fires State fire - fighting activities Firefighting efforts cost the
involved more than 7,000 -man state $38 million and various
hours and cost more than local, regional and federal
$1.5 million. agencies another $100 million.
■ IN
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 32
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
In August and September A dozen state hatcheries
1977, water levels at the took a series of drought -
Goldendale and Spokane related measures, including
trout hatcheries were down. installing equipment at
Fish Fish had difficulties passing North Toutle and Puyallup
through Kendall Creek, a hatcheries to address low
tributary to the north fork of water flow problems.
the Nooksack River in
Whatcom County.
Department of Ecology issued Department of Ecology issued
517 temporary ground -water 172 temporary emergency
Emergency Water Permits permits to help farmers and water -right permits and
communities drill more wells. changes to existing water
rights.
The state's economy lost an The Bonneville Power
estimated $410 million over a Administration paid more than
two -year period. The drought $400 million to electricity -
hit the aluminum industry intensive industries to shut
hardest, with major losses in down and remain closed for
agriculture and service the duration of the drought.
industries, including a $5
million loss in the ski industry. Thousands lost their jobs for
months including 2,000 -3,000
13,000 jobs were lost aluminum smelter workers at
Economic Impacts because of layoffs in the the Kaiser and Vanalco plants
aluminum industry and in Federal agencies provided
agriculture. more than $10.1 million in
disaster aid to growers.
More than $7.9 million in
state funds paid for
drought - related projects;
these projects enabled the
state to provide irrigation
water to farmers with junior
water rights and to increase
water in fish- bearing
streams.
Il
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 33
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
2005 Drought
October precipitation ranged between normal to well -above normal for all but the north Puget Sound
region. However, precipitation was below or much below average November through February for
much of the state, and the fall and winter months were extremely warm, which adversely affected the
state's mountain snow pack. A warm mid - January storm removed much of the remaining snow pack.
February turned out to be warm and dry. By early March, projections showed Washington might be
facing a drought as bad as or worse than the 1977 drought, the worst on state record.
Governor Christine Gregoire
U.S. Dr ought M oni t or M ay 70, 21105 authorized the Department of
Ecology to declare a statewide
H drought emergency on March 10, •
- � I ; " �. k r' Consequently, the state
x. `•. � legislature approved a $12 million
- L _] supplemental budget request that
• •_ r H i — — provided funds for buying water,
improving wells, implementing
other emergency water - supply
•••'TM rA °s"".••.,r.,! \ a * ' ro projects, and hiring temporary
DUARx�naH7 on roar.: ��,• ,.�•� rivisk , p 1 , g p Y
""'iA r •1 .1°"ACA A " ° " "'" " "'°�'" • - -_ state staff to respond to the
MI fi3 rxclwrFairnm. ibazuc drought emergency, conduct
Lk:upt• trs !WW1 SNe hN-Cori
USDA
� lo ;N.:WeAMura.P::asrca e.taa xaarwa ,.. . ..,„ public workshops and undertake
Lxaarnar +r'v nr .Se- rx=z.i.ecrvw rdir s.+
kr drought-related studies.
foram! VoSeic- Ram,srd T1u+rsrfay, fitly f 240U g
171,Sp icfroug MANI!.C(IUi[Ini Acihur_ Pay h ci•1�LL Mt W
In March, the water supply forecast was 66 percent of normal, signaling an extremely poor water year
and a possible reduction in electricity production. By late spring, due to record precipitation in March
and April, water filled reservoirs to about 95 percent of capacity, more than enough to meet projected
electricity demands. Despite projected drought impacts of up to $300 million, unexpected spring rains
combined with reallocation of water and conservation measures by farmers largely mitigated the
drought's impacts. Harvest of most crops was near normal levels. While statewide harvests were near
normal, local farmers who did not receive the spotty rains experienced poor harvests. The number of
wildfires was about 75 percent of average for the previous five years, but the acreage burned was three
times greater. The largest — the School fire — burned 52,000 acres of state - protected lands, 109 homes
and 106 other buildings, and cost more than $15 million to extinguish. The fire also destroyed half of
the elk and bighorn sheep and a third of the deer in the Tucannon Game Management Unit.
In October, Governor Gregoire requested agricultural disaster designations from the U.S. Secretary of
Agriculture because of significant crop damage from drought. The following counties were included in
the disaster request: Asotin, Benton, Chelan, Clark, Columbia, Cowlitz, Douglas, Franklin, Kittitas,
Klickitat, Lincoln, Skamania, Walla Walla, Wahkiakum, and Yakima. The emergency proclamation for the
drought expired on December 31, 2005.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 34
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Drought Impacts to the City of Yakima
The City of Yakima including its economy and water system has suffered no major impacts from previous
drought years. This due in fact to the city's water and irrigation division 'building a drought resilient
community'.
Yakima City's water division has an emergency plan that discusses drought. This emergency plan focuses
on minimizing interruptions to city municipal water sources, affecting industries, businesses and
homeowners.
Mitigation efforts include an underground water storage project. The City currently has 4 wells that store
water underground that can be tapped into during dry weather. The City is working to expand this water
storage to incorporate two more wells and create an Aquifer Storage and Recovery site. This project
started in 1988. In the next 4 -5 years, two more well will be dug. In the next 10 years, the project should
be completed.
Project barriers: permitting and water quality. Water quality concerns are currently being mitigated with
regards to drinking water safety. Permitting will flow the water quality studies /mitigation efforts.
The City doesn't expect Yakima to grow, as their urban boundaries are tightly boarded by neighboring
Cities. The completion of the underground water reserves, will alleviate any population growth pressures
on water supplies.
Summary
➢ Probability of future events — At this time, reliable forecasts of drought are not attainable for
temperate regions of the world more than a season in advance. However, based on a 100 -year
history with drought, the state as a whole can expect severe or extreme drought at least 5
percent of the time in the future, with most of eastern Washington experiencing severe or
extreme drought about 10 to 15 percent of the time.
➢ Jurisdictions at greatest risk — Nine counties meet criteria including percentage of time in
drought, water use for crop irrigation or due to growth, and potential inability to deal with
financial impacts of drought on their communities. (See Maps)
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
U.S. Drought Monitor January 26, 2016
Washington �
(Released Thursday, .�arx A, 2016)
f
* a hington 'Valid 7a.m.EST
�.,r!g„■ nx,rwr„s fre'ser¢.1 I
1- 51 r.r - i -r..l ro -r. i
rItratd F111 11 f.: 7 77 1r r n r n
I xdhlpr'k nil 79 :r i 1 1r rn rn
w .1 rintni s. hqA U A 11f1 - in I JU.UU YJ J1 J..Yt L.LJ
cik =C;M
�� {{{{ ' I !Awl ni
4�
t I I l'aler_Rk� feat kJ #'- 1:. }k '.25 S.' 1_ L LJ L.LJ
}
x 51m Of
4LYrr 'Alm n r 11'111 1111 AA • In VI 7 nn r n
t 4
' i _ '4 ~ L .I l J'lJGa;a
r ' ihr. W:rr 4") _ ' :
3 7 .OE 2 .217 SK C C7 C.C7
� . f usr.s
• -v.- 5 I u 6C XO-cnr iftr
- ' y w 6e:•anc_r�uYN
} D1 ',M ax 6rc.g r. _ #[ noel -cna 6rc�y r.
' L D2 c. - r.
c DrcJg
Yakima County i I I - 3 ' - ,.x ...r.... :,r:..Wr...xr :.'x..�'••. r. rnx}a rr *5•': , c:•.xn•.
•
f
-.C. 1 I r l M::(1: :.xxsn: .:‘ .try/ °Ia- ,x :nny:awtr.; .'xt wcxnx/
AUIi18r!
-
f_'A' Son ril. r...r, 'r5'itta Son {gyp,.'
r. r Y H..„,:,. . sue I
I.
http Ad raughtrnonitar,uni.edul
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 36
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Counties Most At -Risk and Vulnerable to Drought
L- i J
1 r
L
11111W
F
1 - F i '
_ A „
Y
V
%,
Yakima County
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 37
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Table 1— Impact to People
High: Hazard event seriously affects more than 100 people
Medium: Hazard event seriously affects 26 -100 people
Low: Hazard event seriously affects 0 -25 people
Hazard Event - Probabilty Rationale
Drought Low As the City of Yakima is an urban area, drought impacts are
minimal.
Table 2 Impact to Built Environment
High: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure
Of Yakima and the county.
Medium: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to public and private property and critical
infrastructure of Yakima only.
Low: Hazard event is likely to cause some damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure in
Small areas of Yakima.
Hazard Event Probabilty j il l Rstionsle
Drought Low As the City of Yakima is an urban area, drought impacts are minimal.
Table 3 Impact to the Economy
High: Hazard event causing damages over $10 million.
Medium: Hazard event causing damages between $1 and $10 million.
Low: Hazard event causing damages less than $1 million.
Hazard Event Probabilty _ Rationale
Drought Low As the City of Yakima is an urban area, drought impacts are minimal.
Table 4 Impact to the Natural Environment
High: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to the natural environment in Yakima, if not the entire
county.
Medium: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to the natural environment in Yakima only.
Low: Hazard event is likely to cause some damage to the natural environment in Yakima.
Hazard Event Probabilty Rationale
Drought Low As the City of Yakima is an urban area, drought impacts are
minimal.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 38
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Earthquake Profile
Earthquake (EQ)
An earthquake is a sudden release of energy that creates a movement in the earth's crust. Most
earthquake - related property damage and deaths are caused by the failure and collapse of structures due
to ground shaking. The level of damage depends upon the extent and duration of the shaking. Other
damaging earthquake effects include landslides, the down -slope movement of soil and rock (in mountain
regions and along hillsides), and liquefaction. (Reference: Appendix D)
Yakima Municipal Code
Title 15 Urban Area Zoning Ordinance
Effective March 22, 2015
Chapter 15.27 Critical Areas
Part Seven. Geologically Hazardous Areas
15.27.700 Purpose and intent
A. Geologically hazardous areas include those areas susceptible to erosion, sliding, earthquake, or other
geological events. These areas pose a threat to the health and safety of the city of Yakima's citizens when
incompatible development is sited in significantly hazardous areas. When mitigation is not feasible,
development within geologically hazardous areas should be avoided.
B. The purpose of this section is to: (1) Minimize risks to public health and safety and reduce the risks of
property damage by regulating development within geologically hazardous areas; (2) Maintain natural
geological processes while protecting new and existing development; and, (3) Establish review procedures for
development proposals in geologically hazardous area.
15.27.701 Mapping and designation
Geologically hazardous areas that are susceptible to one or more of the following: (1) Erosion hazards; (2)
Landslide hazards; (3) Seismic hazards — referred as earthquake hazards; and (4) Volcanic hazards.
➢ Earthquake Activity Hazard Areas. Recorded earthquake activity in the city of Yakima is mostly marked
by low magnitude events and thus low seismic risk. The city of Yakima's low risk areas are unlabeled
and combined with other low risk hazards
➢ Volcanic hazard areas are not mapped but are defined as areas subject to pyroclastic (formed by
volcanic explosion) flows, lava flows, and inundation by debris flows, mudflows or related flooding
resulting from volcanic activity. Volcanic hazard areas in the city of Yakima are limited to pyroclastic
(ash) deposits. No specific protection requirements are identified for volcanic hazard areas.
15.27.702 Geologically hazardous areas protection approach
Protection measures for earthquake /seismic hazard areas will be accomplished by implementing appropriate
sections of the Building Code as adopted in YMC Title 11.
15.27.703 Development review procedure for geologically hazardous areas
NOTE: There have been no seismic or volcanic activity since the 2000 city HMP. Had there been such activity,
Chapter 15.27 would have addressed the hazard prone areas and its impact on the city's vulnerability.
Furthermore, earthquake and volcanic hazards have no distinctive geographically boundaries —hence the entire
city is vulnerable.
15.27.704 General protection requirements
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 39
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
•
e ss .1.1 •
rr • ,
..{.i¢dmn
�r - ter,• �.- . —
a.w, v.rr.a..t_aa.r
oLo
r:.i aaQw; 'c.-.11•.r.- 4 -
• •
::f .. . ta • v. 1171
�..aa.atta�
FL.LL•
Orvr&un
Irr. Y.Yn.ri ft.:IIdWn
ru uia.• ,
WASHINGTON STAT
COu ntie5 Ma.( Vulnerable to Earthqua - •A.,I.�.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 40
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
' 4 1.1 ' 2 - --
'1 OYano�rn fn l.nl CaunlY C.ndOrwil. Caunry
' � MINH toull xs wnl c�.Hly
' I I 1- unah cnW.ry w
• '• .srlomerl Ire
.!' • ' — I
rl JrR.non Coon.,
,. 0 .4 ; TX un.rylCOwr! spnwo.rnuml
tar !e *1e
� •. • MINn11iy } Wit
F a.4 Ma Cnrr[. . Cwrny
I ruI. Cmi ly
Fleur CI:WM ._. M.m.
r : '- Ihrrriar to my �'� �' 4°i" -° fo-nry
' 1' !�! R�fllir Cu W! ly Ml{[prN'r!
r4Y
t (*NMI }
c 8.4.10 (Inure'
M'..i,rYumCowry CoMmbl ••;,fOrp
Gown, u,,mly I4114 W.IIFCdam} / •[a1n r4.44/
_ fwlMhaaila Ip i. .rr
OrpEon — - fold Ova — Vrcaa huhaa:a
WASHINGTON STATE
• hlf.rlru *Id Own - - - - World WI two
5eismogenic Folds and Active Faults eonoa.loa fold rmo ` -`•` Ealroeaan m u! PKd
I (known or Suspected) Gam!) Scnndoq
Jurisdictions at greatest risk — Communities in western Washington, particularly those in the Puget
Sound Basin and along the Pacific coast, are most at risk from earthquakes. Some counties in
eastern Washington (Chelan, Douglas, Grant, Kittitas, Yakima, Benton, Franklin, Walla Walla, and
Spokane) are also vulnerable.
Risk Level
➢ Frequency — According to Washington State Department of Natural Resources, over
1,000 earthquakes occur annually in the state. This is an average of approximately 3 per
day though most go unfelt and do not cause damage. Larger magnitude earthquakes,
which result in damage, occur less frequently in the state.
➢ People — The population affected in an earthquake depends on many variables like the
magnitude of the earthquake, the population present in the areas of strongest shaking,
the time of day, the age of buildings affected, soil at the location, and many other
factors. It is plausible that an earthquake in the state could injure or kill anywhere
between 0 and 10,000 or more people.
➢ Economy — The economy affected by an earthquake depends on variables similar to
above and if there is a large magnitude earthquake near the major Puget Sound ports
in Olympia, Seattle, Tacoma, and Everett could cause significant damage to the state's
economy.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 41
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
➢ Environment —The type of environmental impact or damage that occurs in the event of
an earthquake does not meet the minimum threshold of ten percent or more loss of a
single species or habitat.
➢ Property — Statewide annualized loss estimates from Hazus -MH 2.1 indicate total losses
over $300,000 million. Property damage could be in excess of $20 billion dollars in the
event of a catastrophic earthquake.
Earthquake Index
Yakima, WA 1.19
Washington 4.04
U.S. 1.81
The earthquake index value is calculated based on historical earthquake events data using USA.com
algorithms. It is an indicator of the earthquake level in a region. A higher earthquake index value means
a higher chance of an earthquake.
! M 72.5 Saddle Min,-
ew.11r•19. Ucasn
U.. i wr
nw • i.iwn i R !' b r • - k5 — I .I
!rRR.i - d: - 7r 'ti. . .r
A ♦i r
+ 'Wont!'
iillili� r, i fii
-
. '., •r.
'A;:ow
}
„ ' r .-3,-. , .! 11 15 51
. 411 FL 1 - t . - trrrn'N d l "a'_ I •
5 . � • 1 Y h f5
Nrw Scene highlight quake risks across the state
Fre,. lO filer z Je•'1 WAD. W311,1. 1+01r ,.r !Wm 1l MAY( .:. V. nom.
14.1na .Fi.w014•a1 f2uylnawd x
4 6 a - - /ir+i:11414
ice._ 6110.s4rerr
• 'rwi. • • a.
-
Qf i41li • _14010.1. AFrIr
Air f,r.i
I
—MEN �m. .� -.. ..
Markommrlrferrr •ot.r.r.r OI.. — w. O wti-.- Y Ip,.— 8•04f
••• M Mem i l rrwo. law" Wilk •rrm■ r'r•0iw..r ■•••
Was ••••M, r• inin' ttln'
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 42
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Probability of future events - Because of its location near the collision boundary of two major tectonic
plates, Washington State is particularly vulnerable to a variety of earthquakes. FEMA has determined
that Washington State ranks second (behind only California) among states most susceptible to damaging
earthquakes in terms of economic loss. FEMA notes that a majority of the state is at risk to strong
shaking (on a scale of minimal to strong) with shaking magnitude generally decreasing from west to east.
•
N - -- -- — - l
0 t} !U WI„ticnm Cn„rrfy
I ,
MAK ti7.r.,1 .. u.
Dkarropn County
*erne County Petld 4tsille Calmly
S1ipit County 5tf4e+ryf• COWRY Is' a nd {.:,..in, I
• 1 31;;tr. Coi my Snahomnh County ,-1
Chelan County
Idr,nw f u■.artq -
Urupys Coursiy Spakrn• Coolly
F! sap I.Qt. nt r - tintain County
Xing [auiny
rst scn , ..c..,r•ry
Cu •
; rL• sir L. r,,r 1 Grout County
Kinh.t, cw,nfy
Vleace iu unry & arns [flvr11y
Thurston Cuunly Whitman County .
Franklin County
•iti un14 lewi4 Ca.ml y
%Amu. County Girlleld Cwnty
n '*" o ar.
alum" C runty Calvmbla Caty
C.7x (thi,I. Walla Walla County Asatin County
Rr,gUn Comity q
Sksmsnia Count' -
ItI.tkitei Cuurvty
C:uk County
PGA (%g) 34.44
WASHINGTON STATE Orego I2-1e +0 -so
n
I41f 50-60
USGS Peak Ground Acceleration Mg) 14 1 pr Y om:; 60-B0
2% Probability of Exceedance in S0 Year 24•37; counh 1Bou
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 43
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Washington State Earthquake History
Major earthquakes in Washington since 1880 (source: USGS)
On December 14, 1872, a strong earthquake in the Cascade Mountains caused damage at Victoria,
British Columbia, and Seattle. It was felt over a very large area, about 390,000 square kilometers,
extending as far south as Eugene, Oregon, and north into British Columbia, probably even into Alaska.
Walls were cracked (MM VI) at Blaine from a January 11, 1909, earthquake. Also, plaster was thrown
down at Bellingham and sidewalks were reported cracked and piers were damaged at Anacortes. The
felt area covered approximately 65,000 square km. Another shock occurred in the same region on
January 23, 1920. The epicenter was probably under the Strait of Georgia. Windows were broken and
brick walls were cracked (MM VII) at Anacortes and Bellingham; there was some damage to houses on
Vancouver Island, British Columbia. The crews of several vessels reported feeling the shock.
On July 15, 1936, a magnitude 5 3/4 earthquake was centered near the Washington State line between
Walla Walla, Washington, and Milton, Oregon. The shock was strongest at Freewater, State Line, and
Umapine, Oregon (MM VII). The ground was badly cracked, and there were marked changes in the flow
of well water. One concrete residence collapsed at Umapine; in addition, many walls and chimneys were
cracked. At Freewater, practically all the chimneys that had been built during the last 10 years were
damaged at the roof level. Concrete pavements were cracked at State Line. The most damaging effects
in Washington were at Waitsburg, where several chimneys fell and plaster cracked. Total damage
amounted to about $100,000. The felt area covered about 272,000 square km, including most of
Washington, Oregon, and northern Idaho.
Another shock of magnitude 5 3/4 originated near Olympia on November 12, 1939. A few fallen and
twisted chimneys (MM VII), cracked concrete and plaster, and broken windows occurred throughout the
epicentral area. The most noticeable damage was at Centralia, Elma, Oakville, and Oylmpia. Most of
Washington and a portion of Oregon felt the tremor; it was also felt in some parts of British Columbia.
The total U.S. area affected was about 155,000 square km.
Minor damage, such as cracked plaster and chimneys (MM VI - VII), was reported from North Bend,
Palmer, and Stampede Pass following an earthquake on April 29, 1945. Slight damage occurred in a
number of other towns in the area and there were large rock slides on the west face of Mount Si. Many
reports described moderately loud to terrific explosion -like sounds accompanying the ground shaking.
This earthquake was felt over the greater portion of Washington, a small section of western Idaho, and
in the vicinity of Portland, Oregon, approximately 130,000 square km. A strong aftershock caused
additional slight damage at North Bend about 10 hours later; another aftershock on May 1 was widely
felt.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
A shock, which reached a maximum intensity of VII at a number of places in the Puget Sound area was
felt over about 182,000 square km, occurred on February 14, 1946. A few deaths were attributed
indirectly to the shock; damage was estimated at $250,000, mostly in Seattle. Most of the reported
damage was limited to cracked plaster and slight chimney failure, but there were a few cases of
spectacular building damage in Seattle. The magnitude 5 3/4 tremor was also felt in southwestern
British Columbia and northwestern Oregon.
One of the strongest earthquakes on record for the Puget Sound area followed a few months later. A
magnitude 7.3 shock in the Strait of Georgia on June 23, 1946, caused the bottom of Deep Bay to sink
between 2.7 and 25.6 meters. These measurements were reported by the Canadian Hydrographic
Department. Also, a 3 meter ground shift occurred on Read Island. One person was drowned when a
small boat was overturned by waves created by a nearby landslide. Waves were reported sweeping in
from the sea, flooding fields and highways. Heavy damage occurred in the epicentral region. South of
the Washington State boundary, some chimneys fell at Eastsound and on Orcas Island and a concrete
mill was damaged at Port Angeles. Some damage occurred on upper floors of tall buildings in Seattle.
The shock was strongly felt at Bellingham, Olympia, Raymond, and Tacoma. The total affected area in
Canada and the United States was about 260,000 square km.
Property damage estimated at upwards of $25 million resulted from a magnitude 7.0 earthquake near
Olympia on April 13, 1949. Eight deaths were caused either directly or indirectly, and many were
injured. At Olympia, nearly all large buildings were damaged, and water and gas mains were broken.
Heavy property damage was caused by falling parapet walls, toppled chimneys, and cracked walls (MM
VIII). Electric and telegraphic services were interrupted. Railroad service into Olympia was suspended for
several days; railroad bridges south of Tacoma were thrown out of line, delaying traffic for several
hours. A large portion of a sandy spit jutting into Puget Sound north of Olympia disappeared during the
earthquake. Near Tacoma, a tremendous rockslide involving an 0.8 km section of a 90 meter cliff
toppled into Puget Sound. The felt area extended eastward to western Montana and southward to Cape
Blanco, Oregon, covering about 400,000 square km in the United States. A large portion of western
Canada also experienced the shock.
On November 5, 1962, a moderately strong earthquake caused minor damage in the Vancouver,
Washington - Portland, Oregon, area. Numerous chimneys were cracked or shaken down (MM VII) in
Portland. Several buildings had tile ceilings fall, and other damage such as cracked plaster and broken
windows were reported. Slight damage was reported from several towns in Washington. The tremor
was felt over an area of approximately 52,000 square km of Washington and Oregon. The magnitude
was measured at 4 3/4.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
f
+, {
•
= 1111
, ,
—
-47 -- •
r - "
A magnitude 6.5 shock on April 29, 1965, which was centered very close to the epicenter of the 1949
earthquake, caused about $12.5 million damage. Three persons were killed by falling debris, and the
deaths of four elderly women from heart failure were attributed to the earthquake. There were
numerous injuries, but most were minor.
i
i
w ;Flirt! fir. y 1 ....
.,,,,,,,,,,,
The shock was characterized by a relatively large intensity VII area and small pockets of intensity VIII
damage in Seattle and Issaquah. Extensive damage to chimneys was noted in West Seattle. In 188 city
blocks, it was found that 1712 of 5005 chimneys were damaged. Two schools in West Seattle and two
brick school buildings in Issaquah were damaged considerably. In general, damage patterns repeated
those experienced during the 1949 shock. Buildings that apparently had been damaged in 1949 often
sustained additional damage in 1965. The tremor was felt over 340,000 square km of Washington,
Oregon, northern Idaho, northwestern Montana, and part of British Columbia.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Most Recent Earthquakes (source: CREW)
A magnitude 5.3 earthquake hit Seattle on May 2, 1996. Information about this earthquake is available
from the Pacific Northwest Seismograph Network.
Another earthquake struck Western Washington on July 2, 1999. Information about this earthquake is
available from EQE, a consulting company.
•
The most recent major earthquake, the Nisqually quake, was a magnitude 6.8 quake and struck near
Olympia, WA on February 28, 2001.
Nisqually Quake impacts to the City of Yakima
➢ Minor ground shaking felt in the Yakima County Courthouse and Yakima City Hall. No damages
occurred.
➢ Residents in the Wenas area in NW Yakima County reported cracked chimneys.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 47
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Table 1— Impact to People
High: Hazard event seriously affects more than 100 people
Medium: Hazard event seriously affects 26 -100 people
Low: Hazard event seriously affects 0 -25 people
Hazard Event Al Prk ilty Rationale
Earthquake High Factors, including the size of potentially vulnerable populations
and age of the housing stock, play a part in determining which
counties are most vulnerable. The City of Yakima is at a greater
risk and most vulnerable to earthquakes. The Saddle Mountain
Fault Zone in South - Central Washington is of major concern to the
city. Reference Earthquake Planning Scenario page 8.
Table 2 Impact to Built Environment
High: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure of
Yakima and the county.
Medium: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to public and private property and critical
infrastructure of Yakima only.
Low: Hazard event is likely to cause some damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure in small
areas of Yakima.
Hazard Event Probabil Rstionsle
Earthquake High Factors, including the size of potentially vulnerable populations
and age of the housing stock, play a part in determining which
counties are most vulnerable. The City of Yakima is at a greater
risk and most vulnerable to earthquakes. The Saddle Mountain
Fault Zone in South - Central Washington is of major concern to the
city. Reference Earthquake Planning Scenario page 8.
Table 3 Impact to the Economy
High: Hazard event causing damages over $10 million.
Medium: Hazard event causing damages between $1 and $10 million.
Low: Hazard event causing damages less than $1 million.
Hazard Event Rationale
Earthquake High Factors, including the size of potentially vulnerable populations
and age of the housing stock, play a part in determining which
counties are most vulnerable. The City of Yakima is at a greater
risk and most vulnerable to earthquakes. The Saddle Mountain
Fault Zone in South - Central Washington is of major concern to the
city. Reference Earthquake Planning Scenario page 8.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 48
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Table 4— Impact to the Natural Environment
High: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to the natural environment in Yakima, if not the entire
county.
Medium: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to the natural environment in Yakima only.
