DOCSLIB.ORG

2021 Draft Local Hazard Mitigation Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2021 Draft Local Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Montpelier Draft Local Hazard Mitigation Plan May 2021 City of Montpelier Draft Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Adopted ___-Approved____ Prepared by the City of Montpelier and the Central Vermont Regional Planning Commission Page 1 of 95 City of Montpelier Draft Local Hazard Mitigation Plan May 2021 Table of Contents 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 4 2. Purpose .............................................................................................................................. 5 3. Community Profile ............................................................................................................ 6 3.1 Environment.................................................................................................................... 6 3.2 Development Patterns ................................................................................................... 6 3.3 Utilities and Facilities ..................................................................................................... 7 3.4 Public Safety ................................................................................................................... 7 3.5 Municipal Plan ................................................................................................................ 7 3.6 National Flood Insurance Program ............................................................................. 8 3.7 Emergency Relief & Assistance Funding (ERAF) ........................................................ 9 4. Planning Process and Maintenance ............................................................................. 10 4.1 Planning Process .......................................................................................................... 10 4.2 Existing Mitigation, Maintenance, and Preparedness Programs, Projects & Activities ................................................................................................................................... 14 4.3 Plan Maintenance ........................................................................................................ 18 4.4 Status of Prior Plan’s Mitigation Actions .................................................................. 19 5. Community Vulnerability by Hazard ............................................................................ 20 5.1 Hazard Identification and Analysis ............................................................................ 20 6. Threat Hazards ................................................................................................................ 24 6.1 Fluvial Erosion/Inundation Flooding ...................................................................... 24 6.2 Severe Winter Storms (Snow, Ice) .......................................................................... 37 6.3 Extreme Cold ............................................................................................................. 43 6.4 Pandemic ................................................................................................................... 47 6.5 Dam Failure ............................................................................................................... 54 6.6 Water Supply Contamination ................................................................................. 57 6.7 Hazardous Materials (fixed & transport) ............................................................... 59 6.8 Cyber Disruption ...................................................................................................... 68 7. Mitigation ........................................................................................................................ 70 7.1 Master Plan Goals that Support Local Hazard Mitigation ...................................... 70 Page 2 of 95 City of Montpelier Draft Local Hazard Mitigation Plan May 2021 7.2 Identified Hazard Mitigation Programs, Projects & Activities ............................... 71 8. Attachments .................................................................................................................... 76 Draft Template to Evaluate Effectiveness of LHMP at Achieving Purpose & Goals ...... 77 2021 Areas of Local Concern ................................................................................................ 78 Montpelier River Corridor Map ................................................................................................ 79 Montpelier Historic District & Special Flood Hazard Area Map ...................................... 80 Stormwater Master Plan priority projects ........................................................................... 81 Dot Poster ................................................................................................................................ 82 Hazard Analysis Survey Questions & Results ..................................................................... 83 5-Year Plan Review/Maintenance Process .......................................................................... 