Washington County Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan

Transcription

1 Washington County Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan Washington County and the Cities of: Tigard and Hillsboro Photo Credit: Gary Halvorson, Oregon State Archives February 2017 Volume I: Basic Plan Prepared for: Washington County Emergency Management Prepared by: University of Oregon Community Service Center Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience

2 This Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan was prepared by: With support from: Planning grant funding provided by: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program Grant: EMS-2014-PC-0011 Sub-grant Application Reference: PDMC-PL-10-OR Additional Support Provided by: This material is a result of tax-supported research and, as such, is not copyrightable. It may be freely reprinted with the customary crediting of the source.

3 SPECIAL THANKS & ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Washington County developed this Multi-Jurisdictional Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan (NHMP or MNHMP) through a regional partnership funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency s (FEMA) Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Competitive Grant Program: EMS-2014-PC-0011, Sub-grant Application Reference: PDMC-PL-10-OR This updated Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan is a collaboration between Washington County and the cities of Tigard and Hillsboro. The county utilized a four-phased planning process, plan templates and plan development support provided by the Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience (OPDR) at the University of Oregon s Community Service Center. Special thanks to Chris Walsh, Washington County Emergency Management Coordinator; Tammy Bain, Hillsboro Emergency Manager; and Mike Lueck, City of Tigard Emergency Services Coordinator for their leadership in convening their respective steering committees. Washington County NHMP Update Steering Committee Washington County City of Hillsboro Chris Walsh, Washington County Emergency Management, Steering Committee Chair Tammy Bain, Hillsboro Emergency Management Rocky Brown, Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation Richard Crucchiola, Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation David Gassaway, Washington County Emergency Management Wayne Hayson, Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation Neil Kennedy, Tualatin Valley Water District Mike Lueck, Tigard Emergency Management Chief Dustin Morrow, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue Jadene Stensland, Clean Water Services Duke Tran, Clean Water Services John Wheeler, Washington County Emergency Management Tammy Bain, Hillsboro Emergency Manager, Hillsboro Steering Committee Chair Catherine Amerson, Fire/Emergency Management Melanie Adams, Building John Bernards, Building Tom Arnold, Public Works Tiffany Bral, Public Works Bob Sanders, Public Works Colin Cooper, Planning Emily Tritsch, Planning Sarah Bruce, Planning

4 Kevin Hanway, Water Sophia Hobet, Water Greg Mont, Information Services Karen Muller, Library Greg Nelson, Fire Mark Prince, Fire Henry Reimann, Police Mary Loftin, Parks & Recreation Peter Brandom, City Manager s Office Mark Clemons, Economic Development City of Tigard Mike Lueck, Tigard Emergency Services Coordinator, Tigard Steering Committee Chair CPT Robert Rogers, Police Tom McGuire, Community Development John Goodrich, Water Utilities Manager Carin Grover, Citizen at Large Community Service Center Team Josh Bruce, Director OPDR Michael Howard, OPDR Assistant Program Director Julie Foster, Grant s Administrator Additional Thanks: To Richard Crucchiola, Washington County GIS Analyst, for hazard mapping; to the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries for assistance with hazard data; to the Department of Land Conservation and Development staff for providing flood hazard data, and for mapping and process support; to the Oregon Military Department Office of Emergency Management for grant administration and process support. About the Community Service Center The Community Service Center (CSC), a research center affiliated with the Department of Planning, Public Policy, and Management at the University of Oregon, is an interdisciplinary organization that assists Oregon communities by providing planning and technical assistance to help solve local issues and improve the quality of life for Oregon residents. The role of the CSC is to link the skills, expertise, and innovation of higher education with the transportation, economic development, and environmental needs of communities and regions in the State of Oregon, thereby providing service to Oregon and learning opportunities to the students involved.

5 About the Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience The Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience (OPDR) is a coalition of public, private, and professional organizations working collectively toward the mission of creating a disasterresilient and sustainable state. Developed and coordinated by the Community Service Center at the University of Oregon, the OPDR employs a service-learning model to increase community capacity and enhance disaster safety and resilience statewide. Plan Template Disclaimer This Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan is based in part on a plan template developed by the Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience. The template is structured to address the requirements contained in 44 CFR 201.6; where language is applicable to communities throughout Oregon, OPDR encourages the use of standardized language. As part of this regional planning initiative, OPDR provided copies of the plan templates to communities for use in developing or updating their natural hazards mitigation plans. OPDR hereby authorizes the use of all content and language provided to Washington County in the plan template.

