MONROE COUNTY 2015 LMS STEP TWO: CHARACTERIZATION FORM

Transcription

1 MONROE COUNTY 2015 LMS STEP TWO: CHARACTERIZATION FORM This form is used to submit information necessary for the LMS Work Group to score and prioritize an initiative relative to other initiatives and projects. It is to be completed by the entity or owner who is responsible for the project when that entity or owner is prepared to move a project forward and seek funding. When the Florida Division of Emergency Management issues a tice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for Hazard Mitigation (HMGP) and Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) funds, the LMS Work Group s Ranking Subcommittee is charged with developing a list of prioritized initiatives using the LMS Project Prioritization Form. The more complete the information, the better the basis for ranking this initiative relative to other initiatives. Name of Entity: Date Submitted: Contact Name: Phone: Is the initiative/project on the Step One (NOI) list? Yes Initiative/project title: Initiative/project description: Does the initiative/project benefit a critical facility? Yes Location map is attached? Yes Does the applicant have the legal authority to under take the project? Yes If no, describe coordination necessary in order for the project to move forward How quickly could the initiative be started after award? Six months or less Six months to one year One to two years How long after award would it take to complete the initiative? Less than two years Two to three years More than three years Describe the problem the Initiative/project will solve and the direct and indirect impact on the facility, system, or community if a worst case hazard scenario occurs. Monroe County: LMS Characterization Form (2010) Page 1 of 6

2 2010 Mitigation Goals addressed by the initiative (select all that apply): 1. Preservation of sustainability of life, health, safety and welfare. 2. Preservation of infrastructure, including power, water, sewer and communications. 3. Maintenance and protection of roads and bridges, including traffic signals and street signs. 4. Protection of critical facilities, including public schools and public buildings. 5. Preservation of property and assets. 6. Preservation of economy during and after disaster, including business viability. 7. Preservation and protection of the environment, including natural and historic resources. Hazards addressed by the initiative (select all that apply): Natural Hazards Technological Hazards Societal Hazards Hurricane/tropical storm Hazardous materials Transportation (winds & surge flooding) Flooding (rainfall ponding) Utility outage or disruption Terrorism/civil disturbance Severe Storm/tornado - Loss of electric service Economic crisis Wildfire - Loss of water service Military conflict Drought - Loss of wastewater service Mass immigration Coastal erosion - Communications Epidemiological emergency Oil spill Radiological accident GENERAL BENEFITS Use this section to provide a big picture description of the benefits of the initiative. These general benefits are not the same quantifiable benefits that are determined using FEMA s formal Benefit-to- Cost Analysis tools. How many people might be injured, sickened or killed in the worst case scenario without this initiative? injured sickened killed don t know not applicable What percentage of the jurisdiction s permanent population is served by the Initiative/project? Up to 10% 26 to 40% 66 to 80% 11 to 25% 41 to 65% 81 to 100% Describe the economic benefits of the project. Describe the social benefits of the project. Monroe County: LMS Characterization Form (2010) Page 2 of 6

3 Describe whether the project protects cultural or historic resources. Describe the environmental benefits of the project. COMPARISON OF BENEFITS TO COSTS The worksheet in Attachment A may be used to approximate a Benefit-to-Cost Ratio for the purposes of moving a project to the Prioritized List. The worksheet can also be used to characterize the benefits and costs of initiatives that are not traditional FEMA-eligible projects (e.g., structure elevation, facility retrofit, drainage improvement). IMPORTANT NOTE: An initiative that is expected to be submitted for FEMA funding can be put on the Prioritized List based on an approximate Benefit-to-Cost Ratio. However, as part of a formal application, applicants for traditional FEMA-eligible projects will be required to satisfy all application requirements, including development of a Benefit-to-Cost Ratio using FEMA s Benefit-Cost Analysis tools. Estimate the total cost to implement (e.g., including design, construction, construction management, purchase of equipment, etc.). $ Has a formal Benefit-Cost Analysis been prepared? Yes If yes, what is the computed Benefit-to-Cost Ratio? If no, use the worksheet in Attachment A and insert the Approximate Benefit-to-Cost Ratio: FEASIBILITY Check the statement that most applies to this project regarding its consistency with other applicable plans, programs, policies, ordinances and codes of the jurisdiction or proposing entity. The proposal is highly consistent (e.g., listed in multiple other documents) The proposal is consistent (e.g., listed in at least one other document) The proposal is not listed in other documents, but is consistent with intent The proposal conflicts with other documents or policies The proposal may be in conflict, needs more analysis Permits and approvals likely to be needed for implementation. Zoning approval/change Concurrence/budget approval by local jurisdiction Building permit State permits (list) Federal permits (list) ne required Monroe County: LMS Characterization Form (2010) Page 3 of 6