95 Page 3 of 95 City of Montpelier Draft Local Hazard Mitigation Plan May 2021 1. Introduction In accordance with the Stafford Act, municipalities may perform mitigation planning and be eligible to receive increased federal funding for hazard mitigation measures (42 U.S.C. 5165). The impact of expected, but unpredictable natural and human-caused events can be reduced through community planning. The goal of this Plan is to provide an all-hazards local mitigation strategy that makes the community of Montpelier more disaster resistant. Hazard mitigation is any sustained action that reduces or eliminates long-term risk to people and property from natural and human-caused hazards and their effects. Based on the results of previous Project Impact1 efforts, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and State agencies have come to recognize that it is less expensive to prevent disasters than to repeatedly repair damage after a disaster has struck. This Plan recognizes that communities have opportunities to identify mitigation strategies and measures during all of the other phases of emergency management – preparedness, response, and recovery. Hazards cannot be eliminated, but it is possible to determine what the hazards are, where the hazards are most severe and identify local actions that can be taken to reduce the severity of the hazard. Hazard mitigation strategies and measures: ALTER the hazard by eliminating or reducing the frequency of occurrence, AVERT the hazard by redirecting the impact by means of a structure or land treatment, ADAPT to the hazard by modifying structures or standards, or AVOID the hazard by preventing or limiting development. 1 Project Impact was a national initiative started by the Federal Emergency and Management Agency (FEMA) in 1997 to help build disaster resistant communities. This federal initiative shifted the focus of emergency management from responding to disasters to helping to prevent potential damage by taking actions beforehand. Page 4 of 95 City of Montpelier Draft Local Hazard Mitigation Plan May 2021 2. Purpose The purpose of this Local Hazard Mitigation Plan is to assist the City of Montpelier in recognizing hazards facing the region and their community and identify strategies to begin reducing risks from acknowledged hazards. The 2021 Montpelier Local Hazard Mitigation Plan is an update of the City’s adopted 2015 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan approved by FEMA on April 15, 2015. This Local Hazard Mitigation Plan assists the City to catalogue hazards facing the region and community, and to identify strategies that reduce risks from acknowledged hazards based on current information. The City reviewed, evaluated, and revised the 2015 plan to reflect changes in development, progress in local mitigation efforts, and changes in priorities. New information has been incorporated into the plan, making it up to date, stronger, and more useful to City officials and residents who will implement the actions and measures going forward. Implementation of this plan will make Montpelier more resistant to harm and damages in the future, and will help to reduce public costs. Montpelier strives to address the strategies, goals and objectives of the 2018 State Hazard Mitigation Plan, including an emphasis on proactive pre-disaster flood mitigation for public infrastructure, appropriate floodplain and river management practices, and fluvial erosion risk assessment initiatives. The 2021 plan consists of the modified, as described below, sections of the existing plan, which have been reorganized, and new sections: • Information from the 2015 plan was updated. • Hazards reflecting the community’s priorities were updated. • The Plan Update Process was updated. • Plan Maintenance activities were updated. • The Hazard Analysis Map was updated to reflect current information. • The status of 2015 mitigation strategies was reviewed and documented. • The new mitigation strategies section was updated and enhanced to reflect current priorities and intended actions of the community over the next five years. The long term and overall goal of this plan is to protect life and property from harm/damages caused by natural and man-made disasters. Page 5 of 95 City of Montpelier Draft Local Hazard Mitigation Plan May 2021 3. Community Profile 3.1 Environment The City of Montpelier, Vermont’s State Capital, is located at the geographic center of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Halfmoon Cove Wildlife Management Area
    Halfmoon Cove Wildlife Management Area General Description Common Fish and Wildlife Halfmoon Cove Wildlife Management Area (WMA) is Mammals You may encounter white-tailed deer, beaver, located in the town of Colchester. This WMA is a mix of muskrat, mink, otter and raccoon in the cove and floodplain forest and emergent marsh framing an oxbow of woodlands. the Winooski River. Its 294 acres stretch along the eastern/northern bank of the river west of Route 127. There Birds Several duck species inhabit the marsh, including is a parking lot and small boat access for the Winooski black and wood ducks, mallards, blue-winged teal and River on the west side of Route 127, just north of the hooded mergansers. Woodcock may be found in the woods. Heineberg Bridge. There is limited parking at the end of There is excellent birding for marsh-dwelling birds such as Holbrook Court which provides foot access down a steep bitterns, herons, rails, coots and marsh wrens. A number of bank to the cove itself. Hunting and trapping are allowed. songbirds nest in the woodlands, some of which forage in Firearms are restricted to shotgun only by the town of the marsh. Woodpeckers nest in and forage on plentiful Colchester. snags. Ospreys sometimes pass overhead; they might be seen fishing in the river. History The Winooski River, like the other major rivers feeding Reptiles and Amphibians This is good habitat for several into Lake Champlain, saw much Native American activity. herptiles, including mudpuppy, northern two-lined There were permanent settlements on its banks, where tribes salamander, newt, spring peeper, bullfrog, and green, grew corn, beans and squash.