6 This page left intentionally blank.

7 TABLE OF CONTENTS Volume 1: Basic Plan Plan Summary... i-1 Section 1: Introduction... I-1 Section 2: Risk Assessment Section 3: Mitigation Strategy Section 4: Implementation and Maintenance Volume II: City Addenda Hillsboro... HA-1 Tigard... TA-1 Volume III: Appendices Appendix A: Action Items... A-1 Appendix B: Planning and Public Process... B-1 Appendix C: Community Profile... C-1 Appendix D: Economic Analysis of Natural Hazard Mitigation Projects... D-1 Appendix E: Grant Programs and Resources... E-1 Appendix F: Community Survey (2015)... F-1 Appendix G: Hazard Analysis... G-1

8 This page left intentionally blank.

9 PLAN SUMMARY Washington County updated this Multi-Jurisdictional Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan (NHMP, MNHMP, or Plan) in an effort to prepare for the long-term effects resulting from natural hazards. This NHMP affects the unincorporated areas of the county and the incorporated cities of Hillsboro and Tigard. It is impossible to predict exactly when these hazards will occur or the extent to which they will affect the community. However, with careful planning and collaboration among public agencies, private sector organizations, and citizens within the community, it is possible to create a resilient community that will benefit from long-term recovery planning efforts. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) defines mitigation as... the effort to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters... through risk analysis, which results in information that provides a foundation for mitigation activities that reduce risk. Said another way, natural hazard mitigation is a method of permanently reducing or alleviating the losses of life, property, and injuries resulting from natural hazards through long and short-term strategies. Example strategies include policy changes, such as updated ordinances; projects, such as seismic retrofits to critical facilities; and education and outreach to targeted audiences, such as Spanish speaking residents or the elderly. Natural hazard mitigation is the responsibility of the Whole Community - individuals, private businesses and industries, state and local governments, and the federal government. Why Develop this Mitigation Plan? In addition to establishing a comprehensive community-level mitigation strategy, the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA2K) and the regulations contained in 44 CFR 201 require that jurisdictions maintain an approved Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan (NHMP) in order to receive federal funds for mitigation projects. Local and federal approval of this Plan ensures 44 CFR The local mitigation plan is the representation of the jurisdiction s commitment to reduce risks from natural hazards, serving as a guide for decision makers as they commit resources to reducing the effects of natural hazards CFR 201.6(a)(1) A local government must have a mitigation plan approved pursuant to this section in order to receive HMGP project grants... that the county and listed jurisdictions will remain eligible for pre- and post-disaster mitigation project grants. What is Mitigation? Any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to life and property from a hazard event. - U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency Washington County NHMP February 2017 Page i-1

10 Who Participated in Developing the Plan? The Washington County NHMP is the result of a collaborative effort between the county, cities, special districts, citizens, public agencies, non-profit organizations, the private sector and regional organizations. County and city steering committees guided the plan development process. The county steering committee included representatives from the following jurisdictions and agencies: Washington County Clean Water Services Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue Tualatin Valley Water District City of Hillsboro City of Tigard Washington County Emergency Management and the emergency manager of Hillsboro and the emergency services coordinator for Tigard convened the planning process for their respective jurisdictions and will take the lead in implementing, maintaining and updating the plan. Washington County is dedicated to directly involving the public in the continual review and update of the natural hazards mitigation plan. Although members of the Steering Committee represent the public to some extent, the public will also have the opportunity to continue to provide feedback about the Plan throughout the implementation and maintenance period. Notably, the county invited additional participation in the planning process. How Does this Mitigation Plan Reduce Risk? 44 CFR 201.6(c)(1) Documentation of the planning process used to develop the plan, including how it was prepared, who was involved in the process, and how the public was involved. The NHMP is intended to assist Washington County reduce the risk from natural hazards by identifying resources, information, and strategies for risk reduction. It is also intended to guide and coordinate mitigation activities throughout the county. A risk assessment consists of three phases: hazard identification, vulnerability assessment, and risk analysis, as illustrated in the following graphic. 44 CFR 201.6(c)(2) A Risk Assessment that provides the factual basis for activities proposed in the strategy... Page i-2 February 2017 Washington County NHMP

