HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/04/2016 13 Hazard Mitigation Plan Status { r '
•
v \
xs 1
s. n.
BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No. 13.
For Meeting of: October 4, 2016
ITEM TITLE: Status of the City of Yakima Hazard Mitigation Plan
SUBMITTED BY: Bob Stewart, Fire Chief
SUMMARY EXPLANATION:
At the regular Business Meeting on July 19, 2016, the Yakima City Council passed Resolution
Number R- 2016 -090 adopting the City of Yakima Hazard Mitigation Plan (Mitigation Plan). After
passing the Resolution, the Mitigation Plan was forwarded to FEMA for review and approval. On
September 15, 2016, the City received approval from FEMA. This approval enables the City of
Yakima to apply for grants and loans under the Stafford Act, which is the statutory authority for
most federal disaster response activities, and some mitigation planning.
ITEM BUDGETED: NA
STRATEGIC PRIORITY: Public Safety
APPROVED FOR
SUBMITTAL: 1 C Manager
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
No Action Necessary
BOARD /COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Upload Date Type
D HMP Executbm Summary 9/22/2016 Execubm Summary
D FEMAAppro I Letter 9/2_2/2016 Exhibit
D Local Mitigation Plan Remew Tool 9/2212016 Exhibit
: City of Yakima
.■• .4 Emergency
• Management
- ^ Public Safety, Public Trust
•
City of Yakima
Hazard Mitigation Plan
2015
Executive Summary
Communit
z � s ee µesilience Mitigation l Preparedness
� o �
Emergency
Mitigation E�
Management
Td "a m�
Ica'
"tae
x� Recovery ,jam,_ " Response
p / d ini ng OcPoe: • �a oC �
Yakima
All Americo City
o" Y 1 CITY OF v; IKx AI.CNK:IF?L OF
• 1 I
Y a k ima
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. FEMA
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
Funding Constraints
The grants are available to eligible applicants on a competitive basis with the following cost share: 75 percent
federal and 25 percent non - federal (applicant and state may split this share, based on legislative approval). The
amount available for the HMGP is based on a percentage of FEMA expenditures on disaster assistance, which may
limit the size of projects and grant awards. All mitigation project proposals will be evaluated against federal and
state program criteria and they must be must be cost- effective.
Eligible Plans & Projects
Among the eligible mitigation projects are:
• Property Acquisition and Structure Demolition
• Property Acquisition and Structure Relocation
• Structure Elevation
• Mitigation Reconstruction
• Dry Flood- proofing of Historic Residential Structures
• Dry Flood- proofing of Non - Residential Structures
• Generators (for critical facilities /infrastructure)
• Localized Flood Risk Reduction Projects
• Non - localized Flood Risk Reduction Projects
• Structural Retrofitting of Existing Buildings
• Non - structural Retrofitting of Existing Buildings and Facilities
• Safe Room Construction
• Wind Retrofit for One- and Two - Family Residences
• Infrastructure Retrofit (utility systems, roads, bridges)
• Soil Stabilization
• Wildfire Mitigation
• Post - Disaster Code Enforcement
The City of Yakima Hazard Mitigation Plan includes resources and information Natural W as H gt oin n
to assist residents, public and private sector organizations, and others interested p 'a
in participating in planning for natural and technological hazards. The mitigation R iI
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- 41.
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
Severe Winter Storms
Tornadoes
Volcanic Eruptions
Wildland Fires
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.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
FEMA Region 10
130 — 228 Street, SW
scp. Bothell, Washington 98021 -8627
FEMA
�� SE��
September 13, 2016
Honorable Avina Gutierrez
Mayor, City of Yakima
129 N. 2nd Street
Yakima, WA 98901
Dear Mayor Gutierrez:
On September 8, 2016, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), Region 10, approved the City of Yakima Hazards Mitigation Plan as
a local plan as outlined in Code of Federal Regulations Title 44 Part 201. This approval provides the
below jurisdictions eligibility to apply for the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act's, Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) grants projects through September 7, 2021,
through your state.
FEMA individually evaluates all application requests for funding according to the specific eligibility
requirements of the applicable program. Though a specific mitigation activity or project identified in
the plan may meet the eligibility requirements, it may not automatically receive approval for FEMA
funding under any of the aforementioned programs.
Over the next five years, we encourage your communities to follow the plan's schedule for
monitoring and updating, and to develop further mitigation actions. To continue eligibility,
jurisdictions must review, revise as appropriate, and resubmit the plan within five years of the original
approval date.