    [Show full text]
  • Be Aware of Potential Risk of Dam Failure in Your Community
    Be Aware of Potential Risk of Dam Failure in Your Community Approximately 15,000 dams in the United States are classified as high-hazard potential (HHP), meaning that their failure could result in loss of life. Dams can fail for a number of reasons, including overtopping caused by floods, acts of sabotage, or structural failure of materials used in dam construction. The worst dam failure in the United States occurred in 1889 in Johnstown, Pennsylvania. Over 2,200 died, with many more left homeless. Dams present risks but they also provide many benefits, including irrigation, flood control, and recreation. Dams have been identified as a key resource of our national infrastructure that is vulnerable to terrorist attack. States have the primary responsibility for protecting their populations from dam failure. Of the approximately 94,400 dams in the United States, State governments regulate about 70 percent. About 27,000 dams throughout our Nation could incur damage or fail, resulting in significant property damage, lifeline disruption (utilities), business disruption, displacement of families from their homes, and environmental damage. The most important steps you can take to protect yourself from dam failure are to know your risk. Contact government offices to learn if an Emergency Action Plan (EAP) is in place and to evacuate when directed by emergency response officials. An EAP is a formal document that identifies potential emergency conditions at a dam and specifies preplanned actions to be followed by the dam owner to reduce property damage and loss of life. The plan may save lives and property damage through timely evacuations of those who live, work, or enjoy recreation near a high-hazard potential dam.
    [Show full text]
  • Winooski Watershed Landowner Assistance Guide
    Winooski Watershed Landowner assistance Guide Help Protect The Winooski River And Its Tributaries index of resources (a-Z) Accepted Agricultural Practice (AAP) Assistance Landowner Information Series Agricultural Management Assistance (AMA) Natural Resource Conservation Service Backyard Conservation Northern Woodlands Best Management Practices Nutrient Management Plan Incentive Grants Program (NMPIG) Better Backroads Partners for Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commissions Rain Garden Project Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) River Management Program Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) Shoreline Stabilization Handbook Conservation Security Program (CSP) Small Scale/Small Field Conservation Conservation Technical Assistance (CTA) Trout Unlimited Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP) Use Value Appraisal (“Current Use”) Farm Agronomic Practices Program (FAP) UVM-Extension Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program (FRPP) Vermont Agricultural Buffer Program (VABP) Farm*A*Syst Vermont Coverts: Woodlands for Wildlife Farm Service Agency Vermont Low Impact Development Guide Forest Bird Initiative Vermont River Conservancy Forest Stewardship Program VT DEC Winooski River Watershed Coordinator Friends of the Mad River Wetland Reserve Program (WRP) Friends of the Winooski River Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program (WHIP) Grassland Reserve Program (GRP) Wildlife Habitat Management for Vermont Woodlands Lake Champlain Sea Grant Winooski Crop Management Services Land Treatment Planning (LTP) Winooski Natural Resources Conservation District
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    Fairfield County, South Carolina, Emergency Operations Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS HEADING PAGE Introduction/Letter of Promulgation vii Legal Basis--Fairfield County Ordinance viii I. AUTHORITIES AND REFERENCES 1 A. Purpose 1 B. Authority 1 C. References 1 D. Maps 2 II. SITUATION AND ASSUMPTIONS 2 A. Situation 2 B. Assumptions 4 III. MISSION 5 IV. CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS 5 A. General 5 B. Municipalities 5 C. Fairfield County Government 5 D. State Government 6 E. Federal Government 6 F. Other Supporting Organizations 6 G. Actions by Phases of Emergency Management 6 H. Level of Readiness 8 I. Requesting Aid 8 J. Incident Command System 9 K. Damage Assessment 9 V. ORGANIZATION AND ASSIGNMENT OF RESPONSIBILITIES 9 A. County Government 9 B. Municipalities 12 C. Incident Command 13 D. Responsibilities 13 E. Coordinating Instructions 14 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) PAGE HEADING VI. ADMINISTRATION AND LOGISTICS 14 A. Reporting Requirements 14 B. Computer Capability 14 C. Logistics 15 D. Mutual Aid Agreements 15 E. Support 15 F. Augmenting Response Staff 15 G. Documentation 15 H. Resources 15 VII. DIRECTION AND CONTROL 16 A. Emergency Operating Center (EOC) 16 B. Line of Succession 16 VIII. PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE 17 A. Implementation 17 B. Development 17 C. Maintenance 17 IX. DISTRIBUTION 17 ATTACHMENTS 18 1. Organization Chart 19 2. Tasks and Responsibilities 20 3. Alert List 21 4. Supporting Plans and Their Sources 22 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) HEADING PAGE ANNEXES A. Emergency Operations Center Appendix 1--Organization Chart 9 Appendix 2--Alert List 10 Appendix 3--Call Down System for EOC Activation 12 Appendix 4--Layout of EOC 13 B.
