Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Resolution 00-1019
RESOLUTION 00-1019 A Illi_IJFI ON OF TNF CITY OF LONG\YOOD, FLOIiIDA, ADOPTING. "1'li I_SFAII\OLF COLNT\" LOCAL III'rIGA'r]ON S'I Ii I IiGtPLAN. PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS AND AN LFFFC'ri V F DA"1"L weeaeAs, ma atynr L„n�et-ood maminnnernn�ni=4,antyi i o es tha vulnernbillttoConr nomntunity to Fie impxts o(dizutei�nnd \VIiFRFAS. the 4l la"Iltelit�- ' , 1'-t',' in the Seminole Con un Itlunniny 'Cliti7 established undrr ihc,u�tPices of the Seminolz Cotmty Contmn n Set.�ies Department. find \Ylh ERI:AS. the Nlnnicipality belizves a single coumywide �t'Ihereinnl[cr"Mitiettion Stmtegy'1 is of benefit to Necitizans of Lonl_O1ood �.tnd \YlIERL15. the tr San tal. Cot �niomPasses the concenv and jutinl'ic ian of the i.1tiniciPxliry: anA t\'li FRGAS. till City of I.onettnod wishes m Paniciltete o= e paiiner�ttth the Con " -. the opphcttian of ibis - „ - n siroie7<; and \YH FI2FA5. the Mnnieipvl'i tv has as5istad the Seminole Cnnnl) Community Services Dapitnment in Providing lnfonnntion and in dveision- maAine ne —l" io extoblish the operxtionul concepts to 1, uti Bled in the n it lituc',pmpeicd lot the Cl'tyofl.unSttood- NO\V, TRI':RFFOIiI:. ItF I RFSOLY FD by the City Connnissimt Df the( e ih of ood❑ L-9wFill n,as tllmvx:. . sr (TlON 1. Thot111, Scminolc Caunty Lo111 Snvte Plan, dated October 31. 1999 is hereby ad,-d. ACTION 2. Tltvt an.'oll resole,,, orpune'ofresoltnions in eonliiu ure hereby tepeule l Departmentof Public Safety City fcocgwood 'd tog gFiorez 3z�so w"'v Baa c oirec�orm eu ' afey as S. Jackson (407)2003400 (407) 3324780 Fax Charles K CM1ap- -hlf f (407)200-3490 (401) 2-340t Fax 10/25/00 Director Baker As directed, I have reviewed the Local Mitigation Strategy document produced by the LMS Work Group this year. The City has two items identified in the LMS as follows: 1. Acquire two portable generators to provide backup power to the City's 25 lift stations. INOI SEM-0119. Ranking 32. 2. Acquire and install a permanent generator at the City's master lift station. INOI SEM-0123. Ranking 29. All items submitted to the working group were reviewed and rated with the highest being 34 and the lowest being 16. It is important that the Commission adopt the LMS else we will not qualify for future Federal and State Hazard Mitigation Grant monies. A copy of the completed adoption resolution will need to be provided to the County. I have attached only the portion of the 500+ page LMS document that applies to the City. Please advise how you wish to proceed. Chief Chapman The Seminole County Working Group For Local Mitigation Strategy Development Initial Local Mitigation Strategy October 31, 1999 The Strategy Section One Executive Summary Introduction and 8ackground Like all counties tmughout Flodda, the wmmunities of Seminole County are vulnerable to a wide range of natural antl technological disasters, as demonstrated by the very high human and ewnomic basis of the events Mat have recently impacted It part of me state. To adtlress this wineabilily, Ihe Seminole County Waking Group for Local Mitigation sustegy Develop—M was seated in October of 1998. The Wonting Gmup is made up of representatives of County 89encies drM municipal gowmments, as well as key wmmuh4 groups antl private sbotbl organizations, and has the responsibility to develop a comprehensive plan, or 'Shategr to eliminate or minimize the impacts of I disasters. The effort to eliminate or minimize the impacts of future disasters is often tanned "hazard mitigation,' and when it is wmpletad. tltis Strategy will be e,b— The Seminole County Local Mitigation Strategy." Its key pumose Is to identify the projects and programs that would be implemented to redum the impacts of future disasters when and g resources became available to do so. These proposed projects and programs are tanned'-igation initiatives" The Florida Department of Community ARairs provided a gant to Seminole County, as well as any muniapaliry MM"" County that desired to pamomate, in oNer tc s,pp. this planning process. In Seminole County, all muniapalities haw joined the process .. are members of M. Workinq Gmup (See Attachment One for Participation Status Report). Other key participants in the Working Group include Seminole Community Volunteer Progam Inc., Florida Power Ctup. adon. Seminole H.EA.R.T., Central Ronda Red Cress. Seminole County Better Living fa Seniors and the Small Business Development Center at Seminole Community College, The Wodcing Group is lb—lahip of local governments, community oryanjo,tjwa, and key elements of the private sador working together to make the communities of Seminole County more resistam to the damages of future disasters. This document is the final report on the planning accomplished by the Working Gmup in the devebpment of the initial Seminole County Local Mitigation Strategy, and is a report to the community to local officials, and to the Department of Community Affairs. It has been prepared by Emergency Response Planning & Managemen4 Inc., the consultant to the county assisting with tlevetop ment of the Strategy. The sections of this document constitute the initial edition of the Seminole County Loral Mitigation Strategy and provide information reg,,di,g the efforts to date of the Working Group. They summarize the analyses to identify the hazards threatening the County and k define how communities are vulnerable to Nose hazards. The document also provides Illy list of Me proposals for programs or projects that are now being tl—Ib,ded to eliminate or minimize those vulnerabilities. The Working Group s effort will be continuing in the future, as Nis document is updated and the list of proposed initiatives given in it expanded Intl refined. At this lime, the Working Group will be requesting the governing bodies to review die Strategy, Intl then take action to adopt or edd... the Strategy. Once accepted, the Strategy will be used a guide for planning, landing Intl devebpimg the proposals listed in it The Florida Department of Community Affairs will also be using the Stotegy as a guide far its decisions in making grants of state and federal monies available to local agencies and organtratlons Goals and Objectives for the Initial Strategy The Working Group', efforts began with the identification of the goals and objectives that should be used to shape Ne initial Strategy. The Working Glop chose to focus on protecting to citizens If Seminole County fmm natural and man made disasters, mcludimg humca— wildfire, and h-bidous materials incidents. Highlights in the Progress of Developing the Initial Strategy Through the coobbinated effoM of its many members, Ne Seminole County Working Group has made significant progress. The organizational,th.— of the Working Group is III, well establishetl, Intl has completed or nearly completed many of the necessary plan rig steps. The activities of Ne Working Goup are eel by a Steering Committee of formally designated representatives of the paricpants, and the planning effort itself is wbd.1eJ through four Subcommittees. The Working Group has now definetl, adopted, Intl completed a step-by-step planning process designed to tlete-se the actions needed to reduce the impacts of future disasters. First. the hazards threatening be communities of Seminole County hake been se -moll, and Nen many of the sperfic vulneabilities ro Nose haiartls have been defined. Using this information, Me planning participants have then proposed one h,,d,d ,ilry seven protects Intl programs, to date, to eliminate or minimize these vulnerabilities These proposed 'mitigation initiatives" have been IwW,,ed into the Stotegy for implementation as resources become available. and to list presented in this document will continue to be expanded In future editions of the Stotegy. e n addition, the relevant existing plans, policies and codes of to local governments of Semmoo County have been assessed in light of the hazaids confronting the County. Based on the findings of these analyses, proposals far enhancements are have been ,,it will continue to be considered for development Intl Incoryoratlon Into the Strategy. FUMher, the Working Group has investigated experiences with past disasters impactlog Seminole County. These experiences provide information based on the adual impacts of prior events, and often claady illustrate the types of "mitigation initiatives" that can be considered for incorporation into the Strategy. The-,tgatlon initiatives" that are identdied as needed based on these analyses are proposed by each of the planning participants, and then—Minated by the Working Group to ensure that potential interjunstlidional impacts or conflicts, or dIplication of initiatives, oan be avoidetl. For the most eddion of the strategy, one hundred sixty-seven mitigation inAiatives have been proposed by the participants, addressing vulnerabilities to both natural and technological h—dals. In addition to defining neetletl 'mitigation inAiatives' and incorporating them into Me strategy, the Working Group Is also storing to provitle infomnation to the public about Me planning process and to obtain participation in ongoing stmtagy development. The Public Information Subcommitee has conducted a survey of boat businesses Intl industnes to solicit information Impodant to Md-ralvdimg their vulnerability to future disasters. Storing to assure the economic well being of the community ftera tlisader is an Important focal point for the Strategy. The Working Group has made a dedicated effort to educate the general public ming the Group's efforts. The Odando Sentinel recently published a favorable editon'al concerning the effWorking orts of the Group to mmin make Seminole Gounty mre o disaster resistant through the identification of mitigation Initiatives Intl Seminole County has asited the public of the process through a press release. Additionally, Seminole Government TV and CFN Channel 13 covered the wrap up session held August 26, 1999, Content¢ of the 0ocememt This tlocument is the initial ed two of the Seminole County Local Mitigation Strategy, A that provides Information, analysis Intl operational Comments that are common to all participants. Then, each local junsdiction is p—lded with its own separate portion of the Strategy for As use. This reflects the Working Group's policies that each kcal priadictw Intl cry—,tion must make its own decisions hapidng to proposed "mitigation Initiatives' A wishes to implement, as well as Me pnonIme that they shoultl be given. The proposed 'mitigation initiatives' listed in this tlocument have been or will be reviewed Intl coordinated by the Working Group. Findings of the Analysis In the late, motion, of — d,w,,,t the finding, If the dialling 111d,oled to, development of the initial strategy are pomaded. He,, the —Ift, of the effofs to identify h ... Me define vi,ld—millhas and as se vent plans and policies apresentedmpresentedadd the mitigation ditmi..s p,po,,d to date are the, listed to, each imladidw All of these amily... In..e been w,d,,t,d to asaist the planning p,,fl,lp,m, identify nestled 'di d1tafive," that should be included in the Stategy. To date those lifialled developed from this p,and fully coordinated i, ambold with the Working Groups operational procedures been Idolmorated Into the initial adbom ofthe strategy. Overall, to data US important facilities , yet,,, ... been .s.. mmd for that, to �to,,,Sdi ...am, Of bese, many am n,ldd,I,,,b , to flooding :d to h,,fl[no,T,a includes thousands of mobile home, vulnerable to high winds bi lamdid with h.,i.ad.. ., other weather, Vulnerabilities to Sodding "ho, 'g depefitive flood mdent, have me, endowment in the initial d[tod at the strategythrough th, Incoryoretlon of several mats, stoomwand oflMl .. A complete list of Ine hazard identification results is included in Seel Five, 'Hazard Identificetion and V,ld.ol Asevatnamt, Mititipi Maid... Proposed to Date A previously moll.ned, the findldgs of this planning have retuned in one hundred As awdd proposals, or 'd-fliptim, Initiatives' that have b..n incorporated into the ,14W edition of the Seminole County L-1 Mitigation Strategy, In Mods actions of the shategy, this list will continue to grew and change, me ,,, intonation become, — .litble d ddb,n ' analyses ..e conducted by the W-ing Godop, A compiled list of th, proposed mifig,flim initiatives, given I, priority order, is mosohed to this summaryas Attachment Two Ambhdm,t Three provided detailed imunion drudeflon smomers, to, these pm,fimad pomob Aft.bhm.st Four 'its the pending initiatives, Each gentling mitigation inAiative dh.d1d be in abasement mmitims. 1midlil edanomically, pri.mbd. and jobbloold" into the Strategy with a likely a —de of landing identified. Attachment Five then provides a list of funding mmobes, UnInd by category. It is jondootod to ampho.ad, that this Sal Is only . -tomall of the prbAa./s that each om"cIdefing jurisdiction and organization —IJ adfd to implement as rasomos, bemme or can be made available. It is not a Wdoem to implement the inithi in the absence of Smiling Som the indicated brother source. The list mindes proposals to, ploymbe or mbqmm, to hard,, lifficitl facilities such a, fire stations and shelters, and to atavism doming throughout the County. The Next Shape Th. — step in the process will be to, all of to g.v.m,,g Immes of the Inlet j,ir,dotmos in Seminole Coldly to ma— their p1mbo of t, strategy to modify it I necessary, antl to take aohon to, its adoption or --amert. Concurrently, the cwmytrcsi M'apaom sumegy Working Group itself will proceed to implement the aotion plan discussed in the Recommendation Section of the in W edition of the strategy. Then, in the years ahead, the initial edition of the Seminole County will be implemented, pd,tM. and expanded to continually reduce the county', vulnerabilities to the human and economic impacts of future disasters. Prgvmlomesemindecoumywddeg GraplploW Mtiaauon,drVYOrdmmamay. LoculMo,kation Strategy Participation Status Report As of 20-Sp-99 "'aft) Jurutliurion: Longwood —61 El El 0 0 ri D D R FA w Yl ------ ---- m ---------- i---- Jurutl:erion: Oviedo ----- ----- -------- -- — ---- c—. ------------------ JuruMmrion: Santora --------------- -- --- w FA ssss 0 D D 0 0 0 El - ---- - ------------------- 11 6d w H ---------- v VI w Cl yj —o ------------- ❑ ------------------ -------------- -- ---------- -------------- . ... ....... Lucal Mlttgad-S-,gy- Mitlgareort lrtltfwli in Prionry Order arty Smso ] tic Spnnmr WOLA'o. Ob�r�quon —11 A �ai�aec re ohmmnf 6ENotta mle 3a ry amour Mop sE•nlanoa ewmyec, aunwnaoceat French Aremre Wamr cMof tonnwooe tlns fmatoe tcaya 25 3f cameo espmys Fre sEu+oczo Mana coon nru(c£MP.j co Pehensre Emerseaoy M of Casseocry 9F.1.41f6 Mnmo i ay 6eMd13� iecaonN ha enez rna. ..... ---- __._..._.... ........ _._....- ..... --- pry of ca cry nunm ro of Local Mifiyrztlnn .Straseg - mhig.d- MtG"w", m p,!,H6 Order Y�losiry Sco.x tnr�lv�ie 5/>aiuor INOI Na. 2 ry [oae..aro ry svM Zs po ou.olnury SUM opf� u(J)rv�i we�n��ulxmauvn i9 c�Nal uysuecny sEN�ooaa ����nJn wo�c�adxnrnnao aiH (i�er 9 flunye�oou 9[rn aw prewro cpa xyn�nm by sn ne xcliry xiiJ lix 29 Mai a�Minem BaMoea � 0eMaid2 u��ttgwan axiN� Ms�p oB xm�Thn royrkmtllV+o�xnx pl fun&n �aJ �tle�na c¢. ayyy a w'an's io viPpm m�Joxttm acrmi�rs. mnai murcc;ar9rs, aniomiJiim puMlo ewoatlon mine a�n�o� a¢HY9p.po eJorxreer�e Irumiim my olmie �o L-1 Altliglli— SI-Iff Afldpli- Lnitiatives M Plhliq Od, .......... ------ — ----------------- — ------------ - ----------- — — ------------ — - -- zs 1 pl ---------- - ------------ Local Midg.dln S-11V - Miligllkn Midd", ill P'lldo, Old,, Priority Seore h"—, sp. INOI No. D p- - ------------------- --------------- LIM Nflllglioa Strategy A111191till, lldli.ti— i. Pli-ily Order —MP. 1TI—IRl— jlTlRlrA` "PPRaEc ' - - ------- - - --------- - ----------------------------- -------------------------------------- - — — ------- — - — ------ .4.— 4— -1- ---------- 1-1— L MAlitigati-Strmegv-Mirigati- Inhimives in Priority Ode, Prionry,kae i.z Spw.w. /NOI Na Deuri0rin�� zt onwen oap sfamwmer sEMafoa re�+eryzaur<ssueseMous �oslona na eesemmenmtm %mrvnam� enoWyarceatnabybaNe pion. The oral tt�� keaayllnea byne eAy of �®M. mapmiett'.iwf.nme wn psio OtE cooxv C* SEm xt naw awry stamramr SEMo[a2 oa.ee oeroewgsnomof gamy s'se 5utim. Rm Big r omnan aamy stoanafer sEwotaS mreh,ea nmmry name ipem na�vemi�n"a �� wa,. scaonwrv, rvewaaa �'iis owewnreR PRorec*: cEM<5w rc+sll 2t sommmfm sEM9m's mo wa mrvwmmb a�R�naY eae Rain e xf aLLnry smrmwam sEJnat01_-----------S---------SWsl,mm�iwaon oMzon vm�rmee05L 035)na umm ISioRMWRiERaPRaEciYEI.pEftortCiHo�a w6,oz•rc a5f---- x0 oAenn Soimrafr sEM4ts9 vap��s oRnRNq ERP O ECTRSpmefakoae. um �f utlac)� ------------ mnwfm sEuaf50 ae evti�gmtm o�ww +�yf'j� oRMWAi RaPROJEci:Ona Nom`o�Minmf�l pNv (aosc5x is at6o9x�1 x0 Ciryatfake Mary sEM1woSx aw ie wa ervea m am mRiarya amm� esnm Ifm x0 <cyo faFe Mary sEMA050 Lamy eWn oaxv fart5muon Reµaremem r Local Mitigmion Strategy - Midgwion klnat+ver in Priority Order Y.twfy Sea fry+ ve Sports MOI No. Dar 20 Cowry Smrmwabr sEMAf o2 wmlon �acrvemi rate wbm'r�ians aa�ersimm�keAima nom� mmvomy�R �aMs y lsi uoKFnwesu----- rvs NEW t9 coumy Slomrasmr SEMAms n im rovemero�(29n mal to t4aau Sem�cananel 19 male sa+M Stommnror sEMossa a�wa eraonve erica ins aemamer any. ma 1q mie cowry 5fmrmater sEM4glo xwon as a - m aoel (sA.s inaoeee vavaory wle carry smmnretar sEMmss nq Wlmv�oNnq Emerer xronmau fa vWe case statnnaWr sEMatay oav�on aaerrym ow.isiy e 1 ewen(sa as lRso�oicll�rs a fa awe eauW 9fwmvnfer SEMAIH oryaon exa (2 R—IECe ersaonvnetmiwoa(xla o es�als oAuwATSPROJEei'. aA erase a yc)I le sfammaM sEAwfrs aauMq tsyearaoim eremrenaeMp orawnilw'ao a me IS10fBMWAi PSPRaEe�i rvew iroee>co aounae(am txc)I IS �^ Swmnm SEMAtet Sa+%meenolwa aivryawoulabe v �IsroReMwwi[R VROJEeianxon Aveweoerav Orero ERR cmumq (a-si-tsc)I omvw ISTro ev Raaa �eolrolsela dauWizaei2e)Isma Is DAbon 5fmmxater sEMatea eneryerequ4etl�bnq a( e, 1$TORMWwiER ac)I 1 g.a l+ol+o Laval Allligati- Strategy -Aliligad- hdd.11y in Priority Order PrtortyScore LJfturi.e Spmuor lN0[Nn rcrtpnmr fs <ewrty swemratee SEMof sl wva,<n µe Rlw 13I�E'appeselSioRMW iER PRO Eei:Fm or ePGass� wv<nlW��fC)i �sioamW rEa PAOJEti:ra aRoae�Pan eo evaie- 5wum'ae �OtdauC, a3A<eoe, axN<x.d oxnaa6e)� to eCwmy Sfwnmmfn sEMatSa oMwn ea�egaann vltife Itlso� ae�olsioamw�Re A<oiEci: BearaR Aver �o zsmy lw-tigiic)1 fe C<udy 51<�mwafer sEM wN Cnvon Eng caIT, nnarym .