11 Figure PS-1 Understanding Risk Source: Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience. By identifying and understanding the relationship between natural hazards, vulnerable systems, and existing capacity, Washington County is better equipped to identify and implement actions aimed at reducing the overall risk to natural hazards. What is Washington County s Overall Risk to Hazards? Washington County reviewed and updated their risk assessment to evaluate the probability of each hazard as well as the vulnerability of the community to that hazard. Scores are based on the Washington County Hazard Analysis submitted to the Oregon Office of Emergency Management (2012) and updated by the steering committee in Table PS-1 below summarizes hazard probability and vulnerability as determined by Washington County (for more information see Section 2, Risk Assessment and Appendix G). Table PS-1 Risk Assessment Summary Total Threat Hazard Probability Vulnerability Score Hazard Rank Drought Moderate Moderate 155 # 5 Earthquake Moderate High 194 # 3 Flood High Moderate 173 # 4 Landslide Low Low 24 # 9 Volcanic Ash Low High 129 # 6 Wildland Fire Moderate Moderate 116 # 7 Windstorm High High 206 # 2 Tornado Low Low 34 # 8 Winter Storm High High 240 # 1 Source: Washington County NHMP Steering Committee (2015) Washington County NHMP February 2017 Page i-3

12 What is the Plan s Mission? The mission of the Washington County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan is to: Reduce risk, prevent loss, and protect life, property, and the environment from natural hazard events. What are the Plan Goals? 44 CFR 201.6(c)(3)(i) A description of mitigation goals to reduce or avoid long-term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards. The plan goals describe the overall direction that the participating jurisdiction s agencies, organizations, and citizens can take toward mitigating risk from natural hazards. Below is a list of the plan goals (Note: although numbered the goals are not prioritized): Goal 1: Minimize loss of life, public and private property damages and the disruption of essential infrastructure and services from natural hazards. Goal 2: Minimize the impact of natural hazards while protecting and restoring the environment. Goal 3: Provide documentation to support effective implementation and increased success in funding opportunities. Goal 4: Engage and motivate the public to invest in natural hazard risk reduction policies and projects. Goal 5: Support the adoption and application of development policies and standards that consider the potential impacts of natural hazards. Goal 6: Increase cooperation and coordination among private entities, and local, state, and federal agencies to mitigate the risks posed by natural hazards. Goal 7: Natural hazard information in local comprehensive plans is up to date and / or reflected through policy and implementing measures. How are the Action Items Organized? Priority action items are listed within tables included within Section 3, Mitigation Strategy (full descriptions are provided in Appendix A-1), A list of other actions to be considered is provided in an Action Item Pool (Appendix A-2). 44 CFR 201.6(c)(3)(ii) A section that identifies and analyzes a comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions... Data collection, research and the public participation process resulted in the development of the action items. The action Items portray the overall plan mitigation strategy. Action items particular to each of the participating cities are included in Section 3, Mitigation Strategy, with each city s addendum, and within Appendix A-1, and Appendix A-2. Page i-4 February 2017 Washington County NHMP

13 Comprehensive Action Plan The following tables summarize specific priority NHMP action items. Volume III, Appendix A-1 contains detailed information for all priority action items, including potential partners, implementation ideas, proposed timeline, and estimated budget. Table PS-2: Washington County Priority NHMP Actions Priority Mitigation Actions Washington County Participate in the FEMA Risk MAP discovery, multi-hazard risk assessment, and resilience meeting processes. Utilize the final multi-hazard risk report and assessment currently being developed by DOGAMI through FEMA's RiskMap program to update the Washington County Hazard Analysis. Utilize the final multi-hazard risk report and assessment currently being developed by DOGAMI through FEMA's RiskMap program to inform an update to the Goal 7 Section of the Washington County Comprehensive Plan (Policy 8). Update county risk assessment maps for relevant hazards using available LIDAR topographic data in collaboration with the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries. Over the next five years, implement retrofit projects on at least two bridges identified as highpriority on Washington County's bridge assessment list. Expand and complete a seismic safety inventory of public buildings (particularly critical and essential facilities) that may be vulnerable to natural hazards (particularly earthquake). Continue to implement structural and non-structural retrofit projects of critical and essential facilities. Priority buildings include the Law Enforcement Center and the Walnut Street Center. Ensure that the locations of Repetitive and Severe Repetitive Flood Loss Properties have been accurately registered with FEMA and work with affected property owners to remove, relocate, elevate or otherwise mitigate non-conforming structures in flood hazard areas. Update the Washington County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). Implement actions identified in the CWPP. Source: Washington County, Hillsboro, and Tigard NHMP Steering Committees (2016) Washington County NHMP February 2017 Page i-5