Low: Hazard event is likely to cause some damage to the natural environment in Yakima.
Hazard Event Probabilty Rationale
Earthquake High Factors, including the size of potentially vulnerable populations
and age of the housing stock, play a part in determining which
counties are most vulnerable. The City of Yakima is at a greater
risk and most vulnerable to earthquakes. The Saddle Mountain
Fault Zone in South - Central Washington is of major concern to the
city. Reference Earthquake Planning Scenario page 8.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 49
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Blank Intentionally
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 50
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Flood Profile
Flood (F)
A flood is the partial or complete inundation of normally dry land. The various types of flooding include riverine
flooding, coastal flooding, and shallow flooding. Common impacts of flooding include damage to personal
property, buildings, and infrastructure; bridge and road closures; service disruptions; and injuries or even fatalities.
Much of the recent development in the City of Yakima occurs in or near flood plains. This development increases
the likelihood of flood damages in two ways. First, new developments near a flood plain add structures and
people in flood areas. Secondly, new construction alters surface water flows by diverting water to new courses or
increases the amount of water that runs off impermeable pavement and roof surfaces. This second effect diverts
waters to places previously safe from flooding.
Developments in the city's flood hazard areas are regulated by YMC Title 15 Urban Area Zoning Ordinance.
Flood Rivers Flood Streams
Yakima River Cowiche Creek
Naches River Wide Hollow Creek
Ahtanum Creek
NOTE: There has been no significant high water event since the 2000 city HMP. Had there been such activity, Chapter
15.27 would have addressed the hazard prone areas (identified above) and its impact on the city's vulnerability.
Yakima Municipal Code
Title 15 Urban Area Zoning Ordinance
Effective March 22, 2015
Chapter 15.27 Critical Areas
Part Four. Flood Hazard Areas
Article I. Flood Hazard Areas established
➢ The special flood hazard areas identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in the
"Flood Insurance Study for Yakima County and Incorporated Areas" dated November 18, 2009, with
accompanying Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and any amendments thereto made by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency are herein adopted by reference and declared to be part of Part Four
of the city of Yakima's Critical Areas Ordinance. The Flood Insurance Study and maps are on file with
the city of Yakima, Washington.
➢ The city recognizes the right and need of the river channel to periodically carry more than the normal
flow of water and establishes regulations to minimize loss of life and property, restrict uses and
regulate structures consistent with the degree of flood hazard.
➢ In advancing the above principles, the intent of the city is: (a) to alert the county assessor, appraisers,
owners, potential buyers and lessees to the natural limitations of flood -prone land; (b) to meet the
minimum requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program; and, (c) to implement state and
federal flood protection programs.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 51
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
➢ The guidelines and regulations set forth herein and in YMC Title 11 and related building codes shall
apply to all special flood hazard areas.
A. The provisions of Part Four of this chapter shall apply to any development proposed in a special
flood hazard area;
B. Flood hazard permits shall be approved by the city of Yakima. Approval shall only be granted in
accordance with Part Four of this chapter and other applicable local, state, and federal regulations.
C. Topographic, engineering and construction information necessary to evaluate the proposed project
shall be submitted to the department for approval.
Article II. Flood Hazard Protection Standards
Article III. Floodway Fringe Uses
Article IV. Floodway Uses
Article V. Flood Hazard Protection Administration
Article VI. Elevation and Floodproofing Certification
Article VII. Flood Hazard Variances
The magnitude of most floods in Washington depend on the particular combinations of intensity and duration
of rainfall, pre- existing soil conditions (e.g., was the ground wet or frozen before the storm), the size of the
watershed, elevation of the rain or snow level, and amount of snow pack. Man -made changes to a basin also
can affect the severity of floods.
Although floods can happen at any time during the year, there are typical seasonal patterns for flooding in
Washington State, based on the variety of natural processes that cause floods:
➢ Heavy rainfall on wet or frozen ground, before a snow pack has accumulated, typically cause
fall and early winter floods.
➢ Rainfall combined with melting of the low- elevation snow pack typically cause winter and early
spring floods. Of particular concern is the so- called Pineapple Express, a warm and wet flow of
subtropical air originating near Hawaii which can produce multi -day storms with copious rain
and very high freezing levels.
➢ Late spring floods in Eastern Washington result primarily from melting of the snow pack.
➢ Thunderstorms typically cause flash floods during the summer in Eastern Washington; on rare
occasions, thunderstorms cause on rare occasions, thunderstorms embedded in winter -like
rainstorms cause flash floods in Western Washington.
Several rivers in Eastern Washington also flood every two to five years, including the Spokane,
Okanogan, Methow, Yakima, Walla Walla, and Klickitat; again, damaging events occur less frequently.
Flooding on rivers east of the Cascades usually results from periods of heavy rainfall on wet or frozen
ground, mild temperatures, or from the spring runoff of mountain snow pack.
Eastern Washington is prone to flash flooding. Thunderstorms, combined with steep ravines, alluvial
fans, dry or frozen ground, and lightly vegetated ground that does not absorb water can result in flash
flooding.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Occasionally, communities experience surface water flooding due to high groundwater tables. This
occurred dramatically during the 1996 -97 winter storms. In many communities, residents outside of
identified or mapped flood plains had several inches of water in basements due to groundwater seepage.
These floods contaminated domestic water supplies, fouled septic systems, and inundated electrical and
heating systems. Fire - fighting access was restricted, leaving homes vulnerable to fire. Lake levels were the
highest in recent history, and virtually every county had areas of ponding not previously seen.
Urban areas across the state have also experienced urban or small stream flooding when a developed
community's stormwater drainage system is overwhelmed by excessive rainfall and runoff from
impervious surfaces such as roads and parking lots. While normally not life- threatening, such urban
flooding can be very disruptive for residents. These events may increase as urban areas develop rapidly
without commensurate improvements in urban drainage infrastructure.
=--t .w�a, x.�n
, 4 : : - ,
-. ;�`. _-4 -_' 4 c - . CM/ of ' lib
..� �. ^� � Flood Impaall Arras
• t , .
- v . _ y _ �.
_ - o-e.
-:' � - .. ' _Z } ia. ` F. --
js •
—_-} ; .
— ' + -' - _ _I - • • i. - , Map 11,...1
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 53
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
YAlsaNIA CFI's'
•
ae Icih VI Yakima River - -,,-
Naches River
__ -_
.:.
--- -
---. ..."-. -- E
Tietaiii/Cowlche , - .-
Vs -I - - -
,. : . _ _ .. . •.- r_.- • - ..•
. ',1:•• I
......"'" •
..6.,_ secitte _. ..r. 1 .,,," • •"".."' l ' t !".. • i 1 r
z.
--I.__
'"•:: _.-----; ]...c't Y I . . z :: ... te .' 1
I . - --....
... • '''
= ..= - —0,1., , a ....1M.,.."... - ..1r- ....
-
. . ••=,- °Ir....&
, 4.... r■ ' . r —
. . ,.,.. _
... ....... . -A. . = 1 .
- ---• ' " r T "." 1" ''''''. ' :j....... —. --..... 114 '
4. Fl 05r Ccr
I +•••■.r. .---
Uricpn Goo
._ _ .
- It- •
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 54
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
- , YA$1PM cowry
[ i ] l . - t 1 - ' : i •
• 0 _ 1 1..-.... ': - .. it , I I I _,-__ •
. "� �I -
l� ` «� L i t . !. : •rte' _ -; , j 1 r ,,':: ::, .ti }1 .. I i : a Ahtallum
tf 9� � �I :� - � ! jS . a ;F! ; ;. -, _ Strram Flood
�; I i
-4 1 I' � .. ! . v �lArea
•i � ' :� • R Oliva '1
- .PI "� ^ T ° ' Srkima i • • r
+� Y ' r
....7 F I , , J ;r. - .- . � 1r I .-. .' .
- • 'M"2'-'e . • Wide Hollow Creek ..1 *, _ I' + �,' -- I; i
• 'f" . - - . + i t En..-,.
Ito ' ! ' I'-- ' • t I ±'. f J aim ts,
. 9.... Jam. t l 1 *. . ._.
} — +
� J . r - aim Gap - R,..n
`mss i�r- - .tv• :�rr. � ' o�
cr: Ahtanum Creek fl W .... ,
Ydooa Cull?
L J �
I Email Nbli¢aliee Mao
y
Map fose7
'
-II-- 55 1 r + . •z :,_ .o
I
} IEC -1 t
I ''M, 11 i
0111 'I '
I — -
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 55
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
r •- ' maw couwrr
I i 11 f ii: ..
1
�_ -' `J .“ r West Wiley
-- 1 1 E .-�, ;s, ' , I:, Stream Flood
- -1, .
r [ [a' impaCtArea
Wide Hollow Creek IL . ` ' -
� b @,-
: , i i. 1 - _ i - t - —
E
1 .. I ' 1 7 . f - ._
,...__ - •': Itiel*Anir e - . -
.: ;..a. v - Rosin MitipYM Ma
i
- _ Nag. taoei
,.',- Ahtanum Creek I
j i ' ' I '` I
•
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 56
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
r 1 4 i {.''' ..fit.-. a ws .n.,sae •x
iilr
F r y ^ .... GGwi[he CetFybn
3 '`r 1 ` +. Stream Flu c41
I -- '•'G tiyi + hipRGI Area
' r ' , . Cowiche Creek I ; � ��
J. t 4'
r C - i !__,I.,..:'
ti ' yr Hxaad Sf tigat Plan
� r + r I 'Limp InsH
I _ I _ I __ � — ] r 3 ' . • xo-
i I r N. pt.. - . .... .. .. __..- — — ....... \
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 57
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
? 1 YAKIIAI CO I1Y
.r i ;rr�rtK%s+•.ra.
•
___ ' i Impxt Area • Cowiche Creek fi` ' ' '°.'
. E p i _ `.
} .
IT. =WIMP
1 ~ ; 1
7, I. - 1 N 1 • . ' !, ! - 'I 16il a Cnu.n
W ide Hollow Creek trii , ±�� r. f Maud '° ".° __
_r - - - i 111,11 ; r s i =
- ` ' . ' r, - t f . .. I SLaf lyao .
1 LE
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 58
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Historical Flooding
A flood is an inundation of dry land with water. Types of floods in Yakima County are primarily river, surface
water and flash. The following table provides descriptions of flood prone streams and rivers as listed in the
WAC 173 -18 -430 Yakima County Streams.
Quadrangle
Stream Name Name and Size Legal Description
(1) r Ahtanum Tampico 7 1/2 From confluence of North and South Forks of
Creek Wiley City 7 1/2 Ahtanum Creek (Sec.17, T12N, R16E)
Yakima West 7 1/2 downstream to mouth at Yakima River (Sec.17,
Yakima East 7 1/2 T12N, R19E) excluding those reaches within
I Yakima Indian Reservation.
(2) IAhtanum Foundation Ridge 7 1/2 From confluence of Ahtanum Creek North Fork
Creek Pine Mtn. 7 1/2 and Ahtanum Creek Middle Fork (Sec.24, T12N,
(N. Fk.) Tampico 7 1/2 R14E) downstream to mouth at Ahtanum Creek
South Fork (Sec.17, T12N, R16E).
(3)IAhtanum Pine Mtn. 7 1/2 From confluence of unnamed creek and
Creek ampico 7 1/2 Ahtanum Creek South Fork (Sec.24, T12N, R15E)
(S. Fk.) downstream to mouth at Ahtanum Creek (left
bank only).
(4) Columbia Priest Rapids 15 From the Yakima Firing Center boundary (Sec.3,
River* T13N, R23E) downstream along the Grant -
Yakima County line to Benton County line
(Sec.12, T13N, R23E). The flow exceeds 200 cfs
MAF at Yakima Firing Center boundary.
(5) Cowiche Tieton 7 1/2 From an approximate point (NW1 /4 of NE1 /4
Creek Naches 7 1/2 Sec.33, T14N, R16E) downstream through
(S. Fork) Wiley City 7 1/2 Cowiche Creek to mouth at Naches River (Sec.9,
Yakima 7 1/2 T13N, R18E).
Selah West 7 1/2
(6) Bumping Bumping Lake* 15 From U.S.G.S. gaging station (Sec.23, T16N,
River* Old Scab Mtn. 7 1/2 R12E) downstream to mouth at Naches and Little
Cliffdell 7 1/2 Naches rivers (Sec.4, T17N, R14E). Exclude
federal lands. The flow is over 200 cfs MAF at
U.S.G.S. gaging station.
(7) 'Little Lester 15 From confluence of North Fork and Middle Fork
Naches Easton* 15 Little Naches River (Sec.36, T19N, R12E)
River* Cliffdell 7 1/2 downstream to mouth at Naches River (Sec.4,
T17N, R14E). Exclude federal lands. The 200 cfs
MAF point begins at confluence with Crow Creek
(Sec.30, T18N, R14E).
III ■
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 59
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Quadrangle
Stream Name Name and Size Le :al Descri stion
I I P _
(8) Naches Cliffdell 7 1/2 From confluence of Little Naches River and
River* Manastash Lake 7 1/2 Bumping River (Sec.4, T17N, R14E) downstream
Nile 7 1/2 to mouth at Yakima River (Sec.12, T13N, R18E).
Milk Canyon 7 1/2 Exclude federal lands. The flow is 200 cfs MAF at
Tieton 7 1/2 confluence of Little Naches River and Bumping
Naches 7 1/2 River.
Selah 7 1/2
(9) Rattlesnake Meeks Table 7 1/2 From Snoqualmie National Forest boundary
Creek* Nile 7 1/2 (Sec.6, T15N, R15E) downstream to mouth at
Naches River (Sec.3, same township). The flow at
Snoqualmie N.F. boundary is 200 cfs MAF.
I
(10) Tieton Weddle Canyon 7 1/2 From west section line (Sec.29, T14N, R15E)
River* Tieton* 7 1/2 downstream to mouth at Naches River (Sec.35,
T15N, R16E). Exclude federal lands. The flow is
200 cfs MAF at west section line (Sec.29, T14N,
R15E).
(11) Teton White Pass 15 From the south section line (Sec.23, T12N, R12E)
River Rimrock Lake 7 1/2 downstream to mouth at Rimrock Lake (Sec.7,
(S. Fk.) T13N, R14E). Exclude federal lands.
(12) Yakima Pomona* 7 1/2 From the Kittitas County line (Sec.33, T15N,
River Selah 7 1/2 R19E) downstream, excluding all federal lands
(Cont.)* Yakima East 7 1/2 and Yakima Indian Reservation, to Benton
Wapato 7 1/2 County line (Sec.7, T8N, R24E). The flow exceeds
Toppenish 7 1/2 200 cfs MAF at Kittitas County line.
I Granger N.W. 7 1/2
Granger 7 1/2
Sunnyside 7 1/2
Mabton West 7 1/2
Mabton East 7 1/2
Prosser 7 1/2
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 60
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Yakima County Recent Flooding Events: 2010 -2014
NOAA National Climatic Data Center
Storm Events Database
Begin Date: 1- 1/2010
End Date: 01/31/2014
Event Details
Event Flood
L Flood Cause Heavy Rain / Snow Melt
L tate WASHINGTON
County /Area YAKIMA
L WFO PDT
Report Source River /Stream Gage
NCDC Data
Source CSV
Begin Date 2011-01-16 18:00:00.0 PST -8
Begin Location 7NNW PRIEST RAPIDS
Begin Lat /Lon 46.74/- 120.99
End Date 1 2011 -01 -19 00:00:00.0 PST -8
End Location 5NNE NACHES
C nd Lat /Lon 46.8/- 120.65
Deaths
Direct /Indirect 0/0 (fatality details below, when available...)
I Injuries
`Direct /Indirect 0/0
I Pr operty
Damage 1.00K
C rop Damage 0.00K
A large Pacific weather system became established in mid January that produced copious amounts
of rainfall with unseasonably warm conditions in parts of Washington. The heavy rainfall combined
with snowmelt caused rapid runoff with 4 rivers and 7 different warning points reaching flood
Episode stage. Flood warnings were first issued on the morning of January 15 and the last flood warning
Narrative ended on January 21st.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP L
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
In Yakima County, the flooding was contained to the low areas along the Yakima River including the
Selah Golf Course and the Yakima Greenway. The Yakima River at Parker crested at 12.2 feet just
Event Narrative after midnight on January 18th, 2.2 feet above flood stage.
Event Details
Event Flood
-- Flood Cause I Heavy Rain / Snow Melt
[State WASHINGTON
County /Area YAKIMA
L W FO PDT
Report Source River /Stream Gage
NCDC Data
Source CSV
[Begin Date 2011 -03 -31 19:30:00.0 PST -8
[Begin Location 4NNW TIETON
Begin Lat /Lon 46.75/- 120.78
End Date J 2011 -03 -31 23:59:00.0 PST -8
End Location 2ESE NACHES
L nd Lat /Lon 46.72/- 120.66
Deaths
[Direct /Indirect 0/0 (fatality details below, when available...)
Injuries
Direct /Indirect 0/0
Property Damage 0.00K
Crop Damage 0.00K
Heavy rainfall on melting snowpack along the east slopes of the Washington Cascades caused
Episode flooding along numerous streams in western Kittitas and Yakima counties. Reported rainfall
Narrative included 2.5 inches in Easton and .69 inches in Cle Elum.
Event Narrative The Naches River at Naches crested .2 feet above normal.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 62
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Event Details
Event Flood
-- Flood Cause Heavy Rain / Snow Melt
State WASHINGTON
County /Area 1 YAKIMA
WFO PDT
Report Source R iv er /Stream Gage
NCDC Data
Source CSV
L egin Date 2011-04-01 00:00:00.0 PST -8
Begin Location 4WNW NACHES
Begin Lat /Lon ' 46.76/- 120.77
End Date 2011-04-01 04:00:00.0 PST -8
End Location 2N GLEED
End Lat /Lon 46.69/- 120.62
Deaths
Direct /Indirect 0/0 (fatality details below, when available...)
Injuries
Direct /Indirect 0/0
Property
Damage 0.00K
Crop Damage 1 0.00K
End of March heavy rainfall on melting snowpack along the east slopes of the Washington Cascades
caused flooding along numerous streams in western Kittitas and Yakima counties. Reported rainfall
Episode included 2.5 inches in Easton and .69 inches in Cle Elum. Water was over the roads in 12 locations in
Narrative upper Kittitas County and resulted in washouts of shoulders and some mudslides.
Event Narrative C ontinuing from March 31, the river gage at Naches crested at .2 feet above flood stage.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 63
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Event Details
Event Flood
-- Flood Cause Heavy Rain / Snow Melt
State WASHINGTON
County /Area YAKIMA
WFO PDT
L eport Source I River /Stream Gage
NCDC Data
Source CSV
Begin Date r2011 -04- 0102:30:00.0 PST -8
L Begin Location r1SSE UNION GAP
B egin Lat /Lon 46.53/- 120.46
End Date 2011 -04 -02 05:45:00.0 PST -8
End Location j 1SSE SAWYER
End Lat /Lon 46.45/- 120.34
Deaths
Direct /Indirect 0/0 (fatality details below, when available...)
Injuries
Direct /Indirect 0/0
Property
Damage 0.00K
Crop Damage 0.00K
End of March heavy rainfall on melting snowpack along the east slopes of the Washington Cascades
caused flooding along numerous streams in western Kittitas and Yakima counties. Reported rainfall
Episode included 2.5 inches in Easton and .69 inches in Cle Elum. Water was over the roads in 12 locations in
Narrative upper Kittitas County and resulted in washouts of shoulders and some mudslides.
L Event Narrative The river gage at Parker crested 1.3 feet above flood stage.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 64
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Event Details
Event Flood
-- Flood Cause Heavy Rain / Snow Melt
State WASHINGTON
County /Area 1 YAKIMA
WFO PDT
Report Source Newspaper
NCDC Data
Source CSV
L egin Date 2011 -05 -15 03:45:00.0 PST -8
Begin Location 4NW CLIFFDELL
Begin Lat /Lon ' 46.97/- 121.11
End Date 2011 -05 -23 12:15:00.0 PST -8
End Location 4NW TIETON
End Lat /Lon 46.73/- 120.82
Deaths
Direct /Indirect 0/0 (fatality details below, when available...)
Injuries
Direct /Indirect 0/0
Property
Damage 0.00K
Crop Damage 10.00K
An upper level low pressure system moved over the Pacific Northwest. Moist and unstable
conditions ahead of the low triggered widespread thunderstorms with heavy rainfall and isolated
large hail. This combined with the abundant spring snow -pack and wet ground to cause flooding. A
75 yard wide mudslide closed Highway 410 at milepost 87. As the upper low brought colder air. late
Episode season heavy snow ended the episode in the Blue Mountains. Snowfall amounts in inches included
Narrative Touchet Snotel (7).
Flooding closed sections of Highway 410 and other roads along the Naches River from Cliffdell to
Yakima. High water and large debris damaged bridges. The Naches River crested at 20.4 on May
15th, which was 3.4 feet above flood stage. At Cliffdell, the river crested at 32.2 feet on May 15th,
Event Narrative which was 1.3 feet above normal.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 65
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Event Details
Event Flood
-- Flood Cause Heavy Rain / Snow Melt
State WASHINGTON
County /Area 1 YAKIMA
WFO PDT
Report Source River /Stream Gage
NCDC Data
Source CSV
L egin Date 2011 -05 -15 16:30:00.0 PST -8
Begin Location 2SE POMONA
Begin Lat /Lon 1 46.69/- 120.47
End Date 2011 -05 -17 15:30:00.0 PST -8
End Location 2SE UNION GAP
End Lat /Lon 46.53/- 120.44
Deaths
Direct /Indirect 0/0 (fatality details below, when available...)
Injuries
Direct /Indirect 0/0
Property
Damage 0.00K
Crop Damage 10.00K
An upper level low pressure system moved over the Pacific Northwest. Moist and unstable
conditions ahead of the low triggered widespread thunderstorms with heavy rainfall and isolated
large hail. This combined with the abundant spring snow -pack and wet ground to cause flooding. A
75 yard wide mudslide closed Highway 410 at milepost 87. As the upper low brought colder air. late
Episode season heavy snow ended the episode in the Blue Mountains. Snowfall amounts in inches included
Narrative Touchet Snotel (7).
The Yakima River at Umtanum crested at 36.5 feet on May 16th, which was 1 foot above flood
stage. At Parker the crest was 13.2 feet on May 16th, which was 3.2 feet above flood stage.
Event Narrative Reported rainfall amounts on May 14 -15 were between 3 and 4 inches.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 66
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Event Details
Event Flood
-- Flood Cause Lleavy Rain / Snow Melt
State I WASHINGTON
I
County /Area YAKIMA
WFO PDT
Report Source L a w Enforcement
L CDC Data Source _ CSV
Begin Date 1 2012 -03 -30 09:00:00.0 PST -8
Begin Location 1W SATUS
Begin Lat /Lon 46.28/- 120.17
End Date 2012 -03 -30 09:00:00.0 PST -8
End Location 1W SATUS
End Lat /Lon 46.28/- 120.17
Deaths
Direct /Indirect 0/0 (fatality details below, when available...)
Injuries
Direct /Indirect 0/0
L roperty Damage 0.00K
L rop Damage 0.00K
Heavy rainfall on snowpack caused flooding creeks and rivers in portions of Klickitat and
Ep isode Narrative Yakima Counties.
Water from Satus Creek was over the West Satus Road and Marion Drain Road near Highway
E vent Narrative 22.
Event Details
Event Fl
-- Flood Cause Heavy Rain / Snow Melt
State I WASHINGTON
[ounty /Area YAKIMA
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 67
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
L WFO J LPDT
Report Source River /Stream Gage
NCDC Data Source CSV
B egin Date 2012 -04 -23 21:45:00.0 PST -8
B egin Location ON NACHES
Begin Lat /Lon 46.73/ -120.7
End Date 2012 -04 -26 21:45:00.0 PST -8
End Location 4NNW TIETON
End Lat /Lon J 46.76/- 120.78
[Deaths Direct /Indirect ' 0/0 (fatality details below, when available...)
Injuries
Direct /Indirect 1 0/0
L roperty Damage 0.00K
L rop Damage 0.00K
Above normal temperatures and rainfall caused minor flooding on the Yakima and Naches
Ep isode Narrative Rivers.
Event Narrative Th Naches River at Naches crested at 18.27 feet on April 25 at 1 am. Flood stage is 17.8 feet.
Event Details
Event Flood
-- Flood Cause Heavy Rain / Snow Melt
State WASHINGTON
1 County/Area YAKIMA
r WFO PDT
L eport Source River /Stream Gage
NCDC Data Source CSV
Begin Date 2012-04-24 10:15:00.0 PST -8
B egin Location ON PARKER
B egin Lat /Lon 46.5/- 120.47
•
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 68
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
End Date _1 2012 -04 -25 21:00:00.0 PST -8
L nd Location 1NNE SOUTH BROADWAY
End Lat /Lon 46.62/- 120.51
L eaths Direct /Indirect 0/0 (fatality details below, when available...)
Injuries
Direct /Indirect 0/0
L roperty Damage 0.00K
Crop Damage 0.00K
Above normal temperatures and rainfall caused minor flooding on the Yakima and Naches
Episode Narrative Rivers.
Event Narrative The Yakima River at Parker crested at 10.19 feet on April 25 at 2:15 pm. Flood stage is 10 feet.
Event Details
Event Flood
-- Flood Cause Planned Dam Release
State ' WASHINGTON
L ounty /Area YAKIMA
L WFO PDT
Report Source River /Stream Gage
NCDC Data Source CSV
Begin Date J 2012 -06 -04 22:00:00.0 PST -8
Begin Location ON NACHES
Begin Lat /Lon 46.73/ -120.7
End Date 2012 -06 -07 03:45:00.0 PST -8
L nd Location I 3NNW ESCHBACH
L nd Lat /Lon 46.7/- 120.66
Deaths
Direct /Indirect 0/0 (fatality details below, when available...)
Injuries
Direct /Indirect 0/0
•
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 69
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
[roperty Damage 0.00K
L rop Damage 0.00K
Snowmelt and increased reservoir releases caused minor flooding on the Naches River from
Ep isode Narrative I June 4 to June 7.
[ _
The Yakima River at Naches crested at 16.44 feet at 5:15 pm on June 6th. Flood stage is 16.0
E vent Narrative f eet.
Event Details
Event 1 Flood
L Flood Cause LPlanned Dam Release
State WASHINGTON
County /Area YAKIMA
WFO PDT
Report Source River /Stream Gage
NCDC Data Source CSV
Begin Date 2012 -06 -17 06:00:00.0 PST -8
b egin Location ON NACHES
b egin Lat /Lon 46.73/ -120.7
End Date 2012 -06 -24 22:00:00.0 PST -8
End Location 1NNW BRACE
End Lat /Lon 46.65/- 120.59
Deaths
Direct /Indirect 0/0 (fatality details below, when available...)
