04 - Laserfiche WebLink

Executive Summary The planning team implemented a public involvement strategy developed by the Steering Committee.The strategy included public meetings to present the risk assessment and the draft plan,a hazard mitigation survey,a project website,and multiple media releases.The planning team and Steering Committee also reviewed the existing hazard mitigation plan,the California statewide hazard mitigation plan,and existing programs that may support hazard mitigation actions. Assemble, Adopt and Maintain the Plan The planning team and Steering Committee assembled a document to meet federal hazard mitigation planning requirements.A mitigation plan review crosswalk included in the hazard mitigation plan demonstrates its compliance with all requirements.The planning partners will formally adopt the plan once the State of California Governor's Office of Emergency Services and FEMA Region IX have granted pre-adoption approval. The plan includes a schedule for monitoring and evaluating plan progress periodically and producing a revised plan every five years. This maintenance strategy also includes processes for continuing public involvement and integrating with other programs that can support or enhance hazard mitigation. RISK ASSESSMENT Risk assessment is the process of measuring the potential loss of life resulting from natural hazards,as well as personal injury,economic injury and property damage.It is used to define the vulnerability of people,buildings, and infrastructure to natural hazards. For this update,risk assessment models were enhanced with new data and technologies that have become available since the ABAG planning effort in 2010.The Steering Committee used the risk assessment to rank risk and to gauge the potential impacts of each hazard of concern in the Tri-Valley planning area.The risk assessment included the following: • Hazard identification and profiling • Assessment of the impact of hazards on physical,social,and economic assets • Identification of particular areas of vulnerability • Estimates of the cost of potential damage. Based on the risk assessment,hazards were ranked for the risk they pose to the overall planning area,as shown in Table ES-1. Each planning partner also ranked hazards for its own area.Table ES-2 summarizes all jurisdictions' numerical ratings of high,medium and low.The results indicate the following general patterns: • The earthquake hazard was most commonly ranked as high. • The severe weather,wildfire and landslide hazards were most commonly ranked as medium. • The dam failure,flood and drought hazards were most commonly ranked as low. Table ES-1. Hazard Risk Rankin• for the Overall Plannin. Area Hazard Rankin. Hazard Event Cate•or 1 Earthquake High 2 Severe Weather High 3 Landslide High 3 Wildfire High 4 Flood Medium 4 Dam Failure Medium 5 Drought Low TETRA TECH xix