� ane psi q aEci. rain lw-feoo5cW11ArE 10 PdeCway snmrveter SEMat55 eficaW, eMn (srOFMWATER pnwEcbtake t+ayeaoemvlc a%)1 is roX C<urty sforrrmaur sEMn1n o d relsioRrnwa�iEI agaecT f to o�eo<wry stamwxer sEMatu oe. �5io ER wen la-tooaell Ai fe w<cm.rtr sm�vramr s s awye<a <.c< omwn qe. Poaro m �feys� away lsi we a'wa<l�s-0i�e)Ig to ewbewnry smrmwsrer SEMafsa11 Doman .naenp T1.19111 ppe vwxheu'aea.IsiogMwaiEaace ascllCr spec Avenue eroa eWven®RR Gasslnp lw-t3- o�.m<n vn, jsi veer. uee<avcw< sc Rap LIM Mitigation Strmeg,-Min'gation Iairiatives in PrioriV Order Rimiry Sure lrririonveS mar /N01 No. ona (Si PPaECT.cawrycl�m �e fno walaEft �� fs oAMw iiA vfto ec �ea�y taea<�R Ma�razooc)� to twe eo�mry seim..afer sEft6fu uma.-e prmon as a �aasa (s oRefmN Ea Ao [cr scum �Mf of e�ooc, aa<)) fe �� swimafer sefnafas unaM.a of �.IstaaxfwerEacpo [ci �vnweav�enue��ece e0 ff smoac)I a Weoutly Stomvakr sEew W raoaaryo me P.man eavMappaa e maeafoxe se)�wAM1 zm maws ��oakwni RacaoJEcrbeurx oiun (o1o6a6a6c)la 19 cnm soimmeter sEMa16l rPv�o Raw �%ulsi eT. e.aramisme oan, of �enla+a<x)Icr � ohknn ve eM a mae Ne mce av yea aear�o¢bn aag)sioftMVUA* Re a (a3rt]6ac)) fa cTy of fake Mary sEtnooaa oesiaaafeeo.neafwfor Masarsenee un skeon no.x The Seminole County Working Group for Local Mitigation Strategy Development Initial Local Mitigation Strategy October 31, 1999 The Strategy Section Two Introduction and Contents 9 This section of the document details the guidance for implementation of the Seminole County Local Mitigation Strategy. It describes the proposed mitigation initiatives to be initiated by each of the panidpanis In the planning prooess, as the necessary resources become available to do so. Through the Implementation of these initiatives, over Gme, the goals and objectives of the Seminole County Local Mitigation Strategy can be achieved. This is the initial edition of the Seminole County Loral Mitigenho Strategy, and, as such, it is anticipated that the mitigation initiatives proposed herein will be expanded and refined in the future, as updated editions of the strategy are prepared by the Working Group, Developmentand Processing of Mitigadon Indiatives The mitigation initiatives listed in the initial edition of the strategy have been derived from the stepwise approach used in the planning process. The initiatives have been identified from the —tat. of: ✓ Tha hazard idenfin—ion and vulnerability.... ssment process u,d h,ken, ✓ The review of local govemment plans, polides and codes, a,of,, ✓ The experiences wnh previous disasters m and eetgenoy events. The initiatives, once proposed by a jurisdiction or organization, are than reviewed by the Mitigation Planning Subcommittee and Steering Committee of the Seminole County Working Group. This review is intended to identify any unintentional or unwarranted inierjurisdidional impacts. conflids or duplications. If there are none, then the initiative is nedered acceptable for incorporation into the annategy. If co ised regarding intedudsdidional impacts, behiids or duplications, the, the panlcipant proposing the initiative is requested to respond wRh addtional information or to sp,priafely —y the proposal. Once an initiative is accepted for inmrpomtion into the strategy, any needed additional information to charado=, the Initiative and justify its implementation is gathered Then I priority for implementation If the lln'twl is beWbIlIhId by Ililm I on—, - of criterinumericalobte, to d,d,, ,numericalwscarem eel pronny ,,. The high,, the , the higher the pro, to, implementation by the jurisdiction or organization. The steps in the process to to ... top antl —do- ftig,ti,h initiatives aredetailed in the W.,i Groups Ope.bing P—d.... Format The format of the took.1 strategy he. been designed to tacte formal obi on the initial edition of the Seminole County L-1 Mitigation Strategy by the 1-1 it—mmbt, end other pbloqiihibg organizations. In this format, the mitigation intati... emieeonot or 1,mi by each of the pi have been separately oM.nized Wine on individual to' In this way, the d—ob make, to, the p,di local j,dediet—, eld can takereviewke on.b toreviewstrategy,only the[, p.li.b of the strategy, end modify it .s needed pro, to Rs adoption or imoophnnee, with- further need 11 consider the hnn ion Metwo, proposed by ... th,,jOintidw or organization — The format of this lebonnenteow ph—, obt;,ize, that any poi neliginum Ini I it is actually to be implemented. obbb he,, an agency or m—eflon that i, defined as the "sponsor of the Initiative. The Sonei—I County W,66,g Group f,, Local MR!,bli.b Strategy Development moogn!..s that potei . mfti,.ti.b initiative without ... imodingly d,tig-ii the j,h,ddi,, , responsible to, beel.men"At" m '.. lessen Rs i p.b.bility of beingb,plib—nont. Thienfone in the Seminole C-My Local l M,figoeStrategy there ,, he mitigation initiatives pm,bo,,il that dD mto identify the sponsor identified for In.,, implementation when resources—',, —nobl, W do — The format i, also Intentionally designed to -.be each pri or organization piottelpabli in the planning em— to eme, it, own decisions ,,,ming mitigation o— end oni Ne—Imb., inleryunstlidional eeneidereli— have been addm—d as well. During the planning process, the potential to, intedri ,,dieti, I impacts, ." bonfliet. ., duplication that would be created by implementation of by i p hb,b been wrii and, 4 identRied, addressed appropriately. Content Each of the jurisdictional or b,phiomb ... I too, contained in the strategy provides to, them ty,ee, of infin-brobiton or action: • Aimmm— by the participant of the bylaws, pebmeem, antl other o,emll planning onmr, adoptetl end ablaze by the Seminole County Working Group fe, Local Mitigation Some,,y Dibmepre-, • A hm,y of the findings regarding the hazardobtfobbilh and vulnerabilitymerit processndbk.. for the phicip.nn'. area of obbeenn. including loss behm.b.h, • A listing of the proposed mitigation nitnitive, desired by the poidp- to, hooryorano, into the Seminole County Lowl Milii Snotegy, The hit o��nra provides information naming the sponsor of the initiative, a brief description of its empe antl intent, the anticipated met o cost impact of the In6,tw, , the preliminary estimated —old to cost ratio justllying its validity for implementaton, the mast likely (ending source for implementation, and its assigned smre for priority of implementation. (The higher the numeric shore, the higher its priorhy.) The contents of each tab, antl the supporting decision making during the planning, have I— tlevelopetl by representatives of each of the participating jurisdieions o Z.—Ill , using a technical approach common to all participants antl adopted by the Seminole County Working Group for Local Mitigation Strategy Development. This common technical approach is detailed in the Working Group', Operatinq Procedures. The detailed supporting inform 1, computer programs and technical forms from which the summary tables wRhib each tab have been developed, is available from: The Seminole County Wobdng Group for Local Mitigation Strategy Development Clc Seminole County Emergency Management DRce f 50 Bush Bivtl. SanfOhd, FL 32773 Procedures For The Seminole County Working Group for Local Mitigation Strategy Development 1.0 Background and Purpose The local governments, --4 getups, antl onvate sector interests in Seminole County, Florida, have initiated a comprehensive and coordinated effod to tlecrease the vulnerebildy of the communities of the county to natural, technological and sodoWn an- madehazards. To dothis,a—Rd%ogency planning organization has been eM,bli,hld and given the title. The Seminole County Working Group for Local Mitigation Stategy Devebpment' or hereina%er, the Working Group. Representatives of the padidpatinq local jurisdictions antl organizations een igned to the Working Getup's Steering Committehave bass e and Subcemmidees. The mission of the Working Group is to identity the hazartls that threaten the county, tletermine the vulnerabilities of the munities to those hazartls antl t0 tletine initiatives that could, R implemented, reduce those vulneabilities. The results of this process are to be documentad in a single, coordinated local mitigation strategy for the promulgation andlor implementation by the panidpating jurisdictions antl organizations. The Working Group will also be responsible for upea mg and maintaining the local mitigation strategy In future years. The organizational arodt— eatablahad to initiate antl maintain this planning process has adopted by-laws to guide and control its managerial and policy actions, d— one .1, methods for representation, voting processes, and similar actions. This document defines the operational procetlures by which the Working Group will conduct and maintain the mitigation planning Process ftself The Working Group, its Steering Commidee and subcemm'lhees require standardized op,and nal procetlures to accomplish their responsibilhies and to strive to achieve those objectives for any action it may take, indudln9 but not neceseanly limited to the following: • To ensure all participants in the Working Group, as well as the community at large when appropriate, have an ad.q,doo op' —by to review and ment upon any proposal for odbon by the Working Group, • To ..in premature, unwa-.. or illegal atlopfion of any proposal for action in the name of the Working Getup andlor one of the partidpating organizations, • To provind a mechanism for any participant In the Working Group to offer proposals, recommentlations ant suggestions far further consideration, • To promote dfft o ive coorom ion and censuttation between the Steering Committee xhth its sebod—lbees, do well as among the subcommittees themselves. • To create a procedure to resolve mr icts between govemmental entities during the mitigation strategy development antl 10 reclRy inconsistencies in policies and regulations in mitigation programming by govemmental entities. Gaunry WOM1Ing Group la Local Miligalian Gearegy Oeveiopmenl a wo. � n w .Bylaws an mrs ores. one o • To provide a mechanism far evaluation of the implementation of the strategy and to provide for its continued updating, • To establish procedures for coordination of local govemment mitigation activities with those of the business community, antl • To establish a consistent basis to prioritize mitigation inhiatives sponsored by members of. or ativocated for implementation by, the Working Group. 2.0 P.... do, for introducing antl processing a proposal for consitleragon Any member of the Working Group or the oe—enhy at larye is enoo—god to develop ,it justRy proposals for—deration and passible adios by the Steenng Committee or any of he subcommittees. This procedure ahlidp.-that subrammillees, through a procedure for cooperation antl wnsuAetion (described below) will generate many proposals or requests to" of own—beretion and/or for mnsideration by other subcemmhtees. Nevedheless,the procedure also antiapates receipt of proposals or other requests for consideration from sources independent of a subcemm... inducting. but not necessarily limbed to, the following: • Ident'Ifcation of speafchazards, vulnerabilhies or risks to be considered in the od"etion strategy, • Proposals or concepts for struttural andlor non-structural m'Ngation strategies to be incorporated into the strategy, Endorsements andlor criticisms of pnonti.. assigned to mitigation initiatives, old orseme." given to inhatives, or actions to reed i""'I d • Needs for and approaches to public information and education programs, Requests tof endorsement of immediate mitigation andlor post -disaster redevelopment actions for speagc geographic areas or senors of the com—fty Requests for spec actions or endorsements that may or may not be consistent whh the mission of the Wonting Group . It can be expected that such requests could pngmete from a range of sources and in a ,,.rely of formats. Requests are also likely to be actively soliated from members of the e—mrodtees and the Working Gmup. Requests will be processed in the following Sfap t. A request receivetl outside of a meeting of the Steedng Committee or subcommittee would be transferred to the Working Group's staff for action. A request r,: ed during a meeting of the Steering Committee or a subcommittee would be processed in =,it with the instructions of the chairperson of the Steering Committee. Step 2. The Working Gmup's staff will prepare a brief cantles description of the request on a form tle,,elople for that purpose, which —Id document the origin of the request, and record the it.. and method of disposhbn d the request by staff. Step �. The Working Groups staff woultl, K necessary, consuh with.chair of the Steering Commhtee repoling'ns disposilion and, ttappe,priate, prepare the request in the form of a draft 1e1o101n for adios by the Steering Committee. 2-2, S1, 4. In —11 1, Procedureth I P'IdIll anticipates that the staff would tlh,,ft the to the ],.d agency representative If the most appropriate subcommittee t, addressthe IltIll If the request. Step S. The subcommittees lead 19111y presentative would beresponsible tb, -ber, g the request by the e., taking further ,, f,, its I disposition, Step It Ifwarranted, the --littIl cold incoryorate the request into the etbbetel-d PlIlliN PlIell by the -b—theb -1f, refer the request to another subcommittee, or propose the — qf,, f,,,,t action by the Steed, 3.0 P .... d... fI, formal action by the Steering Committee F.—I adions in the h.m. If the W.,I,mg Group will only the taken upon ., eff—.1ive — I the Steering Committee. I. —I actions inGutle, but ate not ..I .... nly limited to. the following: 1. APP-1 Ild t—smibbl of any formal d"ll"t 11 the I'll If the W1*119 Group requesting funding f,, any plan, mitigation initiative or other purposef,,, an .,glliIm,ll eAernal to the WIlItIg Group, 2, Endorsement by the W,,k,,g Group If any proposal or request f,, funding by any j.hithlibti- or public or prrvale organization of . structural or 1..- eh,ct.ml hazard miI inttell,e, 3. Publication or issuance If I 1.1bl-W, libel d—rn- under the name of the Working Group, 4, Issua nce If ,y request or I—Itill 1,11119 the intended pT,ee If initiating bli..s f,, hazard milkgation PlIt-chleredevelopment lt,,[, by I it M"t-I e or p— r.dr.ihi. Seminole County, 1, Publication If, final -I strategy prepared pursuant t, state glidllllll d and/or une, state funding, as well as any subsequent anal —t—I or ,,dI If the t,t,gy, ti, Issuance of any fb.1 recommendations in the name If the W.,Idhg Group regarding poet -disaster Ild,111WIllt w-1, or guidelines forth, county .IdlI' its-h 1. Any other .— ..I.. which, In the opinion If the chair of the Steering Committee. The determination of whether 11 ebilm by the Steering C—Ab. is , formal —II ,,d , bi,d to the procedure is within the discretion of the chair If the Steering C.—be, It anticipated by the. the Working G—p's p.ced,,nes that formal actions by the WorkingG p ftelf wit fake the form of recommendations for 1-1 businbusiness �!interests, and other sectors If the community toIfift. their h.ffle. heepbbIi Id resources to implementthe Working G,..p'recommendations .,d the strategy d—ftp- A, , voluntary community -based, public-pn— pIt—hp the Working Group he, no authorities in le, to independently ad,pt antl elf— any recommendation, pie, or Mbetegy. It, strength is in the vvM,g cooperation If the and j,ftdidw, represented on its Stood, C—ftme to implement the P—a", If the local md1gat", strategy- Formal ad,,,, Ita, by the Working Group will — in one of two --s, by Iff—I'll lot, 11 1 1011P duly matle and ww,d,d M , regularly scheduled meeting If the Steering C.Mmid— Such . te will be recorded in the or minutes of the et-fimg, Or, the SW,d,g C,,,ift,, may also I— formal sofion in the following M.Peal Step 1. A proposal to, the action 11 prepared by the III—, in the form of draft resolution to, action by the Steering Committee. The draft resol Won he, ...had any d—M,im) to be issued i t the P.nm of the Working GI, ab,MM, d—a-fiee to further explainexplainth—le.. ..d purposes " .h,'Ip draft resolution for Wl,dl9 Group ad,on, Step 2. The draft —IIII, and Mh—d d--heo, are PIwdld W the Working G—pe Mad to, recording The Me will wnsult with the P14, of the Steering Co—M, to hlemify whether the C.IM, Aft..Iy ., other designated individual should IV- the proposal to, wmment prior to its d lo.11tile to the ShItin CIMPIKII, spap 3. The Working Group', Matt will mpy the draftmeelflon to, distribution to the Steering C..PIft... t the event that the attached bb.—N are ,I,eM, in volume or size, , reference wpy to, mp,pt- by Saar, Committee members — pfihM i dareamd indiIdIala MR be made —11.ble at ad,"! lamd postilt. Step C. The Working G—P , Moe will circulatee a copy of the Pe to Pme,bem of the Steep, Except to, the I emergency meeting, the draft resolution add fl,,hm,,t, I- be = of an Steering P—tbm P,..bMa .. —.ks p6.1 to the MeMiP, . ,M[ph dl...ep, . I! bobP .n the draft resolution .,d proposed action m planned.Step tI. Prier to fie.1 .,I., It, ... p.—d wa-nted by the chair of the Sem6eg C.