Injuries
Direct /Indirect 0/0
Property Damage 0.00K
Crop Damage 0.00K
` I Snowmelt and increased reservoir releases caused minor flooding on the Naches River from
Episode Narrative i June 4 to June 7.
Event Narrative The Yakima River at Naches crested on June 1811 pm at 16.64 feet. Flood stage is 16.0 feet.
•
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 70
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Event Details
Event Flood
-- Flood Cause Heavy Rain / Snow Melt
State WASHINGTON
County /Area YAKIMA
WFO PDT
Report Source River /Stream Gage
NCDC Data
Source CSV
L egin Date 2013 -05 -07 00:15:00.0 PST -8
Begin Location 1WNW BRACE
Begin Lat /Lon 46.63/- 120.59
End Date 2013 -05 -15 14:30:00.0 PST -8
End Location OWNW BRACE
End Lat /Lon 46.63/- 120.59
Deaths
Direct /Indirect 0/0 (fatality details below, when available...)
Injuries
Direct /Indirect 0/0
Property Damage 0.00K
Crop Damage 0.00K
Extrem heat lead to a prolonged period of snow -melt along the Cascades. This allowed the
Episode Naches River near Naches to rise above flood stage for several days. Flood stage for the Naches
Narrative ' River is 16 feet, and the river crested at 16.82 feet on May 12th.
vent Narrative r
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 71
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Table 1— Impact to People
High: Hazard event seriously affects more than 100 people
Medium: Hazard event seriously affects 26 -100 people
Low: Hazard event seriously affects 0 -25 people
Hazard Event Probabilty Rationale
Flood Rivers High Frequency analysis for the Yakima and Naches Rivers indicate that
Yakima River the 100 -year flood has not been attained within the current flow
Naches River record. The 1996 flood is estimated at a 50 -year flood on the
Flood Streams Medium Naches and 70 -yr flood on the Yakima Rivers. The following
Cowiche Creek tributaries, located on the western city limits, have produced
Wide Hollow Creek significant flood damage and are considered flood prone: Cowiche,
Ahtanum Creek Ahtanum, Wide Hollow.
Table 2 Impact to Built Environment
High: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure of
Yakima and the county.
Medium: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure of
Yakima only.
Low: Hazard event is likely to cause some damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure in small
areas of Yakima.
—
Hazard Event Rstionsle
Flood Rivers High Frequency analysis for the Yakima and Naches Rivers indicate that
Yakima River the 100 -year flood has not been attained within the current flow
Naches River record. The 1996 flood is estimated at a 50 -year flood on the
Flood Streams Medium Naches and 70 -yr flood on the Yakima Rivers. The following
Cowiche Creek tributaries, located on the western city limits, have produced
Wide Hollow Creek significant flood damage and are considered flood prone: Cowiche,
Ahtanum Creek Ahtanum, Wide Hollow.
Table 3 Impact to the Economy
High: Hazard event causing damages over $10 million.
Medium: Hazard event causing damages between $1 and $10 million.
Low: Hazard event causing damages less than $1 million.
A@zard Event 'robabilty Rationale
Flood Rivers High Frequency analysis for the Yakima and Naches Rivers indicate that
Yakima River the 100 -year flood has not been attained within the current flow
Naches River record. The 1996 flood is estimated at a 50 -year flood on the
Flood Streams Medium Naches and 70 -yr flood on the Yakima Rivers. The following
Cowiche Creek tributaries, located on the western city limits, have produced
Wide Hollow Creek significant flood damage and are considered flood prone: Cowiche,
Ahtanum Creek Ahtanum, Wide Hollow.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 72
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Table 4— Impact to the Natural Environment
High: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to the natural environment in Yakima, if not the entire county.
Medium: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to the natural environment in Yakima only.
Low: Hazard event is likely to cause some damage to the natural environment in Yakima.
Hazard Event Probabilty Rationale MIMI
Flood Rivers Low Frequency analysis for the Yakima and Naches Rivers indicate that
Yakima River the 100 -year flood has not been attained within the current flow
Naches River record. The 1996 flood is estimated at a 50 -year flood on the
Flood Streams Low Naches and 70 -yr flood on the Yakima Rivers. The following
Cowiche Creek tributaries, located on the western city limits, have produced
Wide Hollow Creek significant flood damage and are considered flood prone:
Ahtanum Creek Cowiche, Ahtanum, Wide Hollow.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 73
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Blank Intentionally.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 74
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Severe Storms Profile
Extreme Temperatures (ET)
Extreme heat and extreme cold constitute different conditions in different parts of the country. Extreme cold
can range from near freezing temperatures in the southern United States to temperatures well below zero in
the northern states. Similarly, extreme heat is typically recognized as the condition where temperatures
consistently stay ten degrees or more above a region's average high temperature for an extended period.
Fatalities can result from extreme temperatures, as they can push the human body beyond its limits
(hyperthermia and hypothermia). (Reference Appendix D)
Severe Wind (SW)
Severe wind can occur alone, such as during straightline wind events, or it can accompany other natural
hazards, including hurricanes and severe thunderstorms. Severe wind poses a threat to lives, property, and
vital utilities primarily due to the effects of flying debris or downed trees and power lines. Severe wind will
typically cause the greatest damage to structures of light construction, particularly manufactured homes.
(Reference Appendix D)
Severe Winter Weather (WW)
Severe winter storms may include snow, sleet, freezing rain, or a mix of these wintry forms of precipitation.
Severe winter weather can down trees, cause widespread power outages, damage property, and cause
fatalities and injuries. (Reference Appendix D)
All areas of Washington State are vulnerable to severe weather. Typically, a severe storm can cause
major impacts to transportation, infrastructure and services, and loss of utilities. Most storms move into
Washington from the Pacific Ocean. A severe storm is defined as an atmospheric disturbance that
results in one or more of the following phenomena: high winds, heavy snow, large hail, thunderstorms,
lightning, tornados, rain, snow or other mixed precipitation. These phenomena are defined by the
National Weather Service:
➢ High Winds — Sustained wind speeds of 40 mph or greater lasting for 1 hour or longer, or
winds of 58 mph or greater for any duration, not caused by thunderstorms.
➢ Severe Thunderstorm — A thunderstorm that produces a tornado, winds of at least 58 mph
(50 knots), and /or hail at least 1 inch in diameter. A thunderstorm with wind equal to or
greater than 40 mph (35 knots) and /or hail at least %2 inches in diameter is defined as
approaching severe.
➢ Tornado — A violently rotating column of air, usually pendant to a cumulonimbus (type of
cloud), with circulation reaching the ground. It nearly always starts as a funnel cloud and may
be accompanied by a loud rotating noise. On a local scale, it is the most destructive of all
atmospheric phenomena.
➢ Heavy Snow — This generally means: a snowfall accumulating to 4" or more in depth in 12
hours or less or a snowfall accumulating to 6" or more in depth in 24 hours or less.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
➢ Lightning — A visible electrical discharge produced by a thunderstorm. The discharge may
occur within or between clouds, between the cloud and air, between a cloud and the ground
or between the ground and a cloud.
➢ Hail — Showery precipitation in the form of irregular pellets or balls of ice more than 5 mm in
diameter, falling from a cumulonimbus cloud.
➢ Winter storm — A storm with significant snowfall, ice, and /or freezing rain; the quantity of
precipitation varies by elevation. Heavy snowfall is 4 inches or more in a 12 -hour period, or 6
or more inches in a 24 -hour period in non - mountainous areas; and 12 inches or more in a 12-
hour period or 18 inches or more in a 24 -hour period in mountainous areas.
Probability of Future Events
Based on a Ted Buehner, Warning Coordination Meteorologist, National Weather Service, Seattle
Forecast Office, presentation to Washington State Emergency Management on October 25, 2012 using
National Climate Prediction Center forecasts and his personal experience as a meteorologist in the
northwest, severe storms can occur in any given winter regardless of the El Nino Southern Oscillation
(ENSO) phase. However, some general trends can be teased out as depicted in the presentation slide
below (Figure 5.7 -5) as to the frequency of the event type to the ENSO phase. Otherwise, climate
predictions are limited to 30 days and weather forecasts are limited to 7 -10 days. Severe storms and
their associated wind, snow and flooding effects will occur in Washington State regularly.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Counties Most Vulnerable to Winter Storms l
5
14.1 d
ly tts1
r.rllyn S•hy.11101
,U'. Id
.1.N.ronn
Rllaa• .I. mvtn LnrAln11JJ.r
Gr... II.mn•
.S M1 ar.m
Ta1V?i ir.li,
•2:.:.1
w.r..IaII
,?;.:-In 1 l'•Yh!•, :4.7.-ij 416tl15
IL¢
7:1L1 Legend
N
-- I. Wlntar S;arm Mont Wrrr
lable [[!unties
it is . 1rl Washington County Soraodary
1 ....1 • • I
. I Count's. Boundary
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 77
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Counties Most Vulnerable to High Winds
❑kannpn Prr.d fllrO4
"1;1;111 1 .. #�I :"�1 ..'Su I i%
.tif ^.511
1-l' l . „ brie/tin ry.1.%1 ��
4.
1 - ..,1 •
.2:a
7 -- ` �� _...w.._ fi11i•lll , i 3 . r 1 . °u T . 4Sb11f,
l Via
=iw . legend
-
r \, . - - HIRh Wind Mau Vulnerable Counties
Zt 6 l. M ' Wathington County Boundary
— —
oe — County Boundary
M
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 78
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Storm Events Database
Event Details:
L vent Winter Storm
[State WASHINGTON
County /Area YAKIMA VALLEY
L WFO PDT
Report Source I COOP Observer
NCEI Data
Source CSV
[Begin Date j[2012 -01 -19 06:00:00.0 PST -8
End Date 1 2012 -01 -19 17:00:00.0 PST -8
Deaths
Direct /Indirect 0/0 (fatality details below, when available...)
Injuries
Direct /Indirect 0/0
I Property
Damage 0.00K
Crop Damage 0.00K
Modified arctic air moved into the region followed by a series of moderate to strong upper level
storm systems riding on a moist subtropical jet stream. The result was widespread heavy snow and
local high winds. Freezing rain and sleet accumulated to between 1/4 and 1/2 inch over the lower
elevations.
On January 17 and 18, snowfall amounts reported in inches included Waitsburg (6), 5 miles north
northwest of Wiley City (6), 18 miles west northwest of West Richland (5), 8 miles west northwest
of Connell (4), 2 miles west of Yakima (5), Toppenish (6), 1 mile southwest of Yakima (5), 5 miles
north northwest of Centerville (15), 9 miles northwest of Roslyn (23), 3 miles north northeast of
Ellensburg (4), Yakima (4), 7 miles northeast of Goldendale (14.5), 4 miles east northeast of White
Salmon (18), 1 mile south southwest of Yakima (4), Cle Elum (7), Dayton (7.5), Ski Bluewood (18),
Goldendale (12), 1 mile west northwest of White Salmon (17), Glenwood (10), 1 mile east of Walla
Walla (5), 5 miles north of White Salmon (10.2), Mount Adams Ranger Station (17), Snowden (18),
Easton (14), Tampico (11), 2 miles east south of West Valley (5.5), 4 miles east northeast of Yakima
(4), Waitsburg (7), Richland (6), 15 miles northeast of Pasco (7.5), 10 miles east of Goldendale (13),
1 mile west of Toppenish (5), Kennewick (7.8), 3 miles northeast of College Place (4), West Richland
(7), 5 miles south of Sunnyside (5), 20 miles west of Prescott (7), Selah (5), White Salmon (16), 6
Episode miles east of White Swan (5.5), West Valley (7), Sunnyside 4.5), 10 miles north of Pasco (4), 1 mile
Narrative southwest of Ellensburg (4), and 2 miles northeast of Husum (10.2).
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
On January 19 -20, another surge of subtropical Pacific moisture moved over the cold air with a
widespread mixture of precipitation. The lower elevations received freezing rain mixed at times
with sleet and snow. The higher elevations received heavy snowfall. The storm caused numerous
vehicle accidents with injuries, downed tree branches, power outages, and closed roads and
schools.
Ice accumulation reported in inches included Kennewick (.5), 1 mile west of Patterson (.25), Dayton
(.5), Walla Walla (.5), 3 miles northeast of Dallesport (.38), 1 mile west northwest of White Salmon
(.25).
Snowfall amounts reported in inches included 8 miles southeast of Cliffdell (13), 5 miles west
southwest of Yakima (4.5), Yakima (4), Connell (4.5), 2 miles northwest of Ellensburg (5.8),
Sunnyside (4.1), Glenwood (8), and 7 miles west of Fruitvale (7).
Event
Narrative
Storm Events Database
Event Details:
L vent Heavy Snow
L tate WASHINGTON
L ounty /Area YAKIMA VALLEY
WFO PDT
Report Source I LCOOP Observer
NCEI Data
Source CSV
Begin Date J 2012 -01 -18 02:00:00.0 PST -8
End Date 2012-01-18 14:00:00.0 PST -8
Deaths
Direct /Indirect 0/0 (fatality details below, when available...)
Injuries
Direct /Indirect 0/0
Property
Damage 0.00K
L op Damage 0.00K
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 80
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Modified arctic air moved into the region followed by a series of moderate to strong upper level
storm systems riding on a moist subtropical jet stream. The result was widespread heavy snow and
local high winds. Freezing rain and sleet accumulated to between 1/4 and 1/2 inch over the lower
elevations.
On January 17 and 18, snowfall amounts reported in inches included Waitsburg (6), 5 miles north
northwest of Wiley City (6), 18 miles west northwest of West Richland (5), 8 miles west northwest
of Connell (4), 2 miles west of Yakima (5), Toppenish (6), 1 mile southwest of Yakima (5), 5 miles
north northwest of Centerville (15), 9 miles northwest of Roslyn (23), 3 miles north northeast of
Ellensburg (4), Yakima (4), 7 miles northeast of Goldendale (14.5), 4 miles east northeast of White
Salmon (18), 1 mile south southwest of Yakima (4), Cle Elum (7), Dayton (7.5), Ski Bluewood (18),
Goldendale (12), 1 mile west northwest of White Salmon (17), Glenwood (10), 1 mile east of Walla
Walla (5), 5 miles north of White Salmon (10.2), Mount Adams Ranger Station (17), Snowden (18),
Easton (14), Tampico (11), 2 miles east south of West Valley (5.5), 4 miles east northeast of Yakima
(4), Waitsburg (7), Richland (6), 15 miles northeast of Pasco (7.5), 10 miles east of Goldendale (13),
1 mile west of Toppenish (5), Kennewick (7.8), 3 miles northeast of College Place (4), West Richland
(7), 5 miles south of Sunnyside (5), 20 miles west of Prescott (7), Selah (5), White Salmon (16), 6
miles east of White Swan (5.5), West Valley (7), Sunnyside 4.5), 10 miles north of Pasco (4), 1 mile
southwest of Ellensburg (4), and 2 miles northeast of Husum (10.2).
On January 19 -20, another surge of subtropical Pacific moisture moved over the cold air with a
widespread mixture of precipitation. The lower elevations received freezing rain mixed at times
with sleet and snow. The higher elevations received heavy snowfall. The storm caused numerous
vehicle accidents with injuries, downed tree branches, power outages, and closed roads and
schools.
Ice accumulation reported in inches included Kennewick (.5), 1 mile west of Patterson (.25), Dayton
(.5), Walla Walla (.5), 3 miles northeast of Dallesport (.38), 1 mile west northwest of White Salmon
(.25).
Snowfall amounts reported in inches included 8 miles southeast of Cliffdell (13), 5 miles west
Episode southwest of Yakima (4.5), Yakima (4), Connell (4.5), 2 miles northwest of Ellensburg (5.8),
Narrative Sunnyside (4.1), Glenwood (8), and 7 miles west of Fruitvale (7).
Event
Narrative
■ J■
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 21
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Table 1— Impact to People
High: Hazard event seriously affects more than 100 people
Medium: Hazard event seriously affects 26 -100 people
Low: Hazard event seriously affects 0 -25 people
Hazard Event Probabilty Rationale
Severe Storms —Heat High Typically recognized as the condition where temperatures
consistently stay ten degrees or more above a region's average
high temperature for an extended period. Fatalities can result from
extreme temperatures, as they can push the human body beyond
its limits (hyperthermia and hypothermia).
Severe Storms — Winter High A storm with significant snowfall, ice, and /or freezing rain; the
Storms quantity of precipitation varies by elevation. Heavy snowfall is 4
inches or more in a 12 -hour period, or 6 or more inches in a 24-
hour period in non - mountainous areas; and 12 inches or more in a
12 -hour period or 18 inches or more in a 24 -hour period in
mountainous areas.
Severe Storms —High High Sustained wind speeds of 40 mph or greater lasting for 1 hour or
Winds longer, or winds of 58 mph or greater for any duration, not
caused by thunderstorms.
Table 2— Impact to Built Environment
High: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure of
Yakima and the county.
Medium: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure of
Yakima only.
Low: Hazard event is likely to cause some damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure in small
areas of Yakima.
Hazard Event Probabilty Rstionsle
Severe Storms - -Heat Low Typically recognized as the condition where temperatures
consistently stay ten degrees or more above a region's average
high temperature for an extended period. Fatalities can result
from extreme temperatures, as they can push the human body
beyond its limits (hyperthermia and hypothermia).
Severe Storms — Winter Low A storm with significant snowfall, ice, and /or freezing rain; the
Storms quantity of precipitation varies by elevation. Heavy snowfall is 4
inches or more in a 12 -hour period, or 6 or more inches in a 24-
hour period in non - mountainous areas; and 12 inches or more in a
12 -hour period or 18 inches or more in a 24 -hour period in
mountainous areas.
Severe Storms —High Low Sustained wind speeds of 40 mph or greater lasting for 1 hour or
Winds longer, or winds of 58 mph or greater for any duration, not
caused by thunderstorms.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 82
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Table 3- Impact to the Economy
High: Hazard event causing damages over $10 million.
Medium: Hazard event causing damages between $1 and $10 million.
Low: Hazard event causing damages less than $1 million.
Hazard Event Probabilty Rationale
Severe Storms - -Heat Low Typically recognized as the condition where temperatures
consistently stay ten degrees or more above a region's average
high temperature for an extended period. Fatalities can result from
extreme temperatures, as they can push the human body beyond
its limits (hyperthermia and hypothermia).
Severe Storms — Winter Low A storm with significant snowfall, ice, and /or freezing rain; the
Storms quantity of precipitation varies by elevation. Heavy snowfall is 4
inches or more in a 12 -hour period, or 6 or more inches in a 24-
hour period in non - mountainous areas; and 12 inches or more in a
12 -hour period or 18 inches or more in a 24 -hour period in
mountainous areas.
Severe Storms —High Low Sustained wind speeds of 40 mph or greater lasting for 1 hour or
Winds longer, or winds of 58 mph or greater for any duration, not caused
by thunderstorms.
Table 4— Impact to the Natural Environment
High: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to the natural environment in Yakima, if not the entire county.
Medium: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to the natural environment in Yakima only.
Low: Hazard event is likely to cause some damage to the natural environment in Yakima.
Hazard Event Probabilty Rationale
Severe Storms - -Heat Low Typically recognized as the condition where temperatures
consistently stay ten degrees or more above a region's average
high temperature for an extended period. Fatalities can result
from extreme temperatures, as they can push the human body
beyond its limits (hyperthermia and hypothermia).
Severe Storms — Winter Low A storm with significant snowfall, ice, and /or freezing rain; the
Storms quantity of precipitation varies by elevation. Heavy snowfall is 4
inches or more in a 12 -hour period, or 6 or more inches in a 24-
hour period in non - mountainous areas; and 12 inches or more in a
12 -hour period or 18 inches or more in a 24 -hour period in
mountainous areas.
Severe Storms —High Low Sustained wind speeds of 40 mph or greater lasting for 1 hour or
Winds longer, or winds of 58 mph or greater for any duration, not caused
by thunderstorms.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 83
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Blank Intentionally
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 84
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Tornado Profile
Tornado (T)
A tornado is a violently rotating column of air that has contact with the ground and is often visible as a funnel
cloud. The destruction caused by tornadoes ranges from light to catastrophic depending on the intensity,
size, and duration of the storm. Typically, tornadoes cause the greatest damage to structures of light
construction, including residential dwellings and particularly manufactured homes. Tornadoes are more likely
to occur during the months of March through May and tend to form in the late afternoon and early evening.
(Reference Appendix D)
May 31, 1997 Tornado 0utbreak23, 24 - A record six tornados touched down in Washington in one day; the
state's previous record was four tornados in 1989 for the entire year. Four F1 tornados hit Stevens and
Spokane counties in northeast Washington. Two FO tornados touched down in western Washington
— Vancouver and Tacoma. Also, on the same day in Idaho, an F1 tornado struck Athol and an FO was
observed near Lewiston. In addition, this storm produced severe thunderstorms with large hail up to two
to three inches in diameter, heavy rain and flash flooding, and wind gusts to near 80 mph. An FO tornado
has winds of 40 -72 miles per hour and is capable of light damage. An F1 tornado has winds of 73 -112
mph and is capable of moderate damage. No deaths or injuries reported. A record 14 tornados were
reported in the state in 1997.
WASHINGTON STAT
Tornado Occurrence; ,y .afL}1IT
;Milan -, „ 10
O44pn..pnr ,* 1.'rr Lflll,t. r.nd r}►il• nly
SkaQh (Dory Clumpy,
IJ.,rA
CndAty
11 ohm [,.,,rry aniti Warty
Solnr,
NFL nen [sully
kiluy lruiOY l.ontdn La
�.
El 1 0
•
fnro II.rMr rOUV. ! \� 10!11 .acb,nly a„n�r�„rt
® R nr rxurry
L. him. ra.nl.
Ih� k, ibv lY S{7rhrr�, Cr ury
E mile r.uv. + FragllUun!i
1 (� ; 17•! r.01rr,.r ll •� iai� [Curdy
141alloi M1r ca,nl, � ` LUl g
f caWUZC lY
Mlle NrI.w IJ Paulin {ru p
,u Ben*: 1 F' u LLI `L'..
•■Ernaria Count, nits t•l4.ourty
floc Cn,mY
•
Legend
p "1205
enu,ly
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 85
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Table 1— Impact to People
High: Hazard event seriously affects more than 100 people
Medium: Hazard event seriously affects 26 -100 people
Low: Hazard event seriously affects 0 -25 people
Hazard Event Probabilty Rationale
Tornado High All areas of the City of Yakima are vulnerable to tornadoes.
Typically, tornadoes cause the greatest damage to structures of
light construction, including residential dwellings and particularly
manufactured homes
Table 2 Impact to Built Environment
High: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure of
Yakima and the county.
Medium: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure of
Yakima only.
Low: Hazard event is likely to cause some damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure in small
areas of Yakima.
Hazard Event Probabilty Rstionsle
Tornado High All areas of the City of Yakima are vulnerable to tornadoes.
Typically, tornadoes cause the greatest damage to structures of
light construction, including residential dwellings and particularly
manufactured homes
Table 3 Impact to the Economy
High: Hazard event causing damages over $10 million.
Medium: Hazard event causing damages between $1 and $10 million.
Low: Hazard event causing damages less than $1 million.
Hazard Event Probabilty Rationale
Tornado Low All areas of the City of Yakima are vulnerable to tornadoes.
Typically, tornadoes cause the greatest damage to structures of
light construction, including residential dwellings and particularly
manufactured homes
Table 4 Impact to the Natural Environment
High: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to the natural environment in Yakima, if not the entire county.
Medium: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to the natural environment in Yakima only.
Low: Hazard event is likely to cause some damage to the natural environment in Yakima.
Hazard Event - Probabilty Rationale a _
Tornado Low All areas of the City of Yakima are vulnerable to tornadoes.
Typically, tornadoes cause the greatest damage to structures of
light construction, including residential dwellings and particularly
manufactured homes
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 86
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Volcanic Eruptions Profile
A volcano is a vent in the earth's crust through which magma (molten rock), rock fragments, gases, and ashes
are ejected from the earth's interior. A volcanic mountain is created over time by the accumulation of these
erupted products on the on the earth's surface. (Reference Appendix D)
Yakima Municipal Code
Title 15 Urban Area Zoning Ordinance
Effective March 22, 2015
Chapter 15.27 Critical Areas
Part Seven. Geologically Hazardous Areas
15.27.700 Purpose and intent
A. Geologically hazardous areas include those areas susceptible to erosion, sliding, earthquake, or other
geological events. These areas pose a threat to the health and safety of the city of Yakima's citizens when
incompatible development is sited in significantly hazardous areas. When mitigation is not feasible,
development within geologically hazardous areas should be avoided.
B. The purpose of this section is to: (1) Minimize risks to public health and safety and reduce the risks of
property damage by regulating development within geologically hazardous areas; (2) Maintain natural
geological processes while protecting new and existing development; and, (3) Establish review procedures for
development proposals in geologically hazardous area.
15.27.701 Mapping and designation
Geologically hazardous areas that are susceptible to one or more of the following: (1) Erosion hazards; (2)
Landslide hazards; (3) Seismic hazards — referred as earthquake hazards; and (4) Volcanic hazards.
➢ Earthquake Activity Hazard Areas. Recorded earthquake activity in the city of Yakima is mostly marked
by low magnitude events and thus low seismic risk. The city of Yakima's low risk areas are unlabeled
and combined with other low risk hazards
➢ Volcanic hazard areas are not mapped but are defined as areas subject to pyroclastic (formed by
volcanic explosion) flows, lava flows, and inundation by debris flows, mudflows or related flooding
resulting from volcanic activity. Volcanic hazard areas in the city of Yakima are limited to pyroclastic
(ash) deposits. No specific protection requirements are identified for volcanic hazard areas.
15.27.702 Geologically hazardous areas protection approach
Protection measures for earthquake /seismic hazard areas will be accomplished by implementing appropriate
sections of the Building Code as adopted in YMC Title 11.
15.27.703 Development review procedure for geologically hazardous areas
NOTE: There have been no seismic or volcanic activity since the 2000 city HMP. Had there been such activity,
Chapter 15.27 would have addressed the hazard prone areas and its impact on the city's vulnerability.
Furthermore, earthquake and volcanic hazards have no distinctive geographically boundaries —hence the entire
city is vulnerable.
15.27.704 General protection requirements
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 87
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
.. - ' _ ' ;ti'R7�e = Q�'M1 -� ' mew G'O��In
•
``% �+f+5• Cascade Range
• , V � _ - ' VOIGaM1otr6
fir- ,x •
£P1. Ramis
-- ��
•
•
•
C..ry
- • Simlptlaa ►Ir
Mount 9L 441m; Mt Adams
I r aimplbel
11111 •
Jurisdictions at greatest risk Communities to the northeast, east, and southeast of Mount St. Helens are at
greatest risk of receiving damaging ash fall. Communities generally to the west and / or south of the
volcanoes are at risk to the impact of damaging lahars.
The jurisdictions vulnerable to lava flow, lahars, and ash fall from volcanic eruptions come from U.S.