4 Other (list) Check the statement that most accurately describes technical feasibility. engineering is necessary to document technical feasibility (e.g., buyouts) An engineer has preliminarily determined that the project is technically feasible (e.g., based on similarity with similar projects) An engineering analysis will have to prepared to document technical feasibility Check the statement that most accurately describes implementation effort. The proposal would be relatively easy to accomplish The proposal is not anticipated to be difficult to accomplish The proposal will be somewhat difficult to accomplish The proposal will be difficult to accomplish The proposal will be very difficult to accomplish Check the statement that most accurately describes how the community would likely react to implementation. The proposal is likely to be endorsed by the entire community The proposal would benefit those directly affected; minimal adverse reaction from others The proposal would be somewhat controversial The proposal would be strongly opposed by some The proposal would be strongly opposed by most If the proposal is expected to be generally acceptable, are there special interest groups or stakeholders that would likely oppose the initiative? Yes FUNDING SOURCE(S) Check the statement that most accurately defines the funding situation: potential funding source (federal or non-federal) has been identified The only source of funding is federal mitigation grant programs Partial funding could be accomplished with local matching funds (budget or grants) Federal/State Mitigation Grant Source Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL) Repetitive Flood Claim (RFC) Residential Construction Mitigation (RCMP) n-federal Source Local government funds n-profit funds Private owner funds CDBG Monroe County: LMS Characterization Form (2010) Page 4 of 6

5 ATTACHMENT A APPROXIMATION OF BENEFITS AND COSTS Do not use this worksheet if a formal Benefit-to-Cost Ratio has been developed. This simplified method to approximate benefits and costs is intended to be used if a formal Benefit-to- Cost Analysis has not been prepared and for initiatives other than traditional FEMA-eligible projects. The result of this approximation can help entities determine whether to pursue grant funding. The result can be used by the LMS Ranking Subcommittee to prioritize initiatives in Step Two (to put initiatives on the Prioritized list). Acceptance by the LMS Ranking Committee does not indicate acceptance by FEMA and this approximation does substitute for a formal analysis. COSTS For FEMA-eligible projects, see FEMA s Hazard Mitigation Guidance (published every year) for guidance on project costs and eligibility. In the total cost to implement a project, include all reasonably anticipated costs. For example, retrofitting a facility can reasonably be expected to have costs associated with design (architect/engineer), permits, construction and materials and, depending on the size of the project, construction management. FEMA s guidance indicates typical useful life for many types of projects. Recipients of federal grants are expected to maintain grant-funded projects. The annual cost to maintain the project are those costs necessary to ensure the project functions as intended. Thus, costs to maintain a retrofitted facility might include the annual check of windows/shutters, anchored roof-mounted equipment, and roofing. Estimate the total cost to implement the initiative/project. $ What is the anticipated useful life of the project (see FEMA guidance) What is the anticipated annual cost to maintain the project. $ years Multiple the useful life (in years) by the annual cost to maintain (to estimate the total cost to maintain the project). $ Add the total cost to implement and the total cost to maintain the project. $ Use this number as the Total Project Cost in the section below, COMPARISON OF BENEFITS TO COSTS BENEFITS For FEMA-eligible projects, see FEMA s Hazard Mitigation Guidance (published every year) for guidance on project benefits. The most basic benefits of an initiative/projects are avoided damage (if damage is avoided, then repair costs are avoided, disruption of facility use is avoided, etc.). One way to estimate avoided direct loss (physical damage) is to imagine a worst case event and estimate how much damage would occur (where the amount of damage is measured in terms of how much it would cost to repair). Similarly, consider the less tangible effects of a worst case event to come up with an estimate of indirect losses. Describe the total direct loss (physical damage) to the facility, system, or community if a worst case hazard scenario occurs and estimate the dollar value of that loss. What is the estimated the dollar value of that total direct loss $ Describe the total indirect loss (other costs associated with damage, e.g., cost to rent replacement facility, lost services, loss of jobs, etc.) if a worst case hazard scenario occurs. Monroe County: LMS Characterization Form (2010) Page 5 of 6

6 What is the estimated dollar value of that total indirect loss $ Combine the total direct loss and the total indirect loss $ Unless modified by the next question, use this number as the Total Project Benefits in the section below, APPROXIMATING THE BENEFIT- TO-COST RATIO. Will the initiative avoid or prevent all of the direct and indirect losses? Yes If yes, the combined total direct loss and the total indirect loss is the estimate of total benefits. If no, describe anticipated losses that will be avoided: Based on the description of anticipated losses that will be avoided, estimate what percentage of all direct and indirect losses would be avoided: Multiply the percentage of losses that would be avoided by the combined total direct loss and the total indirect loss: $ Use this number as the Total Project Benefits in the section below, APPROXIMATING THE BENEFIT-TO-COST RATIO. APPROXIMATING THE BENEFIT-TO-COST RATIO What are the Total Project Benefits from above? $ What is the Total Project Cost from above? $ Divide the benefits by the costs to get the Approximate Benefit-to-Cost Ratio Use this number as the Approximate Benefit-to-Cost Ratio in the main section, COMPARISON OF BENEFITS TO COSTS. Monroe County: LMS Characterization Form (2010) Page 6 of 6