14 Table PS-3: Hillsboro Priority NHMP Actions Priority Mitigation Actions City of Hillsboro Develop public and private partnerships to foster hazard mitigation activities. Develop and/or enhance and implement education programs aimed at mitigating natural hazards and reducing the risk to citizens, private property owners, public agencies, businesses, and schools. Programs will focus on actionable items, such as creation of an emergency supply or home retrofitting. Establish liaison with the Hillsboro 2035 Vision Implementation Committee to identify where we might have common interests and activities. Identify and pursue funding opportunities to implement mitigation actions. Integrate mitigation plan findings into planning and regulatory documents and programs, including the City of Hillsboro Comprehensive Plan. Source: Hillsboro NHMP Steering Committees (2016) Table PS-4: Tigard Priority NHMP Actions Priority Mitigation Actions City of Tigard Protect existing development in landslide prone areas. Improve local capabilities to perform earthquake building safety evaluations and to record and manage building inventory data. Integrate the goals and action items from the Tigard Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan Addendum into existing regulatory documents and programs, where appropriate. Maintain public and private drainage systems. Inventory and map alternative firefighting water sources and encourage the development of additional sources. Adopt the Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue Wildfire Hazard Map and implement the Wildfire Mitigation section of the Oregon Residential Specialty Code Increase technical knowledge of natural hazards and mitigation strategies in Tigard and implement policies and programs on the basis of that knowledge. Identify critical public infrastructure and facilities located in flood hazard areas and highlight those facilities as a focus for mitigation and preparedness measures. Source: Tigard NHMP Steering Committees (2016) Page i-6 February 2017 Washington County NHMP

15 How will the plan be implemented? The plan maintenance section of this NHMP details the formal process that will ensure that the NHMP remains an active and relevant document. The NHMP will be implemented, maintained, and updated by a designated convener. The Washington County Emergency Management Supervisor is the designated convener (Plan Convener) and is responsible for overseeing the review and implementation processes (see city addenda for city conveners). The NHMP maintenance process includes a schedule for monitoring and evaluating the NHMP semiannually and producing a plan revision every five years. This section also describes how the communities will integrate public participation throughout the plan maintenance process. Plan Adoption Once the NHMP is locally reviewed and deemed complete the Convener submits it to the State Hazard Mitigation Officer at the Oregon Military Department Office of Emergency Management (OEM). OEM reviews the Plan and submits it to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA Region ) for review. This review will address the federal criteria outlined in FEMA Interim Final Rule 44 CFR Part Once the NHMP is pre-approved by FEMA, the county and cities formally adopt the NHMP via resolution. The Convener will be responsible for ensuring local adoption of the NHMP and providing the support necessary to ensure plan implementation. Once the resolution is executed at the local level and documentation is provided to FEMA, the NHMP is formally acknowledged by FEMA and the county (and participating cities) will sustain eligibility for the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program, the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds, and the Flood Mitigation Assistance program funds. The accomplishment of the NHMP goals and actions depends upon regular steering committee participation and adequate support from county and city leadership. Thorough familiarity with this NHMP will result in the efficient and effective implementation of appropriate mitigation activities and a reduction in the risk and the potential for losses from future natural hazard events. The steering committees for the county and participating cities each met to review the NHMP update process and their governing bodies adopted the NHMP as shown below: Washington County adopted the plan on November 22, 2016 The City of Hillsboro adopted the plan on November 1, 2016 The City of Tigard adopted the plan on February 14, CFR 201.6(c)(3)(iii) An action plan describing how the actions... will be prioritized, implemented and administered CFR 201.6(c)(4) A plan maintenance process CFR 201.6(c)(5) Documentation that the plan has been formally adopted by the governing body of the jurisdiction CFR 201.6(d) Plan review [process]... FEMA Region approved the Washington County NHMP on February 28, With approval of this Plan, the entities listed above are now eligible to apply for the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act s hazard mitigation project grants through February 27, Washington County NHMP February 2017 Page i-7