If you have questions regarding your plan's approval or FEMA's mitigation grant programs, please
contact Morgan Mak, Mitigation Strategist with Washington Emergency Management Division, at
(253) 512 -7142, who coordinates and administers these efforts for local entities.
Sincerely,
Mark Carey, Director
Mitigation Division
cc: Tim Cook, Washington Emergency Management Division
Enclosure
BH:vl
www.fema.gov
LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL
The Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool demonstrates how the Local Mitigation Plan meets the
regulation in 44 CFR §201.6 and offers States and FEMA Mitigation Planners an opportunity to
provide feedback to the community.
• The Regulation Checklist provides a summary of FEMA's evaluation of whether the Plan
has addressed all requirements.
• The Plan Assessment identifies the plan's strengths as well as documents areas for
future improvement.
• The Multi- jurisdiction Summary Sheet is an optional worksheet that can be used to
document how each jurisdiction met the requirements of the each Element of the Plan
(Planning Process; Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment; Mitigation Strategy; Plan
Review, Evaluation, and Implementation; and Plan Adoption).
The FEMA Mitigation Planner must reference this Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide when
completing the Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool.
Jurisdiction: Title of Plan: Date of Plan:
City of Yakima City of Yakima Hazard 2015
Mitigation Plan
Local Point of Contact: Address:
Charles Erwin Yakima Fire Department
Title: 401 North Front Street
Emergency Management Yakima, WA 98901
Specialist
Agency:
City of Yakima Fire
Department, Emergency
Management Division
Phone Number: E -Mail:
509- 576 -6732 Charles.Erwin@yakimawa.gov
State Reviewer: Title: Date:
FEMA Reviewer: Title: Date:
Abigail Reed Hazard Mitigation Planner March 18, 2016
Wynne Kwan RIX Mitigation Champion /QA- 21 March 2016
QC
Brett Holt, FEMA Region 10 Regional Mitigation Planning April 1, 2016
Manager
Date Received in FEMA Region 10 February 16, 2016
Plan Not Approved
Plan Approvable Pending June 14, 2016
Adoption
Plan Approved September 8, 2016
Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (FEMA, October 1, 2011) A -1
LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL
The Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool demonstrates how the Local Mitigation Plan meets the
regulation in 44 CFR §201.6 and offers States and FEMA Mitigation Planners an opportunity to
provide feedback to the community.
• The Regulation Checklist provides a summary of FEMA's evaluation of whether the Plan
has addressed all requirements.
• The Plan Assessment identifies the plan's strengths as well as documents areas for
future improvement.
• The Multi- jurisdiction Summary Sheet is an optional worksheet that can be used to
document how each jurisdiction met the requirements of the each Element of the Plan
(Planning Process; Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment; Mitigation Strategy; Plan
Review, Evaluation, and Implementation; and Plan Adoption).
The FEMA Mitigation Planner must reference this Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide when
completing the Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool.
Jurisdiction: Title of Plan: Date of Plan:
City of Yakima City of Yakima Hazard 2015
Mitigation Plan
Local Point of Contact: Address:
Charles Erwin Yakima Fire Department
Title: 401 North Front Street
Emergency Management Yakima, WA 98901
Specialist
Agency:
City of Yakima Fire
Department, Emergency
Management Division
Phone Number: E - Mail:
509 - 576 - 6732 Charles.Erwin@yakimawa.gov
State Reviewer: Title: Date:
FEMA Reviewer: Title: Date:
Abigail Reed Hazard Mitigation Planner March 18, 2016
Wynne Kwan RIX Mitigation Champion /QA- 21 March 2016
QC
Brett Holt, FEMA Region 10 Regional Mitigation Planning April 1, 2016
Manager
Date Received in FEMA Region 10 February 16, 2016
Plan Not Approved
Plan Approvable Pending June 14, 2016
Adoption
Plan Approved September 8, 2016
Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool VEMA, October 1, 2011) A-1
LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL
SECTION :
REGULATION LI T
INSTRUCTIONS: The Regulation Checklist must be completed by FEMA. The purpose of the Checklist is to
identify the location of relevant or applicable content in the Plan by Element /sub - element and to determine if
each requirement has been 'Met' or 'Not Met.' The 'Required Revisions' summary at the bottom of each
Element must be completed by FEMA to provide a clear explanation of the revisions that are required for plan
approval. Required revisions must be explained for each plan sub - element that is 'Not Met.' Sub - elements
should be referenced in each summary by using the appropriate numbers (Al, B3, etc.), where applicable.
Requirements for each Element and sub - element are described in detail in this Plan Review Guide in Section 4,
Regulation Checklist.