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment B Flooding and Dam Failure
    page 6-B-1 Attachment B Flooding and Dam Failure The Hazard Nature of the Flooding occurs when normally dry land is inundated with water (or Hazard flowing mud). Flooding may result from: bodies of water overflowing their banks, including artificial ones like dams and levees; structural failure of dams and levees; rapid accumulation of runoff or surface water; hurricane- caused storm surges or earthquake-caused tsunamis; or erosion of a shoreline. (Coastal flooding and erosion are not treated in this attachment.) Typically, the two parameters of most concern for flood planning are suddenness of onset--in the case of flash floods and dam failures--and flood elevation in relation to topography and structures. Other factors contributing to damage are the velocity or "energy" of moving water, the debris carried by the water, and extended duration of flood conditions. Flooding can happen at any time of the year, but predominates in the late Winter and early Spring due to melting snow, breakaway ice jams, and rainy weather patterns. Risk Area All States and territories are at risk from flooding. Apart from a rainy climate, local risk factors, usually present in combination, include: Rivers, These are bodies of water often subject to overflowing. The size of the Streams, and stream can be misleading; small streams that receive substantial rain or Drainageways snowmelt, locally or upstream, can overflow their banks. High-velocity, low elevation flooding can be dangerous and damaging. Six inches of moving water can knock a person off his or her feet; 12 inches of water flowing at 10 miles per hour carries the force of a 100 mile-per-hour wind, although the force would be distributed differently on obstacles.
    [Show full text]
  • Addison County Independent |
    MONDAY EDITION ADDISON COUNTY Vol.INDEPENDENT 31 No. 21 Middlebury, Vermont Monday, December 16, 2019 40 Pages $1.00 Early Mount Abe budget Kory George charged contains 1.8% increase with murdering step- By ANDY KIRKALDY At a Dec. 10 school board meeting, It’s time to BRISTOL — The Mount Abraham Superintendent Patrick Reen emphasized father, David Auclair Unified School District Board this week that the spending plan is “far from By CHRISOTPHER ROSS sing out will continue work on a budget for the anything set in stone.” MONKTON/BURLINGTON — Williston coming school year that, in its current The board must adopt a final district- • The public is invited to resident Kory Lee George, 31, on Friday state, proposes roughly $31.5 million in wide budget in January to put before voters pleaded not guilty to a charge of first-degree join in the annual singing spending. That represents an increase of in the five district towns in March. The murder in the July 11 killing of his stepfather, of Handel’s “Messiah.” See $557,000, or 1.8 percent, over the current MAUSD board will meet this Tuesday at 6 David Auclair. Arts Beat on Pages 10-11. Fiscal Year 2020 budget, which passed by p.m. at New Haven’s Beeman Elementary George, formerly of Monkton, also pleaded just 13 votes on Town Meeting Day this School, and the budget will again be on (See Murder charges, Page 19) past March. (See Budget, Page 18) ACSD joins Juul lawsuit Investigator’s • Multiple school districts report clears are seeking damages from the maker of e-cigarettes.
