Review of thePuyallup Hazard Mitigation Plan

Created by:

Jeremy Smith

Sam Ripley

& Taylor Livingston

For the Class: Natural Hazards Planning EGEO 363

Professor: Scott Miles

City of Puyallup Overview

• In Pierce County, 10 Miles SE of Tacoma, WA• Population 35,490 in 2003, doubled since 1980• Puyallup River Flows through the town, from the

headwaters on Mt. Rainer to the South East

• Prime Land for Agricultural use

• But now over 50 % residential

• Consists of Valley near River and South Hill

Links • Main Website http://www.cityofpuyallup.org/• Hazard Mitigation Plan

http://www.cityofpuyallup.org/page.php?id=800

• Puyallup Tribe HMP http://www.co.pierce.wa.us/pc/abtus/ourorg/dem/EMDiv/MitPTIP.htm

• Pierce County DEM http://www.co.pierce.wa.us/pc/Abtus/ourorg/dem/abtusdem2.htm

• Wiki of Puyallup http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puyallup,_Washington

Planning Process• Planning Development Team

– Consisted of City Employees on the Emergency Management Response Team• Including Emergency Disaster & Reponse• Police and Fire Department• Development Services

– City Engineer- Seth Boettcher– Mitigation and Recovery Specialist from Pierce

County acted as Coordinator- Richard Schroedel– The EMRT meet from September 2001 to

December 2004– Public Involvement began in 2002– Hazard Information was derived from a 1999

Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Analysis (HIVA) from the City of Puyallup

Research and Implementation• Research

– Interviews with residents and experts outside• Aimed to compile specialized knowledge of the City and

local natural hazards– Details processes include

• Capability Idnetification• Risk Asessment• Mitigation Strategy• Critical Facility• Plan Maintenance

• HMP Adopted by City Council in March, 2005• Public Dissemination

– Posted on City’s Website– Introduced at Meetings– Presented at State Fair held in Puyallup

Approach to HMP• The FEMA approach for local hazard

mitigation planning is followed in Puyallup– Even included in FEMA’s “Best Practices

and Case Studies” due to the Puyallup River Levee Rehabilition project• http://www.fema.gov/mitigationbp/brief.do?mitssId=5128

– Comprehensive Hazard Specific Strategy

DMA2K Requirements• Puyallup’s Hazard Mitigation Plan has been accepted by FEMA.• http://www.cityofpuyallup.org/files/library/568e77f573a712d5.pdf

• Puyallup has taken extensive measures to mitigate and plan for a wide range of disasters. These include lahar evacuation plans and drills, utilizing the lahar travel time map produced by Pierce County with information supplied by USGS, designating evacuation routes, supporting the NOAA all hazard warning radios program, and initiating the lahar warning sirens within the City and the local emergency radio station.

• Some of their mitigations chosen to maintain compliance:• Public Education and Awareness Materials on Natural Hazards• Sirens for the Lahar Warning System• A GIS system tied into the County's GIS System

Sustainable Hazard Mitigation

• Sustainable development- "Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” (Oxford University Press, 1987)

• Communities ultimately want to meet current needs and to continue to develop and hopefully grow (in various ways). Doing so requires proper adaptation to environment and organized and efficient response to adversity.

• Poorly planned and executed infrastructure and growth projects, and a disconnected and uniformed public can increase vulnerability to natural hazards, and can create new hazards.

• Practices of any kind that overburden resources natural or human, are not sustainable

Vulnerability and Sustainability

Designing a sustainable community requires a forward thinking approach. Sustainability and hazard mitigation begin their relationship with community development at the inception of the process.

• Community planning begins with zoning and infrastructure projects. Creating hazard resistant utilities and intelligent location and linkage helps communities manage growth to reduce risk and facilitate response when disaster strikes.

• Communities tend to want to maximize profit and growth. Although this approach may offer more immediate rewards, it is flawed in that it often leaves communities vulnerable to hazards. If a community is unable to respond to disaster events technically, financially, and operationally, it may cease to be viable. This is the definition of unsustainable resource management.

• ex. A town that receives abundant heavy snowfall and/or frequent windstorms may want to locate power and communication cables underground. The cost is initially higher, but the design is more resistant to failure. Power and communication are essential in day to day and in emergency situations.

Techniques for Sustainable Hazard Mitigation

Specific tools and techniques can be used for sustainable hazard mitigation.

• Land use planning- Keeping development out of harm’s way; avoid increasing hazard risk/creating new ones through land modification.

• Warning systems- Give people as much advance notice as possible to prepare for impending events

• Building codes/property protection- Require that structures be built in ways that maximize resistance to local hazards. Bring existing structures to code or remove potential for property destruction/injury.

• Insurance- Create insurance plans place the financial on the private sector, and can be worked into incentive programs that influence more cautious decision making.

• New Technologies- Communities must keep themselves appraised of new technologies as they review their mitigation plans. New warning systems, software, and building techniques can be implemented to improve mitigation.

• Preparedness and recovery- This encompasses a broad range of tools. Public awareness, education, organized response teams, and proper acquisition and organization of response resources (shelters, medicine, machinery, etc.) are grouped into this section

• Natural Resource Protection/ Preservation- communities depend on their local resource base for economic reasons and for protection from hazards

Mitigation Measure Rating Criteria

Puyallup’s emergency response team rated mitigation measures using the following criteria1. Goal(s) Addressed2. Cost of Measure3. Funding Source and Situation4. Lead Department(s) or Agency(ies)5. Timeline6. Benefit7. Life Expectancy of Measure8. Community Reaction

In order to achieve sustainability for hazard mitigation, goals must be achievable and maintainable . The above rating

criteria,if applied correctly, could be very effective.

