DOCSLIB.ORG

2020 King County Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan with Mercer Island Annex

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2020 King County Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan with Mercer Island Annex November 5, 2020 The Honorable Claudia Balducci Chair, King County Council 1200 King County Courthouse 516 Third Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 Dear Chair Balducci: On October 1, 2020, the United States Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Region 10, approved the King County Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan as a multi-jurisdictional local plan as outlined in Code of Federal Regulations Title 44 Part 201. This approval provides the below jurisdictions eligibility to apply for the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act’s, Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) grants projects through September 30, 2025, through your state: King County City of Auburn City of Bothell City of Burien City of Clyde Hill City of Des Moines Town of Hunts Point City of Issaquah City of Kent City of Kenmore City of Kirkland City of Lake Forest Park City of Maple Valley City of Mercer Island City of Newcastle City of North Bend City of Redmond City of Renton City of Sammamish City of SeaTac City of Shoreline City of Snoqualmie City of Tukwila City of Woodinville Town of Beau Arts Village Renton School District Northshore Utility District King County Water District King County Water District King County Water District #125 #20 #90 North City Water District Northeast Sammamish Sammamish Plateau Water District Sewer and Water District Skyway Water and Sewer Soos Creek Water and Lake Meridian Water District District Sewer District Cedar River Water and Covington Water District Coal Creek Utility District Sewer District Vashon Island Fire and Valley Regional Fire Valley Regional Fire Authority Rescue Authority South King Fire and Rescue www.fema.gov Chair Balducci November 5, 2020 Page 2 The list of approved jurisdictions has been updated to all the local jurisdiction listed above, which have recently adopted their respective addendums to the King County Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan. To continue eligibility the plan must be reviewed, revised as appropriate, and resubmitted within five years of the original approval date. Over the next five years, we encourage your communities to follow the plan’s schedule for monitoring and updating, and to develop further mitigation actions. To continue eligibility, jurisdictions must review, revise as appropriate, and resubmit the plan within five years of the original approval date. If you have questions regarding your plan’s approval or FEMA’s mitigation grant programs, please contact Kevin Zerbe, State Mitigation Strategist with Washington Emergency Management Division, at (253) 512-7467, who coordinates and administers these efforts for local entities. Sincerely, for Kristen Meyers, Director Mitigation Division cc: Tim Cook, Washington Emergency Management Division Enclosure JS:vl/cf www.fema.gov 2020-2025 King County Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan Letters of Transmission to the King County Council TBD 1 Plan Adoption Ordinance TBD 2 Plan Approval Letter TBD 3 Table of Contents Letters of Transmission to County Executive and County Council ............................................................. 1 Plan Adoption Ordinance.................................................................................................................................... 2 Plan Approval Letter ............................................................................................................................................ 3 Executive Summary................................................................................................................................................. 11 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 13 Mitigation Plan Priorities: .................................................................................................................................. 13 Timeline ................................................................................................................................................................ 14 Revisions from 2015 Edition ............................................................................................................................ 14 Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan Chapters ..................................................................................................... 14 Hazard Mitigation Planning Process .................................................................................................................... 16 Mitigation Planning Partner Engagement ....................................................................................................... 18 Jurisdiction Plan Annex Process ....................................................................................................................... 19 Review and Incorporation of Reports and Studies ........................................................................................ 19 King County Plan Update Timeline ................................................................................................................. 20 Support for Community Rating System (CRS) Communities ..................................................................... 23 Public Outreach Process .................................................................................................................................... 24 Continued Public Participation ......................................................................................................................... 29 King County Regional Hazard Mitigation Program Capabilities ..................................................................... 30 Plan Integration ................................................................................................................................................... 30 Program and Policy Capabilities ....................................................................................................................... 