16

17

18

19

20 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 17- { 1J A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE CITY OF TIGARD REPRESENTATION IN THE UPDATES TO THE WASHINGTON COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL NATURAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (NHMP) 'WHEREAS, the City of Tigard recognizes the threat that natural hazards pose to people, property and infrastructure within our community; and WHEREAS, undertaking hazard mitigation actions will reduce the potential for harm to people, property and infrastructure from future hazard occurrences; and \"'HEREAS, an adopted Natural Hazard :Mitigation Plan is required as a condition of future funding for mitigation projects under multiple FEMA pre- and Post-disaster mitigation grant programs; and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard has fully participated in the FEJ\.fA prescribed mitigation planning process to prepare the \'ashington County, Multi-Jurisdictional Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan, which has established a comprehensive, coordinated planning process to eliminate or minimize these vulnerabilities; and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard has identified natural hazard risks and prioritized a number of proposed actions, processes and programs needed to mitigate the vulnerabilities of the City of Tigard to the impacts of future disasters within the Washington County, Multi-Jurisdictional Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan; and \'HERE.\.S, these proposed actions, processes and programs ha>e been incorporated into the Washington County, Multi-Jurisdictional Natural Hazard :Mitigation Plan that has been prepared and promulgated for consideration and implementation by the cities of\'ashington County; and WHEREAS, the Oregon Office of Emergency Management and Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region officials have reviewed the \'ashington County, Multi-jurisdictional Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan and pre-approved it contingent upon this official adoption of the participating government entities; and WHEREAS, the Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan is comprised of three volumes: Yolume I -Basic Plan, Volume II - City Addenda, and Volume III -Appendixes, collec~ely referred to herein as the NHMP; and WHEREAS, the NH.l\IP is in an on-going cycle of development and revisions to improve its effectiveness; and WHEREAS, City of Tigard adopts the NHJ\.1P and directs the City Manager oversight to develop, approve and implement the mitigation strategies and any administrative changes to the NHJ\.IP. NOW, TIIEREFORE, BE IT RESOLYED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: SECTION 2: The City of Tigard adopts the Washington County Multi-Jurisdictional Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan as an official plan. The City of Tigard will submit this adopting resolution to Washington County, the Oregon Office of Emergency Management and Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region RESOLUTION NO. 17-j t) Page 1

21 officials to enable final approval of the Washington County Multi-Jurisdictional Natural Hazards 1\litigation Plan SECTION : This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This 14th day of February ATTEST: Carol Krager, City Recorder - Ci RESOLUTION NO. 17- /{J Page 2

22 LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL The Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool demonstrates how the Local Mitigation Plan meets the regulation in 44 CFR 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: Washington County, Oregon Local Point of Contact: Chris Walsh Title: Emergency Management Coordinator Agency: Washington County Department of Land Use & Transportation, Administrative Services Division Phone Number: Title of Plan: Washington County Multi-Jurisdictional Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Date of Plan: August 2016 Address: 1400 SW Walnut St. Suite 241, MS 30 Hillsboro, OR Christopher_Walsh@co.washington.or.us State Reviewer: Joseph A. Murray Title: Planner Date: FEMA Reviewer: Kate Skaggs David Freeborn Brett Holt, FEMA Region 10 brett.holt@fema.dhs.gov Title: Mitigation Champion Mitigation Champion Regional Mitigation Planning Program Manager Date Received in FEMA Region September 2, 2016 Plan Not Approved Plan Approvable Pending Adoption October 7, 016 Plan Approved February 28, 2017 Date: 9/23/2016 9/06/ /6/2016 Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (FEMA, October 1, 2011) A-1

23 SECTION 1: REGULATION CHECKLIST 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. Subelements should be referenced in each summary by using the appropriate numbers (A1, 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 Regulation (44 CFR Local Mitigation Plans) ELEMENT A. PLANNING PROCESS A1. Does the Plan document the planning process, including how it was prepared and who was involved in the process for each jurisdiction? (Requirement 201.6(c)(1)) A2. Does the Plan document an opportunity for neighboring communities, local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, agencies that have the authority to regulate 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 planning process during the drafting stage? (Requirement 201.6(b)(1)) A4. Does the Plan describe the review and incorporation of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information? (Requirement 201.6(b)(3)) A5. Is there discussion of how the community(ies) will continue public participation in the plan maintenance process? (Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(iii)) A6. Is there a description of the method and schedule for keeping the plan current (monitoring, evaluating and updating the mitigation plan within a 5-year cycle)? (Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(i)) ELEMENT A: REQUIRED REVISIONS (section and/or page number) Met Acknowledgements; Plan Summary p. i- 2; pp. 1-4; 93-94; ; Appendix B: B-1, 24, 26, 28; HA-1, 2, 3. Acknowledgments; 1-3; i-2, B-24 to B- 25 p. 1-3; addenda pp. 1-2; HA-2; TA-3 Appendix B; pp ; Appendix F Sec. 2; Risk Assessment, Appendix C; Appendix F; Appendix G; footnotes throughout plan Section 4: 4-8, 9 Section4: 4-1 to 4-5; HA-3; TA-3, 4 Not Met A-2 Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (FEMA, October 1, 2011)