—come, the action may be p..p.P.d until . d.d.i.n by the C._, Al.I.y Pag.PMPg . need for . public h..H,g on the proposal. If the. I. . ma,dhimt ... will be referred to the Public Information SIlew",ftee . prep.re to, and beed.d the public hearing in .word with County reqIi—M, ,d prior f.Ph,, action by the St,,,g Committee. Step 6. In , the alam," of , public Imer,g or after , wncl,,i,,, the Steering Committee will take adion on the proposal M the —meeting using one If the following option Sped 7. Adopt the ongie,l proposal formal —ol— by aff-MiNe majority vote Step 6.Ramd the original proposal through fail,to achieve an Mff—W, I ax �y— Step 9. Modify the proposal in some manner prior to voting on its a do Step 10. Instruct , M,bob—fthe to —1g, the matle, further and ad,ise the Steering Committee of . de— of ad., Stab 11. Delay action on the proposal until tM1e neat regularly scheduled meeting ofthe Steering CO—Ifte, county working Group far I.ocei rnitigalian Slralegy neveiopmenr a wo. eNa.s an rote ores. one e o Step 1T. By majomy afirmative vote, circNate the proposal to the Working Group far review and sot',it --t during the neat Working Group meeting prior to formal action by the Steering Commldee, Step 13. When formal acion by the Steering Committee has been completed, the Working Group s staff will archive a copy with supporting documentation in the project files. The staff will provide a final copy of the —Won, without supporting tlocumentation, to each member of the Steering Committee. If appropriate, and under the signature of the chair of the Steering Committee. the staff will distribute the final resolution to the individuals, agencies, or organizations for whom h was intended. 1.0 Procedure for coortlinatha, of Working G dbap activgies The Steeling Commdee Is responsible for e11u619 that the planning process undertaken by the Working Group antl its subcommittees, as well as the actions to be taken, are affedwely coordinated wtthin the management structure of the WOAing Group, as well as with jurisdictions and organizations outside of the Wodking Group. Coordination of acions will be accomplished through the following mechanisms: • CooNinatian mechanisms will be built Into the routine functioning of the Working Group. antl will include diadbution of meeting summaries and inures to members of the Steering Committee, summation of subcommittee activities at each Steeling Committee meetings, periodic release of public information regaNln9 the al i,,dad of the Working Group, involvement of the Working Group'a staff in subcommittee meetings antl similar mechanisms. • The Steering Committee is responsible for aasunng the overall —did—, of edivnies among the remaintle, of the Working Group, working primarily through the assignment of tasks antl a—., to the sub—ihees antl resolving Coordination issues dung the summation reports In meetings. Coodination wnh outside organizations and the wmmunity at large will be achieved by assuring that the Public Information SubcommMee cooMinates the release d information to the media, antl by having the chair of the Steering Committee be designated as the official spokesperson for the Working Group. • Coordination of new assignments for subcommittee attention will be achieved by having all such assignments —de by the chair of the Steedq Committee either diredly during a meeting d the Steering Committee, ar by w femng with the Working Group's staff prior to making such an assignment. • Assignments that originate within a subcommittee that warrant the attenlion and _ideration of another are to be coordinated by the designated lead agency representative of the subcommittee through referral to or consultation with the lead agency rerese pntatives of the other subcommittees whose Involvement is being sought. 5.0 Procedures for resolving conflicts behveen g""dieetal entitles This procedure recognizes that many of the statutory or regulatory mechanisms for promoting hazard mitigation antl postCisaster redevelopment activities are based in the powers antl responsibiinies of local govemment. Funher, it is recogn¢ed that with the TZ, .on eNaws an race ores. oneP I.". t,—I, Ideal gh—h—predidtio.. i. Seminole C..I,,, le,ffidt. and inwnsistencies i, regulations, statutes,polices and pN,,,, elphilibg d,,,,t,, Thplid, and herevery will arise. Thd,,f.,a, one of the pri—ty f—ml, ofthe Wil,itig Group i, to identity where such conflicts or f—ballece, exist, and to provide mechanisms t, address and resolve the .... dM,d problem —, The Working Group', organizational at—, is intended t, wT—t—pe,:,,bv, from each f, p,didp,,g Ideal jdii,dietw an the Staanhq providingf—th to daraffy, deliberate antl -- —fliets among govemmental -b— This organizational ati-let— is anticipated W enhance identification ald hawmw di w,Md, bakeall 91-11-1 IlItill by P—libig .. organized managerial f—tati, Ilppdh1l little ilf—ball, 1=1,1191 tall-11dal 1111yel, and —p-- --i, to adtlress antl resolve such ddhfli— Nevertheless, beyond the organizational stmet—, Seminole Cd.ItYl —g Group to, Loral NiffigIbill Strategy D—lp1l,t will utilize the following lIq ... tilt ad!... t, identify, address and seek W canedconfixt, and inwnsistencies b.tileal 9ovemmenlal .1thm 1. For Ne beneft lithe Working Group antl inwryoration into Ne the Mitigation Planning S-11bell will, in cooperationwith the Working pe -0 will develop an bbia""71"e " of IV" MM't" regulations, polices bed procedures of 11 If the local g—ln- 10,di—, in S,,i,d, County. This baseline willaccomplishllaccomplish the fdlbw,g: I ... Mq each gm__1 "thy. • Catalogue that, statutes,statutes,plans ,d p,lipoliciesrelathazard, d be hazard nat1g.fiel and ted—I.phnattl ldib,.I. • D.acnbe antl leadss the initially apparent sh.rffal, dal ids and gn , tnci,, If ,d I—, g,,,,,,M,l ,Mile • ,, tntraldtim. f., the Working Group . consideron hibeafl.l.n. and., de-etw. ...he . ned— the —ba, and ..pa of such andff.1 , debbithe and Thedeliaei,cial 1. I the ...bt fallible the Mitigation Reeling Subodnhhn. with the adpIg' of the Working Ghd.p a staff will further id,,tffy the dpl,tm, lIhd,,d nd/,,industry and business ctltn, utilized be, dim—, mitigation I'd ladd,,ry by the key elements of the pd,,t, saddr If Seminole C—ry. These will . ....—d m relationship . the mitigation and be—ty programming —elfly dae, bamit implemented by the g—,ent- i altell If S.mlb.]I County. This .—alletit may also attempt to Indicate sh.rt edebict. -d., inconsistencies be—, the pi,1,11. ..d Inlaid sector, --mg Nell, ditardid, from the WotiJbg Group as A develops Its —1 mitigation belt.gy. 3. The baseline will be utilized by the S.e.m.... be —.mI.d . the ble,mg C.—Il proposed betide, by go,are—all enNies to —et Q-1 balles bill acid'... lb.flict, if any, antl, with the C—ce If the Steel, Committee, these —1d be i,d.ddd i, the Mt1h, Group'a overall local thifigabi- alIde,ty f,, S—med C-0, 4. As the -g—, Planning S,bw,,M,, develops the proposed local theg,fle, M"'a,y fid, wri,id—tim antl adoption by the Steering C,m,t,, or Ili m biannual f the b1 updated this pheeld— anticipates that de.., of mitigation initiatives, d ... .. assignments If pd,My thereto, will T— — It— f1hhI1 1-1 hlbleltl—i s and lftIdi1I I—, the d,,!,,d or needed plg—neg by governmental ........ "i entities. When such , —, ,, , dl,ithbd they will became the responsibilityIfth. m"'.— P,b,,lh, S11,111-1 to itlentify I 11,11hill to the P11,11, area, it requested by any If the pIdl, involved i, the behfiet by using the Wli-mg steps: Step ' - The "i., P111,119 Subcommitteewill be responsible f,, -th- dlb, antl p,,d,, d,f,,Ri,, If the inconsistency, lei,tedide, or belf,et In mitigation or recovery p,,g,,,,i,g or le-1 among ge-h—eld befflil, or the—li, g-el—te —1 111 the pin -I Step 2. In the event the Subowm �111[y th—gh dil—lill It it, g,l,dy lIh,d,],d ,,f,,g, ' Id It he di—eth- If the d,,ig,,t,d ]ledagency representative If the MqgbV , PlanningS—Ilittll, I —bl, If intlivitluals fl, --tI, -ebmkilfl If the Subcommittee will be 11,1911d t, serve f,, special, temporary — to further,th., assess the conflict.. The ,,be, I individuals sc —j91Id will be It :h. di.-" If he lead agency pelves h—I - will the I. b, eq,let he Working G—p I staff t, support the task f,, i, the evaluation. 1, 111 le—, the assigned,d,,d.,I, will both md— efthe junstlictions or privatese— with dived interests i, the -lb— If the Ild the, ,dwit,hlits — no dild interest i. outcome of the --i- K It all feasible. The assigned task f— will 1-1 the situation .1d fe-11t, I =n d till for I— fl, —id-- I,d efill by the Planning recommendation -d,,, will be prepared i, w�!,g I'd provide , billib,te d ... dpti,, If the ld Imporlance of the It dlflllthe feasible lbbl, 11011,11 for 1-11hill of the It as well as the III, d—tgle ,d disadvantages If each. recommendation The will 111, dIltffy the pfi,, ,bf—d by the task force and he .—dying ei,—s f., this preference. Step 4. The e'lly If the Mffig,Ibn Planning Sibeb—iftee will reviewthe ,III ei—ldl, If the Ink force antl — far beleblen.. The lead agenty will the, relay the task forte's --h— , — the heti.h. If the vote If,' , W,f- PlanniCommittee., sub—,,ite,e on the preferred hIl epto the h,i, If the Steering C.... Step 5 Th. 'elee_d,te, end vote of the Mft,g,t,,, Planning Subcommittee will then be presented by the chair If the Stewing Committee le that group It Hs— IgW.dy scheduled meeting Formal adion I. the =,,nd, !,, will thenbe taken I — eh the procedures given n d/,r if appropriate, the Mitig.tPlanningPI1Planning— S,bitle, WH the requested t, lllrpohttl the adion into the mitigation strategy. A. be option to Steps 2 through ti above, in whale or in p.l. the Working Group, .1111 discretion If the chair If the St—, CII—I, may Ali- the Regional Dispute Resolution P—d— provided i, Chapter 29F-20 If the Florida Ad—l—We Ced, 6.0 Procedures f., —W.bh, ..d pd.t.,, the mitigation strategy Once prepared, the W-9 G,.p', dool litigation —19Y 411 be -11.1ted led ,pde,d on , continuing IeWi, The Mitigation Planning and Risk Assessment 11 St,bod—ne, will be responsible to, this process. On no I... that , biannual basis, the following allp, will be take, by the W1,1,19 Group to —,hopfi,h this p,ead... Step 1. Th. Mitigation Planning S.—doe wall oond.d the following • Consult wtlh the Financial Issues S,bw,,M,, to determine the e,nent status of footling antl implementation of the pdori(y mitigation initiatives as tlefned in the curtent etlNon of the local mRigafon strategy, as well asio determine R any new federal, state, brat or sources for footling —g,tl , hititi... have become availableW the Working Group, locall government orkey .1— of the pri— ad.,, • R "n"' the Woo,d. of the Teet.gs of the Steering C—nnil,W and Weill Group fi— the l had p,ned to identify any pedlo,Wt, to, nine mitigation initiatives, • Review the status of Wd,W], Woo, and local legislation hal to hazard ,ftigalb, programming p,,,IgM,d doling the p—dog two year od dthe eh-G4any regulations, or pertinent to g.np' strategy, , mission or the contems antl format of the local mNgation • R,q,,,t the P011, Information .S,bw,i,go,t. ...... theof wth,.,Ry', -ht attitudes add perceptions gadimplementation e h—WI ,ftigetw strategy , date and the type, of deffledim, and/,, enhancements that would likely be —paddle W the community at • Plop, , —, description alto, Wt., of the each of the pri,nty mitigation initiatives, new legislation and/or new f,,di,g = for Mitigation initiatives, well acceptability, the public changes to the Transmit the hep,et to the chair of the Sheen., C—d-ite. and each of the W.0on, G—p . than exeding a.bohnmit— lldap '. C.—hently with Step 1, the Risk Assessment S.1,on—Ode .11 — P,i.h the f.l.emng Wake Review all ,00—ht assessments of at..... and emergencies ocouni.q in he Intervening had year period to loll the effectiveness of any me'eto, mftioti... involved, , ,all as to identify any new --Ibilftor - rakS indi—d by the I—W, • Readamt, any new information regarding heeWell threatening the county,the vulnerabilities I ... U kid, to th..e hazards, and the nak, ,,,dM,d with the Z-1,11M s Review a, the pW`loWd effectiveness of any mitigation initiatives being initiated at the fineof the assessment, but not yet completed, • Ph.p.W . —an report regarding the —.1to of the --ant, emphasizing ta,.d,ad off.od—ee, of the mitigation le—i— in pl.ce and defining any new risks W the ooll-ly b.=,i,g apparent during the preceding two Year dared. ,a, Tz. , d — a,.— . I I or,a Provideme written report to the chairoftWorking Groups Steering Committee e, m,d the lead g,,p,,,,tw,,I W each If the su"'mmetmes. SWII 3as . a11 The Steering teen ' mgaCommittee, ,m the atepdemmlem,d' he, Subeodddha.. well aa from came[ thdmdm,iglee, will mhe goals and m,j f d,I,them,mgybl,e mpl... nglPtake add the mddd.If le Itmlegy. Thdaegbfthead bjdm,,ava account the..tamid, leimpledIltmillIl d will be,... fytheIt... , participants to shape the Initiatives be he proposed m the neat eddion . me da"b"t StepMb4.Using Mg the tdme.dhm.iof Steps 1, 2, addde3btttthpe.Mdt.tileh., Planning that.yth...,dmI(he m, dmll,efthe, local l TheIleed,strategy .....b. ..p.b.i.d m.dedor updating.,. . tagency representative will the, .me,y to the chair If the Steering g CI.-thbwp,,m,h..teemed to develop erevision , of the I'h,z,,dim, strategy. Planning P.didy... MI be requested to dpdam the dI'demald Ild vulnerability assessment process in _efid with thprocedure, submit ,, or nedffimidrIpmef dgmid, imb ImeLwith the forms antl Instructions provitled in Adachmentsmm! I Step S. Upon instruction from the dhm, If the Steering Committee, and wfth the w'p,mhe, If the Working Group'a staff, the Mitigation Planning ,pS'Itd_enmm1t1 ee1m, willprepare 11eIddraft mFIof lthe repgmd,.mmdemgmedgy ..I circulate sto .1mbl,Ifthe.legC,,, ,hmmThe StemingCI—idtmbea will individually mimege draft If ettl strategy add comments to the Mhm,b— Planning SdIcemthedid.fil, mdadeemgSmd,diM,em11 lead time ldetf,, 4.1'.. Planning the draft as add submit I be the Steering Committee for mei add dale.aa as Bran, Step 7. PursPursuant.-I the procedure given above, the Steering Committee MI dim I formal chad I. Imem the draft If he deemed Ideal Rig.l,.n strategy f,, I,bdd, review. Upon anlive , the dft MI be I ....d pbblidy I., I request for comments,o, I dmd affid, the dmft will be dablded I. the Mitigation Planning $dbddmdd f,, bi-the, e,i,i,,. Step 8. The Public Imfembeeld S,bwmmh,, w,,Id prepare ad!. releases and age I medd. .9mbidg the hl . the amit for jmw by the pdbfid The Subcommittee mbld take add,fbdn,I amp, to dnc mg. all members If the WwM7 Group to dd,im, the dmft in dedel p, to the meeting in oMe, be _dde't more eftewely on me d.dd..n,. Step 9. The Shed, Cmd.Mm, aml Working Gdodd, mmiff would prepare pla, pm,,nme- summarizing the fmdfidg, and conclusions reached by the W.,Idd, G., in the I at.p, as well .s highlighting the p.pomd changes i, the strategy.Sbap rn 10. Allhemem dgmeWorking G I, the presentation prepared in Step it _ did be g W the members, and comments w,mid be received I,d meal-ded for hime, consideration. The meded If the g woultl ,.=,open,_fforI I balye aver me contusion of did. Woking Groupmeetingdr. any I.'ha, caMdm emdrd,m.. .1 —Y —9 G1.1 f., —1 MR9.1- _ TL , b.— Tre,— M Step it. Planning Suboblnnnlh- —1d modify the draft If the otod"y and 1—ft I f- edit I the Steering C11-11 to, flo,11 Inlinfill in I— vfth the pnooe&— to, such action given above. 7.0 Poi-d—, for coordination If public and private INU9,15- Initiatives dt.j., p.T.be to be achieved in ...bfimhilig the —g Go, is to provide .. ,,g6,g to,, to, ob,lbonnv, offde, information —h,dq, end continuing oon-thefilt, lbbtw..n the public end ind— —, of Seminole County. A, such, the presence of ep—nodwe. If all local 9—m-1 pribojoi— .s well as key el—eds of the —ty, prate sedor on the Steeling Comm— and its S.boonindit ... ... expected to provide to, —nometim of public .,I pm.le end., mfti,efi.d ididen—. In addition to the o,pnizabo,al structure, however, the f,]IW,g responsibilities end p—m... will be followed by each of the W,dl Group', Subcommittees in the .d&ot of their -wili.e All Subcommittees: Each subcommittee's lead agenty will he,, , responsibility to etri to achieve a, appropriate bobalancem representation from the local g_mm"t InenteMm end community l'difflo.ni, ob'dhoob in maintaining , balanced ,pe ... Won fli—bood--le,d y ,g,n,y ,q,,bt assistance recruiting �M:d dn.n.1 m..b.ns from other —noe. The Risk Assessment Subcommittee: this ..boohnnnh- the risk ,p,,., of both 1-1 g.—nnInt end the business tyto the lh.obnds threatening the county will be n.id.— The Mttioalion Subcommittee: In It of the planning efforts, md,didg id.dtffi hf --l�lidie ,,b nidddtee will include ronsideretion of inkiafves applicable to both local , --rd. business end industry, as well be the general public, whether such ino.h— —.1d affect only one of the. .