34 Integration with Departments and other Jurisdictions ................................................................................. 38 Potential Sources of Hazard Mitigation Funding .......................................................................................... 40 King County Hazard Mitigation Grant Assistance Program ....................................................................... 44 Participation in the National Flood Insurance Program ............................................................................... 44 4 Participation in CRS ........................................................................................................................................... 45 Regional Risk and Probability Summaries....................................................................................................... 46 Risk Assessment Overview .................................................................................................................................... 48 Methodology ........................................................................................................................................................ 49 Data ....................................................................................................................................................................... 49 Vulnerable Populations and Population-Based Vulnerability ...................................................................... 52 Determinants of Population Vulnerability .......................................................................................... 52 Selected Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Maps ........................................ Error! Bookmark not defined. Jurisdiction-Specific Risk Assessments ............................................................................................................ 55 King County Development Trends and Risk Trajectory .............................................................................. 56 Regional Risk Profile: Avalanche .......................................................................................................................... 59 Hazard Description ............................................................................................................................................ 59 Vulnerability Characteristics and Previous Occurrences .............................................................................. 60 Scenario Drivers .................................................................................................................................................. 62 Priority Vulnerabilities ........................................................................................................................................ 62 Priority Impact Areas ......................................................................................................................................... 62 Regional Risk Profile: Civil Disorder ................................................................................................................... 65 Hazard Description ............................................................................................................................................ 65 Vulnerability Characteristics and Previous Occurrences .............................................................................. 66 Scenario Drivers .................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SR 520, I-5 to Medina: Bridge Replacement and HOV Project Area Encompasses One of the Most Diverse and Complex Human and Natural Landscapes in the Puget Sound Region
    Chapter 4: The Project Area’s Environment Chapter 4: The Project Area’s Environment The SR 520, I-5 to Medina: Bridge Replacement and HOV Project area encompasses one of the most diverse and complex human and natural landscapes in the Puget Sound region. It includes areas in Seattle from I-5 to the Lake Washington shore, the waters of Lake Washington, and a portion of the Eastside communities and neighborhoods from the eastern shoreline of the lake to Evergreen Point Road. It also includes densely developed urban and suburban areas and some of the most critical natural areas and sensitive ecosystems that remain in the urban growth area. The project area includes the following: ▪ Seattle neighborhoods—Eastlake, Portage Bay/Roanoke, North Capitol Hill, Montlake, University District, Laurelhurst, and Madison Park ▪ The Lake Washington ecosystem and the bays, streams, and wetlands that are associated with it ▪ The Eastside community of Medina ▪ Usual and accustomed fishing areas of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, who have historically used the area’s fisheries resources and has treaty rights for their protection and use This chapter describes what the project area is like today, setting the stage for the project’s effects described in Chapters 5 and 6. 4.1 Transportation The configuration of SR 520 today, with its inadequate shoulders and gaps in HOV lanes, makes the corridor especially prone to traffic congestion. And, as commuters on SR 520 know, the corridor is overloaded with traffic on a regular basis. Population and employment continue to grow both on the Eastside and in Seattle, resulting in new travel patterns and a steady rise in the number of vehicles crossing the Evergreen Point Bridge.
    [Show full text]
  • Last Link of I-90 Ends 30-Year Saga by Peggy Reynolds, Seattle Times, 9 Sept 1993
    Last Link Of I-90 Ends 30-Year Saga By Peggy Reynolds, Seattle Times, 9 Sept 1993 Erica Clibborn's red convertible will be one of the first cars Sunday across the new Lacey V. Murrow Floating Bridge, last link in a project that started before Erica was born. The University of Washington junior, who will be going home to Mercer Island for Sunday dinner, was born in 1973, the year a federal court sent the Seattle-area stretch of Interstate 90 back to square one. By then, I-90 already reached most of the 3,063 miles from Boston to south Bellevue, and the final major segment had been in the works for 10 years. It would be another 20 years before that last 7 miles would be finished. That completion will be marked this weekend with an array of public events, and Clibborn and other drivers should be able to go across the eastbound span by 5 p.m. Sunday. That opening means that I-90 survived the anti-government sentiment of the late 1960s, the mass-transit worship of the '70s and the budget cutbacks of the '80s - even while other urban interstate projects were biting the dust in New York, Chicago, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Washington, San Francisco and Portland. Nevertheless, whether or not I-90 was really needed was subject to debate at all levels. It attracted a formidable enemies list, and was rescued regularly by a cast of hundreds. Without any one of its friends in local governments, on the state Transportation Commission, in the Legislature and in Congress, I-90 could have ended in south Bellevue instead of making it to its junction with Interstate 5 in Seattle.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Q3 Link Light Rail Report