Puyallup’s Risk and Vulnerability Matrix

Puyallup’s Sustainable Mitigation Strategies and Their Application to Specific Hazards

Land use planning- This is applicable principally to floods and landslides, and ties into natural resources protection

• Restrict building, where possible, to prevent structures and people from unnecessarily being in harm’s way.

• Puyallup has restrictions in place for flood planes• Only mentions requiring geotechnical surveys, but not building restrictions. Building

restrictions should be included in landslide mitigation strategy.

Warning systems- This tool can be applied to weather hazards, landslides, floods, and volcanoes. There is not yet any way to give early warning for earthquakes.

• Communities must have information that hazardous situations are imminent. Timely reaction saves lives and property…Loss of either of these threatens community survival.

• Puyallup proposes warning people of weather related hazards, including floods, through the NOAA’s weather radio system, and website. This is listed as an all-hazards measure.

• Warning systems for volcanic events have been in place for 8 years. These warning systems transmit information via NOAA, and alarm sirens.

• Lahars are incorrectly tied directly to volcanic events. The largest lahars are caused by a combination of other things including, weather, and clayation of soils.

• Lahars should be tied to landslides as well, and early warning systems should be included as response measure to landslide hazards

Puyallup’s Sustainable Mitigation Strategies and Their Application to Specific Hazards

Building codes- These restrictions and rules can be used to mitigate earthquake, weather, flood, and volcanic hazards

• Puyallup addresses building codes extensively in its earthquake mitigation measures. It includes new building and retrofitting requirements.

• Requiring certain types of materials, proper venting, and elevated foundations can make structures less prone to wind, flood, and other weather related damage.

• Puyallup’s plan includes nothing about weather or flood related building codes. This should be added.

• Volcanic hazards can be addressed as well by requiring roofs that can support large loads of tephra. Given Puyallup’s proximity to several large volcanoes, a proposal such as this is worth looking into.

Insurance- Can conceivably be used to respond to all types of hazards• Flood insurance policies exist nationally, and homeowner’s insurance generally

covers weather damage. Only one company in the world (Lloyd’s of London, offers landslide insurance.

• Puyallup covers all bases here. They address this in both all hazards and flood measures.

• Puyallup’s approved HMG qualifies it for FEMA flood insurance, and municipal codes require homeowners to carry insurance. All other types of available insurance are out of the city’s hands. But providing information about it is included in the all hazards section

Puyallup’s Sustainable Mitigation Strategies and Their Application to Specific Hazards

New Technology- This is a broad set of tools that encompasses, software, machinery, communications, etc

• Puyallup pays out plans to use HAZUS and LAHARZ hazard modeling systems in their all hazards section.

• New technology applies to every hazard. • Puyallup, by proposing to use software, seismic technology, equipment maintenance,

and geotechnical surveys, is prepared to use and implement new technologies in all phases of mitigation.

• They should expound on their commitment to this in the all hazards measures section• Their technological capabilities are addressed in Section 3 of their plan “Capability

Identification Requirements”

Preparedness and recovery- this is another broad category that can be applied to all hazards

• Puyallup is addressing preparedness from every imaginable angle. A Couple of specific example include initiatives to bury utilities such as power and communication lines, and the trimming of tree branches.

• The burying of utility lines makes them far less vulnerable to weather related disasters. This is listed as an all hazards measure. Other hazards may destroy even buried utilities, but they will be less dangerous when broken if underground…although more difficult to repair.

• Puyallup does an excellent job addressing its hazards with these type of tools

Puyallup’s Sustainable Mitigation Strategies and Their Application to Specific Hazards

New Technology- This is a broad set of tools that encompasses, software, machinery, communications, etc

• Puyallup pays out plans to use HAZUS and LAHARZ hazard modeling systems in their all hazards section.

• New technology applies to every hazard. • Puyallup, by proposing to use software, seismic technology, equipment maintenance,

and geotechnical surveys, is prepared to use and implement new technologies in all phases of mitigation.

• They should expound on their commitment to this in the all hazards measures section• Their technological capabilities are addressed in Section 3 of their plan “Capability

Identification Requirements”

Preparedness and recovery- this is another broad category that can be applied to all hazards

• Puyallup is addressing preparedness from every imaginable angle. A Couple of specific example include initiatives to bury utilities such as power and communication lines, and the trimming of tree branches.

• The burying of utility lines makes them far less vulnerable to weather related disasters. This is listed as an all hazards measure. Other hazards may destroy even buried utilities, but they will be less dangerous when broken if underground…although more difficult to repair.

• Puyallup does an excellent job addressing its hazards with these type of tools

Puyallup’s Sustainable Mitigation Strategies and Their Application to Specific Hazards

Natural Resource Protection and preservation- These techniques are

particularly useful in flood and landslide mitigation• Puyallup’s mitigation plan contains a section addressing the

protection of wetlands and other “natural flood storage features”. This is a very positive step is sustainable mitigation.

• Prevention of landslides though the prevention of deforestation or other forms of slope denudation are not addressed.

• Puyallup should include this in their landslide hazard section. Preserving vegetation is a key sustainability practice in all respects that is quite useful in hazard mitigation