04 - Laserfiche WebLink

Tri-Valley Local Hazard Mitigation Plan;Volume 2-Planning Partner Annexes Table 3-14. Mitigation Action Priorit Can Project Do Benefits Be Funded #of Equal or Is Project Under Existing 1 I Grant Action Objectives Exceed Grant- Programs/ Implementation Pursuit # Met Benefits Costs Costs? Eli•ible? Budgets? Prioritya Prioritya P-1 6 High High Yes Yes No Medium High P-2 6 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low P-3 12 Low Low Yes No Yes High Low P-4 4 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low P-5 8 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Medium P-6 6 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low P-7 5 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low P-8 5 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low P-9 3 High Medium Yes No Yes High Low P-10 3 High Low Yes No Yes High Low P-11 2 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes High High a. See the introduction to this volume for explanation of priorities. Table 3-15. Anal sis of Miti•ation Actions Action Addressing_Hazard,b Miti.ation Typea Public Natural Community Property Education and Resource Emergency Structural Climate Capacity Hazard Type Prevention Protection Awareness Protection Services ' Projects Resilient Building Wildfire 2 1,6,9, 11 6 9 5 2,3,5,6 Earthquake 2,7 1 2,3,5 Severe weather 2 1, 11 5 2,3,5 Landslide 2,7,8 1,8, 11 5 2,3,5 Dam failure 2,4 1,4, 11 4, 10 5 2,3,4,5 Flood 2,4 1,4, 11 4 5 2,3,4,5 Drought 2 5 2,3,5 a. See the introduction to this volume for explanation of mitigation types. 3.11 FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY The City could benefit from a multi-disciplinary plan identifying ways in which climate change will affect Pleasanton in the future, and ways to address/mitigate this change. 3.12 REVIEW AND INCORPORATION OF RESOURCES FOR THIS ANNEX The following technical reports,plans, and regulatory mechanisms were reviewed to provide information for this annex. • City of Pleasanton Municipal Code-The municipal code was reviewed for the full capability assessment and for identifying opportunities for action plan integration. 3-14 TETRA TECH