    Progress Report Link Light Rail Program Applying smoothing layer to the tunnel invert at the Downtown Bellevue Tunnel. September | 2018 Prepared by Project Control & VE l Design, Engineering & Construction Management September 2018 Page 3 of 179 This page left blank intentionally. September 2018 Page 4 of 179 0;o` Link Light Rail // Program Overview September 2018 Page 5 of 179 Link Light Rail Program Overview This page left blank intentionally. September 2018 Page 6 of 179 0;o` Link Light Rail // Program Overview University Link Extension (U-Link): This project is a 3.15- inary Engineering is $286M. mile light rail segment which is located entirely underground South 200th Link Extension: S. 200th Link Extension with tunnels traveling from Pine Street, under the I-5 freeway consists of a 1.6-mile extension of the light rail from the to an underground station at Capitol Hill, continuing north SeaTac/Airport Station to an elevated station at South 200th beneath SR 520 and the Montlake Cut to an underground Street. The Project was developed through a design-build station on the University of Washington campus, near Husky delivery strategy. The Sound Transit Board adopted the base- Stadium. The Sound Transit Board adopted the baseline capital line capital budget of $383.2M in 2011. Revenue Service be- budget of $1.76B in July 2008. Revenue Service began on gan on September 24, 2016. March 19, 2016. Federal Way Link Extension: The Federal Way Link Ex- Northgate Link Extension: The University of Washington tension adds approximately 7.8 miles of light rail from the An- Station (UWS) to Northgate project is a 4.3-mile extension of gle Lake Station in the City of SeaTac to the Federal Way City light rail from the UWS north under campus via twin-bored Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Business of the City Council City of Mercer Island, Wa
    AB 5563 BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL July 16, 2019 CITY OF MERCER ISLAND, WA Study Session AUBREY DAVIS PARK MASTER PLAN Action: Discussion Only CONCEPT ALTERNATIVES Review the recommendations and Action Needed: provide staff direction for preferred Motion alternative development. Ordinance Resolution DEPARTMENT OF Parks and Recreation (Paul West) COUNCIL LIAISON n/a EXHIBITS 1. Summary of Community Meetings & Feedback 2. Schematic Plan Options for Ballfield Conflict Zone 3. Schematic Plan for North and South Trail Options 2019-2020 CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY n/a APPROVED BY CITY MANAGER AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURE $ a n/ AMOUNT BUDGETED $ a n/ APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $ a n/ SUMMARY This purpose of this agenda bill is to provide recommendations for the Aubrey Davis Park Master Plan (“ADMP”) to the City Council for consideration and feedback in advance of the next Community Open House, scheduled for Monday, September 23. For purposes of this agenda bill the “planning team” refers to staff from multiple City departments, WSDOT, consultants from HBB Landscape Architecture, and numerous sub-contractors. PRIOR COUNCIL REVIEW The City Council initially discussed the scope and process of the ADMP at the November 21, 2017 City Council meeting (see AB 5357). On October 23, 2018 the City Council reviewed preliminary trail sections for the portion of the Mountains to Sound Greenway Trail affected by the King County North Mercer Sewer Interceptor Project (see AB 5489). On January 15, 2019 the City Council previewed the preliminary site analysis, draft planning goals, and a summary of community feedback, which involved the first Online Survey, prior to Open House #1 (see AB 5525).
    [Show full text]
  • Washington Transportation Chronology
    Transportation Chronology by Kit Oldham, updated 2004/p.1 Updated by Kit, 2004 WASHINGTON TRANSPORTATION CHRONOLOGY 1835. The Hudson's Bay Company ship Beaver is the first steamship to travel on Puget Sound. HL #1946 October-November, 1845 . The Michael Simmons-George Bush party cuts a makeshift road from Cowlitz Landing (now Toledo) on the Cowlitz River to Budd Inlet on Puget Sound, where they establish Tumwater, the first American settlement north of the Columbia River. Dorpat, 63; HL # 5646; Meeker, 158. 1851 . A crude wooden track portage line along the north bank of the Columbia river at the Cascades in the Columbia Gorge is the first railway constructed in the future Washington. Schwantes, Railroad , 15. 1852 . The first road established by law in the future Washington state is Byrd's Mill Road between Puyallup, Tacoma, and Steilacoom, established by the Oregon Territorial Legislature. Garrett, 3. 1853 . First overland passenger service from Olympia to the Columbia River begins; passengers are initially carried on freight wagons known as mudwagons (given the poor conditions on the route which do not improve much even when a military road is completed in 1861), with stage coaches coming into use as passengers numbers increase. (Except for the Columbia-Puget Sound connection, stagecoaches are little used in Western Washington, as the waters of Puget Sound provide the crucial transportation links). Dorpat, 66-67; Schwantes, Journey , 88-89. 1853. The steamer Fairy is the first steamer to provide regular service among Puget Sound ports. HL #869 January 7, 1853. Congress appropriates $20,000 for a military road from Fort Steilacoom to Fort Walla Walla by way of Naches Pass, a route that Indians used for generations to travel between Puget Sound and the Yakima Valley.