— of the bohn-did, or .11 of In... The A major too., of this subcommittee'sIe on the ¢Bert, will finandal vulnerabNity of the community to disasters, antl the need to, effective oapabilo- in bibAbde, nb—ty, This subcommittee will wbdi with the Risk Assessment Sohoonneb..and the Mitigation Planning SO. ,ob... of the pd.. —., be well as the public be—, arefullyconsideredIt in the development, implement—, end evaluation ofth, local mitigation strategy. This subcommittee, in f,lffl1mg R, responsibility to — b—oo, of funding to, planning and implementation of niz,h- intibb— will pursueavailable oppo—dine to, It— ,d,,fndi,g of mitigation iniliafves as well be g ... m,,nt,l sources. The Public ldfo-bfi.dSubcommittee: hiefid.1-p-eblityfthe W_ng G—p end. ind.diN the th,si—, ob—nity, A, such, the TL 8V.. an P-- P " ofts ,ebed—Mee will be available to assist edhill Ilbbell— on maintaining the It If the private sector and 11 awareness If the mitigation Initiatives nnd,hlk,n by this 'llpl,lnt If the 1111.1ity, 8.9 Procedure for ---t If the lItIllbility W disasters'impaebi The Wonting Group'I approach t, the planning process is intended t,include , nn eep,,h ... I,, —ty-%IJ, assessment If the vulnerability If the ne—nity to the intie,et, If natural, nd societal hazards. T, PIt Of IN, objective,th Working Group h,, developed , Inf— approach I I assessing the -1111hile— It the ousting flolitill systems and neighborhoods in Seminole C... The approach i, detailed in the fln, and instructions given in Attachment One to this procedure. The Risk Assessment SlIbbillftell is Illp'llibl, III beInd"IdIng Ind providing Ilppel to the vulnerability assessment process conducted by each If the planning P'M'P'_ C—e—, If the farm provided 11 Attachment One is intended t, rely on the judgment If knowledgeable InMen.1, using assumptions and efirth—I suitable to this level If planning. It I, not e, q,!,, I, detailed-gi engineering I, te ch — studies h— Intbit, bee,"n'.. Planning ,top-, ,, en—neg.d In use In, fInne antl -Wedl approach provided in Aftllhlllt One in InJIl to assure, to the —t possible, that the vulnerability as—Ilt PIWI, 11 edIP111,1111v1 in its approach and objective in the judgments"'I'd Use If this f— in accord with the I —boons by the planning pitcpht, will provide bell, the pellcip-1 Ind the Working Group With . enneethih I,es to judge the 111111,bi"' N important f'dId" IyItIlI Ind neighborhoods t, the impacts If future disasters. The findings If the vulnerability assessment p,.... are expelled . be used by In. planning p,dicipd- to identify the need f,, proposing —d—I or non-structural mitigation boti ... t, add,,, the mast ...... vulnerabilities identified in the assessment. 9.9 Procedure for identification — coordination If PIWIUII IM91till initiatives The Min,fi- PI —in, Subcommittee in —pdrebld In, coordination of the process to id nfify <hamctet , and p;i,eiz, potential mitigation initiatives proposed in, ncoM,nnion into the local intgati,it edidep. Input In, hI ph,- antl proposals f,, mNgation inlieti—, they ed— f— , variety If sources, dIding but not limited to: • The R, k A11111lere Ind F,,.ne,l Issues S—Tht—, based on the es An If thevulnerability assessment end risk —IyIiI • From local input gained through int—etion with all —b- of W—ng Group, • F,, analysis If thefined—sten-, or eenflint. among the Ine—I end policies If local inn.died-, III/., it. mitigationprogramming If the In— I-1 in n,indill to the public Ildl, ine seminae caunry wont • A proposal from any pudic or prvate sector participant active in the planning P.... , o • A proposal from any source for a mitigation initiative received and pmcessed by the Working Group in accord with pmmdures given above. To ensure that consistent all adequate'mfibmation regarding proposed mitigation in'lliatives submitted by a planning padidpantfOr incorporation into the stategy, the form This for initial itlentRcation d an inAialive given in Anachment Two is to be submhtetl. form is to be completed by representatives of the agency or oM.hibt ti- who woultl be responsible for implementation of the initiative, should the resources to do so become available. Completion of the fort, providetl i, Attachment Two is intended to rely on the judgment If knowledgeable individuals, using assumptions antl estimates suitable to this level of planning. It is not intended to require or necessAate deleted engineering or technical stutlies to complete. The form is submihetl to the Mhigation Planning SubmmmNee who reviews M to determine If • The proposal multl result in an unwar -d ad,,,,, impact in another jurisdiction of to another s,dor of the commu,Ry, • The pmPosal duplicates that submitted by another planning participant, • The proposal is unrelated to the mitigation of vulnerabilities to a natural, technological or societal hazard, or • Adtlitional information is nbod,d to untler ld the proposal pnOr to As consideration for incorporation into the strategy. If none of the above mentioned shuations is present, the Mitigation Planning SubcOmmmee will accept the proposal for incorporation into the strategy. If one of the ldlations appears to be present, the Submmmhtee whit request addfional Information or d,doetion from the submitting agency or organ¢ation, andlor that the proposal be modifietl or whhdrawn. The Mitigation Planning Subcommihee woultl resume the review of the proposal upon submittal of add'llional information or an appropriate motllficatfon. When the Mitigation Planning Subcommittee has completed this process, a mend,b,, will be m,d, to the Steenmg Committee that the proposal should be ccepted for incorporation into the strategy. Upon such action, the submitting agency or organtration will be requested to provide more bellied Information to characterize completely the initiative antl to pdorftfze tt for implementation shoultl the resources to do so become available. When re quested to submh this more tletailetl information,the proposed in "". will be assigned a unique number t0 Ill. m tracking the process of hs development, incorporation into the strategy, and eventual implementation. MO Procedures for charactarizanon of miti91001 initiatives It is the desire of the Working Group that sufident information be available to indimte to the loran —by as a whole antl dedsfon makers within Ioml g0vemmemt and the private sector that the Proposed mhiged- Inhiatives, upon implementation, are likely 0 be: Necessary for mitigation of identRetl or defined inhiatives, based on the fintlings of the hazard identification and vulnerability assessment process • Technically effedive in minimizing vulnerabilities to disasters 'impacts, • Economically justifiable andi olhenvise justifiable for the health, safety, or nmental benefits they would provide, • Acceptable tp the wmmunily aslwhole, Feasible to implement within the regulatory ftamework of p—ftl, approvals Intl existing plans and policies. TI provide the information necessary to attempt to assure that the mAig¢tion initiative proposed for incorporation Into the strategy has these charadenstics, the si,bmhtinq agency or organaatiom will complete the more detailetl form provldad in Attachment Three, using the instrvdions provitletl therein. Completion of this torn provides that information needed to tletetmin grf Intl to what etlent the...I bliistetl c,M d. It tics (or mitigation initiatives in the strategy are present in the proposal being y lk—ld. It is intended that the fort. provitletl g Atachment Three be completed by knowletlgeable intlivitluals using reasonable jutlgments and assumptions. It is not imtendetl by this procedure that eNensive, tleiailetl slutlies be untlenak¢n to gather information to complete the form. 11.0 Procetlures for Prillhbttffo. of MRigation IlWaUves This procedure recognzes that the Working Group, in the tlevelopment of the local mitigation strategy, 41111 potentially large number of structural Intl non-structural initiatves, varying VnIty in cost, enediv....s and sector of the community Ilkely to most directly benefit. In addition, itis highly unlikely that ad.q... finandal, technical or polhiwt wherewithal will be available to fully implement all inNatives identified in the iA.1 mtigation strategy. In addhio,, because a substantial amount of the fedecat Intl state funding for mitigation resources will only became available in the aftermath of a major disaster dedaratlon for Flontla, there is continuing uncertainty as to timing of implementation of major structural intliatives. F.bhlr, h is prudent for the Working Group to anticipate that the involved jurisdictions and organizations will have varying and potentially confl ing interests in the pii.My of implementation of .-,find mitigation initiatives. Ccnseq... fly, this pmc d— recognizes IM there is a need to identity, in advance to the extent possible, such procedures, criteria and approaches for prioritizing mitigation initiatives in a fair Intl equitable manner, maximizing the value to the community's er,I capabilhy to mitigate the human, environmental Intl economic costs of disasters and to spee1 the rate Intl eMaency of recovery of the entire community in their aftermath. It is also recegnlzed that the pnoPoies for Implementation of mitigabon inhiatives will change with time Intl experience, and therefore the approach util¢ed by the Working Group will need to allow for continuing reevaluation Intl revision when indicated. Fuhhernom, h Is recognized thal each of the planning padidpi nts M1as a unique Intl valid perspective on the priorhies for Implementation of mitigation indiatives within their Purview. a wo —ri, uvonin9aG., for-1 luitigaton g�gge9v beveloement u Is Therefore. the Working Group has established a procedure to balance the need for a 000sistert antl predictable approach to assigning priorities to each of the proposed mitigation initiatives with the intent to enable each of the planning padicipants to set their can pdonties for the initiatives they desire to implement. Therstoo, for each proposed mitigation initiative id -off ed, ch—oto sd and coordinated in accord with the above procedure, each submlding agency or organization will define the priority for that initiative sing the common set of criteria speed in Attachment Four. Use of these common cntena will enable each participant to establish their own priorities for initiatives In the stmtegy that are whho their purview to implement, as well as enable the Working Group es a whole to compare priorNes across the county. The submMing agency or oganization will be asked to complete antl submit the pd.-Nihon forms provided in Attachmerd Four. The Project Staff wo then mdude the ssigned priority ranking for each inhmee, in the database of inhiatives to be incorporated into the strategy. 12.g Implementation ofthe Strategy Implementation of the strategy will oaur primarily through implementation of the proposed initiatives by the planning participants themselves as the resources to do so become available, Implementation of the initial edition of the strategy, or each new update of the strategy, will be expected to occur in through the followng steps: Step 1: The it ming body of each local government or participating org,stuseon is requested to review the applicable section of the strategy, to modify it ssary, antl to adopt or endorse the s d- forimplementation, Step 2: The responsible individuals within the agency or organization begin imen plemtation of those inatives for which there are resources to do so, Step 3: For those inNeo— dependent on state o,fad,,l grant programs wherein appliwtions are accepted on a penodio basis without other restrictions or prerequisites, the responsible individutil, would prepare and submit funding appliwtions based on the pd,Mies esfablishetl by the strategy for that agency's or organizafion's proposed irdert es, Step 4: For those initiatives dependent on state or federal funding that have schedule or other restrictions, or would be funded by grants that only are available under spedal antl unpredictable circumstances, such as in the aftermath of a major disaster, the following adions will be taken: • Upon noeflwbon to the County. Steering Commmee or other agencyMdividual responsible for implementation of the strategy. the funding parameters and restrictions required will be reviewed antl defined, The responsible indivdual will review the database of proposed mitigation initiatives Wthin the sh—gy, and select those that are wnsistent Wth the reredied funding parameters and redrktions. • The proposed inbiative with the highest priority scare, as rewrdetl in the database, meeting the funding requirements—ld be solooled for implementation, antl the submitting agency or organization notified of the funding ounry wor 1Group for po`ai ntni't— sfrafegy oevelopmenf oppId—y available. The agency of organization woultl be responsible for replying within the time frame set by the County or Steenng C.mmaee R they tend or be not intend to apply for the available fundmg. If they do, "I" Is the agency's or ol9antzafion's responsibility to submil the necessary funding application_ If they be net the County, Steedng Committee or other agency/ndlvidual responsible for implementation of the strategy would notify the agency or organization submitting the proposed Initiative wtth the neat highest priority score, and notify them.fth, opportunity for tootling. This step woultl be repeated until an agency or organization having a proposed initiative in the strategy, that would meet the funding restddion, is identifed and states that it will complete the application process. In the event that there are two or more mitigation initiatives proposed by the me loeel jurisdiction or other organization that meet the required funding reslne ions and have the same pfionfy score, the junsdidion or.rganvafi.n itseff select from among them the initiative for which the funding application would be submitted. The County or Steedng Committee would promptly be notified of the proposal selected by the agency or.rgan¢ation. It is possible that two or more mitigation initiatives proposed by different locel ' junsdidions or organizations may meet the f it, reetenhons and have the me priority score. In such a case, the Steedng Committee will notify each of these juned eti... or organizations of the funtling oppoRunity antl request a response from each regarding their intention to appty, If more than one Indicate n intent to apply, the Steenng Committee will select the proposed initiative that is the most consistent with the overall planning goals antl objectives expressed in the current etlition of the strategy. In the event that there still remain two or more suitable atives from IMe'd jurisdictions I, wgan'vee—, the proposal with the highest benefit to — ratio, as given in the database, will be seleded as the —did.. for the funding opportunity. The selected judsdie ion or organization woultl then be notified. At the time of such notRication, the Steedng CommMee will also notify the .[herjunstlidi.ns or organizations of the decision, antl set a I— frame far Consideration of any subsequent "Is"" or appeal. The lime frame shall allow for mmplefion of the application process by the see el jurisdiction or agency following confirmation or reversal of the original dedsi.n. Only a single level of appeal is allowed w hln this process antl all dedsions by the Steering Committee are final. The submitting pnedidi...... gani ted.n is responsible for notifying the Steering C.—the,of the out If the application process. The Steedng CommMee, or its designee, volt monhor the funding application process to ensure the jurisdiction or organization completes and submits the application. Failure to omplete the application process it,, a Commitment to be so will prohibit within the sole discretion of the Steenng Committee, the junsdidion or o,gan¢ation from padidpating in the neat available funding opp—ndy. Step 5: The Steering Committee, fhrough the Mitigation Planning Subcommittee antl/., assigned project stall will monit.f implementation of the strategy. This volt indude periodically requesting the partidpating agencies and organizations to inform Ir'. Is., Is the Stalailig Committee ofths, successful funding and implementation of any initiainitiativebfi.a, that 4 may be removed fromthe database of proposed pi and programs babi funding. 6 : On , biannual basis, the Steering C,,,&,, will request the planning perhaps -to update the a-shability assessment process, and to di,shatirs, it additional mitigation i"o, hmiarMshould beprop ... al for the hi odibla If the losagy. It so ", poeficrip"i would be abashed to elliffy, oh —deft, and pirtattime, ,y tere l'i a troeard with this paoselthii. A pl,,K,,g ppM hii hi Wl that , P'P's.,d hari hifiatice, aIhoady listed i, the strategy be ro,drabal or withdrawn if deashi by the participant to be necessary. U' SEMINOLE COUNTY WORKING GROUP FOR HAZARD MITIGATION Bylaws of the Working Group Revision One, November 1, 1998 Bylaws of the Seminole County, Florida, Working Group for Hazard MNgation ARTICLE I. PURPOSES OF THE WORKING GROUP The purpose of the Seminole County Working Group for Hazard Litigation (hemm fterthe Working Group) is to denease the vulnerability of the citizens, governments, businesses and imeKAons of Seminole County, Florida. to the future human, economic and environmental costs of —.1, technological, and societal disasters. The Wonting Gmup will develop, moon.,, and maintain a local strategy for hared mNgatlon and post disaster redevelopment which will be intended to accomplish this pl,ole. ARTICLE U. MEMBERSHIP P,MdpAon in the Seminole County Wolidng Gmup for Hazed MNgation is voluntary by all pamotp ing enNies. Membership is establishetl in a,md= the fallowing Provlalons: • Membership in the Working Group is ;,an W all junsdictions, organizations and individuals sup, ng its purposes, and • The membership and paNdpation of bwi governments in the Worldnq Gmup is controlled by cbm"ctual agreements between the Flontla Department of Communay ARairs. Seminole County, and the parti opating munidpaleds, whirls are Feed in Attachment A. These oonaaCual agreements are i—M.ramd hereto by —renoe, and their ph, isans are oontmlkng. ARTICLE 111. ORGAN6 TIONAL STRUCTURE The ational .Lecture of Ue Wonting Group shall consist of a Steering Committee and penn—rdaned andlor tempo2ry subcommittees. A The Steed, Commferee The Woking Group shall be guided by a Steering Commihee of not more than twenty members, consisting of designated representatives of the following: • One repre,,—a hum the government of Seminole County and each paNtipaing niapalily, • One representative fmm oT.,batiom and associations representing key buainess, industry, and community interest groups of Seminole Coomy, and • Other such indlwitluals appointed by a majority vom of the Steen, C—Mll. Members of the Steering Committee will be designees t by formal resolution, appoin—ot or other action to amve es me oFoal reprassma0m and spokesperson for the juriad icdon or otganrtation ragading the adivNes end deetsans of the Woking Group. To maintain good standing, members of the Steering Committee mast not have --sal absences et more than three cons ,, meegngs. B. Subcommittees The Working Group shall have four permanent suew"eml,: Risk Assessment, Mitigation Planning, Public Infmm,t.n, and Financial Issues. Membership ofthe permanent subwmmfiees is unlimned and is open to all imarestea judsdi—ns, wganizabons and individuals. Tem "y subwmmibees may be establishetl at any time for specal purposes by the chair of the Steering C—Mee, and their membership designated at that time. MembershipinihesubwmmitteesisnotreslnCed. There are no requirements for indivitluals to maintain geed standing as members of a pane... or temporary subwmmMee. C. pmgnm SGff The Seminole County OMce of Emergency Management, Department of Public Safety, w11k provide andlor coordinate individuals and oM-inati-, serving as the program staff for the working Group. ARTICLE V. OFFICERS Any member in good standing of - SteeMg CommMee is eligible for election as an officer. The Steering Commm-will have a chair elected by a majority vote of a querum of the embers. The Steering Committee will also elect by majority vote a Nce chair. One et these posidons win be eIsemd from the representatives of loeal govemmem and the other from the representatives of the pirvats sector. Each w,l serve a mr teof one yea, and be eligible for ra- are also wn alection for s unlimitetl number of terms. The chair and vice chair of the Steenn9 Committee stlered to be chair and vice chair of Ne Working Gmup. The chair of she Sha nng Committee rill Preside at each meeting of the Steering Comm.