    [Show full text]
  • Sonoma County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Meeting Summary
    Sonoma County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Meeting Summary Date/Time of Meeting: Thursday, September 24, 2020 Location: Digital Subject: Steering Committee Meeting No. 2 Project Name: Sonoma County Multi‐Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update In Attendance Attendees: 25 (21 SoCo, 4 TT) Planning Team: Lisa Hulette, Bart Spencer, Rob Flaner, Carol Baumann, Des Alexander Not Present: N/A Summary Prepared by: Des Alexander Quorum – Yes or No Yes Item Action Welcome and Introductions Lisa Hulette welcomed members of the steering committee to Previous steering committee the 2nd meeting for Sonoma County’s MJHMP update meeting notes were approved Des Alexander did a roll call, where 21 committee members were in attendance, with 4 members of Tetra Tech also on the call. No members of the public were on the call. Planning Process Motion to approve meeting summary for Steering Committee meeting 1 was made by Shari Meads, seconded by Kim Jordan, and approved All planning partners who wish to participate in process have been contacted Lisa and Bart discussed the draft mission/vision statement document that was sent to committee members. The document featured several sample mission and vision statements, as well as several goals and objectives Although several members did not have a comment, most of the comments that were made were focused on using fewer and more general words; making sure equity was factored into mitigation process, actions, and outcome; placing more emphasis on disaster mitigation with green infrastructure; separate natural and man‐made hazards in the goals section Meeting Summary Item Action Hazards of Concern The homework from the last meeting was briefly discussed.
    [Show full text]
  • Dam Failure Refers to a Collapse, Overtopping, Breaching Or Any Related Condition That Causes Downstream Flooding
    HAZARD: DAM FAILURE DAM FAILURE PROFILE: Dam failure refers to a collapse, overtopping, breaching or any related condition that causes downstream flooding. Approximately one-third of all dam failures are caused by overtopping due to inadequate spillway capacity, one-third are caused by seepage through or under the structure, and the remainder from improper design or construction or because of earthquake or landside events which trigger the failure of the dam. Examples of dam failure in the United States include the Johnstown Flood in 1889 resulting in 2209 deaths, the Saugus, California dam collapse in the Los Angeles Aqueduct system in 1928 resulting in 450 deaths, and the Teton Dam breach on the Snake River in Idaho during a flash flood in 1976 resulting in 11 deaths. During Hurricane Agnes in 1972, concern about the Conowingo Dam on the Susquehanna River led to the opening of all flood gates to release pressure when the water level was three feet higher than the dam’s rated capacity. COUNTY PERSPECTIVE AND HISTORY: According to the Maryland Department of the Environment, Garrett County has 28 dams, of which 11 are rated as high hazard dams as shown on Figure 33. The Maryland Hazard Analysis rates Garrett County’s composite risk for dam failure at 4 on a scale of one to five. The county’s planning committee agrees with this risk. The largest dams in the county include the Savage River Dam, the Bloomington Dam on the Potomac River, and the Deep Creek Lake Dam as shown on the map on Figure 34.
    [Show full text]
  • Dam Awareness May 2018
    Dam Awareness May 2018 Introduction There is a general lack of knowledge, understanding, and awareness of dams and their risks, leaving those most affected by dams unprepared to deal with the impacts of their failures. This fact sheet provides a general overview of dams for consideration and use by the intended audience, based on their situation. Responsibility and Liability for Dam Safety Dams are owned and operated by individuals, private and public organizations, and various levels of government (federal, state, local, tribal). The responsibility for operating and maintaining a safe dam rests with the owner. Common law holds that the storage of water is a hazardous activity. Maintaining a safe dam is a key element in preventing failure and limiting the liability that an owner could face. The extent of an owner’s liability varies from state to state and depends on statutes and case law precedents. Federally owned and regulated dams are subject to federal regulations and guidelines and applicable federal and state laws. Owners can be fiscally and criminally liable for any failure of a dam and all damages resulting from its failure. Any uncontrolled release of the reservoir, whether the result of an intentional release or dam failure, can have devastating effects on persons, property, and the environment (FEMA, 2016a). Any malfunction or abnormality outside the design assumptions and parameters that adversely affect a dam’s primary function of impounding water is considered a dam failure. Lesser degrees of failure can progressively lead to or heighten the risk of a catastrophic failure, which may result in an uncontrolled release of the reservoir and can have a severe effect on persons and properties downstream (FEMA, 2016b).
