Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
17-1195 Adopting Applicable Provisions to 2016 Update of Ada County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
CITY OF MERIDIAN RESOLUTION NO. / lI q5 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, BORTON, CAVENER, MILAM, PALMER, LITTLE ROBERTS A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ADOPTING APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE 2016 UPDATE OF THE ADA COUNTY MULTI-HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN; DIRECTING THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT STAFF TO IMPLEMENT THE STRATEGIES THEREIN AND 'TO CONTINUE REPRENSENTING THE CITY OF MERIDIAN IN MATTERS RELATED TO THE PLAN, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, natural hazards that increase the risk to life, property, environment and the economy exist within the City of Meridian, as they do throughout Ada County; and WHEREAS; pro-active mitigation of known hazards before a disaster event can reduce or eliminate long-term risk to life, property, environment and the economy; and WHEREAS, The federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-390) provides the legal basis for FEMA mitigation planning for state and local governments as a condition of mitigation grant assistance, and established requirements for pre and post disaster hazard mitigation programs; and WHEREAS; a coalition of Ada County stakeholders with common planning objectives, including a representative from the City of Meridian, has been formed to pool resources and create consistent mitigation strategies to be implemented within each partners identified capabilities, within the Ada County Planning Area; and WHEREAS, the coalition has completed a planning process that engages the public, assesses the risk and vulnerability to the impacts of natural hazards, develops a mitigation strategy consistent with a set of uniform goals and objectives, and creates a plan for implementing, evaluating and revising this strategy; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Council find that it is in the best interest of the people of Meridian to adopt and implement the 2016 updates to the applicable portions of the Ada County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: Section 1. That the following portions of the Ada County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan ("Plan") are hereby adopted within the. City of Meridian: A. Volume I, the Executive Summary of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. B. The Meridian annex of Volume II, attached hereto as Exhibit B. C. Selected Countywide Mitigation actions, attached hereto as Exhibit C. D. Appendicies of Volume II: https:Hadacounty.id.gov/accem/Miti a� tion RESOLUTION ADOPTING APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE 2016 UPDATE OF THE ADA COUNTY MULTI- HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN Section 2. That City staff will use the adopted and approved portions of the Plan to guide pre and post disaster mitigation of the hazards identified. Section 3. That City staff will coordinate the strategies identified in the Plan with other planning programs and mechanisms under its jurisdictional authority. Section 4. That City staff will continue to support the Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee and continue to participate in the Planning Partnership as described in the Plan. Section 5. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. 2017. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho this 21" day of February, 2017. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 21St day of February, .H.rricv V rv: GO�ppRATE0,g06 ATTEST: or Tamm de erd Mayor Y Y m j�IgN " C. y Co , City Clerk RESOLUTION ADOPTING APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE 2016 UPDATE OF THE ADA COUNTY MULTI - HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN EXH I BIT A EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Hazard mitigation is the use of long-term and short-term policies, programs, projects, and other activities to alleviate the death, injury, and property damage that can result from a disaster. Ada County and a partnership of local governments within the County, led by Ada County Emergency Management (ACEM), have developed the 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Flan to reduce risks from natural disasters. The plan complies with federal Disaster Mitigation Act hazard mitigation planning requirements and establishes eligibility for funding under Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) grant programs. Participating planning partners are listed in Tables ES -1 and ES -2. Table ES -1. Mun Ada County Doug Hardman City of Eagle Mike Williams City of Kuna Mike Borzick City of Star Chad Bell Table ES -2. Special Pu Ada County Highway District Tim Nicholson Kuna Rural Fire District Terry Gammel Star Joint Fire Protection Dist. Greg Timinsky Whitney Fire protection District Rem Ross Eagle Sewer District Lynn Moser Independent School District of Boise City #1 Mike Munger Flood Control District #10 William C. Claytc Partners City of Boise Garden City City of Meridian District Plannina Partners Eagle Fire District N. Ada County Fire & Rescue Star Sewer & Water District Drainage District #4 Joint School District #2 Greater Boise Auditorium District PREVIOUS HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING IN ADA COUNTY Romeo Gervais John Evans Kyle Radick Mike Winkle Michael Irvin Hank Day Mike Dimmick Spencer McClean Patrick D. Rice Ada County and a group of planning partners prepared an initial hazard mitigation plan that was approved by FEMA in 2006. Federal regulations require updates of hazard mitigation plans on a 5 -year cycle to reevaluate recommendations, monitor the impacts of actions that have been accomplished, and determine if there is a need to change the focus of mitigation strategies. A jurisdiction covered by a plan that has expired is no longer in compliance with the federal requirements for hazard mitigation planning. To meet the federal requirements for updating plans, the 2006 plan was comprehensively updated in 2011. The 2011 update represented a significant enhancement of the 2006 plan in content, scope and coverage. The 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan represents an update of the 2011 plan. TETRA TECH xiii 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan: Volume 1—Countywide Elements Executive Summary PLAN UPDATE PROCESS Updating the plan consisted of the following phases: Phase 1, Organize Resources—A planning team was assembled for the plan update, consisting of staff from ACEM and a technical consultant. The team conducted outreach to establish the planning partnership. A 17 -member steering committee was assembled to oversee the plan update, consisting of planning partner staff, residents, and other stakeholders in the planning area. Coordination with other local, state and federal agencies involved in hazard mitigation occurred throughout the plan update process. This phase included a review of the existing plan and existing programs that may support hazard mitigation actions. Phase 2, Update the Risk Assessment—Risk assessment is the process of measuring the potential loss of life, personal injury, economic injury, and property damage resulting from natural hazards. This process assesses the vulnerability of people, buildings and infrastructure to natural hazards. Risk assessment models were enhanced with new data and technologies that have become available since 