-, make assgnments of Stead, C—des, members to the permanent subedmmMess, as well ms es M.1, temporary subwmmMees antl assigned Is— nnel to them. The vice chair will fulfill e duties and resp—Raities of the Uair in his or her absence. The —ir of each permanent or tempoary subwmrktt , win be designated from the members in goad standing df the Steering Commh. by ifs onss , and will serve at the pleasure If the Guir of the Steanng Committee. ARTICLEVi. RESPONSISILMES A. Staoring C.-- The Stearn, Committee WlI be responsible for oversight and woNination of all ae6bme and dedaws by the Wonting Group, and is solely responeig. for formal actions in the name of the Working Gmup, i..ding the Meese of reports, devebpment of resolutions, issuance of poa— papery and similar activi ms. The Steanng Committee makes assignments to the subeommrtteea ceefdimes. their—*. and takes atlipn on their reed —lotions. e. sebe—uses The permanent subcommittees have the following responsibilities: t. Risk Assessment —to identify,an,[,ot, and monitor the haoaNslnreatening Seminole County and the vulnerutfnies of the community to those h-1d5, as wen as to assist in the definition of actions to mitigate the impacts of those hatards. 2. Mifiaation Plannina —to define atmctuml and nonstmrdura] actions needed to di the human, economic and environmental impacts of disasfem, and to prepare for consitlemtion and action by the Steering Committee a stategy roc implementation of those ihJuahm. in both the pro- and postdisasler time frame. 3. Financial Issues— to define the eoconomk vulnerability of the community, to the impacts of disaalem, to assist with identification of initiatives to minima. that vulnerability; antl seek funding sources for an pri,my mNgation initiatives identified in the cone strategy dev-W by Ih, Wonting Group. F. Public information — to sewn, public input and comment on the .forts of the Workv'ng Group; to iW.-the public about th. Ic iviti,s of the Working Gmup; to .no.. public information and ad.— programs reg.ming hazard mitigation; to assist with the conduct of public hearings; and, to promote public acceptance of the strategy develop. by the Working Gmup. The responsibilNes of temporary 11bcommllte,s*11 be defined at the time they are established by the chair of the Sheeting Committee. a Pmgmm Staff Technical, clerical and other types of support activities to the Steering Committee and subcommNees wall be provided through the Seminole County Department of Public Safety, Office of Emergency Management, and othercounry agendas as assigned. The Counrys Office of Emergency Management will also serve as the legal governmental representative of the Working Gmup, and is empowered antler County atatutes to accept and disbume funds. erda1 into contracts, hire stag, and take such he, actions as nanassary in support of, or in the me of, the Working Group. Other jurisdictions and organizations may also provide such voluntary basis upon request of the Office of Emergency Management ahWor Ne chair athe Sheering Committee. ARTICLE VII. ACTIONS BY THE WORKING GROUP A. Aetf,.MyfofAedons Only the Steering Committee has the authority M take final aaiona in the name of the Wonting Gmup. Actions by subcommittees or pnogmm staff are not considered as final until Intoned by anon of the Steering Committee. B. Meebngs, Voting end Quorum Meetings M the Steering Committee and As subwmmatees Will be conducted in accord wAh Rodents Rules of Order, When deemed necessary by chair M the meeting. Regular Inch ings of the Steering Committee will be scheduled With a minimum of 10 woddrg days IM— The stile -mg of meetings of a satldrn1 II is at the disaetion of its chair. All final actions and decisions made in Me name of the Working Group Will be by afinnative vote of a quorum of the Steering Committee. A quorum shall be fd y percent of the members M the Steennq Committee in good standing M the file of the vote. Each member of the Steering Commate, will have one vale. Voting by proxy, written ar otherwise, 3 not allowed. C. Specia/Votes Special votes may be taken under emergency sttuet"I or when there are other extenuating wmdd— that arej.dgetl by both the chair and vice chair of the Steeling Collated to pmhibft sdhaMling of a regular meeting of the Steering Committee. Spacial votes may be by telephI— email ardor first does mail, and shall be in aanrtl With all applicable —da for suds actions. D. Publk Naarings When cad dhall by ate— or the pot 'es of Seminoe CO.My, or when deemed necessary by the Steering Committee, a public hearing regarding actions Intl., mIwd.—. for impt—anna4on by the WMI,lg Gmup will be had. E. Dooumanhzbon MAcV.ha All meetings and otherform6If action by the Steering Committee and permanent subcommittees vnll be d—nn..etl and made available for inspection by the public. WI. ADOPTION OF AND AMENDMENTS TO THE BYLAWS The Bylaws of the Working Group may be ad,ptad and/or amended by a two-thirds majority vote of the members In good startling of the Steering CMIrlb . All proposed changes to Me bylaws will be pmvitletl to each member of the Steering Commmae not Iess than 15 woddng days prior to such a vote. DISSOLUTION OF THE WORKING GROUP The Working Gmup may be dissolved by affirmative vote of 100% of the members in good standng of the Steennq Commatee N the time of the vote, by MM,r of a court If competed j.rvh idion, aI&or by in--h of the Seminole County Boa. of Commissioners. At the I — of diaeM..n, all remaining I—nntlte repome, equipment and supplies babnging to the Working Gmup wilt be tzruldo to the Seminole County Office of Emergency Managemem for depoen— SEMINOLE COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION WORKING GROUP Unincorporated Seminole County City of Altamonte Springs, Seminole County City of Casselberry, Seminole County City of Lake Mary, Seminole County City of Longwood, Seminole County City of Oviedo, Seminole County City of Sanford, Seminole County City of Winter Springs, Seminole County Attachment A The Seminole County Working Group for Local Mitigation Strategy Development Initial Local Mitigation Strategy October 31, 1999 The Strategy Section Four Enhancements to Programs and Policies BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE One of the key goals of the process to develop the Seminole County Local Mitigation Strategy is to propose mhigation Initiatives that would, if implemented, improve the programs and policies that guide mhigation programming by local government and other sectors of the --ity. In order to identify f such improvements are needed, an important part of the planning effort by the Seminole County Working Group has been to and analyze the existing plans, programs and mde, of County and municipal govemmenh. Together, these are mlledively refenetl to as the community's 'guiding principles' for mitigation pmg—ing. The objective of this analysis Is to deternine If there ar confide or sisundes among the gulling principles" used by local governments, or to determine ff the "guiding principles' can be considered adeq-a to address the bake posed by the impacts of future tlisasters. It the findings of this analysis indicated that there is an area of mnmm, then one or more mhigation initiatives can to identifed to consider for incorporetion 'mho the strategy. If there is a suitable agency or organization willing to sponsor the initiative under consideration, than that agency or organization would include the initiative in their portion of the overall Seminole County Local Mitigation Strategy for implementation when resources become available to do so. It is important to emphasize that the Seminole Ccuny Wodring Group mnaid— the and analysis of the 'guiding pdnciples' as an ongoing pad of the planning process, just like the other aspects of the pmmsa. The Wohv'ng Group', review was inbiatetl early in the process antl has been antl will be continuing up to and beyond ,ssuanm ofthi, the edition ofthe Seminole County Local Mhigation Strategy. To led list. the review and analysis proms,, the Project Staff developed a mmpenenc.d database in which to enter each of the key 'pnncipll r.I-d to hazard mhigation programming that was contained within the documents reviewed. This database has allowed the Project Sol to assist the Mhigation Planning Submmmlhee in mnvenienfy sling antl evaluating what otherwise woultl be a very substantial and unwieldy ount of information. Using the database, the Subcommittee has been able to focus he efods to date on the areas It=,,Id,, most urgent antl therefore moat appropriate to be to led in this initial IdfflIh of the Somme County Local Hazard Monte, Shade,y. The I —It status of this pmfio, of the planning effoft a reported in this — as are the inifiod..s pmloosed to, this Who[ edition If the strategy to amh— existing onde, P.11—s and ma'ame are head, The "guiding principles" "I'lanted process11, Idled .,in the of the comprehensive plan and [and d ... top ... t most, for eacn of the mmilipIlIg I'liapsit" 11 well 11 Seminole County. A, the NIftigadw Planning Subcommitteeeim, in his area, atltlnional '91j,H19 pr,aplW— denotshe m may identified and bass see in a similar dome, The —io, of the 'gOdiag pnddpib," he, been eo—ded Ia the mmsed of identfyinq he. —h --my has dd,,,,,d the hazards to which it is vulnerable. Although the 1-1 p, vulnerability to any particular community vanes throughoutthe County, the most , of the 'gosling arm6ples has been based on an ..am. se.el Imal of risk throughout the County for 1,eq id.md,d hazard. This allows for as plan appropriateinformation as possible to bed1band in the database without prejudgments about risk. The analysis process oe"I".'of the is, of key documentsdocumentsm, hld oeach local jurmidiei.h and entering ofrequirements bal—ItIg litigation programming into the —polarized donalless.. The p,,pea, of compiling this --hformal in a database ,t is the ability of the d,dames, to be eled for eempedi- analyst, through searches and/,, sad, pa,fended from the database This analysis can be atmomm on path.. hazard ,.1himadthes or locations deemed body fail any pampJW inquiry. The database — also White . m-11, di be expanded ad posted a fee —fly a necessary. "a "T"w 'hn.. blood of these 'gWding plindpl..' would lfi 11selty CO the same modd forme, fisth..e all it would only p, , static raded Mile static reports .1. .useful shapshat of In. pleased .h..j,n st the im, of the research, this plabbeas format allows this m—ation to e — in he named torm while also enabling the convenient otembiq of adopt, a, the documents or conditions change. Additionally, Hother hazards are b-diad, he, mpa,b b.shal upon the newly itlentifed hazard can be obtained from the database possibly with additional information. Additional documents can also be added to the d— d a need to, the, to be ind.,ed is apparent. D.e to the method in which the information has been stored in the database change, to , hn-idpalty a pl.ppdhbhts poWd be altered or changed, or im—d as atltlttional intended- This has islowed and will eandi..e to allow to, —lmn— to be made among nsinidialidel, a, well as of , single municipality over time Additionally, r,&dh, hro.. the —ndy , be—ont for analogy development, is providing the mopiplim, or eaenjimdo, of the Sam —le County L-1 Mdig,tio, Strategy with , compact as, containing all relevant dede d,,,I,p" during the planning p,— This i,d.d,, the guiding principles deldowas b—ol by Pmesat Staff in enter that the Mitigate, Planning Subcommittee will be able to maintain and upstate the database as Gdd[d, Pimples documents is updated by the various mididp,lilles. DISCUSSION OF "GUIDING PRINCIPLES" FOR SEMINOLE COUNTY The —i-ell g.e, — objectives f,, the WIWI Se,md, County L-1 H—t,l Mio,em Strategy were t,: 1. Accurately !.fin tig Seminole C—ty-s vulnerability and r.k (.E, complete the "h—I tet.ly— —deJ to d, 2 Determining ete I= "I .responresponse -dCC.y f ...19.1.y .0 — I.e, 3. Mitgatmg ,bit, h— vulnerability to disaster. and ,I Protecting --iCeti... facilities and systems lhl Mli,.tiC, Planning Sub —et— ei I. narrow its I.— on the Cll.wq areas .. those of most .1— 1. the county and it, —Clpelftle. for p.1p..s of preparing the initial edlio, of the Sllillll County Local Mitigation Strategy: • Fli and fl,ld related 1g.111ill, Wlld,,,C • Mobile Homes Same dil—lill, 11 seen in the 1pld around wAlfllld p.t.d.. —.s The examination leit of guiding p.nCpfes and goals for the strategy in th..e fareas — 9— ri- C —ly suggessuggestions � 991�enhanceexistingthereby9 polily Ild by — dthe --ey � vulnerabilities. These are summad2etl b.— De—it, 0i, det;—y W emergency response and disaster te—q resources Through the vulnerability assessment p,,.,,, the guiding principles —Itei, experience witM1 the W-9 Group — able I. n iil di— .1y.. he ...'g—Y response and disaster recovery --, and from it develop the fflwi,q initiatives: The City of At-- proposes to d ... Cp and improve ARC co ... Ketio, its City, Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (C E W P ), The City f Aft .... A he, Ii p,p,,d (3--y Emergency Response Tee, Ti-emi, (CERT). S-1-1, H EA.R.T. he, prop the need for Firing , —I, specialist to coordinate Old, --y and — with the —et needs committee. The City of C,ss,lb,rry he, , p,C,eeeil for the development of an emergency preparedness let,dl—k that All Integrate mt—t— available from municipal wd ,the, etta— SpeCtli—hawliy htheyrelate -d ft I. the City s residence during e-9g .,d .— -- would die.. k d be provided for I— to all —id-. and --d.1 establishments I the cly, The UY of C—lbei, also he, I plip—I III the leilbileh.- of , Post Cie.- --p— plan. The plan would —jew permit Issuance, -gmeedN and bitili jrt.pectw, S—itid, H.E.A.R,T. p,,p—, funding , study t, explore the possibility of establishing . homeowner's getup insurance f.Cd for those who .,. at ., below the P—q id.lmes. Seminole HEARTT. also proposes a policy for waiving debris removal tees for qualfying repost sitlents in tlisaster situation to mitigate passible disease antl rodent Infestation. The Small Business Development Center at Seminole Community College proposes to hold 5 tlisaster-planning workshops for small businesses located in Seminole County. They would also offer to attendees an on sae visa to assess their needs Protecting communications antl utility facilities and systems Through the vulnerability as ment process, the guiding prinaples analysis, and experience wah past disasters, the Working Group was also able to analyze some of as communications facilities and systems and from a develop the following initiatives: Florida Power Corporation proposes the modification of existing and future vegetation requirements on new development to Ilma the size and type of trees that e required near properly and R.O.W. lines (Applicable where overhead utilities are possible). Florida Power CoryomOon also proposes to motley exMnq antl MIM,-inances that regulate tree -trimming practices to exempt tdmm,d In done Mor overheatl uN,fi line clearances. litillty line Nmminq should be pedortned accordance with National Arbodsts, NESC, and OSHA guidelines. Floods antl Flood Related Hazards Flooding is one of the areas If'guidmg principles' analysis that the M'ltigation Planning Subcommittee selected for emphasis. The following tliscussion explains the "guiding prmdple," that are now ace in place, bad ne seon the cunt analysis, and tlses iscusthe findings In light of enhancements to plans, policies, and programs that have been or could be considered as maigation inaiatives for inwrporztion into future revisions of Seminole County Local Hazard Mitigation SMeegy. All but three of the rwunty's municipalities (CasselbeMy, Lake Mary and Oviedo) ar parlicipants kn the National Field Insurance Progam (NFIP) Community Rating Systems Program (CRS). The three m Mdpalities do not padicipate for varied re .. (see Attachment One, wmpl..d by the Seminole County Building Department, for details) This analysis indicates that the b l governments of Seminole County at risk from flooding deady have flood mitigation as one of their 'guiding principles° for maigaticn programming. The vast majoray of the munid,hities padicipeting have either a Class Ranking of 8 or q th n e CRS (currently, with the assistance al this plan, the County is app4dg for a l rating). In o1er to padicipate in the NFIP, a W1111fty must pass an oldinanrn n,istent with antl meeting the requirements of the Federal Emergenry Management Agency (FEMA). When in the NFIP, the community is provided with Fleed Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM,) which delineate the 'Spedal Flood Hazard Areas- and within which construction or development would need to be in I— with the requirements of the applicable j—di—M, flood control ordinance. The cp —ft, is also expelled to implement FEMA, recommended floodplain sh-9—ht nnae—as via their bldln.bce elf—.11h and [and development P1111ii heqidr—ho. To. Conine The guiding elldpial 11-11t database described above, can be used to address flood —hol and mAigation wobs, All jurisdictions have ciations to existing pmg prn.ipl.s under this d,ligs.d fscdor. F,, purposes of "b""n' ts" they be mgenerallyd,dadgenerally .,do, So—te, Management (Flood Control) :1d Soldle, (ElIlItill and Fli requirements and Fl,,dp'-1f1lhF1d,d control), hit, ,,, b,ad,p both In ods— Flohophout, ,I Is. . I. bf.