    [Show full text]
  • SR 520, I-5 to Medina: Bridge Replacement and HOV Project Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement
    Chapter 2: Alternatives Chapter 2: Alternatives This chapter provides a detailed description of the 6-Lane Alternative and design options evaluated in this Supplemental Draft EIS (SDEIS). The SDEIS evaluates the 6-Lane Alternative with three design options—Options A, K, and L—and a No Build Alternative. We describe the No Build Alternative first because it serves as a basis for comparison. 2.1 What is the No Build Alternative? The No Build Alternative assumes that, other than normal maintenance and repair activities, the SR 520 corridor between I-5 and Evergreen Point Road would remain exactly the same as it is today (Exhibit 2-1). Under the No Build Alternative, SR 520 would continue to operate as a 4-lane highway with nonstandard shoulders and without a bicycle/pedestrian path. No new facilities would be added and none would be removed, including the unused R.H. Thomson Expressway ramps near the Washington Park Arboretum. Stormwater runoff from the existing roadway surface would continue to discharge to surface waters without treatment. WSDOT would continue to manage traffic using its existing transportation demand management and intelligent transportation system strategies. For the transportation analysis included in this document, it was assumed that traffic in the No Build Alternative would not be tolled. As described in Chapter 1, the remaining design life of the Evergreen Point Bridge is currently estimated at just 10 to 15 years, and a severe storm could cause it to fail even sooner. The Portage Bay and west approach bridges are also vulnerable to collapse in a severe earthquake.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Mercer Island Online Open House Response and Comments
    Mercer Island Transit Connection Area Summer 2020 online open house response and comments Overview The Mercer Island transit connection area, along North Mercer Way, 77th Avenue Southeast and 80th Avenue Southeast, includes improvements designed to create a seamless connection experience for riders transferring between bus and light rail on Mercer Island when East Link light rail service begins in 2023. The Mercer Island transit connection area is part of a larger set of transportation improvements and mitigation measures included in the East Link light rail extension project. Since they reached a settlement agreement in 2017, Sound Transit and the City of Mercer Island, along with King County Metro, have worked together to address community concerns in the final design of the project. In June of 2020, Sound Transit shared its 60-percent designs for the transit area and provided an opportunity for the public to submit questions and comments. We received 267 comments through the comment form provided. Concerns related to the design of the transit connection area fall into the broad categories of safety, service and community impact. Safety Bike and pedestrian safety Q: How is bicycle and pedestrian safety at the roundabout being addressed? The proposed roundabout is designed with bicycle and pedestrian safety in mind. In fact, national studies have shown that roundabouts have a better safety record when compared to signalized intersections. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) have studied
    [Show full text]
  • Olympia Tacoma
    8 Zittel’s Marina 11 Longbranch Marina 12 Lakebay Marina-Resort 13 ARabella’s Landing N 47°2’48.59 | W 122°54’13.859 N 47°12’32.251 | W 122°45’23.814 N 47°15’28.42 | W 122°45’21.59 N 47°20’0.261 | W 122°34’59.782 9144 Gallea St NE, Olympia, WA 98516 PO Box 111, Lakebay, WA 98349 15 Lorenz Road, Lakebay, WA 98349 3323 Harborview Drive, Gig Harbor, WA 98332 www.zittelsmarina.com www.licweb.org P: (253) 884-3350 www.arabellaslanding.com P: (360) 459-1950; F: (360) 459-8984 P: (253) 884-5137 P: (253) 851-1793 Monthly and guest moorage. RV camp, [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] cabin rentals, boat launch, kayak and 200 uncovered and covered slips 20’ Gated 42 permanent slips, Longbranch paddleboard rentals, store and café, and Accommodates vessels up to 160’ in slips. Washington to 40’ long with some larger. Parking, residents given priority. Overnight/tran- ethanol-free gas with Soltron available. A Wheelchair accessible. full-service yard, ramp and sling launch, sient moorage available on a first-come, 5,000 square-foot building at the marina marine supplies, convenience store first-served basis. Portable toilets in the is perfect for boater rendezvous, wed- with snacks, and boat rentals offered. summer, ice, BBQ, and covered area for dings, or meetings. Ten-minute bike ride to Fuel dock is located on the east side of group gatherings available. beautiful freshwater Bay Lake and Penrose 14 Gig Harbor Marina & Boat Yard Johnson Point, a mile south of the John- Park.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Hearing
    AB 5489 BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL October 23, 2018 CITY OF MERCER ISLAND, WA Study Session KING COUNTY SEWER PROJECT UPDATE Action: Discussion Only Receive report. Action Needed: Motion Ordinance Resolution DEPARTMENT OF Parks and Recreation (Jessi Bon) Public Works (Jason Kintner) Information and Geographic Services (Mike Kaser) COUNCIL LIAISON n/a EXHIBITS 1. Proposed Sewer Alignment 2. Email from WSDOT on Trail Standards 3. Aubrey Davis Master Plan Community Survey Results 4. Meeting Notes from 09/25/18 Public Meeting 5. Preferred I-90 Trail Cross-Section within limits of King County Sewer Project 2018-2019 CITY COUNCIL GOAL 1. Prepare for Light Rail/Improve Mobility APPROVED BY CITY MANAGER AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURE $ n/a AMOUNT BUDGETED $ n/a APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $ n/a SUMMARY King County is scheduled to replace an aging sewer interceptor, known as the North Mercer Island/Enatai Sewer Upgrade Project (Sewer Project) which conveys sewage from their North Mercer Pump Station across the Island to their Sweyolockyn Pump Station in Bellevue. This Sewer Project will have major impacts on the neighborhoods and parks where it will be constructed (Exhibit 1). This presents both challenges and opportunities for the City to consider. The purpose of this Study Session is to update the City Council on the current considerations being discussed with King County (sewer upgrades and the placement of conduit for fiber optic cable) and to seek Council input on the design standard for modifications to the portion of the I-90 Trail impacted by the Sewer Project. BACKGROUND The King County Wastewater Treatment Division (WTD) needs to replace the sewer pipes that serve areas in North Mercer Island, the southwest portion of Bellevue near Enatai Beach, and the Town of Beaux Arts Village.