2004. Planning partners used the risk assessment to rank risk and to gauge the potential impacts of each hazard of concern on their jurisdiction. The risk assessment included the following: ➢ Hazard identification and profiling ➢ Assessment of the impact of hazards on physical, social and economic assets Vulnerability identification ➢ Estimates of the cost of potential damage. • Phase 3, Engage the Public—The planning team implemented a public involvement strategy developed by the Steering Committee. The strategy included staffing public events where members of the planning team presented the risk assessment and the draft plan, presentations at various events and to community groups, a hazard mitigation survey, an ACEM-sponsored website, and multiple media releases. • Phase 4, Update Goals, Objectives and Actions—The Steering Committee reviewed and updated the goals from the 2011 plan and confirmed a set of objectives. The planning partnership selected a range of appropriate mitigation actions to work toward achieving the goals set forth in this plan update. Additionally, the Steering Committee selected a set of countywide mitigation actions. The mitigation actions recommended in this plan include some that address limitations in the modeling caused by insufficient data, such as digitizing maps of urban flooding issues and collecting perishable data, such as high water marks, after hazard events. • Phase 5, Develop Plan Implementation and Maintenance Strategy—The Steering Committee developed a plan implementation and maintenance strategy that includes the establishment of a hazard mitigation working group, annual progress reporting, a strategy for continued public involvement, a commitment to plan integration with other relevant plans and programs, and a recommitment from the planning partnership to actively maintain the plan over the five-year performance period. • Phase b, Assemble the Updated Plan—The planning team and Steering Committee assembled a document to meet federal hazard mitigation planning requirements for all partners. The updated plan contains two volumes. Volume 1 contains components that apply to all partners and the broader planning area. Volume 2 contains all components that are jurisdiction -specific. Each planning partner has a dedicated annex in Volume 2. • Phase 7, Plan Adoption/Implementation—Once pre -adoption approval has been granted by FEMA, the final adoption phase will begin. Each planning partner will individually adopt the updated plan. Phase 8, Plan Implementation, will occur over the next five years as the planning partnership begins to implement the county -wide and jurisdiction specific actions identified in this plan. xlv TETRA TECH 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan: Volume 1—Countywide Elements Executive Summary RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS Based on the risk assessment, hazards were ranked for the risk they pose to the overall planning area as shown in Table ES -3. Table ES -3. Hazard Risk Ran 1 Severe Weather High 2 Earthquake Medium 3 Wildfire Medium 4 Flood Medium 5 Dam/Canal Failure Medium 6 Landslide Low 7 Drought Low 8 Volcano Low Each planning partner also ranked hazards for its own area. Table ES -4 summarizes the categories of high, medium and low (relative to other rankings) that all jurisdictions assigned each hazard. The results indicate the following general patterns: • The earthquake, flood and severe weather hazards were most commonly ranked as high. • The dam failure and wildfire hazards were most commonly ranked as medium. • The landslide, drought, volcano and wildfire hazard were most commonly ranked as low. Table ES -4. Summa Results Dam Failure 0 14 3 3 Drought 0 0 20 0 Earthquake 18 2 0 0 Flood 13 7 0 0 Landslide 0 2 15 3 Severe weather 16 2 2 0 Volcano 0 0 20 0 Wildfire 4 8 5 3 MITIGATION PURPOSE STATEMENT, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The following purpose statement guided the Steering Committee and the planning partnership in selecting the actions contained in this plan update: To reduce the vulnerability to natural hazards in order to protect the health, safety, welfare and economy of the Ada County community. The Steering Committee and the planning partnership established the following goals for the plan update: • Protect lives and reduce hazard related injuries TETRA TECH xv 2016 Ada County Mufti -Hazard Mitigation Plan: Volume 1 --Countywide Elements Executive Summary • Minimize or reduce current and future damage from natural hazards to property, including critical facilities and environment • Encourage the development and implementation of long-term, cost-effective mitigation projects • Maintain, enhance, and restore the natural environment's capacity to deal with the impacts of natural hazard events. • Improve emergency management preparedness, collaboration, and outreach within the planning area. The following objectives were identified that meet multiple goals, helping to establish priorities for recommended mitigation actions: 1. Minimize disruption of local government and commerce operations caused by natural hazards. 2. Using best available data, science, and knowledge, continually improve understanding of the location and potential impacts of natural hazards. 3. Based on willing participation, encourage retrofit, purchase, or relocation of real property, based on one or more of the following criteria: level of exposure, repetitive loss history, and previous damage from natural hazards. 4. Based on understanding of risk, prevent or discourage new development in hazardous areas; if building occurs in high-risk areas, ensure that it is done in such a way as to minimize risk. 5. Strengthen codes and code enforcement to ensure that new construction and redevelopment of property and infrastructure can withstand the impacts of natural hazards. 6. Integrate hazard mitigation policies into local government land use plans that not only protect the built environment, but also maintain or enhance the natural environment's ability to withstand and recover from natural disasters, with an emphasis on the promotion of regional consistency in policy. 7. Develop new, and improve existing, early warning emergency notification protocols, systems, and evacuation procedures. 8. Educate the public on the area's potential natural hazards and ways to personally prepare, respond, recover and mitigate the impacts of these events. 9. Establish partnerships among all levels of government, the business community, and other stakeholders to improve and implement methods to protect life, property and the natural environment. 