1. REGULATION CHECKLIST Location in Plan Met Not
Regulation (44 CFR 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans) (section and /or page Met
number)
ELEMENT A. PLANNING PROCESS
Al. Does the Plan document the planning process, including how it Section 1: Page 11
was prepared and who was involved in the process for each X
jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(1))
A2. Does the Plan document an opportunity for neighboring Section 1: Page 10
communities, local and regional agencies involved in hazard
mitigation activities, agencies that have the authority to regulate X
development as well as other interests to be involved in the planning
process? (Requirement §201.6(b)(2))
A3. Does the Plan document how the public was involved in the Section 1: Page 11
planning process during the drafting stage? (Requirement X
§201.6(b)(1))
A4. Does the Plan describe the review and incorporation of existing Section 1: Page 11,
plans, studies, reports, and technical information? (Requirement 13 X
§201.6(b)(3))
A5. Is there discussion of how the community(ies) will continue Section 1: Page 13
public participation in the plan maintenance process? (Requirement X
§201.6(c)(4)(iii))
A6. Is there a description of the method and schedule for keeping the Section 1: Pages
plan current (monitoring, evaluating and updating the mitigation plan 12 - 13, 106 - 110 X
within a 5 -year cycle)? (Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(i))
ELEMENT A: REQUIRED REVISIONS
Local Mitigation Plan Rei , -2
LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL
1. REGULATION CHECKLIST Location in Plan Met Not Met
Regulation (44 CFR 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans) (section and /or page
number)
ELEMENT B. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT
B1. Does the Plan include a description of the type, Pages 31 - 89
location, and extent of all natural hazards that can Drought: Page 31
affect each jurisdiction(s)? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i)) - 33
Earthquake: 35 —
41
Flood: 43 — 65
Severe Storm: 67
- 72 X
Tornado: 73 — 74
Volcanic
Eruptions: 75 —
79
Wildland Fire: 81
— 84
B2. Does the Plan include information on previous Drought: 31 - 32,
occurrences of hazard events and on the probability of 34
future hazard events for each jurisdiction? Earthquake: 39,
(Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i)) 40, 41
Flood: 44, 51-
65
Severe Storm: X
68, 71, 72
Tornado: 73 — 74
Volcanic
Eruption: 77 - 79
Wildland Fires:
81 -84
B3. Is there a description of each identified hazard's Drought: 32 — 34,
impact on the community as well as an overall 91 - 96
summary of the community's vulnerability for each Earthquake: 36 —
jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) 41, 91 - 96 X
Flood: 45 — 50,
64 -65, 91 - 96
Severe Storm: 69
— 72, 91 - 96
Local Mitigation Plan Rei , -3
LOCAL ��N������������� PLAN ��N����N����~������
�~������~ MITIGATION m �m-mm� REVIEW TOOL
Tornado: 74, 91 -
96
Volcanic
Eruption: 76 —
79, 91 -96
Wild land Fires:
81-84.91-96
B4. Does the Plan address NFIP insured structures Page 97, 98
X
within the jurisdiction that have been repetitively
damaged by floods? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii))
ELEMENT B: REQUIRED REVISIONS
1. REGULATION CHECKLIST Location in PIan Met Not Met
Regulation (44 CFR 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans) (section and/or page
number)
ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY
C1. Does the plan document each jurisdiction's existing Section 1: 11
authorities, policies, programs and resources and its ability to
Section 4: 35, 43, X
expand on and improve these existing policies and programs?
(Requirement §201.6(c)(3)) 75
C2. Does the Plan address each jurisdiction's participation in the Section 5' 97 - 98
' x
NFIP and continued compliance with NFIP requirements, as
appropriate? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(ii))
C3. Does the PIan include goals to reduce/avoid Iong-term Exec Summary: x
vulnerabilities to the identified hazards? (Requirement
§
C4. Does the PIan identify and analyze a comprehensive range of Section 6: 101 -
specific mitigation actions and projects for each jurisdiction being
105 X
considered to reduce the effects of hazards, with emphasis on
new and existing buildings and infrastructure? (Requirement
§
C5. Does the PIan contain an action plan that describes how the Section 6: 101 -
actions identified will be prioritized (including cost benefit X
105
review), implemented, and administered by each jurisdiction?
(Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iv)); (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iii))
C6. Does the PIan describe a process by which Iocal governments Section 1: 11, 13
will integratethe requirements of the mitigation plan into other
X
planning mechanisms, such as comprehensive or capital
improvement plans, when appropriate? (Requirement
§
ELEMENT C: REQUIRED REVISIONS
Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool VEM8A, October 1, 2011\ 4-4
LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL
1. REGULATION CHECKLIST Location in Plan Met Not
Regulation (44 CFR 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans) (section and /or page Met
number)
ELEMENT D. PLAN REVIEW, EVALUATION, AND IMPLEMENTATION (applicable to plan updates
only)
D1. Was the plan revised to reflect changes in development? Urban Area Zoning
(Requirement §201.6(d)(3)) Ordinance- -
Earthquakes —Page X
35
Volcanoes —Page 75
D2. Was the plan revised to reflect progress in local mitigation Section 6: Pages
efforts? (Requirement §201.6(d)(3)) X
99
D3. Was the plan revised to reflect changes in priorities? Page: 6 X
(Requirement §201.6(d)(3))
ELEMENT D: REQUIRED REVISIONS
ELEMENT E. PLAN ADOPTION
El. Does the Plan include documentation that the plan has been X
formally adopted by the governing body of the jurisdiction
requesting approval? (Requirement §201.6(c)(5))
E2. For multi - jurisdictional plans, has each jurisdiction requesting N/A N/A
approval of the plan documented formal plan adoption?
(Requirement §201.6(c)(5))
ELEMENT E: REQUIRED REVISIONS
El. Pending FEMA approval
ELEMENT F. ADDITIONAL STATE REQUIREMENTS (optional for State reviewers only; not to be
completed by FEMA)
F1.
Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool )FEMA, October 1, 2011) A-5
LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL
1. REGULATION CHECKLIST Location in Plan Met Not
Regulation (44 CFR 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans) (section and /or page Met
number)
F2. ■■
ELEMENT F: REQUIRED REVISION
Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (FEMA, October 1, 2011) A -6
LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL
SECTION 2:
PLAN ASSESSMENT
A. Plan Strengths and Opportunities for Improvement
This section provides a discussion of the strengths of the plan document and identifies areas
where these could be improved beyond minimum requirements.
Element Planning r c
Plan Strengths:
• Information about Regulations and Public Meetings were clearly outlined in
chronological order in an intuitive table.
• The online Public Forum is an interesting way to gather public feedback.
Opportunities for Improvement:
• Plan could state how the meetings were advertised and number /names of people
attended.
• Plan could outline an outreach strategy that identifies what you want to accomplish
through your outreach efforts, who to involve in the process, and how and when to
effectively engage the community. A possible outreach strategy is one with three tiers 1)
a planning team 2) stakeholders, and 3) the public. The timing, method, and level of
engagement or effort could be clearly defined and communicated for each tier.
• The Plan can also state how each team member was selected and what each team
member contributed to the planning effort to provide a better understanding of the
Plan and who is responsible.
Element : Hazard Identification an i Assessment
Plan Strengths
• The tables outlining Impact to People, Impact to Built Environment, Impact to Economy,
Impact to the Natural Environment were easy to read and a clear way to show
information
• The Plan included comprehensive maps and figures to enhance the hazard profiles to
enable the reader to better understand the hazards and impacts.
• The hazard profiles are organized and succinct, presenting only relevant information.
• Hazards are clearly identified at the start of each subsection and clearly referenced in
the Appendices.
• The Plan includes a thorough description of how the hazards were prioritized and
categorized based on risk levels.
Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool VEMA, October 1, 2011) A - 7
LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL
Opportunities for Improvement
• The maps and figures could be replaced at a higher resolution so that they are easier to
interpret and distinguish.
• Vulnerability assessments for each hazard could include a more consistent level of
analysis between hazards (i.e. Flood and Tornado).
• The methodology on how loss estimates are estimated in 'Impact to Economy' tables
should be included in the next iteration of the Plan document.
• The Plan should include a discussion of general land use and development trends.
• The Plan should identify in the vulnerability assessment specific existing and future
buildings and critical infrastructure that would be vulnerable to the identified hazards.
Element Mitigation Strategy
Plan Strengths
• The Hazard - Specific Action Items table makes information easy to find and clearly
organized by Lead Responsible Agency, Benefit, Timeline, Cost, and Priority. The color
coding is another useful tool for quickly identifying which actions are Short -Term, which
are Long -Term, and which are on- going.
• Some of the mitigation actions are integrated with existing local authorities, policies,
programs, plans, and resources potentially making them easier to implement.
Opportunities for Improvement
• The Cost - Benefit analysis could include qualitative criteria instead of solely economic.
For example, quality of life, protection from injury and loss of life, value of protected
infrastructure, and natural /beneficial functions of ecosystems can also be included in
the review.