24 ELEMENT B. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT B1. Does the Plan include a description of the type, location, and extent of all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction(s)? (Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(i)) B2. Does the Plan include information on previous occurrences of hazard events and on the probability of future hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(i)) B3. Is there a description of each identified hazard s impact on the community as well as an overall summary of the community s vulnerability for each jurisdiction? (Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii)) B4. Does the Plan address NFIP insured structures within the jurisdiction that have been repetitively damaged by floods? (Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii)) ELEMENT B: REQUIRED REVISIONS Section 2, pp. 2-41; HA-8 to 23; TA-10 to 29 Section 2: Drought 2-4, 5; Earthquake 2-10, 11; Flood 2-18, 19; Landslide 2-24, 25; Volcano 2-28, 29; Wildland Fire 2-33; Windstorm 2-35, 36; Winter Storm 2-40; pp. 2-41; HA-8 to 23; TA-10 to 29 Section 2: Drought 2-6; Earthquake 2-11; Flood 2-20; Landslide 2-25; Volcano 2-29; Wildland Fire 2-34; Windstorm 2-37; pp. 2-41; Winter Storm 2-41; 2-42 to 48; HA-8 to 23; TA- 10 to 29 Section 2: 2-47, 48; HA-20; TA-24 ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY C1. Does the plan document each jurisdiction s existing authorities, policies, programs and resources and its ability to expand on and improve these existing policies and programs? (Requirement 201.6(c)(3)) C2. Does the Plan address each jurisdiction s participation in the NFIP and continued compliance with NFIP requirements, as appropriate? (Requirement 201.6(c)(3)(ii)) C3. Does the Plan include goals to reduce/avoid long-term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards? (Requirement 201.6(c)(3)(i)) Section 4: 4-5; HA-3, 4; TA-4; Appendix C: C-46 to 48 Section 2: 2-46 to 48; HA-19 to 20; TA- 23 to 24 i-4; Section 3: 3-1, 2 Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (FEMA, October 1, 2011) A-3

25 C4. Does the Plan identify and analyze a comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions and projects for each jurisdiction being considered to reduce the effects of hazards, with emphasis on new and existing buildings and infrastructure? (Requirement 201.6(c)(3)(ii)) C5. Does the Plan contain an action plan that describes how the actions identified will be prioritized (including cost benefit review), implemented, and administered by each jurisdiction? (Requirement 201.6(c)(3)(iv)); (Requirement 201.6(c)(3)(iii)) C6. Does the Plan describe a process by which local governments will integrate the requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms, such as comprehensive or capital improvement plans, when appropriate? (Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(ii)) ELEMENT C: REQUIRED REVISIONS Section 3: 3-4 (Table 3-2); HA 6-7 (Tables HA-1, HA-2), TA 9 (Tables TA-3); Appendices A: A-1, 2 (Table A-1); A-2 to 44 Section 3: 3-3, 4, Table 3-1, Section 4: 4-6 to 8; HA 5-6 (Table HA-1), TA 6-9 (Table TA-1, 2); Appendix A: A-1 (Table A-1) Section 4: 4-4, 5; HA-3, 4; TA-4; Appendix A-1, Washington Priority #1; Hillsboro Priority #3, #5; Tigard Priority #3 ELEMENT D. PLAN REVIEW, EVALUATION, AND IMPLEMENTATION (applicable to plan updates only) D1. Was the plan revised to reflect changes in development? (Requirement 201.6(d)(3)) D2. Was the plan revised to reflect progress in local mitigation efforts? (Requirement 201.6(d)(3)) D3. Was the plan revised to reflect changes in priorities? (Requirement 201.6(d)(3)) ELEMENT D: REQUIRED REVISIONS Appendix C: C-29 to 34 Appendix A: A-1, 2; Appendix B: B-6 to 20 Section 3: 3-3, 4, Table 3-1, Sec. 4 pp. 6-8; HA 5-7 (Table HA-1), TA 6-9 (Table TA-1); Appendix A-1 ELEMENT E. PLAN ADOPTION E1. Does the Plan include documentation that the plan has been 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 approval of the plan documented formal plan adoption? (Requirement 201.6(c)(5)) Front pages pp. 7-8; HA-3, TA-3 A-4 Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (FEMA, October 1, 2011)