10. Increase the resilience and continuity of operations of identified critical facilities and infrastructure within the planning area. MITIGATION ACTIONS Mitigation actions presented in this update are activities designed to reduce or eliminate losses resulting from natural hazards. The update process resulted in the identification of more than 224 mitigation actions for implementation by individual planning partners, as presented in Volume 2 of this plan. In addition, the steering committee and planning partnership identified 15 countywide actions benefiting the whole partnership, as listed in Table ES -5. IMPLEMENTATION Full implementation of the recommendations of this plan will require time and resources. The measure of the plan's success will be its ability to adapt to changing conditions. Ada County and its planning partners will assume responsibility for adopting the recommendations of this plan and committing resources toward implementation. The framework established by this plan commits all planning partners to pursue actions when the benefits of a project exceed its costs. The planning partnership developed this plan with extensive public input, and public support of the actions identified in this plan will help ensure the plan's success, xvi TETRA TECH 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan: Volume 1—Countywide Elements Executive Summary CW-1—Sponsor and maintain a natural -hazard informational website to include the following types of information: • Hazard -specific information such as warning, private property mitigation alternatives, important facts on risk and vulnerability • Pre- and post -disaster information such as notices of grant funding availability • CRS creditable information • Links to planning partners' pages, FEMA and Idaho Office of Emergency Management • Natural hazard mitigation plan information such as progress reports, mitigation success stories, update strategies, Steering Committee meetings. All I ACEM ACEM Operation Budget Short term, ongoing 2,8,9 CW -2 --The Steering Committee will remain as a viable body over time to monitor progress of the plan, provide technical assistance to planning partners and oversee the update of the plan according to schedule. This body will continue to operate under the ground rules established at its inception. All ACEM Can be funded under existing programs Short term, ongoing 6,8,9 CW-3—AI[ planning partners that committed to the update effort will formally adopt this plan when pre -adoption approval has been granted by the Idaho Office of Emergency Management (]OEM) and FEMA Region X. Each planning partner will adhere to the plan maintenance protocol identified in this plan. All actions under this action will be coordinated by ACEM All ACEM! Each planning Can be funded under existing programs Short term All partner CW4—Continue to implement ongoing public outreach programs administered by ACEM, Seek opportunities to promote the mitigation of natural hazards within the planning area, utilizing information contained within this plan. All ACEM Can be funded under existing programs Short term, ongoing 2,8,9 CW-5—Seek out and use the best available data, science and technology to update the risk assessment to this plan as that data, science, technology and funding resources become available. All ACEM FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant funding, RiskMAP, federal Long -Term, depends 2,9 hazard analysis funding on funding CW-6—Continue to support and coordinate with the Idaho Silver Jackets program. All ACEM Can be funded under existing programs Short term, ongoing 2,6,8,9 CW -7— Provide technical support and coordination for available grant funding opportunities to the planning partnership All ACEM Can be funded under existing programs. This technical Short term 2,9 assistance is a reimbursable activity under FEMA Hazard Mitigation Gran Programs CW-8—Participate as a cooperating partners with FEMA and other stakeholders in FEMA's RiskMAP initiative All ACEM Can be funded under existing programs. Could be Short term 2,9 subsidized with funding under the RiskMAP initiative CW -9— Leverage public outreach partnering capabilities (such as CERT) within the planning area to promote a uniform and consistent message on the importance of proactive hazard mitigation. All ACEM ACEM Operation Budget Short Term, ongoing All CW -10— Coordinate mitigation planning and project efforts within the planning area to leverage all resources available to the planning partnership. All ACEM ACEM Operation Budget Short Term, ongoing 9,9,10 CW -11— Where appropriate, support retrofitting, purchase, or relocation of structures located in hazard -prone areas to protect structures from future damage, with repetitive and severe repetitive loss properties as a priority. Seek opportunities to leverage partnerships within the planning area in these pursuits. All Planning Partners Hazard Mitigation Grant funding Long-term, depends 3,9 on funding CW -12— Utilize information contained within the Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan to support updates to other emergency management plans in effect within the planning area. All ACEM Can be funded under existing programs Short term, ongoing 1,2,6,10 TETRA TECH XVII 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan: Volume 1—Countywide Elements Executive Summary CW-13—Using the most current Hazus model and other data available, examine exposure and level of risk to the known hazards of concern for first responder facilities and identified potential sheltering sites. All ACEM, all first Can be funded under existing programs Long-term, depends 2,9 responder planning on funding partners CW -14— Based on identified risks, relocate or structurally harden first responder facilities as needed. Relocation may not be an option based on response requirements of the organization. All ACEM, all planning Hazard mitigation or emergency management grant funding Long-term, depends 3,9 partners on funding CW -15— Using the most current Hazus model and other data available, categorize potential sheltering sites from lowest to highest exposure to the known hazards of concern. Identify partners that own the sheltering sites and encourage building enhancements at those sites that would allow for operations during a major disaster event. All ACEM, all planning Can be funded under existing programs, to be augmented Long-term, depends 2,9 partners by mitigation planning grant funding at next plan update. on funding xviii TETRA TECH EXHIBIT B 6. CITY OF MERIDIAN 6.1 MULTI -HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT Primary Point of Contact Alternate Point of Contact Kyle Radek, Assistant City Engineer David Miles, Environmental Programs 33 E. Broadway Ave Coordinator, Acting Surface Water Meridian, ID 83642 Administrator Telephone: 208.898.5500 33 E. Broadway Ave e-mail Address: kradek@meridiancity.org Meridian, ID 83642 Telephone: (208)898-5500 e-mail Address: dmiles@meridiancity.org 6.2 JURISDICTION PROFILE The following is a summary of key information about the jurisdiction and its history: • Date of Incorporation—Established August 1903 • Current Population—Estimated 91,420 as of April 2016 (COMPASS 1990-2016 Population Estimates by City Limit Boundaries) • Population Growth—Meridian has seen significant growth in the last 10 years, with an increase of 12.8% since 2009. Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho (COMPASS) estimates that the population of Meridian will increase to 138,564 by 2035, an increase of over 70%. • Location and Description—Meridian is not only geographically located in the center of the Treasure Valley, but it also is the population center of the Treasure Valley; people are evenly distributed in all directions from Meridian. Downtown Meridian is approximately 10 miles from the heart of Boise. • Brief History—Meridian has transformed from a sagebrush -filled mail drop located on the Oregon Trail in the 1880s, to a small fruit orchard center after the turn of the century through the 1930s, to a dairy - based farming community in the 1940s. Meridian is named for Idaho's principle meridian used for the initial survey of the state which coincides with Meridian Road at the center of the City. Its character as a small farming community continued until approximately 1990, when its population was still about 10,000. • Climate—Meridian is favored by a mild, and climate. July is the hottest month, with the average high temperature of 900 F. January is the coldest month with an average low temperature of 220 F. The normal precipitation pattern in the Meridian area shows a winter high of 1.2 inches of precipitation per month and a very pronounced summer low of about 0.1 inches. Typically there are 12 inches of annual precipitation. • Governing Body Format—Meridian uses the Mayor -Council form of local government. In Meridian, the Council, which includes the Mayor, possesses both legislative and executive authority. Departments include: City Clerk, Community Development, Finance, Fire, Human Resources, Legal, Mayor's Office, Parks & Recreation, Police, and Public Works. The City Council is responsible for the adoption of this plan, City Departments are responsible for its implementation. TETRA TECH 6-1 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan: Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes City of Meridian • Development Trends—As of April 2016, single family housing is the predominant development in Meridian, accounting for 87% of all dwelling units. Additionally at the end of 2015, Meridian provided 17% of available jobs in Ada County, or 37,108. Meridian seeks to improve and diversify its housing inventory, create strong and sustainable jobs, improve infrastructure, and support diversified modes of transportation. 6.3 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT An assessment of legal and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table 6-1. An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table 6-2. An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table 6-3. Information on National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) compliance is presented in Table 6-4. Classifications under various community mitigation programs are presented in Table 6-5. An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table 6-6. Building Code Yes No Yes Comment: Meridian City Code Title 10, Chapter 1; Adopted 1212 2014; Ord. #14-1633 Zoning Code Yes No No Comment. Meridian City Code Title 11, Chapter 2; Adopted 718/2008; Ord. #08-1372 Subdivisions Yes No No Comment Meridian City Code Title 11, Chapter 6; Adopted 71812008; Ord. #08-1372 Stormwater Management No Yes No . Comment ACHD owns and operates storm drain system. ACHD holds EPA NPDES MS4 Phase I and Phase 11 permits. City complies with the EPA's Construction General Permit for City -awned projects. Post -Disaster Recovery No No No Real Estate Disclosure No No No Growth Management Yes No No Comment. City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan; Adopted 9/912014; Resolution #14-1011 Site Plan Review Yes No No Comment Multiple City Ordinances and Departments; and 311 party agencies. Environmental Protection Yes No No Comment Multiple City Ordinances and Departments; and 3,d party agencies Flood Damage Prevention Yes No No Comment Meridian City Code Title 10, Chapter 6; Adopted 111/2014; Ord. #13-1584 Emergency Management Yes No No Comment Emergency Management for the City of Meridian is done in partnership with ACEM, Meridian participates through the ACEM Board as well as representation on TAG (Technical Advisory Group). In addition, the City has an Emergency Management committee focused on Meridian specific preparedness. _ Climate Change No No No Other Yes No No 6-2 TETRA TECH 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan: Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes City of Meridian General or Comprehensive Plan Yes No No Comment. City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan; Adopted 9/912014; Resolution #14.1011 Capital Improvement Plan Yes No No Comment City of Meridian Engineering Capital & Enhancement Plan (5 -Year CIP for water, sewer and reclaimed utilities. Updated annually. Last Updated to cover 2016-2020. Floodplain or Watershed Plan Yes No No Comment The 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan will qualify as a flood hazard management plan under CRS criteria upon its completion and adoption. Stormwater Plan No Yes No Comment, ACHD owns and operates storm drain system. ACHD holds EPA NPDES MS4 Phase I and Phase II permits. City complies with the EPA's Construction General Permit for City -owned projects. Habitat Conservation Plan No No No Economic Development Plan Yes No No Comment. City of Meridian Strategic Plan presented to Council and adopted 51512015 Shoreline Management Plan No No No Community Wildfire Protection Plan Yes No No Comment The City of Meridian has no wildland-urban interface areas, but does participate in the County -wide wildland fire planning group. This plan is currently being updated. Forest Management Plan No No No Climate Action Plan No No No Other No No Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan Yes No No Comment. The City has adopted a Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan utilizing Emergency Support Functions. Threat & Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment No Yes No Comment. Ada County THIRA – DRAFT; May 2015 Post -Disaster Recovery Plan No No No Comment Currently no adopted Post -Disaster Recovery Plan, _ Continuity of Operations Plan Yes No No Comment. Public Health Plan No Yes No Commend Central District Health Department Emergency Operations Plan, 2013. Fire Department does have input on Public Health .planning via the ACCESS EMS system. TETRA TECH 6-3 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan: Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes Table 6-2. Fiscal City of Meridian Community Development Block Grants Yes Capital Improvements Project Funding Yes Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes Yes User Fees for Water, Sewer, Gas or Electric Service Yes Incur Debt through General Obligation Bonds No Incur Debt through Special Tax Bonds No Incur Debt through Private Activity Bonds No Withhold Public Expenditures in Hazard -Prone Areas Yes State -Sponsored Grant Programs Yes Development Impact Fees for Homebuyers or Developers Yes Other None Table 6-3. Administrative and Technical Planners or engineers with knowledge of land development and land management practices Engineers or professionals trained in building or infrastructure construction practices Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards Staff with training in benefit/cost analysis Yes Community Development, Public Works; several positions Yes Community Development, Public Works; several positions Yes Community Development, Public Works, several positions Yes Community Development, Public Works; various positions Surveyors No Staff capable of making substantial damage estimates Yes Community Development, Public Works; several positions Personnel skilled or trained in GIS applications Yes Information Technology, Community Development, Public Works, several positions Scientist familiar with natural hazards in local area No Planning partners available through universities and Idaho Department of Homeland Security Emergency manager Yes No dedicated Emergency Manager for the City of Meridian. Grant writers Yes Ability to contract for service 6-4 TETRA TECH 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan: Volume 2—Planning PartnerAnnexes Table 6-4. National Flood Insurance P When did the community enter the NFIP? When did the Flood Insurance Rate maps become effective (current)? What local department is responsible for floodplain management? Who is your floodplain administrator? (department/position) • Is this a primary or auxiliary role? Are any certified floodplain managers on staff in your jurisdiction? What is the date of adoption of your flood damage