• The Plan should include additional capabilities in its capabilities assessment in addition
to the codes, regulations. This can include other planning mechanisms /policies /codes/
regulations, administrative and technical capabilities, financing capabilities, public
education and awareness capabilities, etc.
Element Plan Update, Evaluation, and implementation (PI n Updates OnM
Plan Strengths
• The City of Yakima presented a clear list of mitigation strategies from the previous plan
along with a status of progress on pages 99 -100. Additions and changes to the plan are
also clearly laid out in a table on page 6 for reference.
Opportunities for Improvement
• The Plan lists changes to the 2015 Municipal Code Title 15 for Earthquakes, Flooding,
and Volcanic Eruptions. Further discussion could be included as to how the hazard
Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (SOMA, October 1, 2011) A-8
LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW �~����U
���~��n� n�nnon���non��n� n �v�n� nxu-�nx—�� n�����
mitigation plan influenced development, how it will influence it in the future, and how
the Municipal Code changes will influence the impacts ofthe hazards present in the
community.
• The Plan could include a description of how the priorities were decided, why they
decided to use the same goals as were laid out in 2010 instead of updating them, and
who it was who decided the priorities and goals. In addition, now that the community
has implemented some actions, the City may apply lessons learned about what works
and does not.
Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (FEMA, October 1, 2011) A-9
LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL
B. Resources for Implementing Your Approved Plan
The Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide and Tool resource is available through FEMA's Library
and should be referred to for the next plan update.
http: / /www.fema.gov /library /viewRecord.do ?id =4859
The Local Mitigation Planning Handbook is available. While the requirements under §201.6
have not changed, the Handbook provides guidance to local governments on developing or
updating hazard mitigation plans to meet the requirements is available through the FEMA
Library website. http: / /www.fema.gov /library /viewRecord.do ?id =7209
Volcanic Eruption Mitigation Measures: For information on Mitigation Actions for Volcanic
Eruptions that would satisfy the C4 requirement, please visit:
http: / /ea rthzine.org/ 2011 /03/21 /volcanic- crisis - management- and - mitigation- strategies -a-
multi- risk - framework - case - study/ and http: / /www.gvess.org /publ.html.
The Mitigation Ideas: A Resource for Reducing Risk from Natural Hazards resource presents
ideas for how to mitigate the impacts of different natural hazards, from drought and sea level
rise, to severe winter weather and wildfire. The document also includes ideas for actions that
communities can take to reduce risk to multiple hazards, such as incorporating a hazard risk
assessment into the local development review
process. http: / /www.fema.gov /library /viewRecord.do ?id =6938
The Integrating Hazard Mitigation Into Local Planning: Case Studies and Tools for Community
Officials resource provides practical guidance on how to incorporate risk reduction strategies
into existing local plans, policies, codes, and programs that guide community development or
redevelopment patterns. It includes recommended steps and tools to assist with local
integration efforts, along with ideas for overcoming possible impediments, and presents a
series of case studies to demonstrate successful integration in practice.
http: / /www.fema.gov /library /viewRecord.do ?id =7130
Earthquake Tracking: A resource that may be used to find past hazard events for Earthquakes
in Yakima County. This will help to meet the Element B2 historical occurrences criteria.
http:// earthquaketrack .com /us- wa- yakima /recent
FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance: Currently, FEMA administers three programs that provide
funding for eligible mitigation projects that reduces disaster losses and protect life and property
from future disaster damages. The three programs are the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
(HMGP), the Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) Program, and the Pre - Disaster Mitigation (PDM)
Program.
Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (FEMA, October 1, 2011) A-10
LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL
• HMGP assists in implementing long -term hazard mitigation measures following a
Presidential major disaster declaration
• PDM provides funds for hazard mitigation planning and projects on an annual basis
• FMA provides funds for projects to reduce or eliminate risk of flood damage to buildings
that are insured under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) on an annual basis
More information about these programs can be found at http: / /www.fema.gov /hazard-
mitigation- assistance. Contact the Washington State Hazard Mitigation Officer, Timothy Cook
for more information (tim.cook @mil.wa.gov; (253) 512 - 7072).
The FEMA Region X Risk Mapping, Analysis, and Planning program (RiskMAP) releases a
monthly newsletter that includes information about upcoming events and training
opportunities, as well as hazard and risk related news from around the Region. Past newsletters
can be viewed at:
http: / /www.starrteam.com /Starr /RegionalWorkspaces /RegionX /Pages /default.aspx . If you
would like to receive future newsletters, email rxnewsletter @starr - team.com.
Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (FEMA, October 1, 2011) A -11