Geological Survey hazard reports and hazard zone maps published for each volcano. The fourteen counties
threatened are listed below in the table.
County Jurisdictions Vulnerable to Volcanic Hazards
Chelan Clark Cowlitz King Kittitas
(ash) (ash, lahar) (ash, lahar) (ash, lahar) (ash)
Klickitat Lewis Pierce Skagit Skamania
(ash, lahar) (ash, lahar) (ash, lahar) (lahar) (ash, lahar)
Snohomish Thurston Whatcom Yakima
(lahar) (lahar) (lahar) (ash)
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Building a Disaster Resilient Community
Risk Level — Ash Fall
➢ Frequency — Volcanic ash fall incidents do not occur annually.
➢ People — An incident of volcanic ash fall is unlikely to result in significant losses of life.
➢ Economy — An incident of volcanic ash fall has the potential to affect the economy of
Washington from slightly to severely depending on the amount of ash dispersed over the state
and the resources needed to restore normal business operations following such an incident.
➢ Environment — An incident of volcanic ash fall is unlikely to result in the loss of 10% of a single
species or habitat.
➢ Property — State and international statistics indicate that there is the potential for property
damage from a volcanic ash fall incident to exceed $1 billion.
diet 11
r�l r .fr. - .4111 St 1rze1 r - Pr, I u,
Y'. FJr4r 1 "rilJL'. Y4,tW,r.v. IYiuhuiriuR Li i,LLrR IF'clr frra,n di1Y Aim
M /die.1611 r TIME. ' " - Karr; adi ii Hu: ale
Aviv 12y w,hrr, - *1 TTr
Mount St. Helens
Mount St. Helens remains an active and dangerous volcano. In the last 515 years, it produced four
major explosive eruptions and dozens of lesser eruptions. One of those, in 1480, was about five times
larger than the May 18, 1980 eruption; even larger eruptions have occurred during Mount St. Helens'
lifetime
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
The hazard — Washington State has five active volcanoes — Mount Baker, Glacier Peak, Mount Rainier,
Mount St. Helens, and Mount Adams. These volcanoes are all capable of generating destructive lahars,
ash fall, lava and pyroclastic flows, and debris avalanches. In addition, there are several volcanic fields in
southern Washington that could host future eruptions. The phenomenon that poses the greatest threat
is ash fall and lahars from the five major volcanoes. Mount Hood in Oregon also poses a threat to
communities along the Washington side of the Columbia River. These volcanoes pose a high to very high
threat to life, property, the economy, and civil and military aviation from near the volcano to areas
hundreds of miles away from the volcanoes' slopes.
Previous occurrences — All five volcanoes have been active in the past 4,000 years. Mount St. Helens has
been the only one active in the past 30 years with a massive eruption in 1980, followed by dome building
eruptions in the 1980 -1986 and 2004 -2008. All five volcanoes have generated ash fall and / or lahars in
the past 300 years.
Probability of future events — Washington's volcanoes will erupt again, as shown by recent activity at
Mount St. Helens. There is a 1 in 500 probability that portions of 2 counties will receive 10 centimeters (4
inches) or more of volcanic ash from any Cascades volcano in any given year, and a 1 in 1,000 probability
that parts or all of 3 more counties will receive that quantity of ash. There is a 1 in 100 annual probability
that small lahars or debris flows will impact river valleys below Mount Baker or Mount Rainier, and less
than a 1 in 1,000 annual probability that the large destructive lahars would flow down the slopes of Glacier
Peak, Mount Adams, Mount Baker, and Mount Rainier. There is a much higher probability that significant
areas of the State will experience smaller amounts of ash fall.
N
' _
No tes Fo�
d R, Coldwater
Tootle, �_ Valley arre
•
4 Cocke Silver Lake T arrile R. Castle 1 L p t ake
ke
3
ww Kelso
0
Longview m°
g oo ..... I J
Swill Res.
Lake Mervin - Yale Lake
_ _ I 5 f0 MILES'
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 90
Table 1— Impact to People
High: Hazard event seriously affects more than 100 people
Medium: Hazard event seriously affects 26 -100 people
Low: Hazard event seriously affects 0 -25 people
Hazard Event _ Probabilty Rationale
Volcanic Eruption High On May 18, 1980 at 8:32 a.m., Mount St. Helens erupted. Rock,
ash, volcanic gas, and steam were blasted upwards and outward to
the north. Over the course of the day, prevailing winds blew 520
million tons of ash eastward across the United States and caused
complete darkness in the City of Yakima.
Table 2— Impact to Built Environment
High: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure of
Yakima and the county.
Medium: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure
of Yakima only.
Low: Hazard event is likely to cause some damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure in small
areas of Yakima.
Hazard Event Probabilty Rstionsle
Volcanic Eruption High On May 18, 1980 at 8:32 a.m., Mount St. Helens erupted. Rock,
ash, volcanic gas, and steam were blasted upwards and outward to
the north. Over the course of the day, prevailing winds blew 520
million tons of ash eastward across the United States and caused
complete darkness in the City of Yakima.
Table 3- Impact to the Economy
High: Hazard event causing damages over $10 million.
Medium: Hazard event causing damages between $1 and $10 million.
Low: Hazard event causing damages less than $1 million.
Hazard Event Probabilty Rationale
Volcanic Eruption Medium On May 18, 1980 at 8:32 a.m., Mount St. Helens erupted. Rock,
ash, volcanic gas, and steam were blasted upwards and outward to
the north. Over the course of the day, prevailing winds blew 520
million tons of ash eastward across the United States and caused
complete darkness in the City of Yakima.
Table 4— Impact to the Natural Environment
High: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to the natural environment in Yakima, if not the entire
county.
Medium: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to the natural environment in Yakima only.
Low: Hazard event is likely to cause some damage to the natural environment in Yakima.
Hazard Event robabilt Rationale
Volcanic Eruption Low On May 18, 1980 at 8:32 a.m., Mount St. Helens erupted. Rock,
ash, volcanic gas, and steam were blasted upwards and outward
to the north. Over the course of the day, prevailing winds blew
520 million tons of ash eastward across the United States and
caused complete darkness in the City of Yakima.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 91
Blank Intentionally
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 92
Wildland Fire Profile
Wildfire (WF)
A wildfire is any outdoor fire that is not controlled, supervised, or arranged. Wildfire probability depends on local
weather conditions; outdoor activities such as camping, debris burning, and construction; and the degree of
public cooperation with fire prevention measures. Wildfires can result in widespread damage to property and
loss of life.
Yakima County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (YCCWPP)
Tables 1 -4 indicate that wildland fires are a low probability for the rationale stated. However, the
City of Yakima continues to follow the county's Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)
In early 2011, the Board of Yakima County Commissioners adopted the Yakima County Wildfire Protection Plan.
This document serves as an overarching strategic plan highlighting the need for coordinated risk management.
The purpose of the YCCWPP is to assist in protecting human life and reducing property loss due to wildfire
throughout Yakima County. The plan is the result of a community -wide wildland fire protection planning process
and the compilation of documents, reports, and data developed by a wide array of contributors. This plan was
compiled in 2009 in response to the federal Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) of 2003.
This document has been developed to address wildfire threat to communities in Yakima County, Washington; it
provides recommendations to abate catastrophic wildfire and minimize its impacts to communities. A group of
multi - jurisdictional agencies (federal, state, and local), organizations, and residents joined together as a Core
Team to develop this plan, which is termed the Yakima County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (YCCWPP).
Yakima County encompasses a range of community types, including incorporated municipalities, farms and
ranches, National Forest in- holdings, the Yakama Nation, and the Yakima Military Training Center. The natural
environment is equally diverse from plains grasslands and irrigated agricultural lands to montane mixed conifer
forests. Each of these cover types has its own associated fire hazards and are discussed throughout the
document. Community perceptions of these hazards vary drastically throughout Yakima County, most noticeably
complacency by residents in municipal areas regarding wildfire.
Public education forms an important component of this plan as an attempt to highlight common misconceptions
of fire risk. The importance of public education and outreach in conjunction with recommended physical actions
to reduce hazardous fuels are outlined in this plan.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
Witdland Urban Interface Communities at Risk for Fire
. 4101
7 —
L ,1.1%., 4.
._ • ..r - :41 .11 4 lir
9 T _ - 1. +.ra ..
L �
+ '.,' +�l I It• N. e i_
.Ytill
7 r 7-14ZILPF VilOth...1 r -.
L'
601 11-
w . ..111:
JL
,„... , _
.... 4 — - Exfierne �� Inter 1 I
"Mr Hlgh —11.5
Er tural - .1.410V Rrn OV.M.NL• • . Mt1d6'a9C $18�E
M I FtESOUre oeeem6er 3.29 12
Low Local
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 94
Washington WU! High Risk Communities
Statewide Assessment High and Moderate Risk Areas
July, 2011
."
. )
I
• . t .
-,r,_ •• L e
. I . ', • • - .' .
i ' • _. ..
...-1 2 ' ' (
:• 1 ..' - ' :. t• 1: l''' \,... ....: -...". ' ''.. 1 . e r •• -:.'
1,1 ._ .., ..., -,..
.
Z 1
\ . 1 - 1 A . ..'
I l': \ . P 1 ... • 7 — C. -lx:---;•A_\,,-.. •-• .
......_ _ ..... ,..,411. ; ,./- i 1- ' '' * -...-. -- l . , '. i 1
' ....- • .;;...-1... .Ae . .. • ..-Mr M Tiiiiii.
•-r i 4 & . . .. ?..... . ... ,E . ? ' , r._, -...}-_, : .3 • •... . .
f
.=.7--' , ..., triv.•.i. ....- ,:., .
) - .'..,. • ...(1_, 1' - - .,, --, - - 1 ! l ' ,-- ., ' 1 ..p 1
1 : '. ---,_..
- - , \---i
• A i , . - k rp.. - - _ '
. .. I' ' - . h ''' ' 1 .1 E4IQ. - --, _ •
1 1. ilikitV j ?..q. ..- - .- ..... _..., , .. .,,,._ 7.. .. . , ) 1 I '4' - —L 'r ' +- ' I 4.1
- P1 . 1_0S , . i 1 .. • we' ' .. , VI 1* u...
) L s —
' .-r'r ... • 7
4 i r JP
.. •) :5 IS, j .... -. P ., — T •
1 —..,
L7; 4 7-11 -7-•'' '
. . •Oilcr. ..... -.- .. '..,.,
•
i':- 1 n r.. : "J-1- r
) Lk: ....J op 'Is s_. 7
.--- ..---",. .... ..
I I! (..- .-,....,. • • • ir ,..• . _ skr; - J .. L. , ..._ , __I
r 0.rr,-..4-...,--
i .ii R,.,,,i ........__. ' a' • I--- S - ,, -r (. ' \Li 7 -.." " . :
_ ....,.....,.., ..._4r .rk. . ) ..
t illh ' — .... ....- .. • f •;-. .L ....
. .-4, 'fi,_.;...414 ..-..,: e' • • . .. ..
.... • ...i r 2-Z .
• . -...' •
_
. .... ....r.
_.
*— i • —
* -
•,, ,* ....r 1..,.
_
. _ .. --**
___I I- I! , ills lir I) Ali:I!
= •. 1 i jli Fe:-I i• ii 1 r ilir;
• III. I 1 PN ;
ti -HAI I Pi-1
I I - I 7 i : = Lin qS[:
1 JIFF - 11 111 !MI :
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 95
. - 1
Yakima County
• - Urban WMQkands
- Fire Potential
{y ti.l
. r " I.E.
~ q M�
f =t,..
In
. 0 * Fori • . '41'. ... 4. 474:Z 111.. • ; 0,, - { .44..."
e.
l
v .- { :^ .
_ - - • 4� ' ^ c„,. j Hid 1Gr.�.i jii Ma . i - -` - •+ - - flap loS1
I.
.: . 1:7 --... - .37,"; _ • ..' 2 - 'ki 0 - . - . 1 1 , , - -1 " N ..- {.
*S T f : a yy am
r }
� ` � ` '� f . 7.►1 �
may. + ' il, �' t 1. t • ' � -1' • 11. 'Gr ��- I •
4 r7- I a S 1fr P.:0 F , V +..f •
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 96
Storm Events Database
Event Details:
Event Wildfire
{ State WASHINGTON
County /Area YAKIMA VALLEY
WFO PDT
Report Source Fire Department /Rescue
NCEI Data
Source CSV
Begin Date 2011 -02 -12 13:35:00.0 PST -8
End Date 2011 -02 -12 20:30:00.0 PST -8
Deaths
Direct /Indirect 0/0 (fatality details below, when available...)
I Injuries
Direct /Indirect 2/0
f Property
Damage 4.00M
Crop Damage
A fast moving cold front brought high winds. Peak wind gusts in miles per hour included Hanford
Emergency Ops Center (72), Gable Mountain (71), Yakima Barricade (77), Hanford (61), Rattlesnake
Springs (69), Hanford 200 West (71), Hanford Army Loop (69), Vernita Bridge (78), Richland Airport (58).
Tree branches up to 1.5 inches in diameter were downed by the winds 8 miles west northwest of
Connell. A wildfire in White Swan, fanned by the high winds up to 69 mph, was carried from a house to
Episode a logging mill and into the town. The wildfire burned 20 homes. A trailer was blown over west of
Narrative Ellensburg.
I rent Narrative p
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 97
Table 1— Impact to People
High: Hazard event seriously affects more than 100 people
Medium: Hazard event seriously affects 26 -100 people
Low: Hazard event seriously affects 0 -25 people
Hazard Event Probabilty Rationale
Wildland Fire Low Residents in the west valley area of Yakima County who live near
open shrub - steppe range areas have experienced repeated cycles
of wildland fires. The City of Yakima Urban Area Boundary is in
close proximity.
Table 2— Impact to Built Environment
High: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure of Yakima
and the county.
Medium: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure of
Yakima only.
Low: Hazard event is likely to cause some damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure in small areas of
Yakima.
Hazard Event Probabilty Rstionsle
Wildland Fire Low Residents in the west valley area of Yakima County who live near
open shrub - steppe range areas have experienced repeated cycles
of wildland fires. The City of Yakima Urban Area Boundary is in
close proximity.
Table 3- Impact to the Economy
High: Hazard event causing damages over $10 million.
Medium: Hazard event causing damages between $1 and $10 million.
Low: Hazard event causing damages less than $1 million.
Hazard Event - Probabilty Rationale
Wildland Fire Low Residents in the west valley area of Yakima County who live near
open shrub - steppe range areas have experienced repeated cycles
of wildland fires. The City of Yakima Urban Area Boundary is in
close proximity.
Table 4— Impact to the Natural Environment
High: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to the natural environment in Yakima, if not the entire county.
Medium: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to the natural environment in Yakima only.
Low: Hazard event is likely to cause some damage to the natural environment in Yakima.
Hazard Event Probabilty Rationale
Wildland Fire Low Residents in the west valley area of Yakima County who live near
open shrub - steppe range areas have experienced repeated cycles
of wildland fires. The City of Yakima Urban Area Boundary is in
close proximity.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 98
Hazardous Materials Profile
HM ACCIDENT, FIXED FACILITY (EPA - regulated chemicals)
• Release of large concentration of chemical with high toxicity; Highly reactive /Combustibility to
surrounding environment; Contamination large area; Exposed persons exhibit serious, long- lasting acute
health effects- Serious environmental effects could linger for months
HM ACCIDENT, TRANSPORTATION ROUTES (Roadways, Railroad, Pipelines)
• Release of enormous concentration of chemical with very high toxicity; Extremely
reactive /Combustibility to surrounding environment; Contaminated area very large and dispersed;
Exposed persons exhibit major, acute health effects- Permanent disability and /or death; Very damaging
environmental effects could be long- lasting (years) or permanent • . -• . -...: V.r '•-;....- — ---. =mu mom
' Rel�i ' j } . , . _ I
1 ~:y, y . _— ' r `• 4Firaitructur#
v P. • • f f i
1 EMU
L.•4
EMI. ,. • f� ' . -I�a
"'. � • . 0I. �
7 v- - ■ 1 i i . iac' ; i , ; . A i 5 •.. :f
'r 1 1F0� i , 1 J ..z..__i I k ' is i ; 1, ' ..� ri •I . I t Yakima , ragmMom
I. , 1
• r 1 `,..' _ ... , • 1 , . ' - - ;' 4+n _-
. 7 r .
A " 1 ` . ` ,_. • Hrriri sWlor le. Mari
P itt .._, . r �0f i••taY� t • r
� - t
if V
Uoi . IGar' t, . • J ' ,.`
M • ' 1 ' ��•• . F _� aR
F 1 CC 2 •
a.0 •
r
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 99
High -Risk Chemicals in the City of Yakima
1. Anhydrous Ammonia —Over 35 facilities in the city.
Clouds of anhydrous ammonia are subject to the unpredictability of air movement; they will change direction
as quickly as the breeze. Clouds of ammonia may be nearly invisible in some atmospheric conditions, but in
high concentrations may appear as white clouds. Rain will absorb the ammonia and remove it from the air;
however, the ammonia -water mixture may still be a hazard until sufficiently deluded.
Anhydrous ammonia is lighter than air. Under cold condition, it may settle in the low areas of the surrounding
landscape, such as road ditches, sloughs and valleys. People in threatened areas must be warned of the release
and advised to leave the area or shelter in -place until the release has been controlled and the area is considered
safe. These decisions should be made by emergency personnel, such as a local fire department.
2. Chlorine
Exposure to chlorine can occur in the workplace or in the environment following releases to air, water, or land.
Effects of chlorine on human health depend on how the amount of chlorine that is present, and the length and
frequency of exposure. Effects also depend on the health of a person or condition of the environment when
exposure occurs.
Breathing small amounts of chlorine for short periods of time adversely affects the human respiratory system.
Effects differ from coughing and chest pain, to water retention in the lungs. Chlorine irritates the skin, the eyes,
and the respiratory system. These effects are not likely to occur at levels of chlorine that are normally found in
the environment.
3. Propane -5 distributors in the city.
Liquid releases flammable vapors at well below ambient temperatures and readily forms a flammable
mixture with air. Dangerous fire and explosion hazard when exposed to heat, sparks or flame. Vapors
are heavier than air and may travel long distances to a point of ignition and flash back. Container may
explode in heat or fire. Runoff to sewer may cause fire or explosion hazard.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 100
To help emergency responders become aware of the possible chemicals they may encounter at the locations
of an incident, the U.S. Department of Transportation has established a hazardous materials placard system.
Railroad cars and trucks carrying chemicals or hazardous wastes must display a diamond - shaped placard
which includes a material identification number, a hazard class number and symbol, which identifies the
material as a flammable liquid or solid, non - flammable or flammable gas, explosive, corrosive, toxic, oxidizer
or organic peroxide, environmentally hazardous, or radioactive material.
OXIDIZER EXPLOSIVE MIAMieAELf uCUeo
5, i 1
DANGERCUSy -
e 4
ntalleoue _ - -� —I - --
RADIOACTIVE III
ca.
armnr
9
Total Facilities and Chemicals by County -2012
F.
vm-tea l`l.t.. ikI A • BLS i
Fl . .. Skagit ` . } ,W j 'l "7
I r '11 k C7 ?k!1.�1� +amn U
3
!mow -'-.r '.F
Snohomish ��� i"
_ ,si
l t �..y U� r : 2111 1I r,'
�m N = • o `Y ! ! J Jrr] S rkane
: . ▪ w.. u ti
y� � King Cn.ni.la 515
1JJ_L -� °L1� FroYr,
Lnw _
f t �� {����['� ; .snh.. a _ Y.0 Gl.nou.la 1:135P
+.. t'..m 7.. J F : Gran r�lle A: IS
11 111 1 50 - 7 427
"' , ii r
Pierce ?�� itm n .
Ift ; c„dw,. ,. lb ▪ 1rY llr1 cn.nllua r„
Yakima .44 31 •, n r � . i -
Id
Wish 1 -..• a.......0 wx.
Cho l... 11
' . ' 161:41113 Mk V9 ` Y • sam - - �-` • Gwwo■ f1 _ } ,
.r � . JM. f 2�rsf[] .-r1454.515 ;b. . 1
Clark ._
i - lei k: '°r"'• n Courlgr status
- 1447 2}9 Ch4rw25 4 or44 75 F4d54472
r.. _ 14054 ClNnl #IC Or 170+ F.Car*1
li 4011997Ctur s
_ X106Cher:eels te <.o Fac Item
Gately ealered by the 9r319r C tIzet It MT dr
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 101
Table 1— Impact to People
High: Hazard event seriously affects more than 100 people
Medium: Hazard event seriously affects 26 -100 people
Low: Hazard event seriously affects 0 -25 people
azard Event Probabilt Rationale
Hazardous Materials — High Release of large concentration of chemical with high toxicity;
Fixed Locations Highly reactive /Combustibility to surrounding environment;
Contamination large area; Exposed persons exhibit serious, long -
lasting acute health effects- Serious environmental effects could
linger for months
Hazardous Materials- High Release of enormous concentration of chemical with very
Roadways, Railroad, high toxicity; Extremely reactive /Combustibility to
Pipelines surrounding environment; Contaminated area very large
and dispersed; Exposed persons exhibit major, acute health
effects- Permanent disability and /or death; Very damaging
environmental effects could be long- lasting (years) or
permanent
Table 2— Impact to Built Environment
High: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure of Yakima
and the county.
Medium: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure of
Yakima only.
Low: Hazard event is likely to cause some damage to public and private property and critical infrastructure in small areas of
Yakima.
Hazard Event Probabilty Rationale
Hazardous Materials — Low Release of large concentration of chemical with high toxicity;
Fixed Locations Highly reactive /Combustibility to surrounding environment;
Contamination large area; Exposed persons exhibit serious, long -
lasting acute health effects- Serious environmental effects could
linger for months
Hazardous Materials- Low Release of enormous concentration of chemical with very
Roadways, Railroad, high toxicity; Extremely reactive /Combustibility to
Pipelines surrounding environment; Contaminated area very large
and dispersed; Exposed persons exhibit major, acute health
effects- Permanent disability and /or death; Very damaging
environmental effects could be long- lasting (years) or
permanent
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 102
Table 3- Impact to the Economy
High: Hazard event causing damages over $10 million.
Medium: Hazard event causing damages between $1 and $10 million.
Low: Hazard event causing damages less than $1 million.
Hazard Event Probabilty Rationale
Hazardous Materials — Low Release of large concentration of chemical with high toxicity;
Fixed Locations Highly reactive /Combustibility to surrounding environment;
Contamination large area; Exposed persons exhibit serious, long -
lasting acute health effects- Serious environmental effects could
linger for months
Hazardous Materials- Low Release of enormous concentration of chemical with very
Roadways, Railroad, high toxicity; Extremely reactive /Combustibility to
Pipelines surrounding environment; Contaminated area very large
and dispersed; Exposed persons exhibit major, acute health
effects- Permanent disability and /or death; Very damaging
environmental effects could be long- lasting (years) or
permanent
Table 4— Impact to the Natural Environment
High: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to the natural environment in Yakima, if not the entire county.
Medium: Hazard event is likely to cause significant damage to the natural environment in Yakima only.
Low: Hazard event is likely to cause some damage to the natural environment in Yakima.
Hazard Event Probabilty Rationale
Hazardous Materials — Low Release of large concentration of chemical with high toxicity;
Fixed Locations Highly reactive /Combustibility to surrounding environment;
Contamination large area; Exposed persons exhibit serious, long -
lasting acute health effects- Serious environmental effects could
linger for months
Hazardous Materials- Low Release of enormous concentration of chemical with very
Roadways, Railroad, high toxicity; Extremely reactive /Combustibility to
Pipelines surrounding environment; Contaminated area very large
and dispersed; Exposed persons exhibit major, acute health
effects- Permanent disability and /or death; Very damaging
environmental effects could be long- lasting (years) or
permanent
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 103
Blank Intentionally
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 104
Risk Assessment Tool
The City of Yakima Risk Assessment tool is an Excel spreadsheet, which is designed to measure the city's risk from
the effects of various hazards. The tool is based on a formula that weighs the probability and severity of potential
impacts against preparations in place which are intended to minimize these impacts. Using a simple 1 to 5 scale,
the probability of occurrence and the impact potential are tabulated along with mitigation efforts and the
resources available to respond to the hazard. The score is based on a formula that weighs risk heavily but
provides credit for mitigation and response and recovery resources. The higher the score, the higher the
jurisdiction's risk from the hazard.
Scoring Guidelines.
There are eight risk assessment factors contained in the spreadsheet. All factor scoring is done on a scale of 1 -5.
The formula contained in the spreadsheet calculates higher scores in the occurrence and impact columns as
increasing risks, while higher scores in the mitigation and resource categories lower the overall risk score giving
credit for steps taken to reduce the likely impact. Based your scoring on a "worst -case scenario." The following
guidelines will assist you in scoring each hazard.
Historical Occurrence (Frequency):
Based on the number of occurrences: At least one occurrence every 1 -4 years = 5; At least one occurrence every
5 -10 years = 4; At least one occurrence every 11 -50 years = 3; At least one occurrence every 51 -100 years = 2;
Has not occurred, but for planning purposes should be evaluated = 1.
Probability of Occurrence:
Based on the statistical probability of the hazard occurring in a given year. This may be obtained by scientific
research or may simply be an educated guess. The higher the probability, the higher the score. Use the following
guideline in determining you score. If less than 5% score 1, if 5% to 10% score 2, if 10% to 20% score 3, if 20% to
40% score 4, and score 5 if greater than 40% probability.
Human Impact:
Score based on greatest possible impact should worst -case event occur within the jurisdiction. Consider the likely
number of fatalities, injuries, homeless, etc. Score 1 low - 5 highest.
Property Impact:
Score based on the economic costs of the event, including both direct and indirect property damage from the
hazard. Minor damage would be a 1 while a total loss should be a 5. Score 1 low - 5 highest.
Business Impact:
Score based on factors such as service impact, lost wages, revenues, and taxes. Consider cost of relocation,
permanent damage to valuable resources, etc. Score 1 low - 5 highest.
Mitigation Activities:
Based on steps taken to mitigate the hazard such as structural and redundant technical systems. The more
mitigation measures taken, the higher the score. Score 1 low - 5 highest.
Internal Resources:
Base your score on the internal response and recovery resources. High scores should be given when there are a
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 105
formal on -site response teams, or recovery teams. Score 1 low - 5 highest.
External Resources:
Base your score on the external resources that would be immediately available. This would include the local
jurisdictions. Give higher scores if there are specialized equipment and responders available or if contractor
support such as specialized equipment, is immediately available. Score 1 low - 5 highest.
Understanding the Scores
Based on the weighted scoring formula hazards that are relatively high will score 3.5 or higher. The spreadsheet
is programmed to change colors based on the score as follows:
Red High Risk Greater than 3.5
Yell Medium From 2.0 to 3.5
Green Low Risk Less than 2.0
These scores are based on subjective judgments but, nonetheless, they provide a means to quickly rate the
jurisdiction's risk from various hazards. Based on this risk scoring, priorities for increased mitigation and
preparedness activities can be determined.