prevention ordinance (current)? • Does your floodplain management program meet or exceed minimum requirements? • If so, in what ways? Compliance When was the most recent Community Assistance Visit or Community Assistance Contact? Does your jurisdiction have any outstanding NFIP compliance violations that need to be addressed? • If so, please state what they are. Do your flood hazard maps adequately address the flood risk within your jurisdiction? • If no, please state why. Does your floodplain management staff need any assistance or training to support its floodplain management program? • If so, what type of assistance/training is needed? Does your jurisdiction participate in the Community Rating System (CRS)? • If so, is your jurisdiction seeking to improve its CRS Classification? City of Meridian 3120192 10/02103 Community Development, Public Works Public Works; City Engineer or Appointee Primary Yes 1/112014 Exceed Several (Low Floor 2' freeboard, Crawlspace 1' freeboard, added buffer of mapped boundaries, etc.) 12131/2013 (CAV); 2/1812015 (CAC) No Yes No Yes How many Flood Insurance policies are in force in your jurisdiction? Approx. 107 (as of Oct. 2014) • What is the insurance in force? $21,664,200 (as of Oct. 2014) • What is the premium in force? $73,617 (as of Oct, 2014) How many total loss claims have been filed in your jurisdiction? 1 (as of Oct. 2014) • How many claims were closed without paymentlare stili open? 0 (as of Oct. 2014) • What were the total payments for losses? $23,747 (as of Oct. 2014) Table 6-5. Communitv Classifications Community Rating System Yes 8 51612015 (draft) Building Code Effectiveness Yes 99 NIA Grading Schedule Public Protection Yes ISO Class 3 2009 Storm Ready Yes Blue NIA Firewise No NIA N/A TETRA TECH 6-5 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan: Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes City of Meridian Table 6-6. Education and Outreach Criteria iResponse Do you have a Public Information Officer or Communications Office? Yes - Mayor's Office Communications Manager Do you have personnel skilled or trained in website development? Yes - Information Technology Do you have hazard mitigation information available on your website? Yes • If yes, please briefly describe. Links to Ada County Mitigation websites Do you utilize social media for hazard mitigation education and outreach? No • If yes, please briefly describe. Do you have any citizen boards or commissions that address issues related to No hazard mitigation? • If yes, please briefly specify. Do you have any other programs already in place that could be used to Yes communicate hazard -related information? • If yes, please briefly describe. Social media could be accessed to provide information Do you have any established warning systems for hazard events? No • If yes, please briefly describe. Code Red – residents may sign up to receive emergency notifications and critical community alerts. Ada County Emergency Management developed a Joint Information System Plan that delineates the processes with developing a regional joint information system and center for coordinating public information messaging. 6.4 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES This section describes the City's process for integrating the Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan into local planning. 6.4.1 Existing Integration The following plans and programs currently integrate the goals, risk assessment and/or recommendations of the Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan: City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan—The Comprehensive Plan for Meridian currently includes mitigation related policies as they related to the protection of human life and property from flood events. Additionally, the Comprehensive plan addresses the need for natural resource protection and the identification of ]mown hazards within the County. Meridian Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance—Ordinance integrates with Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan goals and objectives. COOP - The COOP plan for the City of Meridian was completed in 2012 and adopted by City Council. 6.4.2 Opportunities for Future Integration The following plans and programs do not currently integrate the goals, risk assessment and/or recommendations of the Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan, but provide an opportunity for future integration: • Meridian Comprehensive Plan—Plan can integrate goals and objectives of the Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan • )Engineering Capital & Enhancement Plan (CIP)—Mitigation may be funded, in part, through the City CIP plan. • Name of plan or program Brief description of how the plan/program can be integrated with the Multi - Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-6 TETRA TECH 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan: Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes City of Meridian 6.5 JURISDICTION -SPECIFIC NATURAL HAZARD EVENT HISTORY Table 6-7 lists all past occurrences of natural hazards within the jurisdiction. Table 6-7. Natural Hazard Events 6.6 JURISDICTION -SPECIFIC VULNERABILITIES Repetitive loss records are as follows: • Number of FEMA -identified Repetitive -Loss Properties: 0 • Number of FEMA -identified Severe -Repetitive -Loss Properties: 0 • Number of Repetitive -Loss Properties or Severe -Repetitive -Loss Properties that have been mitigated: 0 Other noted vulnerabilities include: • Canal failure is a potential vulnerability. Refer to local irrigation districts for vulnerability assessments. , 6.7 HAZARD RISK RANKING Table 6-8 presents the ranking of the hazards of concern. Table 6-8. Hazard Risk Ran 1 Severe Weather 51 High Cloudburst Rain Event NIA Sept 2013 Unknown Cloudburst Rain Events NIA Aug 2010 Unknown Wildfires NIA Sept 2400 Unknown Rain & Flooding NIA Dec 1964 Unknown 6.6 JURISDICTION -SPECIFIC VULNERABILITIES Repetitive loss records are as follows: • Number of FEMA -identified Repetitive -Loss Properties: 0 • Number of FEMA -identified Severe -Repetitive -Loss Properties: 0 • Number of Repetitive -Loss Properties or Severe -Repetitive -Loss Properties that have been mitigated: 0 Other noted vulnerabilities include: • Canal failure is a potential vulnerability. Refer to local irrigation districts for vulnerability assessments. , 6.7 HAZARD RISK RANKING Table 6-8 presents the ranking of the hazards of concern. Table 6-8. Hazard Risk Ran 1 Severe Weather 51 High 2 Earthquake 32 High 3 Flood 18 Medium 4 Wildfire 12 Medium 5 Drought 12 Medium 6 Volcano 11 Low 7 Landslide 5 Low 8 Dam Failure 0 Low 6.8 STATUS OF PREVIOUS PLAN INITIATIVES Table 6-9 summarizes the initiatives that were recommended in the previous version of the hazard mitigation plan and their implementation status at the time this update was prepared. TETRA TECH S-7 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan: Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes City of Meridian Table 6-9. Status of Previous Action Plan M-1—Conduct a survey of water, sewer, fire, and police infrastructure including X power generation equipment, wastewater treatment plant facilities, communications, and Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) equipment to analyze vulnerability to severe weather and earthquake, then design and execute improvements to mitigate. Comment: Vulnerability assessment is being conducted. Willinclude weather and flood elements. #M-2 - Become a "Firewise Community" X Comment: Long term endeavor. No significant WUI