Bay Area Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan

1. Bay Area Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan JEANNE PERKINS DANIELLE HUTCHINGS ABAG Earthquake and Hazards Program

2. What Is DMA 2000?

3. The federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) focuses on – • Mitigation before, rather than after, disasters • Ties future mitigation funding to cities, counties, and special districts having “Local Hazard Mitigation Plans” completed

4. Bottom Line – Eligible for MITIGATION Dollars from FEMA- PDM-C Grants- HMGP Grants- Flood Grants

5. Is It Worth Complying Even If I Don’t Plan to Apply for Mitigation Funds from FEMA? YES!

6. NEW 2007 State Legislation impacts Public Assistance dollars for damage reimbursement – • “Waives” the 6.25% “match” requirement for Public Assistance damage reimbursement

7. ABAG has taken the lead in developing a Bay Area“multi-jurisdictional” LHMP • Participating in the MJ-LHMP is simpler than a “stand-alone LHMP • That plan is being updated 2009. • Thus, now is the logical time to “get on board”

8. MJ-LHMP Focus on NATURAL HAZARDS

9. Earthquake-Related Hazards • Ground Shaking • Fault Rupture • Liquefaction • Landslides • Tsunamis

10. Global Seismic Hazard Map

11. U.S. Seismic Hazard Map

12. California Shaking Potential Map

13. Shaking Potential Highest Two Units • 37.1% of land • 55.5% of urban • 55.7% of roads

14. 141 Realistically – earthquakes dominate any analysis.

15. Liquefaction SusceptibilityVeryHigh • 2.4% of land • 6.0% of urban • 4.6% of roads

16. Infrastructure - Roads • 142 road closures in Loma Prieta • 140 road closures in Northridge • 1,700 road closures in future “entire” Hayward quake

17. Past Housing Impacts • Over 16,000 uninhabitable units in Loma Prieta • Over 46,000 uninhabitable units in Northridge • Over 155,000 uninhabitable units in future Hayward or San Andreas earthquakes

18. Weather-Related Hazards • Flooding • Landslides • Wildfires • Drought • Climate Change

19. Flooding Hazard100-Year Event • 9.4% of land • 8.9% of urban • 7.3% of roads

20. Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Threat • 48.5% -urban • 40.7% -roads

21. Existing Landslide AreasMostly Slides • 23.0% of land • 8.3% of urban • 10.5% of roads

22. What Is Different in 2009 than the LAST Time We Did This?

23. REQUIREMENTS 1 – Turn in “Letter of Commitment” by June 30 2 – The “Lag” Time is NO LONGER AVAILABLE so get us your critical facilities by June 30 – or you can’t make any changes (This “train” is together this time…) 3 – Can’t “Join In” after the plan is final. 4 – We must have “Core” Regional Mitigation Strategies (with pros and cons) 5 – More of language in your “Annexes” to be part of the main LHMP (under negotiation…)

24. CORE Mitigation Strategies (FEMA required) “Core” priorities will be based on the review of the exiting priorities in the existing annexes and the hazards assessment.THIS workshop is being held so that we can work together to ensure consensus on these draft “Core” mitigation strategies. The “Core” priorities can then be changed (or accepted) by individual cities, counties, and special districts.We must allow the public an opportunity to comment on those choices (at Council/Board meeting and with ABAG)

25. What Is Mitigation?

26. Increase emergency response capability Increase actions taken to reduce or eliminate the impacts of future incidents Two ways to deal with hazards

27. Reducing the potential loss of life, property damage, and environmental degradation from natural disasters, while Speeding economic recovery from those disasters. MJ-LHMP GOAL –To develop a disaster-resistant region by

28. And ANOTHER (Practical) Goal –To have a type of “insurance” for receiving more “Public Assistance” money from FEMA and the State…

29. Setting REGIONAL Priorities for MitigationThe Purpose of Subregional Workshops

30. Deaths and injury Damage – property dollar loss Disruption – downtime due to inoperable functioning MITIGATION Decisions –Costs of ACTION vs. INACTIONCOSTS vs. LOSS REDUCTION(Benefit–Cost Analysis or BCA)

31. Social Technical Administrative Political Legal Economic Environmental OTHER Criteria – STAPLEE

32. Adoption and enforcement of floodplain management requirements Floodplain identification and mapping Description of community assistance and monitoring activities OR why you don’t participate MITIGATION Decisions –Address the jurisdictions’ participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) by:

33. Organization of Strategies by Function

34. Infrastructure – This includes mitigation of lifeline facilities “critical” for operations AND recovery.

35. 2. Health 3. Housing 4. Economy

36. 5. Government Services – This includes mitigation related to government facilities, in general.

37. 6. Education (for school districts) 7. Environment (including climate) 8. Land Use

38. Where is ABAG’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan information on the internet? http://quake.abag.ca.gov/mitigation With link to Commitment Letter (as word file)

39. Setting Priorities • Existing Program • Very High – NOW! • High – need money • Moderate – if money • Under Study • Not Applicable • Not Yet Considered