RISK ASSESSMENT
Type of Historical Probability of Human Property Business Mitigation Internal External
Hazard Occurrence Occurrence Impact Impact Impact Activities Resources Resources
Total
NATURAL
Drought 5 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 2.2
Earthquakes 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.4
Extreme 5 5 1 1 1 2 1 1 .1
Temps - heat
Floods (River) 4 4 1 2 2 4 3 3 2.7
Floods 4 4 1 2 2 4 3 3 2.7
(Streams)
Severe Wind 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.7
Storms
Severe Winter 4 4 2 1 2 1 1 1 3.4
Storms
Tornadoes 4 1 2 1 1 3 5 5 1.3
Volcanic 1 1 2 2 2 1 4 5 0.9
Eruptions
Wildland Fires 4 4 2 2 2 2 4 5 2.8
TECHNOLOGICAL
Hazardous 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 4 1.9
Materials
(Fixed Facility)
Hazardous 5 4 1 1 1 1 5 5 2.9
Materials
(Transit)
Analysis Results High Risk: Greater than 3.5 Medium Risk: 2.0 to 3.5 Low Risk: Less than 2
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 106
Hazard Impact on Critical /Essential Service Infrastructure
Generally, a catastrophic incident will demand extraordinary actions from state agencies and local jurisdictions -
actions for which we are not currently well prepared. The City of Yakima is vulnerable to technological and
natural hazards with the potential to cause significant casualties and infrastructure damage. Disasters labeled
'major' are not uncommon and the City of Yakima Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP)
addresses the response requirements of floods, earthquakes, hazardous materials and wildfires. These incidents
cause injuries, loss of life and damage in a relatively limited area. Current procedures provide response and
recovery for these incidents including terrorist incidents. In contrast a catastrophic incident impacts a large area
or across many societal sectors. Mitigation efforts reduce impacts and current mitigation efforts are focused on
many of the catastrophic scenarios in the City of Yakima; however a catastrophic incident is one that
overwhelms. The nature and extent of damage; number, location and severity of personal injuries; type,
availability and condition of surviving resources and the damages to critical infrastructure all are likely to be in
the extreme range. Warning may or may not be available.
CRITICAL /ESSENTIAL SERVICE IMPACTS -- CRITICAL FACILITY NAME /LOCATION
DISRUPTIONS
1. Streets /roads Yakima Fire Department Arterials
debris, power lines, water
North to South
Fair Avenue (East Lincoln to East Mead)
15t Street (city limit to city limit)
6 Street (Nob Hill to East Yakima)
3rd Avenue (West "D" Street to West Washington)
16 Avenue (city limit to city limit)
24 Avenue (West Washington to Nob Hill)
32' Avenue (Englewood to West Mead /West King)
40 Avenue (SR -12 to West Washington)
48 Avenue (Summitview to West Washington)
56 Avenue (Englewood to Arlington)
64 Avenue (Tieton to Washington)
72' Avenue (Summitview to West Washington)
80 Avenue (Tieton to Zier Rd)
East to West
Washington Avenue (18 Street to West City Limits)
Mead Avenue (18 Street to West City Limits)
Nob Hill Blvd (city limits to city limits)
Tieton Drive (5 Avenue to West City Limits)
Walnut Avenue (Union Street to 11 Avenue)
Yakima Avenue (East City Limits to West City Limits)
Summitview Avenue (Yakima Avenue to West City Limits)
"B" Street (10 Street to Pierce /7 Avenue)
Lincoln Avenue (Fair Avenue to West City Limits)
Fruitvale Blvd. (5 Avenue to 40 Avenue /SR -12)
Highway /Freeway
1 -82: From Rest Haven Road to the Valley Mall
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 107
Blvd. exit all mile post and exit numbers
Hwy 12: From 1 -82 to Ackley Road, all mile post and exit numbers.
Union Gap Arterials
North /South
Rudkin Road From Viola Ave. to Valley Mall Blvd.
S 18th St. From Rainier PI. to Mead Ave
Main St. From Old town Rd. to Leisure Hill Dr.
Longfiber From W. Washington Ave to W. Ahtanum Rd.
Goodman Rd. From Ahtanum to Meadowbrook Rd.
S. 3rd. Ave From Mead Ave. to Ahtanum
S. 16th Ave From W. Washington Ave. to Gilbert Rd.
East /West
Mead Ave. From Rudkin Rd. to s. 1st St.
Washington Ave. From S. 18th St. to S. 16th Ave.
Valley Mall Blvd. from 1 -82 to S. 16th Ave.
E. Ahtanum /W. Ahtanum /Ahtanum From Main St. to S. 42nd Ave.
Meadowbrook Rd. From Goodman Rd. to S. 11th Ave.
McCullough Rd. From S. 18th Ave to S. 42nd Ave.
2. Utilities City of Yakima Water /Irrigation
power lines, water mains Naches River WTP
6390 Highway 12
Naches River -River Intake Structure
Wastewater Plant
2220 East Viola
3. Health /medical Yakima Regional Medical & Cardiac Center
health /medical care facilities 110 S 9th Avenue
Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital
2811 Tieton Dr.
4. Emergency response Yakima Fire Department
fire, police, ambulance Station 91 -401 North Front Street (Fire Administration)
Fire Station 92 -7707 Tieton Drive
Fire Station 93 -511 North 40 Avenue
Fire Station 94 -2404 West Washington Avenue
Fire Station 95 -807 East Nob Hill Blvd
Fire Station 96 -107 West Ahtanum Road, Union Gap
Yakima Police Department
200 South Third Street
Ambulance Services
American Medical Response -229 S 2' Avenue
Advanced Life Systems -2106 W Washington Avenue
5. Communications SunComm -9 -1 -1 Communications and Public Safety Dispatch
landlines, cell phones, radio linkages
6. Continuity of government City of Yakima City Hall
day -to -day business 129 North Second Street
Legal Department /Municipal Court
200 South Third Street
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 108
Public Works Administration
Transit Division; Streets /Traffic; Water & Irrigation; Refuse
2301 Fruitvale Blvd
Yakima Convention Center
10 North 8th Street
7. Private - sector business Utilities
normal business activities Power
PacificCorp (Scottish Power), Benton REA
Natural Gas
Cascade Natural Gas
Telecommunications
The City of Yakima is subject to the following hazards and their impacts. (Keyed
to Table
1. Street /road disruptions, e.g. debris, power lines, water;
2. Utility —line disruptions, e.g., power lines, water mains, etc.;
3. Health /medical care facilities
4. Emergency response disruptions, e.g. fire, police, ambulance;
5. Communication disruptions, e.g. landlines, cell phones, radio linkages.
6. Continuity of government service interrupted, e.g. day -to -day business;
7. Private - sector business interruption, e.g. normal business activities;
HAZARD IMPACT ON CRITICAL /ESSENTIAL SERVICE
Impacts 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
NATURAL HAZARDS
Drought n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Earthquakes x x x x x x x
Extreme Temperatures
Floods (River) x x x x
Floods (Stream) x x x
Severe Wind Storms x x x x
Severe Winter Storms x x x x
Tornadoes x x x x
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 109
HAZARD IMPACT ON CRITICAL /ESSENTIAL SERVICE
Impacts 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Volcanic Eruption x x x x x
Wildland Fires n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
TECHNOLOGICAL HAZARDS
HM Accident, Fixed Facility X X x
HM Accident, Transportation X X X x X
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 110
SECTION FIVE: NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM
LEVEL OF NFIP PARTICIPATION STATUS
Does your community have a dedicated YMC 15.27.400 identifies the Division of Community and
Floodplain Manager or NFIP Coordinator Economic Development as the Administrative
Official /Floodplain, and Floodplain management is an
auxiliary duty of this position or designee.
Is the floodplain management an auxiliary duty? Yes
Is there a Certified Floodplain Manager on staff? Yes
Provide an explanation of NFIP administration The City of Yakima Department of Community and Economic
services (e.g., permit review, GIS, education or Development currently provides permit review of
outreach, inspections, engineering capability) construction of structures within the floodplain through its
Critical Area Ordinance and building codes, inspection of
structures built within the FEMA 100 -year floodplain, review
of flood elevation certificates and retention, GIS mapping of
FEMA Floodplain maps, and public outreach through funding
of the Yakima County Flood Control District.
CONTINUED COMPLIANCE ACTIONS STATUS
Identify need for additional staff None noted at this time
Identify training needs of existing staff None noted at this time
Are there potential ordinance changes to No ordinance changes are required at this time as the City of
consider to strengthen requirements? Yakima's Critical Area Ordinance amended 2009.
Are there potential improvements to permitting None at this time
process or other administrative aspects of the
community's NFIP program?
Could your community enhance its floodplain No, not at this time
services?
Consider outreach and education to provide in The City of Yakima provides outreach through its continued
the community? funding of the Yakima County Flood Control District, as well as
its continued participation in the community's various flood
plans
Outreach can be targeted to increase NFIP No change needed at this time
policies, promote NFIP services, or increase
knowledge of local flood risk, among other
topics.
Consider a variety of audiences, such as elected In updating the City of Yakima's regulations, numerous
officials or builders. audiences were considered, including: home builder
associations, general public, elected officials, and others.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 111
NFIP Participation
CID Community Number of Total Coverage Total Total Claims Total Paid
Policies Premium Since 1978 Since 1978
530217 Yakima County 675 $ 141,995,500 $ 604,622 195 $ 1,011,646
530223 Naches, Town of 15 $ 4,516,200 $ 21,567 4 $ 27,325
530226 Selah, City of 6 $ 2,434,000 $ 13,608 48 $ 699,671
530227 Sunnyside, City of 0 $ 0 $ 0 1 $ 0
530265 Tieton, City of 7 $ 853,900 $ 98,249 0 $ 0
530228 Toppenish, City of 325 $ 62,695,800 $ 199,164 8 $ 43,550
530229 Union Gap, City of 22 $ 3,536,200 $ 10,436 1 $ 3,291
530230 Wapato, City of 101 $ 12,738,200 $ 121,496 9 $ 30,433
530311 Yakima, City of 115 $ 36,086,800 $ 98,249 10 $ 14,963
530232 Zillah, City of 2 $ 560,000 $ 816 0 $ 0
County Total 1,268 $ 265,416,600 $ 2,336,414 276 $ 3,661,758
Repetitive Loss Properties
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) defines a repetitive loss property as, ".. those [properties]
for which two or more losses of at least $1,000 each have been paid under the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) within any 10 -year since 1978." A property is defined as a "severe repetitive loss property" when it meets
one of these conditions:
1. Four or more separate flood claim payments have been made and each claim payment exceeds $5,000;
or
2. At least two flood claim payments have been made and the cumulative payments exceed the value of the
property.
NFIP Repetitive Losses
CAC CAV FIRM CRS
CID Community # of # of Date Date Date
Variances Repetitive
Losses
530217 Yakima County 0 20 03/05/2009 02/19/2015 07/17/2012 Yes
530223 Naches, Town of 0 0 02/24/1996 05/03/2006 11/18/2009
530226 Selah, City of 0 12 02/24/1996 05/22/2008 11/18/2009
530227 Sunnyside, City of 0 0 03/05/2009 11/18/2009
530265 Tieton, City of 0 0 02/24/1996 11/18/2009
530228 Toppenish, City of 0 0 03/05/2009 11/01/2011 11/18/2009
530229 Union Gap, City of 0 0 02/24/1996 08/13/2014 07/17/2012
530230 Wapato, City of 0 0 07/12/2006 08/12/2014 11/18/2009
530311 Yakima, City of 0 0 02/24/1996 08/11/2014 07/17/2012
530232 Zillah, City of 0 0 11/08/2006 06/22/1994 11/18/2009
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 112
SECTION SIX: HAZARD - SPECIFIC ACTION ITEMS
2010 -2014 Action Items /Status /Summary
CITY OF YAKIMA
2010 -2014 ACTION ITEMS
*Status:
Completed
Deferred — Funding Availability; Not as Effective
On- Going /Unchanged — Perpetual or Annual
Flood (River /Stream)
The City of Yakima will be adopting the 2009 International Building Codes by the mandated date of July 2010.
*Status -- Completed
The City of Yakima building inspectors all have within their vehicles a packet to placard buildings after assessing
damages for their structural stability.
*Status —On- going /Unchanged
City will continue be a part of the National Flood Insurance Program and regulate floodplain construction.
*Status —On- going /Unchanged
City of Yakima participates in the County Flood Control Zone District. Projects identified as FCZD include
mitigation encompassing the city's impact area for floods.
*Status —On- going /Unchanged
Landslide
Not applicable —the City of Yakima is not identified in Landslide impact area
Yakima will review landslide - related information as disseminated by the Office of Emergency Management.
*Status —On- going /Unchanged
Wildland Fire
City of Yakima is not in a high wildfire impact area.
*Status —City will include wildfire into their 2015 -2020 update
Yakima will review wildland fire - related information as disseminated by the Office of Emergency Management
*Status -- On- going /Unchanged
Severe Winter Storm
The City of Yakima will be adopting the 2009 International Building Codes by the mandated date of July 2010.
*Status -- Completed
The City of Yakima building inspectors all have within their vehicles a packet to placard buildings after assessing
damages for their structural stability.
*Status —On- going /Unchanged
Wind Storm
The City of Yakima will be adopting the 2009 International Building Codes by the mandated date of July 2010.
*Status -- Completed
The City of Yakima building inspectors all have within their vehicles a packet to placard buildings after assessing
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 113
CITY OF YAKIMA
2010 -2014 ACTION ITEMS
*Status:
Completed
Deferred — Funding Availability; Not as Effective
On- Going /Unchanged — Perpetual or Annual
damages for their structural stability.
*Status —On- going /Unchanged
Earthquake
The City of Yakima will be adopting the 2009 International Building Codes by the mandated date of July 2010.
*Status -- Completed
The City of Yakima Building Inspectors all have within their vehicles a packet to placard buildings after assessing
damages for their structural stability.
*Status —On- going /Unchanged
Volcano
Continue to develop plans to remove ash fall from critical infrastructures, i.e., waste water treatment, major
arterials, water supply; etc.
*Status -- On- going /Unchanged
Improve emergency service support through alert and warning, emergency operations center, and other direction
and control facilities
*Status -- On- going /Unchanged
Improve emergency public information on clean -up and removal of ashfall
*Status -- On- going /Unchanged
Hazardous Materials —Fixed and Transportation
2009 International Fire Code dictates issues dealing with chemical regulations established by state and federal
programs, i.e., Ecology, EPA, OSHA, etc.
*Status -- Completed
Yakima Fire Department continues to update response equipment and training.
*Status -- On- going /Unchanged
Yakima Fire Department continues to conduct hazard assessments on chemical facilities.
*Status -- On- going /Unchanged
Yakima Fire Department continues to use risk mapping and technologies
*Status -- On- going /Unchanged
Yakima Fire Department continues to participate in the county LEPC.
*Status -- On- going /Unchanged
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 114
2015 -2020 Hazard - Specific Action Item
Lead Responsible Agency
City of Yakima departments and other groups who work with the city that are necessary for the completion of a
particular Action Item are listed as the responsible agency. The first listed department is primarily responsible for
the Action Item.
Benefit /Cost Analysis
After each action item was generated through the public process, research, and feedback from meetings with city
departments, it was then subjected to a basic benefit /cost comparison. Each action item was assigned a cost or
benefit of high, medium, or low, based on the following criteria:
Structural Mitigation Action Items
Benefit
1. Low = Less than one million dollars of damage prevented
2. Medium = Between one and ten million dollars of damage prevented
3. High = More than ten million dollars of damage prevented
Cost:
1. Low = Within Yakima's existing budget
2. Medium = Less than one million dollars of additional funds required
3. High = More than one million dollars of additional funds required
Benefit estimates were made based on the frequency of the hazardous event, longevity of the benefit, and the
discounted present value of the future damages prevented.
N /A: Per FEMA requirements, the estimation of benefits did not include the value of human lives or
consideration of lost cultural value.
Funding Sources (Local sources, State programs, federal programs, private)
Timeline
The determination of a timeline for each action item included consideration of the funding necessary and
probable availability of that funding, the necessary time to make a specific plan for the project and to obtain the
necessary approvals, and the implementation time for each action item. The timelines listed indicate the
following:
hort -Range (less than 2 years); id -Range (2 -5 years); ong -Range (more than 5 years); ngoing
1. Mid -Range Action Items — Activities which city agencies /departments are capable of implementing
with existing resources and authorities within two to five years. Highlighted in Yellow.
2. Long -Range Action Items - -May require new or additional resources or authorities, and may take
more than five years to implement. Highlighted in Green
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 115
CITY OF YAKIMA
HAZARD - SPECIFIC ACTION ITEMS
2015 -2020
Timeline:
Short -Range (less than 2 years); Mid -Range (2 -5 years); Long -
Priority: Range (more than 5 years); Ongoing Funding Source:
H (High); M Local; State; FEMA;
(Medium); Cost /Benefit: Private; Other
L (Low)
High, Medium, Low, or N/A
GENERAL: ALL HAZARDS PUBLIC AWARENESS
Action Items Lead Priority Timeline Cost/ Funding
Benefits Sources
Emergency preparedness education YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
programs for schools Management
Division
Drills, exercises in homes, workplaces, YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
classrooms, etc. Management
Division
Public service announcements YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Management
Division
Hazard "safety fairs." YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Management
Division
Hazard awareness weeks. YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Management
Division
Preparedness handbooks, brochures; YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
distribution of severe weather guides, Management
etc. Division
Regular newspaper articles. YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Management
Division
Utility bill inserts. YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Management
Division
DROUGHT /HEAT WAVES
Action Items Lead Priority Timeline Cost/ Funding
Benefits Sources
Assess Vulnerability to Drought Risk YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Management
Division
Monitor Drought Conditions Water High Ongoing N/A Local
Department
Monitor Water Supply Water High Ongoing N/A Local
Department
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 116
CITY OF YAKIMA
HAZARD - SPECIFIC ACTION ITEMS
2015 -2020
Timeline:
Short -Range (less than 2 years); Mid -Range (2 -5 years); Long -
Priority: Range (more than 5 years); Ongoing Funding Source:
H (High); M Local; State; FEMA;
(Medium); Cost /Benefit: Private; Other
L (Low)
High, Medium, Low, or N/A
Plan for Drought Planning High Ongoing N/A Local
Division
Require Water Conservation During Water High Ongoing N/A Local
Drought Conditions Department
Educate Residents on Water Saving Water High Ongoing N/A Local
Techniques Department
EARTHQUAKE
Action Items Lead Priority Timeline Cost/ Funding
Benefits Sources
Adopt and Enforce Building Codes Code High Ongoing N/A Local
Administration
Incorporate Earthquake Mitigation into YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Local Planning Management
Division
Map and Assess Community Planning High Mid -Range Low /Low Local
Vulnerability to Seismic Hazards Department
Conduct Inspections of Building Safety Code High Mid -Range Medium/ Local
Administration Medium
Protect Critical Facilities and Water/ Long -Range High /High Federal
Infrastructure Wastewater (FEMA)
Implement Structural Mitigation Engineering High Long -Range High /High Federal
Techniques (FEMA)
Increase Earthquake Risk Awareness YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Management
Division
Conduct Outreach to Builders, Code High Ongoing N/A Local
Architects, Engineers, and Inspectors Administration
Provide Information on Structural and Code High Ongoing N/A Local
Non - Structural Retrofitting Administration
EXTREME TEMPERATURES
Action Items Lead Priority Timeline Cost/ Funding
Benefits Sources
Increase Awareness of Extreme YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Temperature Risk and Safety Management
Division
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 117
CITY OF YAKIMA
HAZARD - SPECIFIC ACTION ITEMS
2015 -2020
Timeline:
Short -Range (less than 2 years); Mid -Range (2 -5 years); Long -
Priority: Range (more than 5 years); Ongoing Funding Source:
H (High); M Local; State; FEMA;
(Medium); Cost /Benefit: Private; Other
L (Low)
High, Medium, Low, or N/A
Assist Vulnerable Populations YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Management
Division
Educate Property Owners About YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Freezing Pipes Management
Division
FLOOD (RIVER AND STREAMS)
Action Items Lead Priority Timeline Cost/ Funding
Benefits Sources
Incorporate Flood Mitigation in Local YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Planning Management
Division
Form Partnerships to Support Planning High Ongoing N/A Local
Floodplain Management Division
Limit or Restrict Development in Planning High Mid -Range Medium/ Local
Flood plain Areas Department Medium
Adopt and Enforce Building Codes and Code High Mid -Range Medium/ Local
Development Standards Administration Medium
Improve Stormwater Management Engineering High Ongoing N/A Local
Planning Department
Adopt Polices to Reduce Stormwater Engineering High Ongoing N/A Local
Runoff Department
Improve Flood Risk Assessment YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Management
Division
Manage the Floodplain Beyond Planning High Ongoing N/A Local
Minimum Requirements Department
Conduct Regular Maintenance for Engineering High Ongoing N/A Local
Drainage Systems and Flood Control Department
Structures
Protect Infrastructure Public Works High Long -Range High /High Federal
(FEMA)
Protect Critical Facilities Engineering High Long -Range High /High Federal
Department (FEMA)
Construct Flood Control Measures Planning High Long -Range High /High Federal
Department (FEMA)
Preserve Floodplains as Open Space Planning High Long -Range High /High Federal
Department (FEMA)
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 118
CITY OF YAKIMA
HAZARD - SPECIFIC ACTION ITEMS
2015 -2020
Timeline:
Short -Range (less than 2 years); Mid -Range (2 -5 years); Long -
Priority: Range (more than 5 years); Ongoing Funding Source:
H (High); M Local; State; FEMA;
(Medium); Cost /Benefit: Private; Other
L (Low)
High, Medium, Low, or N/A
Increase Awareness of Flood Risk and YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Safety Management
Division
Educate Property Owners about Flood Planning High Ongoing N/A Local
Mitigation Techniques Department
SEVERE WIND STORM
Action Items Lead Priority Timeline Cost/ Funding
Benefits Sources
Adopt and Enforce Building Codes Code High Ongoing N/A Local
Administration
Promote or Require Site and Building Code High Ongoing N/A Local
Design Standards to Minimize Wind Administration
Damage
Assess Vulnerability to Severe Wind YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Management
Division
Increase Severe Wind Risk Awareness YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Management
Division
SEVERE WINTER STORMS /FREEZES
Action Items Lead Priority Timeline Cost Funding
Benefits Sources
Adopt and Enforce Building Codes Code High Ongoing N/A Local
Administration
Protect Buildings and Infrastructure Code High Long -Range High /High Federal
Administration (FEMA)
Reduce Impacts to Roadways Public Works High Long -Range High /High Federal
(FEMA)
Conduct Winter Weather Risk YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Awareness Activities Management
Division
Assist Vulnerable Populations YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Management
Division
■
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 119
CITY OF YAKIMA
HAZARD - SPECIFIC ACTION ITEMS
2015 -2020
Timeline:
Short -Range (less than 2 years); Mid -Range (2 -5 years); Long -
Priority: Range (more than 5 years); Ongoing Funding Source:
H (High); M Local; State; FEMA;
(Medium); Cost /Benefit: Private; Other
L (Low)
High, Medium, Low, or N/A
TORNADO
Action Items Lead Priority Timeline Cost/ Funding
Benefits Sources
Require Wind- Resistant Building Code High Ongoing N/A Local
Techniques Administration
VOLCANIC ERUPTION
Action Items Lead Priority Timeline Cost/ Funding
Benefits Sources
Maintain ash removal plans Public Works High Ongoing N/A Local
WILDLAND FIRE
Action Items Lead Priority Timeline Cost/ Funding
Benefits Sources
Map and Assess Vulnerability to Yakima Fire High Ongoing N/A Local
Wildfire Department
Reduce Risk through Land Use Planning Planning High Ongoing N/A Local
Department
Encourage residents to assess and Yakima Fire High Ongoing N/A Local
improve accessibility to their property. Department
Increase Wildfire Risk Awareness Yakima Fire High Ongoing N/A Local
Department
Educate Property Owners about Yakima Fire High Ongoing N/A Local
Wildfire Mitigation Techniques Department
MULTIPLE HAZARDS
Action Items Lead Priority Timeline Cost/ Funding
Benefits Sources
Assess Community Risk YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Management
Division
Map Community Risk YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Management
Division
Prevent Development Planning High Mid -Range Medium/ Local
in Hazard Areas Department Medium
Adopt Development Regulations in Planning High Mid -Range Medium/ Local
Hazard Areas Department Medium
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 120
CITY OF YAKIMA
HAZARD - SPECIFIC ACTION ITEMS
2015 -2020
Timeline:
Short -Range (less than 2 years); Mid -Range (2 -5 years); Long -
Priority: Range (more than 5 years); Ongoing Funding Source:
H (High); M Local; State; FEMA;
(Medium); Cost /Benefit: Private; Other
L (Low)
High, Medium, Low, or N/A
Integrate Mitigation into Local Planning YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Management
Division
Strengthen Land Use Regulations Planning High Ongoing N/A Local
Department
Adopt and Enforce Building Codes Code High Ongoing N/A Local
Administration
Monitor Mitigation Plan YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Implementation Management
Division
Protect Structures Code High Long -Range High /High Federal
Administration (FEMA)
Increase Hazard Education and Risk YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Awareness Management
Division
Improve Household Disaster YFD Emergency High Ongoing N/A Local
Preparedness Management
Division
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 121
2015 -2020 Hazard Specific Action Items Annual Review and Progress
Plan monitoring means tracking the implementation of the plan over time. The plan should identify how, when,
and by whom the plan will be monitored. For example, the plan may describe a monitoring system for tracking
the status of the identified mitigation actions and reporting this information on an annual basis. The responsible
agency assigned to each mitigation action should be responsible for tracking and reporting on each of their
actions. Page 110 illustrates the report form for reporting progress on a mitigation action.
Step One: Identify mitigation actions that your planning team has identified for the annual review. The planning
team has the option to address ALL action items, or only those that should be acted on during this first year cycle
of review.
Step Two: Complete a form as illustrated on page 110 for each Mitigation Action identified in Hazard Specific
tables on pages 102 -105.
Step Three: Insert the letter indicated in the Action Status onto the following Annual Review and Summary table.
Step Four: Submit the completed form(s) to the City's Emergency Management Office.
CITY OF YAKIMA
HAZARD - SPECIFIC ACTION ITEMS
2015 -2020
ANNUAL REVIEW AND PROGRESS SUMMARY
Status (Choose One and Insert LETTER):
A. Completed;
B. In Progress (on schedule);
C. In Progress (delayed);
D. Delayed Until Funding Available;
E. Canceled
GENERAL: ALL HAZARDS PUBLIC AWARENESS
Actions Status
Emergency preparedness education programs for schools
Drills, exercises in homes, workplaces, classrooms, etc.