areas in City. M-3—Maintain compliance and good standing in the National Flood Insurance X Program Comment: Good standing in NFIP is maintained M-4—Apply for participation in the Community Rating System (CRS) and Maintain X Standing in CRS Comment: Action Item should change to maintain CRS standing and improve rating as beneficial M-5—Consider the creation of a surface water utility including fee collection X Comment: Initiative to be revised per findings. ACHD owns and operates storm drain system and is MS4 permittee in Meridian area. M-6—Develop a comprehensive surface water protection program, including a X stormwater management plan that includes the creation of a capital improvements program for stormwater in support of a stormwater utility. Comment: Initiative to be revised. Stormwater elements of City projects are funded as part of CIP. ACHD owns and operates storm drain system and is M54 permittee in Meridian area. M-7—Partner with ACHD to implement a culvert replacement program for X approximately 15 crossings of Fivemile, Ninemile, and Tenmile Creeks including design and construction. Comment: Culvert replacements occur as road funding becomes available. Consider additional Action Item for specific Old Town Meridian undersized system of culverts. Partners to be RR, ID, ACHD, City, Urban Renewal District, Meridian Development Corporation M-B—Partner with Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) to design and construct X culvert improvements on Fivemile Creek at the 1-84 I Eagle Road Interchange according to recommendations of "Fivemile Creek at Interstate 84—Eagle Road to Wells Street" Hydraulic Report, November 2008. Comment: Partial - Construction ongoinq at 1-84. Eagle Rd culvert pending design. M-9—Perform a vulnerability assessment on the Ridenbaugh and New York Canal X system in the Meridian Area of Impact. Comment: Action item should change to partner with and assist local ID with future vulnerability assessments. M -10 --Perform an assessment to determine housing areas that would benefit from X foundation elevation projects. Work with homeowners to apply for grant funding for projects. Comment: Assessment still to be completed. M-11—Integrate Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan into the City of Meridian's X Comprehensive Plan. Comment: To be done in 2016 Comp Plan update M-12—Consider appropriate higher regulatory standards that prevent or reduce risk X X to the built environment from the known hazards of concern. Comment: 6-8 TETRA TECH 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan: Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes City of Meridian M-13—Where appropriate, support retrofitting, purchase, or relocation of structures X located in hazard -prone areas to protect structures from future damage, with properties with exposure to repetitive losses as a priority. Comment: Suqqest combininq with Ni' 9 above. Assessment is needed first. M-14—Support County -wide initiatives identified in Volume 1. X Comment: M-15—Continue to support the implementation, monitoring, maintenance, and X updating of this Plan, as defined in Volume Comment: 6.9 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN AND EVALUATION OF RECOMMENDED ACTIONS Table 6-10 lists the actions that make up the City of Meridian's hazard mitigation action plan. Table 6-11 identifies the priority for each action. Table 6-12 summarizes the mitigation actions by hazard of concern and the six mitigation types. M-1—Conduct a survey of water, sewer, fire, and police infrastructure including power generation equipment, wastewater treatment plant facilities, communications, and Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) equipment to analyze vulnerability to severe weather and earthquake, then design and execute improvements to mitigate. Existing Severe Storm, 1,2,3,10 City (PW) Medium Enterprise, General Short Term Earthquake Funds M-2—Become a "Firewise Community" New & Wildland Fire 2,4,5,6,8 City (Fire) Low General Fund Long term Existing M-3—Maintain good standing under the National Flood Insurance Program by implementing programs that meet or exceed the minimum NFIP requirements. Such programs include but are not limited to: enforcing an adopted flood damage prevention ordinance, participating in floodplain mapping updates, and providing public assistance and information on floodplain requirements and impacts. New & Flood 1,2,4,5,6,8 City (PW) Low General, Enterprise Ongoing Existing Funds M-4—Maintain, and improve where beneficial, participation rating in the Community Rating System (CRS) New & Flood 1,2,4,5,6,7,8 City (PW) Low General, Enterprise Ongoing Existing Funds M-5—Evaluate surface water protection program, including surface water restoration, stormwater management, capital improvement program integration, and potential regulatory and fee impacts. New & Flood, Severe Weather 1,2,3,10 City (PW) High Enterprise Fund Short, Long Existing Term M-6—Partner with ACHD to implement a culvert replacement program for approximately 15 crossings of Fivemile, Ninemile, and Tenmiie Creeks including design and construction. New & Flood, Severe Weather 1,2 City (PW, CD) High Multiple Short, Long Existing Term TETRA TECH 6-9 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan: Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes City of Meridian M-7—Partner with Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) to design and construct culvert improvements on Fivemile Creek at Eagle Rd and the 1-841 Eagle Road Interchange according to recommendations of "Fivemile Creek at Interstate 84—Eagle Road to Wells Street" Hydraulic Report, November 2008. Existing Flood, Severe Weather 1,2 ITD-, City (PW, CD) High Multiple Short, Long Term M-8—Assist local irrigation districts with vulnerability assessments on the Ridenbaugh and New York Canal systems in the Meridian Area of Impact. New & Flood, Earthquake 1,2,4,7,9,10 Local Irrigation Medium Multiple Long Term Existing M-9—Perform an assessment to determine housing areas that would benefit from foundation elevation projects; and where appropriate, support and assist in grant funding opportunities for retrofitting, purchase or relocation projects.. Existing Flood, Earthquake, 3,8,9 City (PW) High Multiple Long Term Wildland Fire M-10—Integrate Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan into the City of Meridian's Comprehensive Plan. New & All Hazards 2, 5, 6 City (All) Low General Fund ShortTerm Existing M-11—Consider appropriate higher regulatory standards that prevent or reduce risk to the built environment from the known hazards of concern, New & All Hazards 4,6 City (All) Low General Fund Long Term Existing M-12—Support County -wide initiatives identified in Volume 1. New & All Hazards All City (All) Low General Fund Ongoing Existing M-13—Continue to support the implementation, monitoring, maintenance, and updating of this Plan, as defined in Volume 1, New & All Hazards All Ada County, City (All) Low Multiple Ongoing Existing M-14—Provide fire safety, fire prevention and Firewise education to neighborhoods, schools and community via the internet, social media and direct public outreach. New and Wildfire 8,9 City, Meridian Fire, Low General Fund Ongoing Existing ACEM M -15 -Whenever possible, coordinate with local experts and employ natural environmental processes in mitigation activities that increase ecosystem resilience and reduce the impacts of flooding on the built environment. New and Flood 2, 5, 9 City of Meridian Medium Local, Grants, Long term Existing Development Fees 