-' dhod, Potable Water, Sewage. and Solid Waste St —a-, Management -Flood Q,ndol The —1 —pty of cftbhi.hs heve to do Wth ag.lt.,y and —pli.t. hhho— ., the intent!,, to develop such regulation, All ndshlop,litted and the County have inds.ded the L-1 of S.M. standard to, It— management aystanh. in Ita, Comprehensive Plans, F,, example, —al w,,,,t,, raq,rb an equal volume of storage mp,.Iy for any ,o]—a of the regulatory floodthat would be displacedby fill o, structures. Addiftion,lb, most w—IMIS address fi,odbo, ph-dw to in assist.s debt intiald damage and, in phased d—li.p..rd., the ate...., system nddst be daiddide of fii g ind,i,end-ly. Cift.ws nal.mg to p.ja .. .... from general to specific in h... Oviedo states that all Ad— h.h.genh- f.61has be on"! h. to, . Tindd— of N-ye. , 1. Most, 4 not all, of the .—hities require that development to fl..dp,..e areas shall not impact adjacent properties,that de, "b"'On infloo,li is prohibited, do that purchasers be ,tV,,d that property, in a flWdpM,l area. The Sulown,mitee, though. expressedI., phada,d wh— over when this hollalio, takes place C.e. 3 days bfd,e lost, sho, the ',aid -ill is do,plonly sided! in the pjeot). While not mhantly ad bbbjjvd the corn—ad has do —fitted to enhancing its flood pbfio- add ,.1—bilhis, in "' no. phase of the ..l.g, which4., mould be g— time to furtheraaa.rch, . solution to this problem. 1, adi through S,,i,,Ie County Emergency Manta,brood. a brochure regarding toddling hazards antl fli mitigation has been prepared to, direct —Ring to all phop,ftrd, on— W exist is the flood I,[, This Vo,h,,, shoultl assist property l -rellsohns I. -.in the flood plain to be more awareawareof the flood beIand and to take action to Ingen, the hazard. no Fo.ddReauTements - The 11j,"y of the wmmunities lq,!,, that p,p,dy within the 100 year floodidle, be anchored to prevent fletano, that residential and nonresidential w—oti- have the -1- z lowest flood elevated It least one (1) f- above the fleede,in, that ala—dl buildings allow the Ine, and —t or —ItIll, led that utilities be fl,eepne- 9... Flood Elevation Analysis f filed elevation requirements throughout the county show that all of the communities 11 111altIlt in that, field Iln,atll naq,[—.lns City of Oviedo qqLq L"g .. d 12inch. above 100 III year r 1 elevation _ I III feet 11100 fled plain Altamonte Springs Defer t, Reed Mae— R,2,1,ti,, W011e, Springs eed�'lain I 1 12 h—a above ftedhplan mt 12 inches above flootlplain Senke e, Comply with requirements ofNFlP SeminoleCounty —el, with ed—nanna If VFI1 Sha-nna-F.ad.—I o-t.1 The pdicilla and —, regarding this subject area, stale that development shall not ..an changes in head patterns ., flood new areas and require vulnerablet at laaa vulnerable t. flood II protected against flood damage. In III severaleatere.nitea ..k to minimize a,endInnea of p.l,le money f., costly flood -control projects. Other notable raq,m—ta mend, the provision of neln,naete, at.ag, where the ..ge capacity at a flood hazard area hes tate, eninced and the prohibition . buildings or atre-ea in fl..d—yI. S.—It, S—m Level If SIM The design requirement f,, a 2blaar storm event standard is Indd across the county. The dO ... eea are bate— the ateM d-0, which can be as short a, 6 he,, up t, 96 hours. Some of the j,dIdiction, also indede requirements for fiedifty III that nd d, —1, ditches, dosed drainage systems, roadways and bddg,,, Th.. requirements rangef,,, 10 hon1t. 100-lea, — —,, I M.WW .. b t Rate City If Oviedo25 y-124h,- iqtIZ f Longwood VIII16h, An—ne, Sninga 25 y.a.h, Writers do s'— 26 C...'ean, Lake Ma Santa. 25 Y-124h," 25 Y-I Stemed. Count 25 ..,)24h,— Enhancements feaardina Flood control oroambbbina; One Initiative stemming from discussion on the issue of flooding deals with what many embers feel are inaccurate FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM). It smi,ld be noted that one of the initial mitigation initiatives now proposed for incorporation into the rategy is to request revisioNopdafing of the FIRM maps and to complete dosed basin studies throughout the County. In discussing proposals for enhancement to plans, policies and programs in flood profedio,, there have also been a number ie structural stormwater inhibit... proposed for flood mitigation. Wildfires There were no ill—ah is reviewed that could be construed as having guiding principles addressing wildfire risk management, and it would therefore appear that there are basically im existing community "guitling prindples" that address the wildfire risk. Enhancements reaaftl1h, ..be me et of the wlldflredsk ebil fives stemming from this area of diewssion inlims: The Red Cross of C.nthal Florida has proposed a Community Disaster Education Program over 3-year peed. Program is designed to educate homeowners a bout ways m become disaster resistant. Indades 101oeal businesses. The City of Altamonte proposal fo implement Wildfire training for Fire Department Special Response Team (SRT). Train and educate SRT Team in special .duration ofwildfre management. Town 8 Country RV. R...he proposal to remove weak the—imbs to protect esidents from damage due fo high vends or wildfire. Also the Seminole County Fire Chiefs Association curt my has in its possession a technical document provided by Projed Staff for development of initiatives to address the the wiltlflre nsk. ManufacturadlMobile Homes The Seminole County WOMng Gmup is also add leg the need far enhancements in policies, plans and programs related to manufaduredlmobile homes to address the higher level of risk from wind and fiootling damage that these strudun.s expaence. All of the municipalilies have guiding pdndples --mg mobile homes. The existing guiding principles generally all into concems for placement of homes in terms of general bcation and speuFc elevation; stmdurel features which bear on issues of safety', and public health issues such as requiring mobile homes m conned to a municipal water supply system and central sewer system. In mg,his to placement, all juriedi h,,n, mquiha mobile homes be placediin mobile home packs. with exceptions for temporary use and agr..f— areas. Several communities notably prohibit the placement of mobile homes In fioodwaya The City of AXamode Springs requires the bwen floor of mobile homes to be elevated one (1) foot above the base tided level. Enhancam n fM n cto dlM bile He,,, Proposed initiatives from this discussion Indude: Town & Country R.V. Resod proposal to re weak treesAmbs to protect esidents from damage due to high W ho, or wildfire.e Town & Country R.V. Resort proposal to build a safe sheXer with elevated mergency generator and wiring to protect residents of Town and Country RN, Park antl sumondl parks. It ran be seen from the analysis that regulations do exin for new mobile homes, however, the problem is in the area of ex firm, mobile homes. While it might be di to promulgate new rules andlor guidelines for existing homes, and some mmmmities e alreatly needy buift-out, it may be valuable to further explore options for making this type of housing more disaster -resistant, if only through community education. The issue will continue to be discussed by the Seminole County Working Group in the nest phase of me strategy. Hazardous Materials and Weil ld Protacbon Zones The following is comparison of uses that era mobibitetl within each community's wellfield protedion zone. Some communities have established intenm distances for their well field protedion zo s. These interim distances will be used until the St. Johns Water Management District issues findings and recommendations on me subject. MunicipaiRy Protectlon Zone Prohibdetl or ResVicted Uses Wietlo 1000ft L.hdfilla bulknomge (inducting unameaund)or alenais on FL substances list, Substances bb, Phed ( Agr. Chemicals, Petroleum Prod, Medical Wade etc) Wastewater Treatment Fac., Mines or W-d le Excavation Oraina eFx. Longwood 1000ft Septictanks, hazartlous materials handling antl storage, dry d operations, and amergmund mead storage of petroleum products or other hazartlous materials. AXamonte Springs 200It Winter Springs 2ooft Septictanks."boage and handling d H. Wane aeM 1 indusmal uses. Casselberty 300 feet No developmem within moil Lake Mary 200feet PolenliaXy contaminating above antl below grountl 1000 feet es Prohibits bulk, toxic,chemical,peVoleum or nuclear waste Sanford No development "I Is' 600 Limited h1tindl.l. activity In Seminole County No stantlartl Wllproted wellfieltls as possible under the law Research into the firinsirm —Ill dists— have revealed in, St. Johns Water Management District has released —ff,,ld n,d,,g, in Isreport e,tM,d Mill P—Ow Area Delineation Study. County.,I, Cty. TheSt Johns Water Management Its technical assistance revireviepossibleDistn� ill 1� pmvi Is, i,d possible thplenniintst.h f the finding, in this report. Enhancements .—dine H..M... M-1.1. antl W.M.1d P.-Im Z.... Sisli-is County has p.p.— that local gh—hhtihs revise interim —1111,ld pi,-- -- SJRWMD sh..Id Its whldsd to d—ins appropriate zones it possible. OTHER PROGRAMS AND POLICIES In conducting., the ',.id,h, principles" analysis, Working, recognizedths W�, Group recognized In— _iI be needs to, enhancements to plans, policies antl programs that —ld not bedirectly.1 directly -d . . single type of — o, Ills—, event. This p.S,.- in atltlr it, this area of iprogninh tshh.n.—t is .—.ftd .1— PostDisaster st, Longterm C.—.1ty Redevelopment A �—of in, isdining 'g,idl,g pflndpl,,' indicated that ,Of another .... . enhancements f. plans, p.g.hns and poIia.s is h Ine a of --fing posldis.— 'ednvti,prnshl. Generally, C,,p,h,n,,, E,,,g,ny Management Plans dd— his—hi, in , g,n,n, ,n,,: f,, —t they dlmc—s damage --sin, public ..sisn— shd n—hinn— 1—it, this d—sints — I.,.Iy p—d..l (d—bl,g the I-W.] —sh. that is available I. obtain funds f,, redevelopment) and d. n. address issues such as permitissuance, nn,,h-d,, antl Wild, inspection. Entint—h— . P-t-Disaster RisitI.Inilititimerit Pmgmmming The Working Group h,, i,d,d,d in its program priority ...s f,, in, ensuing planning pe—, . g— W d .. l,p , w,p,h,, s,!, w-mid, plan f,, th—gs— of this redevelopment - in— in the in—ditt— environment In fact, thin City of C—lbs, has .]..dy proposed an miti.w. for . —hopl Risdii—p—l-I R.h. Fnint In. P_',this , f County Wonting Group, the .ishng -9.,ding pl- . nt�pld, not appear to an adequate basis to effectivelymanagethe po.Iistiithi, redevelopment process in in, sfi—inh f , ,j,, III— , — , staking the ,. Therefore, of the enhancements Mit—rit, to the existing plans and programs will be to propose I. developIs —pnshtinsv. pi.n,,hg P.... to develop , = d- d[n,t,d plan for managementf P-Awinns, redevelopmentP.—i—This Itl Involve both weary municipal -ymunicipalIi—as well. p.l agendas, 11 key private — T =—w oell.lity bleed organizations, to Imillss the PIll policyml operational 1 ....s that will confront local g ... I-- after , major event t Pl..IU.I and CoshAlm.td.h of L..I Mftio.d.h P.g...h,g A,Mh,, -eo— of both the'guiding pd,api ... analysis and the review of mitigation p,g,,,,,g responsibilities indiest,d -h—,-, were needed in the m,,Wd, —Ioi, tw antl developmentof related effft. The Working Group eumpiu,d that there was not . do, glated mdWd,,I or agency, M the —m time, W .... Is the fool point to, esee'l fi�cfim,' III-eetly elated to promotion and llfillfill If IftigMIll programming '� . . . img in S,,i,,I, County, i,d,di,g: • Maintenance antl updating of the Semmes County Local Mitigation Strategy, • Monitoring md promoting implementation of the stgy, Mai• mlvulg the eornpOlhold databases made available 11 the WorkingGroupby the Project Staff, • Providing even assassistanceAa,to Am, planning participants in preparation of funding a'p "'0" for"'I'l "Po"' to implement the initiatives- !,,Plltld into the sh-st;y. • Providing staff and logistlesl s,ppon to the Working Group antl As hd • Ah.w.e promoting ..d coordinating improvements and -h..osmsm. m mdigalion P.I,.—Ing m Somme's C.-Y. En a Is Pro ,.fimn ed Coo of Local Mitla".. Pro —mmlh, To respond to this need, the County submitted I proposed mRig,ti,, mfietw, to M " establish ,bJ,h Ild fund the position of "Local Mitigation Stmegy Coordinator." It wa ,eoot;t,i.d that this imp.A.ot fuhofi.n heested to be ..f,.uO to m— the st..gy —Id —mus I be p,ft of S,,i,,I, County, f.t,,: planning , U, receipt If Itde sm, det— notedp funding for implementation, this position would be M,bi,,h,d h so.. initiated. In the — planning cycle, —y of the aelien Items he. --deof to, action, also .dd,... —.11 enhancements to the opabilfie. If S—i-I. C ... ly and As lul ciplitill to pIIlIlt 11 lessen the hums, and economic Ok, of future di-- As ,he Iftill edition If the strategy I, implement, the enhancements el ... rest! above on be ambdpssod to I. expanded, esf—d antl h.d.l.d to, SEMINOLE AND INCORPORATED COMMUNITIES CURRENT NFIP/CRS STATUS Ap,.17' 9 SEMINOLE COUNTY Contact P— Hd L11-- R.-- I-, 665_7- C—tly — Class An scheduled for May 11, 1999 to up d- the CFS credits CITY OF ALTAMONTE SPRINGS Contact P,— --l- -uy. — Cl . � - F— I- states brat lelt Mly (1998) an ISOIGRS 1-11fl-11 —d .--d t. determine the .-- 1—t credits. Since than the CRC credits updated In 1999 CRS --f and - R.—h believes that there m possibility that a higher —g class —ld be achieved. CITY OF CASSELSERRY C.—t P—.1 Phyllis Wallace. Project M1.91, Ph— 262 7725 .1237 Currency: N. p—p-t Wallace —d that ffi. .19-i-- d— not have enough —p—, t. pft,.-, fie CRS N—, — the c11, ha only insignificant d—1 p— in the — pl- lke to participate it -N—1 —ml and sraff was CITY OF LAKE MARY Cl—1 = 3J24h_13050�4— "I Engineer Cunenity: on -participant M gh manpower p-,,pIn - the CFS program, --p— In the flood CITYOFLONGWOOD 01t P-1 J- Brock, D,l— of Community Services Phone. 260-2 CRS 01- 11 Ild 1h, ItIll, because d_ not h.' They are m the procesMoog11, of h9 CITY OF OVIED Contact Person: Carol Zeyn. Stoonwater Utility Coortlinator Ph.. 977-32 Nonparticipant Mrs. Z claims that the og—.- d— not have —ugh —p.., to participate In the CPS pog— She explains that 75 percent of the d-1,p—t M the wmmuniry was —, —d .- 1987 and Is In compliant, with flood p.,o CITY OF SANFOR C— P.I., Bob Walters, City Engineer Phone: 3305671 New Participant Mr. Walters a inetl that the city .—ty applied for the CPS g— and is ..,omg for the Ippli-11 pl.— t. be completed imminently. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS Colt- P—.1 Chris Mo,p y $1--1 M.o1 Ph— 327 1800 severalLeh -- .,d no oooo SEMINOLE COUNTY AND INCORPORATED CITIES TOTAL PREMIUMS ❑ $95,569 18 $139,378 IN $86,799 0$57,034 ■ $101,548 MA-MONTE 0$58,636 •cnssE�sEaav ■ $735,801 ouKE WRY ©$82,475 •LONGM00 -ED. •SANFORD ■SEMI-E C WINTER SPRGS The Seminole County Working Group for Local Mitigation Strategy Development Initial Local Mitigation Strategy October 31, 1999 The Strategy Section Five Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Assessment Introduction and Purpose The untledying purpose of the Seminole County Local Mitigation Strategy is to identify how the key ffmlbbe systems and areas of the community are vulnerable to the natural, technologicad l and s decal (me, hazas to which they a exposed. To ccomplish this objective K is necessary to first identify the hazards that are of concern and than to define how, spactically, the elements of the community are vulnerable to those hazards. This is the objective of the 'hazard id arlfi-ion and vulneability memt Process.' After spec vulnerabilities a e defined, speK mitigation inRiatves to counteract those vulnerabilities ran be proposed for implementation through the strategy. The hm,—idemtihcabon process defines the types of hazards that could impact the warty antl Its communities, as welt as the locations where those impads could occur. With this information, the vbreabildy as mart process idimeres d antl how the floes, systems or areas whin those dil ated locations may be tlamaged or made inoperable by the impacts of the event. The Seminole County Working Gmup has undertaken this process and has made significant progress in both certifying the fi_is, and defining the Wmeabish.. for puryoses of development of the initial strategy. This section of the Local Hazard Mitigation Strategy provides a report on the Working Groups hazard iderocation and vulnerability --art process, reflecting the information and ayses available to date. As future action, of the strategy are prepared, It is aniidnalpated that additional information will become available and that further analyses can also be completed. The asuhs of continuing analyses will be used to also determine the need for proposing addfional mitigation indiatives for incom—tch into the stategy. To data pdmadly because of the availability of information and the magnitude of the risk, a si,ficart focus of the Working Group has been on natural hazards. However, the pa a tomb,, sem�eole couery w rkmv croup 11 I.e<m la1g.. stra egy ee pet by Welding Group he, also be,, striving to obtain and while information on technologicalhazards and threats 11 the economic 011AY If the W""Ry. In consider, the iff—sti., "do 1, this sedion, I imponant to an,di that ... hazard information and methods W utilize it become ohava ilable iddl, on I continuing basis. Therefore, 11 the PlInq process continues, 11 the years ahead, add, ... I or omdhfidd information will b,w,, 111011,11 W the Wlffilg Group. This will be used to update and Improve the analyses provided hem as well as to support the identification of addttional ond9dw inhiatives to, incorporation into tipbodd edition, of the anstogy. Using Odle, V.I—biflty Assessment 0 ...... Is It is also into .... t to nodagna, that, in addition to the analytical offIns of the Seminole County Working God., discussed at gm-, length in his sed., them are other I—da. of d—idl, v.Ih.hdd1,ty assessments that are available 11 the Working Group. These have be,, used provided to the Risk Assessment S,,oddhohil.e as additional i'monles- A prime.. example of these type, of aftsummary,y h: I. .omdocument of recommenrecommendedeaomoded h hga— actions as highlighted by he IV winds, of S—Ind, Coolly Wth the hoij., disasters of the mosol pet. The i.p..s of data, disasters are . v.,y good ildlaam, of the hqa, of mitigation inbalives that are nodded W prevent amid, damages from the mohe kind of event in the future. Aft— major tlisaster in which . "Presidential Use— Oad.lew" is mad, an analysis Is often completed by a had, of state and leo—I Iffidal, to identoy ways that the event', tomed, =,to have b... I ...... J. These I.... call I ris.,,:, HHazard Mitigation RReviewTo— (., -1—he'), assess the dia.st;l. inhod"na make modoi—darldis regarding mitigation actions In. are headed. A suln "M of available past 1—on mean, and other d ... ly relatedof—fid,related to Sloillil ClIlty 11 provided 11 Attachment One to this sedion. This ofoontai was also been available W the Working Group as it J ... oped and implemented its own .,orted, to hazard deri and v.Ih.oibihty O,lahi of the Working Goads', Hazard Identification emotions Seminole County is exposed to any different types of hat—m , dmf� hidsi and o' I.cItII hnlld$, hat vary agliff—gy 11 the In,,ahen, I.Pe and saim—als If ",I, offidds on the alon—My. Th. general -I .... bilhas of Slosod, C ... ty's dani—Gies to these h—ms can be M,,t,,t,d by loodetailimg some of the basic demographic of the county. Seminole County has . p.p.1.1mrodlia o of approximately 329 a 31 (IM estimates), and composes an area of 298 square miles vdh 46 square miles of Depending on the dh,radaoafics of the toolod and its impad, substantial components of the g.mmI id,p--, the business commonly. p,bli. de— and .1t and sent"ody Z"vulnerable Is —,d, In doneid.do, the -heinnihity of Seminole County to dId I. important I emphasize In. some fali.. and the populations they had are often more v,Ih,mbe to disasters. Th, rap, of the vulnerability If these MIMI, and populations i, Seminole County can be seen from the following: AtluR Congregate Living Fadihies '6 Nursing Homes 32 -� Ambulatory Surgical Centers 16 The —g, If these uI—bllthbs If the commu,4y t, dim—, is very wide -d depends on many factors. One If the key 111, If ft Seminole County Working G— p's Risk Assessment &b=llibll h,, been t, stave t, --ke very spea,c analyses If the W11.1ifill' -111bilthel through the ts—, described f,fth,, -- Only through the de,fif—tim, If specfc W—bilhes he, the Working Group d—ed 1plafil Iftigefill initiatives to be included i, the M—gy. The Steps in the Hazard ld-ff,,U,, and Vulnerability Assessment P—... A key 111111t in the pIllil9 PlIell adopted by the S—me County WI,,i,, Group is t, use , methodical, m,pllh,nsi,, approach to —,tm, spedfic Wbebebilfti.. If the col—fty to the ilpldl If dill-11 11 11PPIft, i, t the id,,hflion If specific 'befill, W W-111d those hazards. The sped(, steps In the process are detailed through the formsbd instructions provided.— — provided m the Op. Procedures the Working G—p, given above. In summary, the step, are the following: Step t Use the h—,d dsbtf,-i.n process to define whet hoards can strike the county and where they couldped, Step 2: Use , geographic iff—Mm y-, (GIS) d,Wb... W d,c,,,,t the location If the impads If the id,MM,d h—, Step 3: Use"' this information to — ,1- key fcifffim, systems ,d neighborhoods It risk ,—' they ,, in ...... those locations, and Step 4! Al."'I their sp—, Wbe—by If the selected fedlefl,s, systems and b.ighb.ft,d, t, the physical or operational effed, If the disaster events. The ...Its If this p,..... —p—d to des, using currently available information. I. further ---d in this —im, Methodology for Hazard P,,,,, The development If the hazard id -if —lb, p,... Is based p.. existing data colledetl from --1 agendes throughout the w1lby — b the — 1-1. A, "I. , the Slate's guidelines for strategy Pt, information that was -.11.1he i. G 'S format was , first —b,d ,d then developed t, ell— , comparison behebs, the I-- If he hazards' Iss and the fialfitie, systems and neighborhoods of -- Reedy id,,tff,,d databases for Seminole County i,dbd, aZ,IlhRy mmlewl, Ild roadways, feed! plains, hazardous matme, he, and a', mpet ....... nd the f,11-m type, of designated ',,bul fwlmw' Schools Da he Cam— (1995 Ldhtl Use Churches 'w� dwwla w. - Mobile home RN Parks (1995I Wd—. ImW� Land Usk_ Aa—tml , g factmam— g he,,, Pol . waw�a d" Wellssitesc'y Re etitive food damage . hall. Water and wastewater treatment plams Each of these data w— he. been ..bimml i.o one existing F.alftide" d-tdwe m the Working Gm.p's GIS ma.b.— The —al.p.- of INs database i. Imead on the Flend, Department of C,,,,,hy Afthe wamR.d format m, critical facilities h-,emes, and he, been p—lded t, that agency. The potential to, these fdldi,, he be vulnerable t, fem, disasters has been identified by using the GIS 'mmb..e to map them wemt the locations within which the impacts of the defined diawbeha can dded, As wl.d above, this W—a— was the, made —bbl, t, the planning participants the, could select the fhilhias they wished to ah.,_ using the prescribed vuI-ddfldy assessment ph—aa The hnmel zones or due— available 11.4h awm.g GIS data indmi.: • 100-y.., fed plains ('Special Fbed .—,d --) (S.— Federal Emergency M—q—hl Agency). • Predicted Whel waddle for edpi.i wamw and heri.— (S.— Rend. DCA: The ArbR., of S.— (TAOS)) • Flood P.- Ahaw (Stm—C—ly Std-..e, O.p.demm) • Predieted hazardous materials acmdem imp.d zones (Source: Seminole County OEM: CAMEO d,mb... Dw.flptmn of Map. Th. GIS d-b.e has been d-1,mad by the Pha.ht Staff and is available to wa.te map, that superimpose any o, all of the Iecational Information cerwimel therein. The paef the n-6- given he, Is t, use "example maps' (we Aftw,A hem5) he p "e" am explanation w f the type, ( , that edU. d be developed wh ped by the planning pliap.nIt m meet their ,ad,, The map, given he'e are implyexamples f the hmmm, that f.. Seminole County and the twIffie, at d,k T, provide , better view of the medw, each map el-tif- . pamwe, hazaml and selected fauld- that. wwdl on their lowtien, ..Id be vulnerable W the impacts of that h—d. A more cemphmansi, .. analysis he, b..n wnd,dw, the rawft, of which are —ibbe as Attachment Two: Seminole County Fdl-s Rap- The tabular format far the dw.d Is as follows: E N... Primary fm for fhy ha—zm 'Y,,": Facility resides in , hazardous ,i . ..... Facility is within 250 feet of a hazardous - zone. Td1l he. Facility is fthm 500 feet f hazardous matenals e. 100 Y.. Flood = "In": F ealty resides in Splall Flood Hazard Area 1111:: Facility iwithin feet If Special Flood Hazard A-. "<500; Facility Iswithin 0fef Special Flood Hazard Area. 0 # = W,,d speed based on Cg,,y # St- Event It should be mild that 11 the 11p, some flultill may 1p,,d., vulnerable, d,, W the d the maps are presented, but .. legal ., dh,dbg.bcy e.p.l. det.hhhmel.h. sh ould be ,d, bleed , the,, ,p, In addition, GIS ddfldy was determined by exact ep.fi.1 point Iddetim and not lb. —I ,.f ..id Ili (Dud I. i d 'det, '"" dd'pdt' edd."'y is not 9hledd The maps md,ded In the iniial strategy to demonstrate the availability of helli 1f,111i 11 the F,1119: MI➢�$-1 'B.,hd,,I,," This map,, , view of the county 15 municipalities. "Sp..J.11 Flood Hazard Areas" This map lh—s an analysis of SI,ed.1 Fli Hazard Areas (SFHA). SFHA i. an ..a that I. susceptible be some level of the 101y.., — ,,t, This data may provide pi-11 Mh , tool for pwMi s dures to be analyzed for f,dh,, vulnerability be vulnerability assessment process utilized by the d'g' Group, individuals fHw y of these et —Ill were able to epeaIly evaluate the vulnerability of each to flooding. Met, 5-3, "Reed Pm- Ames" Map S-3 i, an 41 view of roadway fiddiliq in Sj, County. This data was .11e-d from the Seminole County St.—., Division on the basis of mnofl basins.T. Late, not all basins have belee, analyzed for Idedii iff—dw, F,hh,, information will be provided .. I, is mad. available. Th. ..p displays locations were there is p roadwaysfl,,di,g of roadways 100 stoma M events. Aft,,h,,Three: Table F-1, Bata this e. data and also lists 25 year et- event information. Some df theselocations ..e plot f proposed ,p ... d Thigli initiatives III the initial —gy. M,S�Tm— Land Us., in Me Flood Plain' This map illustrates future land ...s planned ml the year 2010 that are id -bind as abi 'o dd,dg with the 100-y— fl— pion. A, discussed in SaSectionSection7 Recommendations in, Implementation, f-m-planning dean, for the L— Hazard Mitigation Strategy may consitle. the densities and units dviii to such Use land uses. In addition, other research could illild, assessing the Am land so plan in Ishii if d is potentially -- this would entail combining these data sets with ..... t ,d ... laded ]and and oni data to determine whether areas in old of pa—mi .. ....... ft,bl, f,, development' Table FLU - I Zen below,sh—stil.bet[dismo—mg-fda.f.mb land sathat i.1—sidin Sp.a.1 Flood H—d[ Areas. Mao S-5• "Wildfire F,,I, Model" This map display, a — models' map for Snnin- County as an example of him wdHm nak for spear areas If the callity can be idembed. This data provides , visual of the f- tyians used in deci,led,ii the Na ml Fins Dmqm Raiiiiii System. This .mmq in .,ad by ffii to determine tlanger ,,, on , daily ly basis. This did, co possible ... RD, be used in an initiative to develop I historical lddi If the FireDamao, Rating System. This type of study could be expanded and enhanced in develop ,,, of givenebased on the number of finma in area exceeds the him danger threshold in a time Map "Hazardous Materials Amid— hdinbt Zones" On Map S-6 Iaboard..s materials adds and schools are shown. H—dah. Miseries (Hi -inability —., are spatially displayed. Th... an,,, were Impind from CAMEO analysis results provided by Seminole County Emergency Management antl ,,, based on , TS MPH wind speed (see Attachment F,,,. H—d... M,mml, —,tm, Repon). This wind -speed indiddl.. . — .s aded.r. min add ah..Id be analyzed an I site -specific blij factors the, oe ..,to be take, da, comm midi .., canbe used to help identify vulnerabilities of insihWons with p.,lindri. PI-ii.11y more sensNve to the i.p.lb If ..h events. Map S-7"Wind Damage W Mobile Honda," The map displays damage estimates for mobile homes in. Category 2 mnicane event.s d .... d from The A— at Stands (TAOS) did,pind, model —ft, The Flodd, oIp.dm,,t of Community Affairs piaitadd the TAOS data to the WP,kddq Group. Displayed by percentage are the leblItId =lte If ItIldIll dIllql. This data provides I useful planning tool for ii le h— wmmunities at heightened nk from high winds, A. I b.leI —ft of the TAOS —II ..— If the Risk Assessment C-- — with —el mobile hIM. W-11bIll throughout the County. From these meeting — MI m-111 from the T— & Country R.V.Resod. First, they propose It e— —k i—ellinthe t, protect residents from damage d.. to high winds, wildfire.S—d they propose to b.ild I safeh.he, withelevated b mergency ge—tor ,d wiring to protect residents If T— and Country R.V. Pand - ..—dibg p.,k., M.i, S8 "W.I., Depth From hl—t.— Events" This —p displays the water depth M I Category 2 ""i . event, based on the TAOS GIs —de. It is apparent that the —el depth net I pl.bill f,, the I,- of the —ty, I-i—, as be, be seen from the —p ,go,, along the St. J—, River may experience significant levels If flootling K I — directly Impacted the area. The hazard III antl ,I—bilby assessment p,,,,, bdi—, that the, be some residential homes in theee potentially ii Man 9-9. "Special Need, P-blei This —p shows the 1cfibb, If the meb,ty If the Sp—1 IN,— population in Seminole County. The wind speed data indicates that d.n,g . category storm the county =.Id experience bet 3 and rat 2 wind speeds. The Special Need, population is one that will need assistance in the —M If a dje,ei- Map S-10 "Sturm Debbie EUbette," The .., displays It,bde estimates tlen— from TAOS ..d.11bg f., all N. categories If humcane .1— —bt., This data is di,li in cubic yards per —.. Table D 2, givenbelow, estimates the .—I cubic yards If debne generated by each storm category. Map S-11. "Sitel of Repetitive Flood lb—" This ..p III the FEMA repetfwe loss she W.-eti., f., S..m.l. C—ly antl ft —i,pelfti- The numbers referenced on the —p wmsp.,d whh the b—b.. in I.e. R-1. This table provides 1.Ih., data g." mg --ry and dates losses. The d..b.e has b..n di with FEMA and County data. Mbet If the mf—fii on repethive t— —Ibme wMes from the FEMA database mwt,i ,el under the National Flood Insurance P,g— Th... data will be useful i implementation If the plant. adthe mitigation need, If ,petgi,e Ils et— I, during the ,A planning ,I, as described I S2- 1 If this d—ment. Vulnerability Assessment The reports, chaos and t.b],, attached provide data in regards t, the hazards that , f,dlhy may f—, based ,I"i , its 1—b— During this ph-, of the L— Hazard Mitigation Strategy, 2,188 -hff- were analyzetl. Of these ftalihm, 11 S% are 1—d in a Special Flood H ... Id A,,,. This designation indicates that , fdUy i, spatially located in , d, g 'an,d 100-y... fl,,dpl,!, and may b, Wh—bl, W fi-d1hg? In addition, 11.2% percent of fdhl,, a,,IMd are 1—ted in , h—dmaterials - vuh—biky —.. The d,— below s'— the M— ..bm..d 1 damage for —ling —d— types in the County. This data was bt.—d from the TAOS M-1 -pN. Ch., I.M-h P.—hh D.,, f., —.d F.— SI—res F 21% 1 2 1 1 Chart 2. M... P-1 D,,,,, in, Concrete Block Structures - --------------------- -------- - -- - - ' Concrete Block 1 8. 00%-5- 60 0 % % 2 1 1 % % C., I C.1 2 Cat 3 Gat 4 Cat 5 ----- — ---------- — - 11 lFtl- A --11-1---- -PM f., 1e —M.I. County w 6 Vf., Chart 3 .— -- D-- f., M.W. H.— Structures Mobile Home 100% 80% 40% 20% C , t I C.t 2 C,t 3 C— Cats Table D-1. Structural Damage Ef,,,t,, fin Dollar amounW T— 1,1551111 11,111121 1116— 1 111141 I,IW - 21 —111 -n,! §Jw I—=23'3 —10 1 121 � 52.IN 11 6,§� 318 lit _4 o100 1— 1 2 ��4Q'Bj4 Ill 4' 119 a4j�691 1657,243 355 2 Table FLU-1. Future Land U,. Acre i, 100 Y... Flood Z.— aaL-$adv ww .iOe�i d u C.M—.1 165 Planned Development 227 C--.