Public service announcements
Hazard "safety fairs."
Hazard awareness weeks.
Preparedness handbooks, brochures; distribution of severe weather guides, etc.
Regular newspaper articles.
Utility bill inserts.
Add New Action Items as Applicable
DROUGHT /HEAT WAVES
Actions Status
Assess Vulnerability to Drought Risk
Monitor Drought Conditions
Monitor Water Supply
Plan for Drought
Require Water Conservation During Drought Conditions
Educate Residents on Water Saving Techniques
Add New Action Items as Applicable
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 122
CITY OF YAKIMA
HAZARD - SPECIFIC ACTION ITEMS
2015 -2020
ANNUAL REVIEW AND PROGRESS SUMMARY
Status (Choose One and Insert LETTER):
A. Completed;
B. In Progress (on schedule);
C. In Progress (delayed);
D. Delayed Until Funding Available;
E. Canceled
EARTHQUAKE
Actions Status
Adopt and Enforce Building Codes
Incorporate Earthquake Mitigation into Local Planning
Map and Assess Community Vulnerability to Seismic Hazards
Conduct Inspections of Building Safety
Protect Critical Facilities and Infrastructure
Implement Structural Mitigation Techniques
Increase Earthquake Risk Awareness
Conduct Outreach to Builders, Architects, Engineers, and Inspectors
Provide Information on Structural and Non - Structural Retrofitting
Add New Action Items as Applicable
EXTREME TEMPERATURES
Actions Status
Increase Awareness of Extreme Temperature Risk and Safety
Assist Vulnerable Populations
Educate Property Owners About Freezing Pipes
Add New Action Items as Applicable
FLOOD (RIVER AND STREAMS)
Actions Status
Incorporate Flood Mitigation in Local Planning
Form Partnerships to Support Floodplain Management
Limit or Restrict Development in Floodplain Areas
Adopt and Enforce Building Codes and Development Standards
Improve Stormwater Management Planning
Adopt Polices to Reduce Stormwater Runoff
Improve Flood Risk Assessment
Manage the Floodplain Beyond Minimum Requirements
Conduct Regular Maintenance for Drainage Systems and Flood Control Structures
Protect Infrastructure
Protect Critical Facilities
Construct Flood Control Measures
Preserve Floodplains as Open Space
Increase Awareness of Flood Risk and Safety
Educate Property Owners about Flood Mitigation Techniques
Add New Action Items as Applicable
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 123
CITY OF YAKIMA
HAZARD - SPECIFIC ACTION ITEMS
2015 -2020
ANNUAL REVIEW AND PROGRESS SUMMARY
Status (Choose One and Insert LETTER):
A. Completed;
B. In Progress (on schedule);
C. In Progress (delayed);
D. Delayed Until Funding Available;
E. Canceled
SEVERE WIND STORM
Actions Status
Adopt and Enforce Building Codes
Promote or Require Site and Building Design Standards to Minimize Wind Damage
Assess Vulnerability to Severe Wind
Increase Severe Wind Risk Awareness
Add New Action Items as Applicable
SEVERE WINTER STORMS /FREEZES
Actions Status
Adopt and Enforce Building Codes
Protect Buildings and Infrastructure
Reduce Impacts to Roadways
Conduct Winter Weather Risk Awareness Activities
Assist Vulnerable Populations
Add New Action Items as Applicable
TORNADO
Actions Status
Require Wind- Resistant Building Techniques
Add New Action Items as Applicable
VOLCANIC ERUPTION
Actions Status
Maintain ash removal plans
Add New Action Items as Applicable
WILDLAND FIRE
Actions Status
Map and Assess Vulnerability to Wildfire
Reduce Risk through Land Use Planning
Encourage residents to assess and improve accessibility to their property.
Increase Wildfire Risk Awareness
Educate Property Owners about Wildfire Mitigation Techniques
Add New Action Items as Applicable
MULTIPLE HAZARDS
Actions Status
Assess Community Risk
Map Community Risk
Prevent Development in Hazard Areas
Adopt Development Regulations in Hazard Areas
Integrate Mitigation into Local Planning
Strengthen Land Use Regulations
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 124
CITY OF YAKIMA
HAZARD - SPECIFIC ACTION ITEMS
2015 -2020
ANNUAL REVIEW AND PROGRESS SUMMARY
Status (Choose One and Insert LETTER):
A. Completed;
B. In Progress (on schedule);
C. In Progress (delayed);
D. Delayed Until Funding Available;
E. Canceled
Adopt and Enforce Building Codes
Monitor Mitigation Plan Implementation
Protect Structures
Increase Hazard Education and Risk Awareness
Improve Household Disaster Preparedness
Add New Action Items as Applicable
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 125
Blank Intentionally
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 126
2015 -2020 Hazard - Specific Action Items Annual Review Progress Report Form
MITIGATION ACTION PROGRESS REPORT FORM
Progress Report Period From Date: To Date:
Action Item
Responsible Agency
Contact Name
Contact Phone /Email
A. Completed
Action Status B. In Progress (on Schedule)
Anticipated completion date:
C. In Progress (delayed)
Explain:
D. Delayed Until Funding Available
E. Cancelled
SUMMARY OF ACTION PROGRESS FOR THIS REPORT PERIOD
What was accomplished for this Action during this reporting period?
What obstacles, problem, or delays did the Action encounter?
If uncompleted, is the Action still relevant? Should the Action be changed or revised?
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 127
Blank Intentionally
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 128
Appendices
The plan appendices are designed to provide users of the Mitigation Plan with additional information to assist
them in understanding the contents of the mitigation plan, and potential resources to assist them with
implementation.
Appendix A: Resource Directory
This appendix includes county, regional, state, and national resources and programs that may be of technical
and /or financial assistance to Yakima County during plan implementation.
Appendix B: Definitions and Acronyms
This appendix provides a list of definitions and acronyms for county, regional, state, and federal agencies and
organizations that may be referred to within the Mitigation Plan.
Appendix C: Mitigation Actions and Ideas
This appendix provides lists of "best practices" compiled from numerous sources, e.g., federal mitigation
guidebooks.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 129
Blank Intentionally.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 130
Appendix A
Resource Directory
Government, Federal
Alaska Volcano Observatory
Bureau of Reclamation
Cascades Volcano Observatory - USGS
Census - Population & Housing Unit Estimates The Resource Directory provides contact
Code of Federal Regulations /Congressional Register information for local, regional, state,
Department of Energy and federal programs that are currently
Environmental Protection Agency involved in hazard mitigation activities.
Federal Census Tiger Maps This section may also be used by various
Federal Communications Commission community members interested in
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hazard mitigation information and
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Region X projects.
Urban Search and Rescue (US &R)
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
Federal Government Documents
Federal Government Resources on the Web
Federal Register
GPO Gate at University of California
GSA Region Ten
Library of Congress
Los Alamos National Laboratory
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Images
National Archives and Records Administration
National Communications System
National Mental Health Services Knowledge Exchange Network
National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
NOAA National Environmental Satellite Data & Information
National Safety Council
Naystar Global Positioning System
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Occupational Safety & Health Administration
OSHA Computerized Information System
THOMAS Legislative Information on the Internet
US Department of Agriculture (USDA)
US Department of Energy (USDOE) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy - Center of Sustainable
Development, Disaster Planning information
US Fire Administration (USFA)
US Geological Survey (USGS)
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 131
Blank Intentionally.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 132
Appendix B
Definitions and Acronyms
COMPREHENSIVE FLOOD HAZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN - Recommendations on future flood hazard
management alternatives for problematic areas. Once the plan is adopted, it serves as a policy document, for the
County and Cities that adopt it. The Plan itself is not a regulatory document, but identifies and prioritizes flood
control and mitigation projects for the community. Adoption of the plans increases the chances of State and
Federal funding of projects and post flood disaster relief.
DISASTER - An event expected or unexpected, in which a community's available, pertinent resources are
expended; or the need for resources exceeds availability; and in which a community undergoes severe danger;
incurring losses so that the social or economic structure of the community is disrupted; and the fulfillment of
some or all of the community's essential functions are prevented.
EARTHQUAKE - The shaking of the ground caused by an abrupt shift of rock along a fracture in the earth, called a
fault.
EMERGENCY - An event, expected or unexpected, involving shortages of time and resources; that places life,
property, or the environment, in danger; that requires response beyond routine incident response resources.
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT or COMPREHENSIVE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT - The preparation for and the
carrying out of all emergency functions, other than functions for which the military forces are primarily
responsible, to mitigate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from emergencies and disasters, and to aid victims
suffering from injury or damage, resulting from disasters caused by all hazards, whether natural or technological,
and to provide support for search and rescue operations for persons and property in distress.
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) - Agency created in 1979 to provide a single point of
accountability for all federal activities related to disaster mitigation and emergency preparedness, response, and
recovery. Federal Emergency Management Agency manages the President's Disaster Relief Fund and
coordinates the disaster assistance activities of all federal agencies in the event of a Presidential Disaster
Declaration.
FLOOD - An inundation of dry land with water. Types of floods in Yakima County are primarily river and stream.
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Materials, which, because of their chemical, physical, or biological nature, pose a
potential risk to life, health, or property when released.
LANDSLIDE - Landslide is the sliding movement of masses of loosened rock and soil down a hillside or slope.
MAJOR DISASTER - As defined in federal law, is any hurricane, tornado, storm, flood, high water, wind - driven
water, tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, mudslide, snowstorm, drought, fire,
explosion, or other technological or human caused catastrophe in any part of the United States which, in the
determination of the President, causes damage of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant major disaster
assistance... in alleviating the damage, loss, hardship, or suffering caused thereby.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 133
MITIGATION - Actions taken to eliminate or reduce the degree of long -term risk to human life, property, and the
environment from natural and technological hazards. Mitigation assumes our communities are exposed to risks
whether or not an emergency occurs. Mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, building codes,
disaster insurance, hazard information systems, land use management, hazard analysis, land acquisition,
monitoring and inspection, public education, research, relocation, risk mapping, safety codes, statues and
ordinances, tax incentives and disincentives, equipment or computer tie downs, and stocking emergency
supplies.
PREPAREDNESS - Actions taken in advance of an emergency to develop operational capabilities and facilitate an
effective response in the event an emergency occurs. Preparedness measures include, but are not limited to,
continuity of government, emergency alert systems, emergency communications, emergency operations centers,
emergency operations plans, emergency public information materials, exercise of plans, mutual aid agreements,
resource management, training response personnel, and warning systems.
PRESIDENTIAL DECLARATION - Formal declaration by the President that an Emergency or Major Disaster exists,
based upon the request for such a declaration by the Governor and with the verification of Federal Emergency
Management Agency preliminary damage assessments.
RECOVERY - Activity to return vital life support systems to minimum operating standards and long -term activity
designed to return life to normal or improved levels, including some form of economic viability. Recovery
measures include, but are not limited to, crisis counseling, damage assessment, debris clearance,
decontamination, disaster application centers, disaster insurance payments, disaster loans and grants, disaster
unemployment assistance, public information, reassessment of emergency plans, reconstruction, temporary
housing, and full -scale business resumption.
RESPONSE - Actions taken immediately before, during, or directly after an emergency occurs, to save lives,
minimize damage to property and the environment, and enhance the effectiveness of recovery. Response
measures include, but are not limited to, emergency plan activation, emergency alert system activation,
emergency instructions to the public, emergency medical assistance, staffing the emergency operations center,
public official alerting, reception and care, shelter and evacuation, search and rescue, resource mobilization, and
warning systems activation.
RISK ASSESSMENT TOOL - An Excel spreadsheet, which is designed to measure a jurisdiction's risk from the
effects of hazards contained in the HMP.
SEVERE WINTER STORM - An atmospheric disturbance manifested in strong winds, snow, and ice.
WIND STORM - A localized violently destructive windstorm occurring over land.
VOLCANO - A vent in the earth's crust through which molten rock, rock fragments, gases, and ashes are ejected
from the earth's interior.
WILDLAND FIRE - Uncontrolled destruction of forests, brush, field crops and grasslands caused by nature or
humans.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 134
ACRONYMS
CAO - Critical Areas Ordinance
CEMP — Comprehensive Emergency Management Program
FEMA — Federal Emergency Management Agency
GMA - Growth Management Act
HICA — Hazard Identification and Community Assessment
HMGP — Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 135
Blank Intentionally.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 136
Appendix C
Mitigation Actions and Ideas
(FEMA Mitigation Ideas: A Resource for Reducing Risk to Natural Hazards, January 2013)
14
yhICT, .
FEMA
Introduction
The purpose of this document is to provide a resource that communities can use to identify and evaluate a range
of potential mitigation actions for reducing risk to natural hazards and disasters. The focus of this document is
mitigation, which is action taken to reduce or eliminate long -term risk to hazards. Mitigation is different from
preparedness, which is action taken to improve emergency response or operational preparedness.
This document is intended to be a starting point for gathering ideas and should not be used as the only source for
identifying actions. Communities should seek innovative and different ideas for reducing risk that meet their
unique needs. The actions listed are not necessarily eligible for Federal assistance programs. Users should review
specific program guidance and contact their State Hazard Mitigation Officer (SHMO) or regional FEMA office for
more information.
Hazard Descriptions
Risk Codes: D— Drought; EQ— Earthquake; VE— Volcanic Eruption; ER— Erosion; ET -- Extreme temperatures; F—
Flood; HA —Hail; LS— Landslide; L— Lightning; SW -- Severe wind; WW -- Severe winter weather; SU— Subsidence;
T— Tornado; WF— Wildfire; MU-- Multiple Hazards
Drought (D)
A drought is a period of unusually constant dry weather that persists long enough to cause deficiencies in water
supply (surface or underground). Droughts are slow onset hazards, but, over time, they can severely affect crops,
municipal water supplies, recreational resources, and wildlife. If drought conditions extend over a number of
years, the direct and indirect economic impacts can be significant. High temperatures, high winds, and low
humidity can worsen drought conditions and also make areas more susceptible to wildfire. In addition, human
actions and demands for water resources can accelerate drought - related impacts.
Earthquake (EQ)
An earthquake is a sudden release of energy that creates a movement in the earth's crust. Most earthquake -
related property damage and deaths are caused by the failure and collapse of structures due to ground shaking.
The level of damage depends upon the extent and duration of the shaking. Other damaging earthquake effects
include landslides, the down -slope movement of soil and rock (in mountain regions and along hillsides), and
liquefaction.
Volcanic Eruption
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 137
A volcano is a vent in the earth's crust through which magma (molten rock), rock fragments, gases, and ashes are
ejected from the earth's interior. A volcanic mountain is created over time by the accumulation of these erupted
products on the on the earth's surface.
Erosion (ER)
Erosion wearing away of land, such as loss of riverbank, beach, shoreline, or dune material. It is measured as the
rate of change in the position or displacement of a riverbank or shoreline over a period of time. Short -term
erosion typically results from periodic natural events, such as flooding, hurricanes, storm surge, and windstorms,
but may be intensified by human activities. Long -term erosion is a result of multi -year impacts such as repetitive
flooding, wave action, sea level rise, sediment loss, subsidence, and climate change. Death and injury are not
typically associated with erosion; however, it can destroy buildings and infrastructure.
Extreme Temperatures (ET)
Extreme heat and extreme cold constitute different conditions in different parts of the country. Extreme cold can
range from near freezing temperatures in the southern United States to temperatures well below zero in the
northern states. Similarly, extreme heat is typically recognized as the condition where temperatures consistently
stay ten degrees or more above a region's average high temperature for an extended period. Fatalities can result
from extreme temperatures, as they can push the human body beyond its limits (hyperthermia and
hypothermia).
Flood (F)
A flood is the partial or complete inundation of normally dry land. The various types of flooding include riverine
flooding, coastal flooding, and shallow flooding. Common impacts of flooding include damage to personal
property, buildings, and infrastructure; bridge and road closures; service disruptions; and injuries or even
fatalities.
Hail (HA)
Hailstorms are a potentially damaging outgrowth of severe thunderstorms. Hailstorms frequently accompany
thunderstorms, so their locations and spatial extents overlap. Hail can cause substantial damage to vehicles,
roofs, landscaping, and other areas of the built environment. U.S. agriculture is typically the area most affected
by hail storms, which cause severe crop damage even during minor events.
Landslide (LS)
The movement of a mass of rock, debris, or earth down a slope by force of gravity is considered a landslide.
Landslides occur when the slope or soil stability changes from stable to unstable, which may be caused by
earthquakes, storms, volcanic eruptions, erosion, fire, or additional human - induced activities. Slopes greater than
10 degrees are more likely to slide, as are slopes where the height from the top of the slope to its toe is greater
than 40 feet. Slopes are also more likely to fail if vegetative cover is low and /or soil water content is high.
Potential impacts include environmental disturbance, property and infrastructure damage, and injuries or
fatalities.
Lightning (L)
Lightning is a discharge of electrical energy that results from the buildup of positive and negative charges in a
thunderstorm, which creates a "bolt" when the buildup of charges becomes strong enough. Lightning can strike
communications equipment (e.g., radio or cell towers, antennae, satellite dishes, etc.) and hamper
communication and emergency response. Lightning strikes can also cause significant damage to buildings, critical
facilities, and infrastructure, largely by igniting a fire. Lightning can also ignite a wildfire.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 138
Severe Wind (SW)
Severe wind can occur alone, such as during straightline wind events, or it can accompany other natural hazards,
including hurricanes and severe thunderstorms. Severe wind poses a threat to lives, property, and vital utilities
primarily due to the effects of flying debris or downed trees and power lines. Severe wind will typically cause the
greatest damage to structures of light construction, particularly manufactured homes.
Severe Winter Weather (WW)
Severe winter storms may include snow, sleet, freezing rain, or a mix of these wintry forms of precipitation.
Severe winter weather can down trees, cause widespread power outages, damage property, and cause fatalities
and injuries.
Subsidence (SU)
Subsidence is the gradual settling or sudden sinking of the Earth's surface due to subsurface movement of earth
materials. The level of subsidence ranges from a broad lowering to collapse of land surface. Most causes of
subsidence are human - induced, such as groundwater pumpage, aquifer system compaction, drainage of organic
soils, underground mining, hydrocompaction, natural compaction, sinkholes, and thawing permafrost. Areas
located above or adjacent to karsts topography have a greater risk of experiencing subsidence. Sudden collapses
of surface areas can damage and destroy buildings and infrastructure.
Tornado (T)
A tornado is a violently rotating column of air that has contact with the ground and is often visible as a funnel
cloud. The destruction caused by tornadoes ranges from light to catastrophic depending on the intensity, size,
and duration of the storm. Typically, tornadoes cause the greatest damage to structures of light construction,
including residential dwellings and particularly manufactured homes. Tornadoes are more likely to occur during
the months of March through May and tend to form in the late afternoon and early evening.
Wildfire (WF)
A wildfire is any outdoor fire that is not controlled, supervised, or arranged. Wildfire probability depends on local
weather conditions; outdoor activities such as camping, debris burning, and construction; and the degree of
public cooperation with fire prevention measures. Wildfires can result in widespread damage to property and
loss of life.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 139
Mitigation Actions
The suggested mitigation actions are summarized into four types: (1) Local Planning and Regulations, (2) Structure
and Infrastructure Projects, (3) Natural Systems Protection, and (4) Education and Awareness Programs. Examples of
activities that can be used to accomplish each mitigation goal are identified, as well as the relevant FEMA
publications or resources, if applicable.
I. Local Planning and Regulations
These include government authorities, policies, or codes that influence the way land and buildings are
developed and built.
D -1 AssessVulnerabilityto Drought Risk
To better understand and assess local vulnerability to drought, consider actions such as:
• Gathering and analyzing water and climate data to gain a better understanding of local
climate and drought history.
• Identifying factors that affect the severity of a drought.
• Identifying available water supplies.
• Determining how the community and its water sources have been impacted by droughts in
the past.
D -2 Monitor Drought Conditions
Monitoring drought conditions can provide early warning for policymakers and planners to make
decisions through actions including:
• Identifying local drought indicators, such as precipitation, temperature, surface water levels,
soil moisture, etc.
• Establishing a regular schedule to monitor and report conditions on at least a monthly basis.
D -3 Monitor Water Supply
Monitoring the water supply and its functions can save water in the long run through actions such
as:
• Regularly checking for leaks to minimize water supply losses.
• Improving water supply monitoring.
D -4 Plan for Drought
Plan for future drought events in your area through actions such as:
• Developing a drought emergency plan.
• Developing criteria or triggers for drought - related actions.
• Developing a drought communication plan and early warning system to facilitate timely
communication of relevant information to officials, decision makers, emergency managers,
and the general public.
• Developing agreements for secondary water sources that may be used during drought
conditions.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 140
• Establishing an irrigation time /scheduling program or process so that all agricultural land gets
the required amount of water. Through incremental timing, each area is irrigated at different
times so that all water is not consumed at the same time. Spacing usage may also help with
recharge of groundwater.
D -5 Require Water Conservation during Drought Conditions
Require mandatory water conservation measures during drought emergencies, including:
• Developing an ordinance to restrict the use of public water resources for non - essential
usage, such as landscaping, washing cars, filling swimming pools, etc.
• Adopting ordinances to prioritize or control water use, particularly for emergency situations
like firefighting.
D -6 Prevent Overgrazing
Prevent overgrazing, which has been linked to drought vulnerability, through actions such as:
• Establishing a grazing policy or permitting program to prevent overgrazing.
• Reducing the number of animals and improving range management.
EQ -1 Adopt and Enforce Building Codes
Building codes reduceearthquakedamageto structures. Consider actions such as:
• Adopting and enforcing updated building code provisions to reduce earthquake damage risk.
• Adopting the International Building Code (IBC) and International Residential Code (IRC).
EQ -2 Incorporate Earthquake Mitigation into Local Planning
Earthquake risk can be reduced through local planning, codes, and ordinances, including:
• Creating a seismic safety committee to provide policy recommendations, evaluate and
recommend changes in seismic safety standards, and give an annual assessment of local and
statewide implementation of seismic safety improvements.
• Developing and distributing guidelines or passing ordinances that require developers and
building owners to locate lifelines, buildings, critical facilities, and hazardous materials out of
areas subject to significant seismic hazards.
• Incorporating structural and non - structural seismic strengthening actions into ongoing
building plans and activities in the capital improvement plan to ensure that facilities remain
operational for years to come.
• Supporting financial incentives, such as low interest loans or tax breaks, for home and
business owners who seismically retrofit their structures.
EQ -3 Map and Assess Community Vulnerability to Seismic Hazards
To better understand and assess local vulnerability to earthquakes, consider actions such as:
• Developing an inventory of public and commercial buildings that may be particularly
vulnerable to earthquake damage, including pre -1940s homes and homes with cripple wall
foundations.
• Collecting geologic information on seismic sources, soil conditions, and related potential
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
hazards.
• Creating an earthquake scenario to estimate potential loss of life and injuries, the types of
potential damage, and existing vulnerabilities within a community to develop earthquake
mitigation priorities.
• Using HAZUS to quantitatively estimate potential losses from an earthquake.
• Maintaining a database to track community vulnerability to earthquake risk.
• Using GIS to map hazard areas, at -risk structures, and associated hazards (e.g., liquefaction
and landslides) to assess high -risk areas.
EQ -4 Conduct Inspections of Building Safety
Inspections can be used to assess earthquake risk, such as:
• Establishing a school survey procedure and guidance document to inventory structural and
non - structural hazards in and around school buildings.
• Using rapid visual screening to quickly inspect a building and identify disaster damage or
potential seismic structural and non - structural weaknesses to prioritize retrofit efforts,
inventory high -risk structures and critical facilities, or assess post- disaster risk to determine if
buildings are safe to re- occupy.
• Consulting industry standard publications such as American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
31 - Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings, ASCE 41 - Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing
Buildings, and Applied Technology Council (ATC) 20 - Procedures for Post - earthquake Safety
Evaluation of Buildings.
ER -1 Map and Assess Vulnerability to Erosion
Erosion risk can be better assessed and monitored with mapping techniques, including the
following:
• Using GIS to identify and map erosion hazard areas.
• Developing and maintaining a database to track community vulnerability to erosion.
• Using GIS to identify concentrations of at -risk structures.
• Improving mapping of hazard areas to educate residents about unexpected risks.
ER -2 Manage Development in Erosion Hazard Areas
Erosion damage can be mitigated by regulating how development occurs in hazard areas, such as the
following:
• Adopting sediment and erosion control regulations.
• Adopting zoning and erosion overlay districts.
• Developing an erosion protection program for high hazard areas.
• Employing erosion control easements.
• Prohibiting development in high- hazard areas.
• Developing and implementing an erosion management plan.
• Requiring mandatory erosion surcharges on homes.
• Locating utilities and critical facilities outside of areas susceptible to erosion to decrease the
risk of service disruption.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 142
ER -3 PromoteorRequireSite andBuildingDesignStandards to Minimize Erosion Risk
Development can be designed to minimize damage due to erosion using the following techniques:
• Constructing open foundation systems on buildings to minimize scour.
• Constructing deep foundations in erosion hazard areas.
• Clustering buildings during building and site design.
• Designing and orienting infrastructure to deter erosion and accretion.
ET -1 Reduce Urban Heat Island Effect
As urban areas develop and buildings and roads replace open land and vegetation, urban regions
become warmer than their rural surroundings, forming an "island" of heat. Several methods for
reducing heat island effects include:
• Increasing tree plantings around buildings to shade parking lots and along public rights -of-
way.
• Encouraging installation of green roofs, which provide shade and remove heat from the roof
surface and surrounding air.
• Using cool roofing products that reflect sunlight and heat away from a building.
F -1 Incorporate Flood Mitigation in Local Planning
Comprehensive planning and floodplain management can mitigate flooding by influencing
development. Strategies include:
• Determining and enforcing acceptable land uses to alleviate the risk of damage by limiting
exposure in flood hazard areas. Floodplain and coastal zone management can be included in
comprehensive planning.
• Developing a floodplain management plan and updating it regularly.
• Mitigating hazards during infrastructure planning. For example, decisions to extend roads or
utilities to an area may increase exposure to flood hazards.
• Adopting a post- disaster recovery ordinance based on a plan to regulate repair activity,
generally depending on property location.
• Passing and enforcing an ordinance that regulates dumping in streams and ditches.
• Establishing a "green infrastructure" program to link, manage, and expand existing parks,
preserves, greenways, etc.
• Obtaining easements for planned and regulated public use of privately -owned land for
temporary water retention and drainage.
F -2 Form Partnerships to Support Floodplain Management
Partnerships between local, state, and regional entities help expand resources and improve
coordination. Consider the following actions:
• Developing a storm water committee that meets regularly to discuss issues and recommend
projects.
• Forming a regional watershed council to help bring together resources for comprehensive
analysis, planning, decision - making, and cooperation.
• Establishing watershed -based planning initiatives to address the flood hazard with
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 143
neighboring jurisdictions.