6-10 TETRA TECH 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan: Volume 2 -Planning PartnerAnnexes City of Meridian M-1 4 High Medium Yes Yes Yes High Medium M-2 5 High Low Yes No No Medium Low M-3 6 High Low Yes No Yes High Low M-4 7 High Low Yes No Yes High Low M-5 4 High High Yes No No Medium Medium M-6 2 High High Yes Yes No Medium Low M-7 2 High High Yes Yes No Medium Low M-8 6 High Medium Yes Yes No Low Low M-9 3 High High Yes Yes Yes Medium Low M-10 3 High Low Yes No Yes High Low M-11 3 High Low Yes No No High Low M-12 2 High Low Yes No Yes High Low M-13 10 High Low Yes Yes Yes High Low M-14 2 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low M-15 3 High Medium Yes Yes No Medium High a. See the introduction to this volume for explanation of priorities. Dam Failure NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA Drought M-10, M-11, M-13 M-9 M-12 M-10 M-12 Earthquake M-1, M-8, M-10, M4 M-9 M-12 M-10 M-12 M-1 M-11, M-13 Flood M-3, M-4, M-5, M-6, M-3, M-4, M-5, M-3, M-4, M-12 M-10, M-15 M-12 M-5, M-6, M-7, M-7, M-8, M-9, M-6, M-7, M-8, M-9 M-10, M-11, M-13, M-9, M-15 M-15 Landslide M-10, M-11, M-13 M-9 M-12 M-10 M-12 Severe Weather M-1, M-5, M-10, M-1, M-9 M-12 M-10 M-12 M-1, M-5, M-6, M-11, M-13 M-7 Wildfire M-2, M-10, M-11, M-2, M-9, M-14 M-2, M-12, M-14 M-10, M-14 M-12 M-13, M-14 a. See the introduction to this volume for explanation of mitigation types. TETRA TECH 6-11 Z Essential Facilities & Transportation Systems "' W ovadae W Lamont Rd K W Victory Rd N En 81 J ar WAmity Rd J i KUNA7 W Lake Hazel Rd - _- - GARDEN ------- ' - i I CITY EAGLE71 t ' - EChindenBlvd 'i�'rOPlf' n Rd s - -` - W Chinde $Jvd W E%eWtive Or W Franklin Rd Ori � N 4 U rn K W Victory Rd m v [i 'N Reutzel Or .�EAmIf Rd W Amity Rd j = _ W La Grange St E Lake Hazel Rd W Lake Hazel Rd Legend C Q.f �. Emergency Q Other Essential Bus Facilities "� *** r� N 0 Operation Facilities Highway Bridges "r W E Centers JA Police Stations t Fire Stations & ; IN. it Schools &f S EMS Facilities r �1V Educational - e Medical Care Facilities Facilities 0 0.4 0.8 1.6 © Airport Facilities Q TETRATECH Miles Data Sources: Ada County, U.S. Geological Survey, COMPASS, Idaho DHS Ada County does not warrant the accuracy, reliability or timeliness of any information on this map, and shall not be held liable for losses caused by using this information. BOISE W Edna St W Ustick Rd m d 2 U LL Z Z - - W FairviewAve W E%eWtive Or W Franklin Rd Ori � N 4 U rn K W Victory Rd m v [i 'N Reutzel Or .�EAmIf Rd W Amity Rd j = _ W La Grange St E Lake Hazel Rd W Lake Hazel Rd Legend C Q.f �. Emergency Q Other Essential Bus Facilities "� *** r� N 0 Operation Facilities Highway Bridges "r W E Centers JA Police Stations t Fire Stations & ; IN. it Schools &f S EMS Facilities r �1V Educational - e Medical Care Facilities Facilities 0 0.4 0.8 1.6 © Airport Facilities Q TETRATECH Miles Data Sources: Ada County, U.S. Geological Survey, COMPASS, Idaho DHS Ada County does not warrant the accuracy, reliability or timeliness of any information on this map, and shall not be held liable for losses caused by using this information. a a z Utilities & Infrastructure W Overland, W Lamont Rd '— � I a v W Victory Rd Ul 4 i W Amity Rd i W Lake Hazel Rd KUNA — — EAGLE E Chinden Blvd GARDEN CITY W JOAlin Rd W Chi k}en Bfvr, BOISE W Edna St W a g W Ustick.Rd d •w I!„"'�� z z W Fairview Ave V `7• ^� _ W Executive Dr Franklin Rd W Franklin Rd v m i a U o U1 o� W uctory Rd v v tr. V1 W Reutzel ❑r '-WE Amity,Rti W AmityRd I- _ W La Grange St E Lake Hazel Rd W Lake Hazel Rd Legend Cot, Communication Natural Gas Facilities Facilities !, Potable Water Facilities ■ Dams ;a-;,- .. �: Wastewater Facilities •• ` S Electric Power Facilities �3,`' Hazardous Materials o 44 08 1,16 Q TETRATECH Miles Data Sources: Ada County, U.S. Geological Survey, COMPASS, Idaho DHS Ada County does not warrant the accuracy, reliability or timeliness of any information on this map, and shall not be held liable for losses caused by using this information. Peak Ground Acceleration for a 100 -Year Probabalistic Event Legend Col. i____i Ada County Boundary Modified Mercalli Scale, w r E Potential Shaking S IV (Light) pi- V (Moderate) 0 0.4 0.8 1.6 a TETRATECH Miles Data Sources: Ada County, U.S. Geological Survey, Hazus Ada County does not warrant the accuracy, reliability or timeliness of any information on this map, and shall not be held liable for losses caused by using this information. GARDEN _ CITY EAGLE W Chinden Blvd e - E Chinden Bivd -. _ . "Piro Rd _ Z 1'. N O W McMillan Rd BOISE v Of .- - _ - . _ W Edna St � � m _—_—___—_—_ __O, .. -.. y '-m- .-.. - g _. 2it Z _ _ _ E_Ustick: Rd W Ustick Rd 0 Zi ZI Z _ Z z W EherryLn _ "E Fairview Ave - W Fairview Ave vvp� E Pine Ave W Executive Dr 111 � W Fradkl In Rd -- _. -. E Franklin Rd W Franklin Rd I 1 all* W Overland Rd a F Ovedand Rd, I — .. � '. u rr i I W Lamont Rd _� - -_ ;'_` '` 1° I,. o n -o f Z5 W Victory Rd _ c - F Victory Rd • o rn [L W Victory Rd m I r Y i I rU) d LL U3 I f i � m C11 ui � \N Rowzel Dr I I W Amity Rd E Amity Rd W Amlty Rd I - 'A:. - W La Grange St I KU NA -Rd I W Lake Hazel E Lake Hazel Rd W Lake Hazel Rd Legend Col. i____i Ada County Boundary Modified Mercalli Scale, w r E Potential Shaking S IV (Light) pi- V (Moderate) 0 0.4 0.8 1.6 a TETRATECH Miles Data Sources: Ada County, U.S. Geological Survey, Hazus Ada County does not warrant the accuracy, reliability or timeliness of any information on this map, and shall not be held liable for losses caused by using this information. Peak Ground Acceleration for a 500 -Year Probabalistic Event EAGLE EChi.d.,[3lvd GARDENI CITY Jd1lil Rd VV Chindep &Ivd BOISE W Edna St ,15 W Uslick Rd :00� LL - ®r,- — Z Z arVV Fairview Ave - ar i!!! C-3� Ave -.. - Z --- - -0e /V Executive Dr VLVFrariklin Rd W[Frarklin Rd ell, --j slip* WNW W Overland W Lamont Rd ? W W 2 Victory Rd 4 E Victory Rd --j V1 VyyicFRD_Rd \N Reutzel Dr in WAmity Rd_Pmitye'RQ VV Amity Rd VV La Grange St KUNA W Lake Hazel Rd E Lake Hazel Rd J W Lake Hazel Rd Legend C N L Ada County Boundary Modified Mercalli Scale, W E Potential Shaking S V (Moderate) V1 (Strong) TETRATECH 0 0.4 0.8 1.6 Miles Data Sources: Ada County, U.S. Geological Survey, Hazus Ada County does not warrant the accuracy, reliability or timeliness of any information on this map, and shall not be held liable for losses caused by using this information. p Z Squaw Creek M7.0 Scenario Peak Ground Acceleration l W tihin�len H�v 4 tF I 1 WFranklin Rd . S^. o n W Lamont Rd ,... v W VictM Rd fx v. a J GARDEN - - CITY EAGLE I _ i E Chinden Blvd W Jeplrn Rd dl C R w hlRde _ i 9 W Lake Hazel Rd K'UNA -J E Lake Hazel Rd BOISE W Edna St afa v -2 W Ustick Rd A o m � U � Z Z Z r --I W Fairview Ave W Execttive Dr i W Franklin Rd tY a i 0 U v U � W Victory Rd m 9 LL W Reutzel Ur W Amity Rd W La Grange St W Lake Hazel Rd Legend N _ — 1 Ada County Boundary Modified Mercalli Scale, ,;' Potential Shaking�_- r}. oi,V S V (Moderate) VI (Strong) o 0.4 0.8 1.6 TETRATECH Miles Data Sources: Ada County, U.S. Geological Survey Ada County does not warrant the accuracy, reliability or timeliness of any information on this map, and shall not be held liable for losses caused by using this information. FEMA DFIRM Flood Hazard Zones GARDEN .. — -- EAGLE CITY W �htfidenBly` ,"A. - l - - - E Chlnden Blvd Jopl<6 Rd' L Wr ,, 1 W ChindsR Blvd — — , � _Si ! y al BOISE WEdna St _—_—_—_— __p, WDstick Rd T_ r�i �pairview_ W Fairview Ave - — - F VV Execut'!ve Or -�'anklir Rd,Lw _Y { =e = E Frahklin Rd W Franklin Rd WOverlantl r1C �'T,-Fs i^'o. andRd - � ea W Lamont Rd _ •r `m r. _-. , .