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Winooski Watershed Fisheries Summary
    2017 Upper Winooski Fisheries Assessment Prepared by Bret Ladago; Fisheries Biologist, Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department The Upper Winooski River watershed is defined in this fisheries assessment as the Winooski River from the headwaters in Cabot downstream to the top of the Bolton Dam in Duxbury. Introduction The Winooski River basin contains a diversity of fish species, many of which support popular recreational fisheries. Most streams within this watershed provide suitable habitat to support naturally reproducing, “wild” trout populations. Wild populations of native brook trout flourish in the colder, higher elevation streams. Lower reaches of some tributaries and much of the mainstem also support naturalized populations of wild rainbow and brown trout. Both species were introduced to Vermont in the late 1800s, rainbow trout from the West coast and brown trout from Europe. Most of the tributary streams of the Winooski River basin are managed as wild trout waters (i.e. are not stocked with hatchery-reared trout). The Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department (VFWD) stocks hatchery-reared brook trout, brown trout or rainbow trout to supplement recreational fisheries in the Winooski River mainstem from Marshfield Village to Bolton Dam, as well as in the North Branch (Worcester to Montpelier) and Mad River (Warren to Moretown) where habitat conditions (e.g. temperature, flows) limit wild trout production. As mainstem conditions vary seasonally, wild trout may reside in these areas during certain times of the year. Naturally reproducing populations of trout have been observed in the upper mainstem of the Winooski as far downstream as Duxbury. Trout from mainstem reaches and larger tributaries may migrate into smaller tributary streams to spawn.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Consequences of Dam Failures. a How-To Guide
    This document was prepared by Risk Assessment, Mapping, and Planning Partners 8401 Arlington Boulevard Fairfax, Virginia 22031 Table of Contents ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................ iii SECTION ONE INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................1-1 1.1 What This Guide Provides.................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Purpose of This Guide .......................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Limitations of the Guide....................................................................... 1-1 1.4 Audience for This Guide....................................................................... 1-2 1.5 How This Guide Is Organized .............................................................. 1-2 1.6 Further Application of Recommended Procedures ................................ 1-3 SECTION TWO OVERVIEW OF ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ...........................2-1 2.1 Define the Inundation Area................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Create an Inventory of Assets ............................................................... 2-1 2.3 Estimate the Potential Consequences .................................................... 2-1 2.4 Determine the Impacts.......................................................................... 2-1 2.5 Limitations of the Recommended Approach ......................................... 2-2 SECTION THREE
    [Show full text]
  • Hazard Vulnerability Assessment
    SAN MATEO COUNTY HAZARD VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT HAZARD VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT APPENDIX TO THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN (HAZARD + RISK = VULNERABILITY) San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office Homeland Security Division Office of Emergency Services J A N U A R Y 2 , 2 0 1 5 SAN MATEO COUNTY HAZARD VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT County of San Mateo Sheriff’s Office Homeland Security Division Office of EmergencyServices 400 County Center Redwood City, CA 94063 650-363-4955 www.smcsheriff.com i 01/02/2015 SAN MATEO COUNTY HAZARD VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL ............................................................................................................................. 1 SAN MATEO COUNTY PROFILE ................................................................................................ 3 HAZARD 1: DAM FAILURE ...................................................................................................... 5 HAZARD 2: DROUGHT ......................................................................................................... 11 HAZARD 3: EARTHQUAKES ................................................................................................... 15 HAZARD 4: EXTREME HEAT .................................................................................................. 23 HAZARD 5: FLOODING ......................................................................................................... 25 HAZARD 6: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]