— 236 Public 1-d 165 High Density 7e Rural 1 17 �1 LowDensity — R— 5 Medium Density R...I 142 30,,,. Recreational —Y N. F... Land Use — Suburban estates 195 Table 0-2, M,micIll 011,11 EIVII-' --me "I"PO'lle, C.' I -tL :P.12- Ovietlo , " 345 449 867 14e 1,063p48 2,287 2122 8539U Lake Mary 140210 42 277 801 aMhjZ 5,1el,- iEMjWZf 1 ' 112141 2�' VI 686,206 1,703,589 3656,057 7,855,142 Sanford 801,062 1 948057 4,583.421 9e0, - ---- . — I. — Table R-1. R—M! a L... She, Zb-I IIIS Ly 14 1 8 _8 1 5192 5 W197 �j _1 91 I 1'hea� 1-41 11 a2l'*. $21— 14 $14219201 -21 $12ba a $7 12 V.1-babil"Amity... A, im,fie"ed above, the PlIIIiI9 PIddollta have been antl are confnuing to use the ty,e, of information presented in the example Map, given hereto selectthe key fdlfti,, systems and neighborhoods to, which to conduct . me detailed -1—bilit, merit The 1111111bitty assessments to, bmilifibe — eralm, completed i, ccord wAh the Working G—pa Operating Procedures- Th. —Ifte of the vulnerability ... e—m, are I —Id afthit each local government's potion of the Seminole County Local Mitigate' Sbat'gy (So, Sadie, 6), The vulnerability —1y..s p— bomi.beed by the W.,Jbmg Group is intended to highlight spec W—.1,40im, to sTborfi.d laaabo.. These —1h. have been and will wolm- to be used by the W,,W,g Group to id,,* and pbaboo, ap,offle mkii imfi,fi.s to eliminate ., minimize that vulnerability. The Working Group oemi— two type, of vulnerability analyses. The fi,al a to define vulneabilities of ip,chfic ptalffie, antl systems. Each separate mumidp,l sadion within Section" provides —fib Information mt; giebthese, mi—thilite, determined to date. The other is an assessment If to, neighborhoods or larger areas encompassing w,,,l aimcm, a or olla,, features that as a whole, are -1111ble to the impacts of disasters.Examplea he. may be mobile home oo,mmm a, that are Wmaabe to high wmd and hous ing d—Imp—ma di—t to —,—pad lands that vulnerable to wildfireswildfires(,, Map S8 to, —, depth area A, the ..., Group —mae, this area I-ef analysis, i, the babe phase of the at—gy implementation and development Bee Sedion 7), mitig—b initiatives needed in the strategy to address the identified vulnerabilities will be defned, a sponsor for the initiative identRed, and the initiative proposed for incorporation Into the strategy. Conclusion The process and by the Working Group during development of the Initial edton of the strategy to identity the hazards threatening the communities of Seminole County, and to defne spb�kally how key fadlities, systems and neighborhoods are vulnerable to those hazards, has established a dd,prehensive, methodical approach to developing proposetl mtligation initiatve9 to eliminate or lessen many of those vulne2bililies. As the vulnerability assessment process continues in fW years, and revised editions of the strategy are issued, n initiatives will have been proposed by each of the planning padicipants. When resources become available and the initiatives proposed m the strategy are implemented, Seminole County can continue to become more resistant to the human and economic impacts of future disasters. SUMMARY OF STATE AND FEDERAL POST -DISASTER MITIGATION NEEDS ANALYSIS FOR SEMINOLE COUNTY A,nI 9,1999 P,pare /or ibe: Seminole County Working Group emergency response planning & managemenp Inc. p.o. bpz 7065 princ , n.i. 06563 609�6.3566 Summary of State and Federal Post-Oisaster Mitigation Needs Analysis for Seminole County Introduction Emergency Response Planning 8 Management, Inc. da;b&h) is assisting Seminole County in the development of a local Ingation strategy pursuant to its grant from the Flenda Department of Community ARairs, The Seminole County Working Group has w established a process through which it id -lifts, hatle tents and pnomizes mitigation initiatives that shoultl be in=rpoaled into its local mitigation stategy. These proposed mitigation initiatives may derive from these in, general sources: the vulnerability as ment process, the 'guiding prindples' analysis, and based on he, ideas and expenen=s, In this latter category, a key element to consider is the runty s past experiences with major disasters and the mitigation initiatives that in... events pointed oN as needed. This document has been prepared by eM&m to assist Seminole County Working Group in nsidenng the mitigation -related experiences from past major disasters under the Stefford Ad. It is erp8m's objective in preparing and distributing this report to allow Seminole County Wodti,g Group an opp,huntty to =,,lost this potential source far identlymg mitigation initiatives for ihoom afon into the local mitigation strategy for Seminole Coun, Background Fiend .. unique location, while providing its residents vWth very enjoyable dlmate and abundant natural resources has also provided its resitlents with a myriad of natural and maoehsxatds. The resitlents mustface these hazaMs asa=nditicn for their =ntinued inhabitance on this peninsula. This repod has been developed to m-d, some history Into the various types of ha led. that this state and in padicular Seminole County has had to few for almost the past thirty years. Included are summanes of some of the disasters that have impaled these =unties and =me of the mitigation imistives that were derived from the Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team Reports that are written after each major disaster dodaration. The data and Inteagency Hazard Mitigation Reports and other Fedeal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) news releases were obtal,ed from the FEMA webshe, the Florida Department of Community Affairs and FEMA—Region lV. However, due to the sing number of such events, large fumover of reports and limited storage vailable, not all =um of the numerous dents requested from these agencies were —tables at the time of this report The Interagency Hazard Mitigation Reports that eM&m was able to obtain for this re=h indude W met Storm, March, 1993, FEMA-982-01R-FL; Tmpi=I Storm Gordon, November, 1994, FEMA-1043-DR-FL', Florida Mitigation Strategy—Hum=ne Erin, August, 1995. FEMA-1062-DR-FL: The President's Long Term Recovery Action Plan, 1997-1998 Whitill Storms, May, 199B, and sh-It"I 1IPlh$ taken from the FEMA web - History If Presidential Di.— DedbdIben, The tacking If presidential dil-11 eldi 911, ble, in 1972, Ifthl,igh the —11 IMI'defill I'd d1IIMII redi,,nned phtgIll he, undergone el—li —1911 Inde that 1— In all the Sill, of Pence he, —wed 31 P111dinn'll didedl, dIdIIId11l tbdtwdlh 1972 and 1998. Sim", of the, occurred in the plied benell, 1972 and 1991 while tibel- 15 were dedi —en 1992 and up through 1998. The period between 1972 Ild 1991 hed In average &.84 In—, d,d,,fo,s be, year, while the disaster dedflnetions aillet doubled de— it,, the wild between 1992 and 1998 t, 2,5 indents per year. This pet y,,, 1998 ended with the highest number of major I'll— dIddinn"n, ending the year with 6 such went,, Thi.=dhe lend -de in presidential died.., de—mlhs is the WhIletteh of tinin fed", These inaude the 11h;l plillbeill 11—Ide that the Idel he, enjoyed most If it along the Waldel areas, 111helled "pell, and rede,e,y "hii be the led of the federal government through FEIVA end changing weather penethe that thile shown some intensity. The Wind, St.- of M-1, 1993 reported that while In. —1 population f., the state of Florida to be —112 InItIon I.Pl., .1—th 7.1 If those resided in the thih,f— —..i Natural 11—m! Threat While : the beet from tropical stones and h,hidand, with the stone... g, -d high winds that re produced in events pose real threat to the coastal a ies, there If, eStei ral the, hazards that MpId most eed— throughout the also lel-thethedistinction of having n, highest numberte, IF lighting enll, Ild the g umber of -hinded, for ,y state. The ,,, report included Itoured, feq ... by in county map in Appendix A for Ine period f.m 1959 It 1990, Th. map range effne, Ielidy If beit,... 20 to 29 W—d— ob-hing In S.reillil County dIn19 that period. Although the httenwdy —k tornadoes thet net struck in the past had tildend the temedo threat to be ..I lightly, Ine initnend, in infientifty which has he., d—Adell, shown the,, pest few yeas and the neelled population thllghwt the tell he, I de— the t11Idl threat W be like, more unii =,gend 4, associated d— ,, 1,, another serious . 6.. On- Ithe Whiny and I, tyi'communitiethroughout In. State. Sin. most floodingndid.,=ll h of e hInrelle or other ecipidel MIM —, the winter III— e1nith muck Fiend, beginning in the III If 1997 into In, sprang of 199Bshowed that flooding events -I be I— by stone systems unrelated to tropical storm IYmen-1 Net . single I —I, but , led,, If —, wdandl systems intensRed by the El Nine weather phenomenon, inundated Fl.nd. with —en, 1—mgwind d—,,. antl I.—Ide, a—,dana.- I-T,,, Mitigator, Project R......odab... The three Interagency H—to Mitigation Teen, Reports old in, Lllg-TInh Recovery Adron Plan tod,ded in this report have Ideal reviewed with the pp,,pn,t, initiatives for ,he doinnty id,,tf,,d and i,d,d,d The w,,,,d,d initiatives h... We, nd,d,,l in e chronological No, Where the I-T,,, indutletl ],ad and support agenda, that Information he, been inGutletl along and, Ine sohad.l. hdh,d.d for each mitigationinitati- Sirce the first I- T .m i,d,d,d in this na,ent dates from 1993, d is anticipated that a —Ide, of the initiatives ..y have already been implemented or .re in the planning p... for 'PInnor"ohion. The h :,.ppli.fi applicable rong..n initiatives fadd, of the InteragencyHand,ard, d Mitigation To Reports have been ind.d,d in the anarre foment in which they were Inducted in the report. Of the reports onfitoond for the nqaal, Seminole Courtly was only identified in the Long-Tm R—,ry Adtf- Report for the Winter StrannS Of 1997-1998. Tha Wi—Sod—ofI997.1998 FEMA-1204-DR-FL&FEMA-1196-DR-FL Long -Tenn R...-ty A.U.. Report Although not an I -Team report this rd,,on are, issued following a sends of six major ,t,m events that began in Decemberof 1997 and ended in mid-Marchof 1998, This o,tb,,,k of storms Odd 46 people and do ... d $500,000 000 — of damage and .the, losses. Many of the issues covered in on, report were ongoing assessments of FEMA , and the $I.. a response for assistance. Th..e dams have not been thorned unless they also nol.de irrigation infloetwea. Shin"thal damage from wind antl ..Ir, unp.ot. over 15,000 no 750 businesses acroae the adet,, Repirann-, Use the Wnd— of Opportunity created ,recent fldo and to—do di: are, W lonqoond, mitigation into the effd, A.— FEMA to provide do—boal, trei,ing, and a,,isory assistance in a.p,,o,l of Federal, State and 1-1 pid-do.— assistance in the area. of ,,,dpi,in management and hadool rhithgation la.o. Cl..ad been Flooding antl Regional Mapping I-- Closed basins flooding d,, W the high — table and gone,,] evened flooding Red.1--r Hydrogy / hyd,,,Ij, at,di.$ high — maf, and --do mapping are needed 1d idny base f.od elevations and anon I.- — —.1 management prcn— A—: FEMA W pmId, assistance W SWFWMD to provide ortalled flood mapping. Issue: Contaminated Water Wells antl Failing Sept, Systems, the fl,,di,g Its, contaminated Wells and septic.y...s R,q,i,,,M: Assist— in d,w,t,,i,Wi,g those It— that are ,,,,tly unsafe and 11 ll appropriate mitigation measures to id— the,, systems from d-snt and fem, omt-t—t- and fliIIII. Adti— Use of the State Re,dil Led, F— to id —id, for low interest e..s f,, the omet'djol led lidiildilg of water and —se, f1d1lill that are anagetl by the State. Other I— interest— programsand I— to be made available to, otm—by — -ft, —t— systems. I inadequate Waterway Cd—,moss Unusual .—ml. of d.bd. iml.ong ...im. vegetation .,d debris caused obstructions increasing flood! domb... Remidsie.e. Assistance is needed to oete. III v".de- .,d dolon. g.,..I.d by 11—mg from ..t,.Ys Adieu: The United Ste- Amy Corp of E,gimis (USACE) es, provide 1uppoft Intl,, the Section 208 Continuing Aeh,a" to, Cll and Sn.g,i,,. Wmfe the fi-dfi- or navigation Is affected. Issue: All -host, —ing system, severaI —et, Indicated the need W impove the .11l —on, systems in place. Rir—nt: lo-Ill of an enhanced —mm system and —1 —mg of hydo-destell data W temed the impacts of th..e type, of events. Adtiot: Establish I state-wide all hoddid, mm, — dissemination system combining the use of Emergency Management Warning Information (EMWIN) and National Weather Rod, (N�) could igefoddtl improve th—mi-gio-ess Aod,p,,h—tv,,,mdgsystem for the St- east bs wed using the l Mg,til Grant Program (HMGP) 6 percent Initiative funding from any Fl.nd. dide—, Transportation system doeshis, to fed-1 highway system sustained heavy ese—ge from the flooding events. Requirement: Damage W federal -aid highways occurred ffl wi,,Iy at the 111, The United States DeptIrm- of T—spedetil I Fees., High,, Ad, 'ist_on she'd continue to explore fending options wdh address State to IddlIdIMIgs, W feds-,,ol highways. A.— The Florida Dept— of Tlmspoddtw (F!L-IDOT) Mll —beld damage ,,eye and identify —i ties that are eligible to, emegemy repair funding. .°oasem=.°ems Summary of Recommended Mitignib- Meltves Following is a bnef summary listing dine venous mitigation initiatives that had been idendfed in the four repods includetl in this report. Although it is quite possible In. e of the mitigation inRiatives have already been wmpleted, no aft"Pt has been matle el this point to confirm thet implementation of any program identified in any of the reviewed reports. The mitigation Man ves are listed in chronological order as identified in the repots. ♦ Conduct educational antl awareness programs for local building officials, building tmde professionals, and home -owners for vulnerable iiihi- es (including wind hardening, and retrofMi,g pre -FIRM and repetitive loss structures) ♦ FEMA to assist SW D to provide detailed flood mapping. • Explore low interest loans antl oNer assistance for the construction antl upgrading of water end wasle-ster fadlills. through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Agncuft—, • Have USAGE provde supped under Sedion 208 to inspect and atre vsgihst n antl debits where fiehei and navigation are ected. Partidpate and encourage the establish of a state-wide Ni hazards ming system. • Wnh FL -DOT identify all transportation systems whh repetitive bsses antl develop mitigation rewmmendations. Conclusion This d—nnenl summarizes the fndings of available reports on ponevent analysis far Presidentially-dedaretl disasters which are conducted by fedeal agendes to identify mMigafion initiatives that the experience indiceted —le be needetl or desirable. In preparing this dowment, I", shempled to obtain all such reports from both state antl federal agend,s. Howevel, it is hewgnized that there are several major disc hers in the past far whbh port -event mAigation .,.Is were either not prepared, or have in. been removed from the agencys files. N—heless, the information matle available antl desctibetl above, may provide the Seminole County Working Oro, wth ideas of mMigafion inilletives that should or could be more wmpletely tailored to the sm— needs of the ehni—dies within the aunty, and then induded as proposed mitigation initialives in the nrstegy being preparetl. - -ILanewwi Wngwax .... . ...... The Seminole County Working Group for Local Mitigation Strategy Development Initial Local Mitigation Strategy October 31, 1999 The Strategy Section $ix The City of Longwood Mitigation Strategy Background For this Initial Report of the Local hazard Mhigation Strategy, this se n of the d —hb illustrates the content and format of the individual junsdittional andlor organizational wmponehl of the Seminole County Loral Hazard Mitigatlon Strategy. For this Infel report, it is important to emphas¢e that panicipating jurisdictions antl organizations are continuing their efforts in the planning process. Therefore, the material en herein Is ve likel to be modified ex ntled or other - chap ed in subs vent etlhipns of the hrib.y. Purpose This portion of the Seminole County Loral Mitigation Strategy summarizes the fndings to date of the hazard identifcaticn antl vulnerability assessment concerning the City of Longwootl antl Ilsts the mitigation Initiatives proposed to date to address the vulnerabilities identRed. The mitigation initiatives listed herein originate from three rces: 1] the analysis of vulnerabilities appll-1c tc Longwood, 21 the assessment of the plans, policies and codes of local gp rh—t, andlor 3] from experiences with past tllsasters and emergencies impacting Seminole Coun,, The Seminole County Loral Mitigation Strategy has been prepared as a —ty-wide, oordinated mitigation plan, relying on the cooperative, voluntary Involvement of all participating jurisdictions, organizations and Institutions. Consequently, the planning process recognizes IhIt each participant maintains a separate legal or adminisfhrw responsibilily apad from the other participants far implementation of the applicable mhigetion initiatives. The strategy therefore relies on the eRods of the paNcipant for implementation. In view of this, this ponlon of the oveall strategy is that which is to be —id d for formal aelpe- by Longwood antl for implementation as the resources to do sa become mailable. County WOMing Gtyroume Fage2 d20lwOo Incorporation by Reference The Chy of Longwood has Commihed to voluntary padkipation in the planning process and therefore incorporates by reference and accepts for use the bylaws, operating procedures and other polities for the planning process that have been adopted by the Steering Com M— for the Seminole County Local Mitigation Strategy Development. Contents This podion of the Seminole County Local Mitigation St—, highlights the following for Longwood'. Attachment One: Prioritized and pending list of initiatives and municipal map Attachment Two: List of potential funding sources Attachment Three: Characterization Summary Report for Longwood Attachment Four. Initial Notification of Interest Summary List Longwood, Attachment Five: Vulnerability Assessments for Longwood. Detailed information 1e9- ng each of the Initiatives summarized in the table can be reviewed by --mg: John Blackwood, Manager Seminole County Emergency Management 150 Bush Blvd Sanford, FL32T13 1407)323-2500 %5121 Implementation The implementation of the mhigation initiatives listed in this section is contingent upon Longwood ehher receiving the necessary Flnancial support to tic so, or, as appropdale, the agreement antl endorsement of the applicable governing body to Implement the listed initiative. listing of- initiative in this section serves only as a proposal for fudher nsidera0on and action on the part of the Longwood to in — the impacts of It — Future Updatlng of N. Strategy The City of Longwood will continue to participate in the tlevelopment antl maintenance of the Seminole County Loral Mitigation Strategy. The strategy will be uptlated as speIad In the bylaws and proradums, vnth Continuing assessment of the vulnerobilhies If Longwood to the impacts of future disasters and emergencies, as well as ongoing identification of mhigation inhiatives needed to add,. those vu—bilities. Prepared for me City or Lon dty Longwood Longxnod I- Ch—dz.ti,n Sm—q Repon —p-9 owi-14: L—d E �$m wo in a. sses. F—S75 M 0--d-l- S..—, R," ------------------ Initial Notice of Interest/Mitigation Proposal ^- 9@, R N-1.,—, D [3 GOdmg—elp'. —069m 11*1 —0— E] El 11 L ---- - --------- - --------- j 0 S.6--1 H.,d -- ] —d. E: El UE —f- E T n D—& ------------- Ej E o - - - - - - - - - - - d ii F— El Ti— I. .-P-1.? Initial Notice of Interest/Mitigation Proposal ----------------------- -- - --- - ----- gf< u. Cj] II mcene U I.— Ell —d U wOlmdl l Ej] -dF.,, 0 D..,hl Cj] C] m. [Q] Cmil —6, C] U] -Pl. B—N<d --di- -w-k: O P. 1., 1 C—pl,,i—i— 1 S 117 I I .ilil —UT U Cry flnng,vaod r Mup I.N-I Legend I o . ®w