26 ELEMENT E: REQUIRED REVISIONS Must be included after plan receives FEMA approval. ELEMENT F. ADDITIONAL STATE REQUIREMENTS (OPTIONAL FOR STATE REVIEWERS ONLY; NOT TO BE COMPLETED BY FEMA) F1. F2. ELEMENT F: REQUIRED REVISIONS Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (FEMA, October 1, 2011) A-5

27 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 A: Planning Process Plan Strengths Comprehensive planning process with a wide range of stakeholders. Opportunities for Improvements This plan states that establishing the steering committee meets public participation requirement. This alone does not meet the public participation requirement. This plan will meet the public participation requirement once the public comments collected are addressed. For the plan update, omit the statements that the steering committee establishment meets public participation requirements. The plan demonstrates that existing plans, studies, etc., were utilized, however including a list of the sources and clarifying how the relevant information was incorporated would provide an opportunity for additional research and would help substantiate the planning process. Element B: Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Plan Strengths Future climate variability in the drought hazard risk assessment provides good, supplemental data to help inform mitigation strategies and planning. Opportunities for Improvements For the next update, consider mapping critical facilities in relation to each hazard. For extent for volcanos the plan provides an estimate of ash accumulation. This seems very appropriate. Another scale that can be used for volcanic eruptions themselves is the Volcanic Explosively Index. Dam failure is not profiled but dams are mentioned as a hazard on page Consider including dam failure as a profiled hazard in the next update. Element C: Mitigation Strategy Plan Strengths The plan provides comprehensive information on the capacity and characteristics of the communities to address mitigation and reduce hazard risk. Detailed information is provided on how mitigation actions will be prioritized and implemented through existing programs. Opportunities for Improvements A-6 Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (FEMA, October 1, 2011)

28 LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL Update should clarify references to Table 3-2. Table is mentioned in report on Page B-5, but does not exist in Section 3. Element D: Plan Update, Evaluation, and Implementation (Plan Updates Only) Plan Strengths The plan illustrates good information for how the plan maintenance will be conducted and carried out by the steering committee and actions reviewed. Opportunities for Improvements Provide additional information on the hazards that will impact North Bethany and urban and rural reserves; as was done for Bull Mountain by identifying landslide threat. Include a more clear understanding of how changes in local priorities may have impacted updates to the plan; different from how actions are prioritized. Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (FEMA, October 1, 2011) A-7

29 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. The Local Mitigation Planning Handbook is available. While the requirements under 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. 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. 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. 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. 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 Contact the Oregon State Hazard Mitigation Officer, Angie Lane, for more information: angie.lane@state.or.us ( ). The FEMA Region 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: If you would like to receive future newsletters, rxnewsletter@starr-team.com A-8 Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (FEMA, October 1, 2011)

30 SECTION 3: MULTI-JURISDICTION SUMMARY SHEET (OPTIONAL) INSTRUCTIONS: For multi-jurisdictional plans, a Multi-jurisdiction Summary Spreadsheet may be completed by listing each participating jurisdiction, which required Elements for each jurisdiction were Met or Not Met, and when the adoption resolutions were received. This Summary Sheet does not imply that a mini-plan be developed for each jurisdiction; it should be used as an optional worksheet to ensure that each jurisdiction participating in the Plan has been documented and has met the requirements for those Elements (A through E). # 1 Jurisdiction Name Washington County Jurisdiction Type (city/borough/ township/ village, etc.) County Plan POC Chris Walsh Mailing Address MULTI-JURISDICTION SUMMARY SHEET Phone A. Planning Process B. Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment Requirements Met (Y/N) C. D. Mitigation Plan Review, Strategy Evaluation & Implementation E. Plan Adoption Y Y Y Y Y F. State Requirements 2 Hillsboro City Tammy Bain Y Y Y Y Y 3 Tigard City Mike Lueck Y Y Y Y Y 4 Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (FEMA, October 1, 2011) A-9