    [Show full text]
  • East Link Construction Underneath the East Channel Bridge
    May 2018 East Link Construction Underneath the East Channel Bridge Reduced boat clearance Sound Transit’s East Link Extension has been working to retrofit the East Channel Bridge for future light rail construction and operation. To do so, crews have Suspended work installed temporary suspended work platforms to the platform underside of the bridge. The main channel will remain navigable but may be narrowed as work moves from east to west and platforms move from pier to pier. Boat clearance has been reduced to approximately 59 feet below the work platforms. For safety, when work is occurring, boats will be directed around the suspended platforms. Additional amber warning beacons have been installed Approximately 59’ to warn boaters. All boaters should still be vigilant and navigate with care around the East Channel Bridge. Safety is our top priority; please use appropriate boater etiquette and follow speed and navigation signs near the bridge. Mercer Island boat launch staging area Beginning later this spring, Sound Transit will use a Photo of the East Channel Bridge with work platforms. portion of the Mercer Island Boat Launch parking area for construction staging. Some parking spaces and access to the boat launch will be maintained throughout construction. Additional boat launch parking is available at Mercer Island City Hall. Sound Transit plans, builds, and operates regional transit systems and services to improve mobility for Central Puget Sound. 401 S. Jackson St. | Seattle, WA 98104 | 1-800-201-4900 / TTY Relay: 711 | [email protected] | soundtransit.org What to expect Work hours will be Monday – Friday: 7 a.m.
    [Show full text]
  • King County-Owned Historic Properties Survey Report
    Survey Report Survey of County-Owned Historic Properties in King County, Washington Certified Local Government Grant No. FY10-61020-001 Principal Investigators: Charlie Sundberg King County Historic Preservation Program King County Department of Natural Resoruces and Parks 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 700 Seattle, WA 98104 Submitted to: Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation 1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 Olympia, WA 98501 August, 2011 This project was financed in part with Federal funds from the National Park Service, Department of the Interior administered by the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) and the King County Historic Preservation Program. However, the contents and opinions do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Department of the Interior or DAHP. Regulations of the U.S. Department of Interior strictly prohibit unlawful discrimination in departmental Federally Assisted Programs on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, or handicap. Any person who believes he or she has been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility operated by a recipient of Federal assistance should write to: Director, Equal Opportunity Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1849 C Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20240. ii 2010 King County-Owned Historic Properties Survey & Inventory King County, WA Executive Summary This report presents the findings of an intensive-level survey of historic County-owned properties in King County, Washington. The project took place between October of 2009 and August of 2011. Its purpose is to provide information required for the ongoing management of County-owned historic resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Environmental Impact Statement
    EAST LINK PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Appendix H4 Historic and Archaeological Resources Technical Report FINAL EIS July 2011 SOUND TRANSIT EAST LINK PROJECT Appendix H4 Historic and Archaeological Resources Technical Report Prepared for: Sound Transit Prepared by: Historical Research Associates, Inc. CH2M HILL July 2011 Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................ ES-1 Project Overview ................................................................................................................................................... ES-1 Archaeology ........................................................................................................................................................... ES-1 Historic Resources ................................................................................................................................................. ES-1 1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Project Description ............................................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Description of Alternatives .............................................................................................................................. 1-1
    [Show full text]