• Forming a citizen plan implementation steering committee to monitor progress on local
mitigation actions. Include a mix of representatives from neighborhoods, local businesses,
and local government.
F -3 Limit or Restrict Development in Floodplain Areas
Flooding can be mitigated by limiting or restricting how development occurs in floodplain areas
through actions such as:
• Prohibiting or limiting floodplain development through regulatory and /or incentive -based
measures.
• Limiting the density of developments in the floodplain.
• Requiring that floodplains be kept as open space.
• Limiting the percentage of allowable impervious surface within developed parcels.
• Developing a stream buffer ordinance to protect water resources and limit flood impacts.
• Prohibiting any fill in floodplain areas.
F -4 Adopt and Enforce Building Codes and Development Standards
The use of building codes and development standards can ensure structures are able to
withstand flooding. Potential actions include:
• Adopting the International Building Code (IBC) and International Residential Code (IRC).
• Adopting ASCE 24 -05 Flood Resistant Design and Construction. ASCE 24 is a referenced
standard in the IBC that specifies minimum requirements and expected performance for the
design and construction of buildings and structures in the flood hazard areas to make them
more resistant to flood loads and flood damage.
• Adding or increasing "freeboard" requirements (feet above base flood elevation) in the flood
damage ordinance.
• Prohibiting all first floor enclosures below base flood elevation for all structures in flood
hazard areas.
• Considering orientation of new development during design (e.g., subdivisions, buildings,
infrastructure, etc.).
• Setting the design flood elevation at or above the historical high water mark if it is above the
mapped base flood elevation.
• Using subdivision design standards to require elevation data collection during platting and to
have buildable space on lots above the base flood elevation.
• Requiring standard tie -downs of propane tanks.
F -5 Improve Storm Water Management Planning
Rainwater and snowmelt can cause flooding and erosion in developed areas. Storm Water
management practices to prevent this include:
• Completing a storm water drainage study for known problem areas.
• Preparing and adopting a storm water drainage plan and ordinance.
• Preparing and adopting a community -wide storm water management master plan.
• Regulating development in upland areas in order to reduce storm water run -off through a
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
storm water ordinance.
• Linking flood hazard mitigation objectives with EPA Storm water Phase II initiatives.
• Developing engineering guidelines for drainage from new development.
• Requiring a drainage study with new development.
• Encouraging the use of Low Impact Development techniques
F -6 Adopt Polices to Reduce Storm Water Runoff
In addition to storm water management, techniques to reduce rain runoff can prevent flooding
and erosion, such as:
• Designing a "natural runoff" or "zero discharge" policy for storm water in subdivision design.
• Requiring more trees be preserved and planted in landscape designs to reduce the amount of
storm water runoff.
• Requiring developers to plan for on -site sediment retention.
• Requiring developers to construct on -site retention basins for excessive storm water and as a
firefighting water source.
• Encouraging the use of porous pavement, vegetative buffers, and islands in large parking
areas.
• Conforming pavement to land contours so as not to provide easier avenues for storm water.
• Encouraging the use of permeable driveways and surfaces to reduce runoff and increase
groundwater recharge.
• Adopting erosion and sedimentation control regulations for construction and farming.
F -7 ImproveFlood Risk Assessment
Heighten awareness of flood risk with the following:
• Incorporating the procedures for tracking high water marks following a flood into emergency
response plans.
• Conducting cumulative impact analyses for multiple development projects within the same
watershed.
• Conducting a verification study of FEMA's repetitive loss inventory and developing an
associated tracking database.
• Regularly calculating and documenting the amount of flood -prone property preserved as
open space.
• Requiring a thorough watershed analysis for all proposed dam or reservoir projects.
• Developing a dam failure study and emergency action plan.
• Using GIS to map areas that are at risk of flooding.
• Obtaining depth grid data and using it to illustrate flood risk to citizens.
• Incorporating digital floodplain and topographic data into GIS systems, in conjunction with
HAZUS, to assess risk.
• Developing and maintaining a database to track community exposure to flood risk.
• Revising and updating regulatory floodplain maps.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
F -8 Join or Improve Compliance with NFIP
The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)enables property owners in participating communities
to purchase insurance protection against flood losses. Actions to achieve eligibility and maintain
compliance include:
• Participating in NFIP.
• Adopting ordinances that meet minimum Federal and state requirements to comply with
NFIP.
• Conducting NFIP community workshops to provide information and incentives for property
owners to acquire flood insurance.
• Designating a local floodplain manager and /or CRS coordinator who achieves CFM
certification.
• Completing and maintaining FEMA elevation certificates for pre -FIRM and /or post -FIRM
buildings.
• Requiring and maintaining FEMA elevation certificates for all new and improved buildings
located in floodplains.
F -9 Manage the Floodplain Beyond Minimum Requirements
In addition to participation in NFIP, implementing good floodplain management techniques that
exceed minimum requirements can help minimize flood losses. Examples include:
• Incorporating the ASFPM's "No Adverse Impact" policy into local floodplain management
programs.
• Revising the floodplain ordinance to incorporate cumulative substantial damage
requirements.
• Adopting a "no- rise" in base flood elevation clause for the flood damage prevention
ordinance.
• Extending the freeboard requirement past the mapped floodplain to include an equivalent
land elevation.
• Including requirements in the local floodplain ordinance for homeowners to sign non -
conversion agreements for areas below base flood elevation.
• Establishing and publicizing a user - friendly, publicly - accessible repository for inquirers to
obtain Flood Insurance Rate Maps.
• Developing an educational flyer targeting NFIP policyholders on increased cost of compliance
during post -flood damage assessments.
• Annually notifying the owners of repetitive loss properties of Flood Mitigation Assistance
funding.
• Offering incentives for building above the required freeboard minimum (code plus).
F -10 Participate in the CRS
The Community Rating System (CRS) rewardscommunitiesthat exceed the minimum NFIP
requirements. Depending upon the level of participation, flood insurance premium rates are
discounted for policyholders. Potential activities that are eligible to receive credit include:
• Advising the public about the local flood hazard, flood insurance, and flood protection
measures.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 146
• Enacting and enforcing regulations that exceed NFIP minimum standards so that more flood
protection is provided for new development.
• Implementing damage reduction measures for existing buildings such as acquisition,
relocation, retrofitting, and maintenance of drainage ways and retention basins.
• Taking action to minimize the effects of flooding on people, property, and building contents
through measures including flood warning, emergency response, and evacuation planning.
F -11 Establish Local Funding Mechanisms for Flood Mitigation
Potential methods to develop local funding sources for flood mitigation include:
• Using taxes to support a regulatory system.
• Using impact fees to help fund public projects to mitigate impacts of land development (e.g.,
increased runoff).
• Levying taxes to fix maintenance of drainage systems and capital improvements.
LS -1 Map and Assess Vulnerability to Landslides
Improve data and mapping on specific landslide risks in the community by:
• Studying areas where riparian landslides may occur.
• Completing an inventory of locations where critical facilities, other buildings, and
infrastructure are vulnerable to landslides.
• Using GIS to identify and map landslide hazard areas.
• Developing and maintaining a database to track community vulnerability to landslides.
• Assessing vegetation in wildfire -prone areas to prevent landslides after fires (e.g., encourage
plants with strong root systems).
LS -2 Manage Development in Landslide Hazard Areas
Landslide risk can be mitigated by regulating development in landslide hazard areasthrough actions
such as:
• Creating a plan to implement reinforcement measures in high -risk areas.
• Defining steep slope /high -risk areas in land use and comprehensive plans and creating
guidelines or restricting new development in those areas.
• Creating or increasing setback limits on parcels near high -risk areas.
• Locating utilities outside of landslide areas to decrease the risk of service disruption.
• Restricting or limiting industrial activity that would strip slopes of essential top soil.
• Incorporating economic development activity restrictions in high -risk areas.
SW -1 Adopt and Enforce Building Codes
Adopt regulations governing residential construction to prevent wind damage. Examples of
appropriate regulations are:
• Adopting the International Building Code (IBC) and International Residential Code (IRC).
• Adopting standards from International Code Council (ICC) -600 Standard for Residential
Construction in High -Wind Regions.
• Reviewing building codes and structural policies to ensure they are adequate to protect older
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 147
structures from wind damage.
• Requiring or encouraging wind engineering measures and construction techniques that may
include structural bracing, straps and clips, anchor bolts, laminated or impact- resistant glass,
reinforced pedestrian and garage doors, window shutters, waterproof adhesive sealing
strips, or interlocking roof shingles.
• Requiring tie -downs with anchors and ground anchors appropriate for the soil type for
manufactured homes.
• Prohibiting the use of carports and open coverings attached to manufactured homes.
• Requiring the use of special interlocking shingles designed to interlock and resist uplift forces
in extreme wind conditions to reduce damage to a roof or other structures.
• Improving nailing patterns.
• Requiring building foundation design, braced elevated platforms, and protections against the
lateral forces of winds and waves.
• Requiring new masonry chimneys greater than 6 feet above a roof to have continuous
reinforced steel bracing.
• Requiring structures on temporary foundations to be securely anchored to permanent
foundations.
SW -2 Promote or Require Site and Building Design Standards to Minimize Wind Damage
Damage associated with severe wind events can be reduced or prevented if considered during
building and site design. Examples include the following:
• Using natural environmental features as wind buffers in site design.
• Incorporating passive ventilation in the building design.
• Incorporating passive ventilation in the site design. Passive ventilation systems use a series of
vents in exterior walls or at exterior windows to allow outdoor air to enter the home in a
controlled way.
• Encouraging architectural designs that limit potential for wind -borne debris.
• Improving architectural design standards for optimal wind conveyance.
• Encouraging wind - resistant roof shapes (e.g., hip over gable).
SW -3 Assess Vulnerability to Severe Wind
In order to better understand and assess local vulnerability to severe wind, consideractionssuch as:
• Developing and maintaining a database to track community vulnerability to severe wind.
• Using GIS to map areas that are at risk to the wind hazard associated with different hurricane
conditions (e.g., Category 1, 2, 3, etc.) and to identify concentrations of at -risk structures.
• Creating a severe wind scenario to estimate potential loss of life and injuries, the types of
potential damage, and existing vulnerabilities within a community to develop severe wind
mitigation priorities.
• Using HAZUS to quantitatively estimate potential losses from hurricane wind.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 148
SW -4 Protect Power Lines and Infrastructure
The regular maintenance and upkeep of utilities can help prevent wind damage. Possiblestrategies
are:
• Establishing standards for all utilities regarding tree pruning around lines.
• Incorporating inspection and management of hazardous trees into the drainage system
maintenance process.
• Preemptively testing power line holes to determine if they are rotting.
• Inspecting utility poles to ensure they meet specifications and are wind resistant.
• Burying power lines to provide uninterrupted power after severe winds, considering both
maintenance and repair issues.
• Upgrading overhead utility lines (e.g., adjust utility pole sizes, utility pole span widths, and /or
line strength).
• Avoiding use of aerial extensions to water, sewer, and gas lines.
• Using designed - failure mode for power line design to allow lines to fall or fail in small
sections rather than as a complete system to enable faster restoration.
• Installing redundancies and loop feeds.
WW -1 AdoptandEnforce Building Codes
Buildings and infrastructure can be protected from the impacts of winter storms with the
following regulations:
• Adopting the International Building Code (IBC) and International Residential Code (IRC).
• Ensuring the development and enforcement of building codes for roof snow loads.
• Discouraging flat roofs in areas that experience heavy snows.
SU -1 MapandAssess VulnerabilitytoSubsidence
Some areas with subsidence risk may not be fully identified in your community.Consideractions
such as:
• Using GIS to map areas that are susceptible to subsidence.
• Identifying and mapping old mining areas or geologically unstable terrain so that
development can be prevented or eliminated.
• Using ground - penetrating radar to detect lava tubes and map their location.
• Supporting mapping efforts to identify areas of existing permafrost.
• Improving accuracy of hazard area maps to educate residents about unanticipated risks.
Upgrading maps provides a truer measure of risks to a community.
SU -2 Manage Development in High -Risk Areas
Development regulations should consider areas with poor soil conditions, including the
following:
• Prohibiting development in areas that have been identified as at -risk to subsidence.
• Restricting development in areas with soil that is considered poor or unsuitable for
development.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 149
SU -3 Consider Subsidence in Building Design
If subsidence is considered during building design, future damage may be prevented. Potential
actions include:
• Educating design professionals about where to locate information on subsidence rates and
maps.
• Incorporating structural designs that can resist loading associated with subsidence.
• Adopting an ordinance promoting permafrost sensitive construction practices.
• Including potential subsidence in freeboard calculations for buildings in flood -prone areas.
SU -4 Monitor Subsidence Risk Factors
Several risk factors can be monitored to help predict subsidence, such as the following:
• Monitoring areas at risk to subsidence by remaining aware of changes in groundwater levels.
• Monitoring areas where natural resources are removed from underground.
• Filling or buttressing subterranean open spaces, as with abandoned mines, to prevent or
alleviate collapse.
WF -1 Map and Assess Vulnerability to Wildfire
The first step in local planning is to identify wildfire hazard areas and assess overall community
vulnerability. Potential actions include:
• Using GIS mapping of wildfire hazard areas to facilitate analysis and planning decisions
through comparison with zoning, development, infrastructure, etc.
• Developing and maintaining a database to track community vulnerability to wildfire.
• Creating a wildfire scenario to estimate potential loss of life and injuries, the types of
potential damage, and existing vulnerabilities within a community to develop wildfire
mitigation priorities.
WF -2 Incorporate Wildfire Mitigation in the Comprehensive Plan
Communities can review comprehensive plans to ensure wildfire mitigation has been addressed.
The comprehensive plan may include the following:
• Recognizing the existence of wildfire hazards and identifying areas of risk based on a wildfire
vulnerability assessment.
• Describing policies and recommendation for addressing wildfire risk and discouraging
expansion in the wildland -urban interface.
• Including considerations of wildfire hazards in land use, public safety, and other elements of
the comprehensive plan.
WF -3 Reduce Risk through Land Use Planning
Local governments can mitigate future losses by regulating development in wildfire hazard areas
through land use planning, including:
• Using zoning and /or a special wildfire overlay district to designate high -risk areas and specify
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 150
the conditions for the use and development of specific areas.
• Addressing density and quantity of development, as well emergency access, landscaping and
water supply.
• Promoting conservation of open space or wildland -urban boundary zones to separate
developed areas from high- hazard areas.
• Setting guidelines for annexation and service extensions in high -risk areas.
WF -4 Develop a Wildland- Urban Interface Code
Communities can develop regulations for safer construction and incorporate mitigation
considerations into the permitting process. Potential actions include:
• Developing specific design guidelines and development review procedures for new
construction, replacement, relocation, and substantial improvement in wildfire hazard areas.
• Addressing fire mitigation through access, signage, fire hydrants, water availability,
vegetation management, and special building construction standards.
• Involving fire protection agencies in determining guidelines and standards and in
development and site plan review procedures.
• Establishing wildfire mitigation planning requirements for large scale developments or
planned unit developments.
WF -5 Require or Encourage Fire - Resistant Construction Techniques
A local government can encourage fire - resistant construction or may choose to require it through
local regulations. Examples include:
• Encouraging the use of non - combustible materials (i.e., stone, brick, and stucco) for new
construction in wildfire hazard areas.
• Using fire resistant roofing and building materials in remodels, upgrades, and new
construction.
• Enclosing the foundations of homes and other buildings in wildfire -prone areas, rather than
leaving them open and potentially exposing undersides to blown embers or other materials.
• Prohibiting wooden shingles /wood shake roofs on any new development in areas prone to
wildfires.
• Encouraging the use of functional shutters on windows.
MU -1 Assess Community Risk
Understanding community vulnerability and level of risk is important to identify and prioritize
mitigation alternatives. Improve risk assessment through the following:
• Obtaining local data including tax parcels, building footprints, critical facility locations, and
other information for use in risk analysis.
• Developing and maintaining a database to track community vulnerability (i.e., exposure in
known hazard areas).
• Establishing a process to coordinate with state and Federal agencies to maintain up -to -date
hazard data, maps, and assessments.
• Keeping aerial photography current, especially in rapidly developing areas.
• Identifying the most at -risk critical facilities and evaluating potential mitigation techniques.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 151
MU -2 Map Community Risk
Maps are an important tool for communicating risk. Consider the following for developing GIS
capabilities:
• Developing a coordinated GIS Department. Find out who uses GIS, determine how it is used,
and identify other potential uses.
• Incorporating a GIS system /management plan for tracking permitting, land use patterns, etc.
• Obtaining hazard data and using GIS to map risk for various hazards.
MU -3 Prevent Development in Hazard Areas
Limit or prohibit development in high- hazard areas through the following types of actions:
• Encouraging clustering of residential lots outside of hazard areas in subdivision
design /review.
• Prohibiting or limiting public expenditures for capital improvements in known hazard areas.
• Organizing a managed retreat from very high -risk areas.
• Purchasing the "right of first refusal" for hazard -prone parcels targeted for public acquisition.
• Purchasing land and title in the name of a local governing body to remove structures and
enforce permanent restrictions on development.
• Acquiring and using easements (e.g., conservation) to prevent development in known hazard
areas.
• Using conservation easements to protect environmentally significant portions of parcels from
development.
• Acquiring hazardous areas for conservation or restoring as functional public parks.
• Acquiring safe sites for public facilities (e.g., schools, police /fire stations, etc.).
• Prohibiting new facilities for persons with special needs /mobility concerns in hazard areas.
• Prohibiting animal shelters in known hazard areas.
MU -4 Adopt Development Regulations in Hazard Areas
Regulate development in hazard areas. Examples include:
• Using subdivision and development regulations to regulate development in hazard -prone
areas.
• Evaluating the use of performance /impact zoning to set risk -based standards for land
development.
• Requiring setbacks from delineated hazard areas (e.g., shorelines, wetlands, steep slopes,
etc.).
• Requiring conditional /special use permits for the development of known hazard areas.
• Offering expanded development rights to developers /businesses for performing mitigation
retrofits.
• Incorporating restrictive covenants on properties located in known hazard areas.
• Designating high -risk zones as special assessment districts (to fund necessary hazard
mitigation projects).
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 152
MU -5 Limit Density in Hazard Areas
Limit the density of development in the hazard areas through the following techniques:
• Increasing minimum lot size for development in known hazard areas.
• Designating "agricultural use districts" in the zoning ordinance to limit densities in known
hazard areas.
• Ensuring the zoning ordinance encourages higher densities only outside of known hazards
areas.
• Requiring clustering for planned unit developments (PUD) in the zoning ordinance to reduce
densities in known hazard areas.
• Establishing a local transfer of development rights (TDR) program for risk in known hazard
areas.
• Establishing a process to use floating zones to reduce densities in damaged areas following a
disaster event.
MU -6 Integrate Mitigation into Local Planning
Hazard mitigation can be integrated into local planning efforts through the following:
• Incorporating risk assessment and hazard mitigation principles into comprehensive planning
efforts.
• Incorporating a stand -alone element for hazard mitigation into the local comprehensive (land
use) plan.
• Incorporating hazard mitigation into broader growth management (i.e., Smart Growth)
initiatives.
• Incorporating a hazard risk assessment into the local development and subdivision review
process.
• Adding hazard mitigation measures to existing adequate public facilities (APF) tests and
programs.
• Ensuring natural hazards are considered in all land suitability analyses (LSA).
• Determining and enforcing acceptable land uses to alleviate the risk of damage by limiting
exposure in such hazard areas.
• Developing a post- disaster reconstruction plan to facilitate decision making following a
hazard event.
• Involving citizens in comprehensive planning activities that identify and mitigate hazards.
MU -7 Strengthen Land Use Regulations
Land use regulations can reduce hazard risk through the following:
• Using bonus /incentive zoning to encourage mitigation measures for private land
development.
• Using conditional use zoning to require or exact mitigation measures for private land
development.
• Establishing a process to use overlay zones to require mitigation techniques in high- hazard
districts.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 153
• Adopting a post- disaster recovery ordinance based on a plan to regulate repair activity,
generally depending on property location.
• Adopting environmental review standards.
• Incorporating proper species selection, planting, and maintenance practices into landscape
ordinances.
MU -8 Adopt and Enforce Building Codes
Building codes and inspections help ensure buildings can adequately withstand damage during
hazard events. Effective actions include:
• Adopting the International Building Code (IBC) and International Residential Code (IRC).
• Increasing the local Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) classification
through higher building code standards and enforcement practices.
• Incorporating higher standards for hazard resistance in local application of the building code.
• Providing advanced training to local building inspectors.
• Considering orientation of new development during design (e.g., subdivisions, buildings,
infrastructure, etc.)
• Requiring standard tie -downs of propane tanks.
• Requiring tie -downs for all manufactured housing.
• Establishing moratorium procedures to guide the suspension of post- disaster reconstruction
permits.
• Revising fire codes to limit hotel room occupancy to ensure timely evacuation of high -use
and multi -floor structures.
• Establishing "value- added" incentives for hazard - resistant construction practices beyond
code requirements.
MU -9 Create Local Funding Mechanisms for Hazard Mitigation
Local funding resources can be developed through the following measures:
• Establishing a local reserve fund for public mitigation measures.
• Using impact fees to help fund public hazard mitigation projects related to land development
(i.e., increased runoff).
• Requiring a development impact tax on new construction to mitigate the impacts of that
development.
• Recruiting local financial institutions to participate in "good neighbor" lending for private
mitigation practices.
• Providing local match to Federal funds that can fund private mitigation practices.
MU -10 Incentivize Hazard Mitigation
Incentives and disincentives can be used to promote hazard mitigation through the following
measures:
• Using special tax assessments to discourage builders from constructing in hazardous areas.
• Using insurance incentives and disincentives (i.e., incentives for best practices).
• Providing tax incentives for development of low -risk hazard parcels.
• Waiving permitting fees for home construction projects related to mitigation.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP
• Using tax abatements, public subsidies, and other incentives to encourage private mitigation
practices.
• Reducing or deferring the tax burden for undeveloped hazard areas facing development
pressure.
• Encouraging infill development through tax incentives, streamlined approval processes, etc.
MU -11 Monitor Mitigation Plan Implementation
Monitoring the implementation of the local mitigation plan can ensure that mitigation actions
are being completed through:
• Forming a plan implementation steering committee to monitor progress on local mitigation
actions. Include a mix of representatives from neighborhoods, local businesses, and local
government.
• Preparing a plan implementation monitoring schedule and outlining roles for those
responsible for monitoring (i.e., local departments, agencies, and committees).
• Preparing and submitting an annual plan implementation progress report to the local elected
body.
II. Structure and Infrastructure Projects
These actions involve modifying existing structures and infrastructure to protect them from a hazard or
remove them from a hazard area. This could apply to public or private structures as well as critical
facilities and infrastructure. This type of action also involves construction of manmade structures that
reduce the impact of hazards, such as floodwalls, retaining walls, detention and retention structures,
culverts, and safe rooms.
D -7 Retrofit Water Supply Systems
Improve water supply and delivery systems to save water through actions such as:
• Designing water delivery systems to accommodate drought events.
• Developing new or upgrading existing water delivery systems to eliminate breaks and leaks.
EQ -5 Protect Critical Facilities and Infrastructure
Reduce potential damage to critical facilities and infrastructure from future seismic events through
actions such as:
• Conducting seismic retrofitting for critical public facilities most at risk to earthquakes.
• Requiring bracing of generators, elevators, and other vital equipment in hospitals.
• Identifying and hardening critical lifeline systems (i.e., critical public services such as utilities
and roads) to meet "Seismic Design Guidelines and Standards for Lifelines" or equivalent
standards such as American Lifelines Alliance (ALA) guidance. This may distinguish a
manageable earthquake from a social and economic catastrophe.
• Reviewing construction plans for all bridges to determine their susceptibility to collapse and
retrofitting problem bridges.
• Using flexible piping when extending water, sewer, or natural gas service.
• Installing shutoff valves and emergency connector hoses where water mains cross fault lines.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 155
EQ -6 Implement Structural Mitigation Techniques
Use structural mitigation measures to reduce damage from future seismic events, such as:
• Strengthening and retrofitting non - reinforced masonry buildings and non - ductile concrete
facilities that are particularly vulnerable to ground shaking.
• Retrofitting building veneers to prevent failure.
• Building a safe room to provide protection during an earthquake.
• Installing window film to prevent injuries from shattered glass.
• Anchoring rooftop- mounted equipment (i.e., HVAC units, satellite dishes, etc).
• Constructing masonry chimneys greater than 6 feet above a roof with continuous reinforced
steel bracing.
ER -4 Remove Existing Buildings and Infrastructure from Erosion Hazard Areas
To prevent damage to buildings and infrastructure from erosion, consider acquiring and
demolishing or relocating at -risk buildings and infrastructure and enforcing permanent restrictions
on development after land and structure acquisition.
F -12 Remove Existing Structures from Flood Hazard Areas
Communities may remove structures from flood -prone areas to minimize future flood losses by
acquiring and demolishing or relocating structures from voluntary property owners and
preserving lands subject to repetitive flooding.
F -13 Improve Storm Water Drainage System Capacity
Rainwater and snowmelt can cause flooding and erosion in developed areas. Structural storm
water management projects that prevent this include:
• Installing, re- routing, or increasing the capacity of a storm drainage system.
• Increasing drainage or absorption capacities with detention and retention basins, relief
drains, spillways, drain widening /dredging or rerouting, logjam and debris removal, extra
culverts, bridge modification, dike setbacks, flood gates and pumps, or channel redirection.
• Increasing capacity of storm water detention and retention basins.
• Increasing dimensions of drainage culverts in flood -prone areas.
• Using stream restoration to ensure adequate drainage and diversion of storm water.
• Requiring developers to construct on -site retention basins for excessive storm water and as a
firefighting water source.
• Providing grassy swales along roadsides.
F -14 Conduct Regular Maintenance for Drainage Systems and Flood Control Structures
Regular maintenance will help drainage systems and flood control structures continue to function
properly. Potential activities include:
• Performing regular drainage system maintenance, such as sediment and debris clearance, as
well as detection and prevention of discharges into storm water and sewer systems from
home footing drains, downspouts, or sewer pumps.
• Implementing an inspection, maintenance, and enforcement program to help ensure
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 156
continued structural integrity of dams and levees.
• Routinely cleaning debris from support bracing underneath low -lying bridges.
• Routinely cleaning and repairing storm water drains.
• Regularly clearing sediment build -up on riverbanks near aerial lines.
• Inspecting bridges and identifying if any repairs or retrofits are needed to prevent scour.
• Incorporating ice jam prevention techniques as appropriate.
F -15 Elevate or Retrofit Structures and Utilities
Structures and utilities can be elevated to reduce flood damage, including:
• Elevating structures so that the lowest floor, including the basement, is raised above the base
flood elevation.
• Raising utilities or other mechanical devices above expected flood levels.
• Elevating and anchoring manufactured homes or, preferably, keeping manufactured homes
out of the floodplain.