�".� r ,. •s. 'Q y a o > _ ! U m WVi. ctoryRd r m - �y _ Y Eel W Uctory Rd m Reutzel Dr ! Vi W Amity Rd E Amaty Rtl W Amity Rd i ok o W La Grange St I_ . IKUNA : -- ! W Lake Hazel Rd E Lake Hazel Rd W Lake Hazel Rd Legend — --� Ada County Boundary Water Bodies'' E f _ 1 % Annual Chance Flood Boundary (100 Year) 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Boundary (500 Year) Flood Hazard Areas as depicted on FEMA Digital Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM). 0 0.4 0.8 1.6 This map is a combination of effective and preliminary DFIRM boundaries. TETRA TECH N Miles Data Sources: Ada County, U.S. Geological Survey, FEMA, USACE Ada County does not warrant the accuracy, reliability or timeliness of any information on this map, and shall not be held liable for lasses caused by using this information. EXHIBIT C 20. MITIGATION ACTIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION 20.1 SELECTED COUNTYWIDE MITIGATION ACTIONS The planning partners and the Steering Committee determined that some actions from the mitigation catalogs could be implemented to provide hazard mitigation benefits countywide. Table 20-1 lists the recommended countywide actions, the lead agency for each, and the proposed timeline. The parameters for the timeline are as follows: Short Term = to be completed in 1 to 5 years Long Term = to be completed in greater than 5 years Ongoing = currently being funded and implemented under existing programs. CW-1—Sponsor and maintain a natural -hazard informational website to include the following types of information: • Hazard -specific information such as warning, private property mitigation alternatives, important facts on risk and vulnerability • Pre- and post -disaster information such as notices of grant funding availability • CRS creditable information • Links to planning partners' pages, FEMA and Idaho Office of Emergency Management • Natural hazard mitigation plan information such as progress reports, mitigation success stories, update strategies, Steering Committee meetings. All ACEM ACEM Operation Budget Short term, ongoing 249 CW-2—The Steering Committee will remain as a viable body over time to monitor progress of the plan, provide technical assistance to planning partners and oversee the update of the plan according to schedule. This body will continue to operate under the ground rules established at its inception. All ACEM Can be funded under existing programs Short term, ongoing 6,8,9 CW-3—All planning partners that committed to the update effort will formally adopt this plan when pre -adoption approval has been granted by the Idaho Office of Emergency Management (IDEM) and FEMA Region X. Each planning partner will adhere to the plan maintenance protocol identified in this plan. All actions under this action will be coordinated by ACEM All ACEM/ Each planning Can be funded under existing programs Short term All partner CW-4—Continue to implement ongoing public outreach programs administered by ACEM. Seek opportunities to promote the mitigation of natural hazards within the planning area, utilizing information contained within this plan.. All ACEM Can be funded under existing programs Short term, ongoing 2,8,9 CW-5—Seek out and use the best available data, science and technology to update the risk assessment to this plan as that data, science, technology and funding resources become available. All ACEM FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant funding, RiskMAP, federal Long -Term, depends 2,9 hazard analysis funding on funding CW-6—Continue to support and coordinate with the Idaho Silver Jackets program. All ACEM Can be funded under existing programs Short term, ongoing 2,6„8,9 TETRA TECH 20-1 2016 Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan: Volume 1—Countywide Elements Mitigation Actions and Implementation CW -7— Provide technical support and coordination for available grant funding opportunities to the planning partnership All ACEM Can be funded under existing programs. This technical Short term 2,9 assistance is a reimbursable activity under FEMA Hazard Mitigation Gran Programs CW-8—Participate as a cooperating partners with FEMA and other stakeholders in FEMA's RiskMAP initiative All ACEM Can be funded under existing programs. Could be Short term 2,9 subsidized with funding under the RiskMAP initiative CW -9— Leverage public outreach partnering capabilities (such as CERT) within the planning area to promote a uniform and consistent message on the importance of proactive hazard mitigation. All I ACEM ACEM Operation Budget Short Term, ongoing All CW -10— Coordinate mitigation planning and project efforts within the planning area to leverage all resources available to the planning partnership. All ACEM ACEM Operation Budget Short Term, ongoing 1,9,10 CW -11— Where appropriate, support retrofitting, purchase, or relocation of structures located in hazard -prone areas to protect structures from future damage, with repetitive and severe repetitive loss properties as a priority. Seek opportunities to leverage partnerships within the planning area in these pursuits. All Planning Partners Hazard Mitigation Grant funding Long-term, depends 3,9 on funding CW -12— Utilize information contained within the Ada County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan to support updates to other emergency management plans in effect within the planning area. All ACEM Can be funded under existing programs Short term, ongoing 1,2,6,10 CW-13—Using the most current Hazus model and other data available, examine exposure and level of risk to the known hazards of concern for first responder facilities and identified potential sheltering sites. All ACEM, all First Can be funded under existing programs Long-term, depends 2,9 Responder planning on funding partners CW -14— Based on identified risks, relocate or structurally harden first responder facilities as needed. Relocation may not be an option based on response requirements of the organization. All ACEM, all Planning Hazard mitigation or emergency management grant funding Long-term, depends 3,9 Partners on funding CW -15— Using the most current Hazus model and other data available, categorize potential sheltering sites from lowest to highest exposure to the known hazards of concern. Identify partners that own the sheltering sites and encourage building enhancements at those sites that would allow for operations during a major disaster event. All ACEM, all Planning Can be funded under existing programs, to be augmented Long-term, depends 2,9 Partners by mitigation planning grant funding at next plan update. on funding 20.2 BENEFIT/COST REVIEW 44 CFR requires the prioritization of the action plan according to a benefit/cost analysis of the proposed projects and their associated costs (Section 201.6.c.3iii). The benefits of proposed projects were weighed against estimated costs as part of the project prioritization process. The benefit/cost analysis was not of the detailed variety required by FEMA for project grant eligibility under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and Pre -Disaster Mitigation (PDM) grant program. A less formal approach was used because some projects may not be implemented for up to 10 years, and associated costs and benefits could change dramatically in that time, Therefore, a review of the apparent benefits versus the apparent cost of each project was performed. Parameters were established for assigning subjective ratings (high, medium and low) to the costs and benefits of these projects. 20-2 TETRA TECH