• Relocating utilities and water heaters above base flood elevation and using tankless water
heaters in limited spaces.
F -16 Flood Proof Residential and Non - Residential Structures
Flood proofing techniques may protect certain structures from flood damage, including:
• Wet flood proofing in a basement, which may be preferable to attempting to keep water out
completely because it allows for controlled flooding to balance exterior and interior wall
forces and discourages structural collapse.
• Encouraging wet flood proofing of areas above base flood elevation.
• Using water resistant paints or other materials to allow for easy cleanup after floodwater
exposure in accessory structures or in a garage area below an elevated residential structure.
• Dry flood proofing non - residential structures by strengthening walls, sealing openings, or
using waterproof compounds or plastic sheeting on walls to keep water out.
F -17 Protect Infrastructure
Mitigation techniques can be implemented to help minimize losses to infrastructure from flood
events, such as:
• Elevating roads and bridges above the base flood elevation to maintain dry access. In
situations where flood waters tend to wash roads out, construction, reconstruction, or repair
can include not only attention to drainage, but also stabilization or armoring of vulnerable
shoulders or embankments.
• Raising low -lying bridges.
• Flood proofing wastewater treatment facilities located in flood hazard areas.
• Flood proofing water treatment facilities located in flood hazard areas.
• Depending on its infrastructure capabilities, using check valves, sump pumps, and backflow
prevention devices in homes and buildings.
• Using bioengineered bank stabilization techniques.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 157
F -18 Protect Critical Facilities
Techniques to protect critical facilities from flood events include:
• Requiring that all critical facilities including emergency operations centers (EOC), police
stations, and fire department facilities be located outside of flood -prone areas.
• Requiring all critical facilities to meet requirements of Executive Order 11988 and be built 1
foot above the 500 -year flood elevation.
• Installing /upgrading storm water pumping stations.
• Raising electrical components of sewage lift stations above base flood elevation.
• Raising manhole openings using concrete pillars.
• Installing watertight covers or inflow guards on sewer manholes.
• Installing flood telemetry systems in sewage lift stations.
• Installing back -up generators for pumping and lift stations in sanitary sewer systems along
with other measures (e.g., alarms, meters, remote controls, and switchgear upgrades).
• Building earthen dikes around flood- threatened critical facilities.
• Using bioengineered bank stabilization techniques.
F -19 Construct Flood Control Measures
Small flood control structures can be built to prevent flood damage. Examples include:
• Using minor structural projects that are smaller and more localized (e.g., floodwalls or small
berms) in areas that cannot be mitigated through non - structural activities or where
structural activities are not feasible due to low densities.
• Using revetments (hardened materials placed atop existing riverbanks or slopes) to protect
against floods.
• Using bioengineered bank stabilization techniques.
HA -1 Locate Safe Rooms to Minimize Damage
Locate tornado safe rooms inside or directly adjacent to houses to prevent hail- induced injuries
that may occur when taking shelter during a severe thunderstorm.
HA -2 Protect Buildings from Hail Damage
For new construction as well as retrofitting existing buildings, techniques to minimize hail damage
include:
• Including measures such as structural bracing, shutters, laminated glass in window panes,
and hail- resistant roof coverings or flashing in building design to minimize damage.
• Improving roof sheathing to prevent hail penetration.
• Installing hail resistant roofing and siding.
• Contacting the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety (IBHS) to learn more about
the most appropriate type of roof covering for your geographic region.
LS -3 Prevent Impacts to Roadways
To prevent roadway damage and traffic disruptions from landslides, consideroptions such as:
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 158
• Implementing monitoring mechanisms /procedures (i.e., visual inspection or electronic
monitoring systems).
• Applying soil stabilization measures, such as planting soil- stabilizing vegetation on steep,
publicly -owned slopes.
• Using debris -flow measures that may reduce damage in sloping areas, such as stabilization,
energy dissipation, and flow control measures.
• Establishing setback requirements and using large setbacks when building roads near slopes
of marginal stability.
• Installing catch -fall nets for rocks at steep slopes near roadways.
LS -4 Remove Existing Buildings and Infrastructure from Landslide Hazard Areas
To help mitigate landslide hazards, communities can acquire and demolish or relocate at -risk
buildings and infrastructure and enforce permanent restrictions on development after land and
structure acquisition.
L -1 Protect Critical Facilities and Equipment
Protect critical facilities and infrastructure from lighting damage with the following measures:
• Installing lightning protection devices and methods, such as lightning rods and grounding, on
communications infrastructure and other critical facilities.
• Installing and maintaining surge protection on critical electronic equipment.
SW -5 Retrofit Residential Buildings
The following types of modifications or retrofits to existing residential buildings can reduce future
wind damage:
• Improving the building envelope.
• Installing hurricane shutters or other protective measures.
• Retrofitting gable end walls to eliminate wall failures in high winds.
• Replacing existing non - ductile infrastructure with ductile infrastructure to reduce their
exposure to hazardous events.
• Retrofitting buildings with load -path connectors to strengthen the structural frames.
• Installing safe rooms.
• Reinforcing garage doors.
• Inspecting and retrofitting roofs to adequate standards to provide wind resistance.
SW -6 Retrofit Public Buildings and Critical Facilities
Public buildings and critical facilities can be retrofitted to reduce future wind damage with the
following actions:
• Improving roof coverings (e.g., no pebbles, remove ballast roof systems).
• Anchoring roof - mounted heating, ventilation, and air conditioning units.
• Retrofitting buildings with load -path connectors to strengthen the structural frames.
• Retrofitting or constructing the emergency operations center to FEMA 361 standards.
• Avoiding placing flag poles or antennas near buildings.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 159
• Upgrading and maintaining existing lightning protection systems to prevent roof cover
damage.
• Requiring upgrading of reused buildings that will house critical facilities.
• Protecting traffic lights and other traffic controls from high winds.
• Converting traffic lights to mast arms.
WW -2 Protect Buildings and Infrastructure
Buildings and infrastructure can be protected from the impacts of winter storms with the
following techniques:
• Adding building insulation to walls and attics.
• As buildings are modified, using new technology to create or increase structural stability.
• Retrofitting public buildings to withstand snow loads and prevent roof collapse.
WW -3 Protect Power Lines
Power lines can be protected from the impacts of winter storms with the following techniques:
• Establishing standards for all utilities regarding tree pruning around lines.
• Burying overhead power lines.
• Using designed - failure mode for power line design to allow lines to fall or fail in small
sections rather than as a complete system to enable faster restoration.
• Installing redundancies and loop feeds.
WW -4 Reduce Impacts to Roadways
The leading cause of death during winter storms is from automobile or other transportation
accidents, so it is important to consider ways to lessen roadway impacts. Potential strategies
include:
• Planning for and maintaining adequate road and debris clearing capabilities.
• Using snow fences or "living snow fences" (e.g., rows of trees or other vegetation) to limit
blowing and drifting of snow over critical roadway segments.
• Installing roadway heating technology to prevent ice /snow buildup.
SU -5 Remove Existing Structures from Subsidence Hazard Areas
To prevent property loss, acquire and demolish or relocate buildings and infrastructure in high -
risk areas.
WF -6 Retrofit At -Risk Structures with Ignition- Resistant Materials
Existing structures in wildfire hazard areas can be protected through the use of non - combustible
materials and technologies, including:
• Installing roof coverings, sheathing, flashing, skylights, roof and attic vents, eaves, and
gutters that conform to ignition- resistant construction standards.
• Installing wall components that conform to ignition- resistant construction standards.
• Protecting propane tanks or other external fuel sources.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 160
• Purchasing and installing external, structure - specific water hydration systems (sprinklers);
dedicated power sources; and dedicated cisterns if no water source (e.g., lake, river, or
swimming pool) is available.
WF -7 Create Defensible Space around Structures and Infrastructure
Local governments can implement defensible space programs to reduce risk to structures and
infrastructure, including:
• Creating buffers around residential and non - residential structures through the removal or
reduction of flammable vegetation, including vertical clearance of tree branches.
• Replacing flammable vegetation with less flammable species.
• Creating defensible zones around power lines, oil and gas lines, and other infrastructure
systems.
WF -8 Conduct Maintenance to Reduce Risk
Local governments can implement maintenance procedures to reduce wildfire risk, including:
• Performing arson prevention cleanup activities in areas of abandoned or collapsed
structures, accumulated trash or debris, and with a history of storing flammable materials
where spills or dumping may have occurred.
• Preventing or alleviating wildfires by proper maintenance and separation of power lines as
well as efficient response to fallen power lines.
• Routinely inspecting the functionality of fire hydrants.
• Requiring and maintaining safe access for fire apparatus to wildland -urban interface
neighborhoods and properties.
MU-12 Protect Structures
Damage to structures can be prevented through the following actions:
• Acquiring or relocating structures located in hazard areas.
• Moving vulnerable structures to a less hazardous location.
• Relocating or retrofitting public buildings located in high- hazard areas.
• Relocating or retrofitting endangered public housing units in high- hazard areas.
• Retrofitting fire and police stations to become hazard resistant.
• Identifying and strengthening facilities to function as public shelters.
MU -13 Protect Infrastructure and Critical Facilities
Infrastructure and critical facilities can be protected from damage by the following:
• Incorporating hazard mitigation principles into all aspects of public- funded building.
• Incorporating mitigation retrofits for public facilities into the annual capital improvements
program.
• Engineering or retrofitting roads and bridges to withstand hazards.
• Relocating or undergrounding electrical infrastructure.
• Designing and building water tanks or wells for use in times of water outage.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 161
• Installing quick- connect emergency generator hook -ups for critical facilities
III. Natural Systems Protection
These are actions that minimize damage and losses and preserve or restore the functions of natural
systems. Examples include sediment and erosion control, stream corridor restoration, forest
management, conservation easements, and wetland restoration and preservation.
D -8 Enhance Landscaping and Design Measures
Encourage drought - tolerant landscape design through measures such as:
• Incorporating drought tolerant or xeriscaping practices into landscape ordinances to reduce
dependence on irrigation.
• Providing incentives for xeriscaping.
• Using permeable driveways and surfaces to reduce runoff and promote groundwater
recharge.
EQ -7 Increase Earthquake Risk Awareness
There are many ways to increase awareness of earthquake risk, including:
• Working with insurance industry representatives to increase public awareness of the
importance of earthquake insurance. Residential structural improvements can be factored
into the process of obtaining insurance coverage or reduced deductibles.
• Developing an outreach program about earthquake risk and mitigation activities in homes,
schools, and businesses.
• Educating homeowners on safety techniques to follow during and after an earthquake.
• Offering GIS hazard mapping online for residents and design professionals.
EQ -8 Conduct Outreach to Builders, Architects, Engineers, and Inspectors
Building susceptibility to earthquake damage can be improved if design professionals are made
aware of proper design and building requirements. Outreach activities include:
• Conducting information sessions or other forms of outreach on seismic code provisions for
new and existing buildings to enhance code use and enforcement by local architects,
engineers, contractors, and code enforcement personnel.
• Training building department staff and officials on Form ATC -20 for post- earthquake building
evaluation. The ATC -20 report and addendum, prepared by the Applied Technology Council,
provide procedures and guidelines for making on- the -spot evaluations and decisions
regarding continued use and occupancy of earthquake- damaged buildings.
EQ -9 Provide Information on Structural and Non - Structural Retrofitting
Property owners can retrofit existing structures to reduce damage from seismic events. Potential
actions include the following:
• Educating homeowners about structural and non - structural retrofitting of vulnerable homes
and encouraging retrofit.
• Developing a technical assistance information program for homeowners. Teaching them how
to seismically strengthen their houses can be an effective mitigation activity. The program
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 162
can include providing local government building departments with copies of existing
strengthening and repair information for distribution.
• Developing an outreach program to encourage homeowners to secure furnishings, storage
cabinets, and utilities to prevent injuries and damage. Examples include anchoring tall
bookcases and file cabinets, installing latches on drawers and cabinet doors, restraining
desktop computers and appliances, using flexible connections on gas and water lines,
mounting framed pictures and mirrors securely, and anchoring and bracing propane tanks
and gas cylinders.
• Establishing a library of technical documents on structural and non - structural mitigation
options as well as model ordinances and procedures that have been used by other
jurisdictions to reduce earthquake risk.
ER -5 Stabilize Erosion HazardAreas
To stabilize slopes susceptible to erosion, consider options such as:
• Preventing erosion with proper bank stabilization, sloping or grading techniques, planting
vegetation on slopes, terracing hillsides, or installing riprap boulders or geotextile fabric.
• Stabilizing cliffs with terracing or plantings of grasses or other plants to hold soil together.
• Prohibiting removal of natural vegetation from dunes and slopes.
• Planting mature trees in the coastal riparian zone to assist in dissipation of the wind force in
the breaking wave zone.
• Using a hybrid of hard /soft engineering techniques (i.e., combine low- profile rock, rubble,
oyster reefs, or wood structures with vegetative planting or other soft stabilization
techniques).
• Implementing marine riparian habitat reinstatement or re- vegetation.
• Using a rock splash pad to direct runoff and minimize the potential for erosion.
• Using bioengineered bank stabilization techniques.
F -20 Protect and Restore Natural Flood Mitigation Features
Natural resources provide floodplain protection, riparian buffers, and other ecosystem services
that mitigate flooding. It is important to preserve such functionality with the following:
• Protecting and enhancing landforms that serves as natural mitigation features (i.e.,
riverbanks, wetlands, dunes, etc.).
• Using vegetative management, such as vegetative buffers, around streams and water
sources.
• Protecting and preserving wetlands to help prevent flooding in other areas.
• Establishing and managing riparian buffers along rivers and streams.
• Retaining natural vegetative beds in storm water channels.
• Retaining thick vegetative cover on public lands flanking rivers.
F -21 Preserve Floodplains as Open Space
Preserving natural areas and vegetation benefits natural resources while also mitigating potential
flood losses. Techniques include:
• Developing an open space acquisition, reuse, and preservation plan targeting hazard areas.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 163
• Developing a land banking program for the preservation of the natural and beneficial
functions of flood hazard areas.
• Using transfer of development rights to allow a developer to increase densities on another
parcel that is not at risk in return for keeping floodplain areas vacant.
• Compensating an owner for partial rights, such as easement or development rights, to
prevent a property from being developed.
F -22 Increase Awareness of Flood Risk and Safety
Ideas for increasing flood risk awareness include the following:
• Encouraging homeowners to purchase flood insurance.
• Annually distributing flood protection safety pamphlets or brochures to the owners of flood -
prone property.
• Educating citizens about safety during flood conditions, including the dangers of driving on
flooded roads.
• Using outreach programs to advise homeowners of risks to life, health, and safety.
• Offering GIS hazard mapping online for residents and design professionals.
• Establishing a Program for Public Information (PPI) with a PPI committee (as suggested by
Activity 332 of the CRS Coordinator's Manual).
WF -9 Implement a Fuels Management Program
A fuels management program may be implemented to reduce hazardous vegetative fuels on
public lands, near essential infrastructure, or on private lands by working with landowners. The
program can include the following:
• Performing maintenance including fuel management techniques such as pruning and clearing
dead vegetation, selective logging, cutting high grass, planting fire - resistant vegetation, and
creating fuel /fire breaks (i.e., areas where the spread of wildfires will be slowed or stopped
by the removal of fuels).
• Using prescribed burning to reduce fuel loads that threaten public safety and property.
• Identifying and clearing fuel loads created by downed trees.
• Cutting firebreaks into public wooded areas in the wildland -urban interface.
• Sponsoring local "slash and clean -up days" to reduce fuel loads along the wildland -urban
interface.
• Linking wildfire safety with environmental protection strategies (i.e., improving forest
ecology, wildlife habitat, etc.).
• Developing a vegetation management plan.
IV. Education and Awareness Programs
These are actions that inform and educate citizens, elected officials, and property owners about
hazards and ways to mitigate them. Such actions include radio or television spots, websites with maps
and information, real estate disclosure, presentations to school groups or neighborhood organizations,
and mailings to residents in hazard -prone areas. These actions may also include participation in
national programs, such as StormReady or Firewise Communities. Although this type of mitigation is
more indirect than structural projects that directly reduce risk, it is an important foundation. A greater
understanding and awareness of hazards and risk is more likely to lead to direct action.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 164
D -9 Educate Residents on Water Saving Techniques
Encourage citizens to take water - saving measures, such as the following:
• Installing low -flow water saving showerheads and toilets.
• Turning water flow off while brushing teeth or during other cleaning activities.
• Adjusting sprinklers to water the lawn and not the sidewalk or street.
• Running the dishwasher and washing machine only when they are full.
• Checking for leaks in plumping or dripping faucets.
• Installing rain - capturing devices for irrigation.
• Encouraging the installation of gray water systems in homes to encourage water reuse.
D -10 Educate Farmers on Soil and Water Conservation Practices
Encourage farmers to implement soil and water conservation practices that foster soil health and
improve soil quality to help increase resiliency and mitigate the impacts of droughts. Potential
conservation practices include the following:
• Rotating crops by growing a series of different types of crops on the same fields every season
to reduce soil erosion.
• Practicing contour farming by farming along elevation contour lines to slow water runoff
during rainstorms and prevent soil erosion, allowing the water time to absorb into the soil.
• Using terracing on hilly or mountainous terrain to decrease soil erosion and surface runoff.
• Planting "cover crops /' such as oats, wheat, and buckwheat, to prevent soil erosion.
• Using zero and reduced tillage to minimize soil disturbance and leave crop residue on the
ground to prevent soil erosion.
• Constructing windbreaks to prevent evaporation from reclaiming salt- affected soil.
• Collecting rainwater and using natural runoff to water plants.
D -11 Purchase Crop Insurance
Preserve economic stability during a drought by encouraging agricultural interests to obtain crop
insurance to cover potential losses due to drought.
ER -6 Increase Awareness of Erosion Hazards
Consider ways to help citizens become more aware of specific erosion risks in your area, such as:
• Notifying property owners located in high -risk areas.
• Disclosing the location of high -risk areas to buyers.
• Developing a brochure describing risk and potential mitigation techniques.
• Offering GIS hazard mapping online for residents and design professionals.
ET -2 Increase Awareness of ExtremeTemperatureRisk and Safety
The impacts of extreme temperatures on public health can be lessened if citizens know how to
prepare and protect themselves. Ideas for increasing awareness include the following:
• Educating citizens regarding the dangers of extreme heat and cold and the steps they can take to
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 165
protect themselves when extreme temperatures occur.
ET -3 Assist Vulnerable Populations
Measures should be taken to ensure vulnerable populations are adequately protected from the
impacts of extreme temperatures, such as:
• Organizing outreach to vulnerable populations, including establishing and promoting
accessible heating or cooling centers in the community.
• Requiring minimum temperatures in housing /landlord codes.
• Encouraging utility companies to offer special arrangements for paying heating bills, if not
already required by state law.
• Creating a database to track those individuals at high risk of death, such as the elderly,
homeless, etc.
ET -4 Educate Property Owners about Freezing Pipes
Extreme cold may cause water pipes to freeze and burst, which can cause flooding inside a
building. Ideas for educating property owners include the following:
• Educating homeowners and builders on how to protect their pipes, including locating water
pipes on the inside of building insulation or keeping them out of attics, crawl spaces, and
vulnerable outside walls.
• Informing homeowners that letting a faucet drip during extreme cold weather can prevent
the buildup of excessive pressure in the pipeline and avoid bursting.
F -23 Educate Property Owners about Flood Mitigation Techniques
Educate property owners regarding options for mitigating their properties from flooding through
outreach activities such as:
• Using outreach activities to facilitate technical assistance programs that address measures
that citizens can take or facilitate funding for mitigation measures.
• Encouraging homeowners to install backflow valves to prevent reverse -flow flood damages.
• Encouraging residents in flood -prone areas to elevate homes.
• Educating the public about securing debris, propane tanks, yard items, or stored objects that
may otherwise be swept away, damaged, or pose a hazard if picked up and washed away by
floodwaters.
• Asking residents to help keep storm drains clear of debris during storms (not to rely solely on
Public Works).
HA -3 Increase Hail Risk Awareness
Conduct outreach activities to increase public awareness of hail dangers, including:
• Mailing safety brochures with monthly water bills.
• Posting warning signage at local parks, county fairs, and other outdoor venues.
• Teaching school children about the dangers of hail and how to take safety precautions.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 166
L -2 Conduct Lightning Awareness Programs
Use outreach programs to promote awareness of lightning dangers. This could include ideas such as:
• Developing a lightning brochure for distribution by recreation equipment retailers or
outfitters in mountainous areas.
• Mailing safety brochures with monthly water bills.
• Posting warning signage at local parks.
• Teaching school children about the dangers of lightning and how to take safety precautions.
SW -7 Increase Severe Wind Risk Awareness
Improve public awareness of severe wind through outreach activities such as:
• Informing residents of shelter locations and evacuation routes.
• Educating homeowners on the benefits of wind retrofits such as shutters, hurricane clips, etc.
• Ensuring that school officials are aware of the best area of refuge in school buildings.
• Instructing property owners on how to properly install temporary window coverings before a
storm.
• Educating design professionals to include wind mitigation during building design.
WW -5 Conduct Winter Weather Risk Awareness Activities
Public awareness of severe winter storms can be improved through the following efforts:
• Informing the public about severe winter weather impacts.
• Producing and distributing family and traveler emergency preparedness information about
severe winter weather hazards.
• Including safety strategies for severe weather in driver education classes and materials.
• Encouraging homeowners to install carbon monoxide monitors and alarms.
• Educating citizens that all fuel- burning equipment should be vented to the outside.
WW -6 AssistVulnerable Populations
Protect vulnerable populations from the impacts of severe winter storms through the following
efforts:
• Identifying specific at -risk populations that may be exceptionally vulnerable in the event of
long -term power outages.
• Organizing outreach to vulnerable populations, including establishing and promoting
accessible heating centers in the community.
SU -6 Educate Residents about Subsidence
Increase residents' knowledge of subsidence through the following:
• Promoting community awareness of subsidence risks and impacts.
• Offering GIS hazard mapping online for residents and design professionals.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 167
T -3 Conduct Tornado Awareness Activities
Conduct outreach activities to increase awareness of tornado risk. Activities could include the
following:
• Educating citizens through media outlets.
• Conducting tornado drills in schools and public buildings.
• Teaching school children about the dangers of tornadoes and how to take safety precautions.
• Distributing tornado shelter location information.
• Supporting severe weather awareness week.
• Promoting use of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) weather radios
WF -10 Participate in Firewise Program
The Firewise program provides a series of steps that individual residents and their neighbors can
take to keep their homes and neighborhoods safer from fire. Consider actions such as:
• Joining the "Firewise Communities /USA" recognition program sponsored by the National
Wildlife Coordinating Group (firewise.org).
• Sponsoring Firewise workshops for local officials, developers, civic groups, and
neighborhood /homeowners' associations.
• Consulting Firewise guidance and encouraging or requiring best practices in your community.
WF -11 Increase Wildfire Risk Awareness
Education and outreach programs can target citizens, businesses, developers, landscapers, and
insurers among others to increase awareness of wildfire risk and strategies for protecting homes
and infrastructure. Consider actions such as:
• Offering GIS hazard mapping online for residents, developers, and design professionals.
• Organizing a local fire department tour to show local elected officials and planners the most
vulnerable areas of the community's wildland -urban interface and increase their
understanding of risks.
• Working with insurance companies, utility providers, and others to include wildfire safety
information in materials provided to area residents.
• Developing partnerships with neighborhood groups, homeowners' associations, and others
to conduct outreach activities.
• Using local fire departments to conduct education programs in schools.
• Informing the public about proper evacuation procedures.
• Forming a citizen plan implementation steering committee to monitor progress of local
mitigation actions. Include a mix of representatives from neighborhoods, local businesses,
and local government.
WF -12 Educate Property Owners about Wildfire Mitigation Techniques
Educate property owners on actions that they can take to reduce risk to property, such as the
following:
• Installing fire mitigation systems such as interior and exterior sprinkler systems.
• Performing safe disposal of yard and household waste rather than open burning.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 168
• Removing dead or dry leaves, needles, twigs, and combustibles from roofs, decks, eaves,
porches, and yards.
• Creating a defensible space or buffer zone cleared of combustible materials around property.
• Installing and maintaining smoke detectors and fire extinguishers on each floor of their
homes or other buildings.
• Safely using and storing necessary flammable materials, including machine fuels. Approved
safety cans should be used for storing gasoline, oily rags, and other flammable materials.
Firewood should be stacked at least 100 feet away and uphill from homes.
• Keeping flammables, such as curtains, secured away from windows or using heavy fire -
resistant drapes.
MU -14 Increase Hazard Education and Risk Awareness
Hazard education and awareness activities that address multiple hazards include:
• Developing and implementing a multi- hazard public awareness program.
• Providing information on all types of hazards, preparedness and mitigation measures, and
responses during hazard events.
• Establishing a "hazard awareness week" in coordination with the media to promote hazard
awareness (seasonal).
• Establishing an interactive website for educating the public on hazard mitigation and
preparedness measures.
• Annually hosting a public hazards workshop or exposition for all residents.
• Establishing hazard information centers.
• Creating a speakers bureau for disaster - related topics that focus on mitigation and
preparedness measures.
• Enhancing hazard awareness of the private sector, particularly lenders, insurance agents, and
realtors.
• Scheduling an annual "what's new in mitigation" briefing for the local governing body
(possibly with SHMO, etc.).
MU -15 Improve Household Disaster Preparedness
Educate the public on how to prepare for hazards and disasters, including the following:
• Encouraging property owners to purchase hazard insurance not as an alternative to
mitigation, but rather to add financial protection if damage does occur.
• Encouraging residents to prepare by stocking up the necessary items and planning for how
family members should respond during a disaster. Publicized information about household
preparedness can be found at www.ready.gov.
• Providing hazard vulnerability checklists for homeowners to conduct their own inspections.
• Promoting the purchase and use of NOAA weather radios by residents.
• Encouraging citizens to secure loose items (i.e., patio furniture).
• Participating in Nation Weather Service StormReady Program.
• Purchasing and installing NOAA weather radios in schools, government buildings, parks, etc.
• Storing digital or hard copies of public records in low -risk, offsite locations.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 169
MU -16 Promote Private Mitigation Efforts
Encourage private mitigation efforts that address multiple hazards through the fol lowing:
• Using outreach programs to: 1) advise homeowners of risks to life, health, and safety; 2)
facilitate technical assistance programs that address measures that citizens can take; or 3)
facilitate funding for mitigation measures.
• Establishing, maintaining, and publicizing a library section on hazard mitigation techniques for
local residents.
• Identifying and recruiting civic groups and volunteer agencies for community mitigation
projects.
• Establishing a network for a business -to- business mitigation mentoring program.
• Offering hazard susceptibility audits of local small businesses.
• Completing a "demonstration model" showing use of hazard mitigation techniques for public
display.
City of Yakima 2015 HMP 170