The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutHazard Mitigation Plan - 2010 ��/1� + �� r+�"J, � A�11 �, !� � ��. .� 3., �.. � � �� $�_ � � a � � � � � � � � �t � ��x ,o {. � � � � �� o a �� i � �,�� .� W ' 0 �C � � � �,F. � O O i N • a — � N �� •L � a �� V � � ,�s.... � #��Y � .< . � \ .� � � � � .� � � .� � � � :� � � � ..� � .� � .� � :� � � � � � �� .y� � � � � � � � .� � � � � .A �rr � � +�rr � � Table of Contents � "� Chapter 1: Introduction 1-1 +�r �,,, Chapter 2: Community Profile 2-1 � Chapter 3: Public Input 3-1 �r � Chapter 4: Mission Statement, Goals, Objectives and Action Items 4-1 � �, Chapter 5: Plan Adoption, Maintenance and Implementation 5-1 � Chapter 6: Flood Hazards 6-1 �.r wr Chapter 7: Winter Storms 7-1 � � Chapter 8: Earthquakes 8-1 �'" Chapter 9: Landslides and Debris Flows 9-1 � ,,, Chapter 10: Volcanic Hazards 10-1 �r Chapter 11: Coal Mine Hazards 11-1 vrr �'` Chapter 12: Hazardous Materials 12-1 �rr ;,�, Chapter 13: Terrorism 13-1 �r V""` Appendix 1: Synopsis of FEMA Grant Programs A1-1 � ,,,�, Appendix 2: Principles of Benefit Cost Analysis A2-1 wr Appendix 3: Hazus Reports A3-1 � '�' Appendix 4: Planning and Public Meeting Records A4-1 �r ,;�, Appendix 5: City Council Approval A5-1 � � � � iwr City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan i. April 2010 +r �... � � �r ,�, 1.0 INTRODUCTION � 1.1 What is a Mitigation Plan? +�w w.r The City of Renton and the surrounding areas are subject to a wide range of ,,,,r, natural and anthropogenic hazards, including: floods, winter storms, earthquakes, vr landslides, hazardous material spills and more. The impacts of potential future hazard events on Renton may be minor, like a few inches of water in a street, or `�'" they may be major, with damages and economic losses reaching millions of �►' dollars. � �, The impacts of major disasters on communities can be devastating. The total damages, economic losses, casualties, disruption, hardships and suffering are � often far greater than the physical damages alone. Furthermore, recovery from `"� major disasters often takes many years and some heavily impacted communities �r may never fully recover. Completely eliminating the risk of future disasters in ,,�, Renton is neither technologically possible nor economically feasible. However, � substantially reducing the negative impacts of future disasters is achievable with the implementation of a pragmatic hazard mitigation plan. � � Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan addresses each of the natural hazards that pose a � significant risk to Renton, along with the major anthropogenic hazards. The „�„ mitigation plan addresses hazards such as severe weather events or localized storm water drainage flooding that may happen in some locations almost every �" year. The plan also addresses larger hazard events that will affect much or all of "'r"`" the Renton community, albeit with lower probabilities of occurrence in a given :rr►� year. Infrequent hazard events, such as a major earthquake, which may occur only ,,�,,, every few decades or every few hundred years, still pose a substantial threat to �r. Renton because the consequences, when they do occur, may be extremely high. """ Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan has several key elements. � 1. Each hazard that may impact Renton significantly is reviewed to �`�"" determine the probability (frequency) and severity of likely hazard �► events. `�"' 2. The vulnerability of Renton to each hazard is evaluated to estimate the �r likely extent of physical damages, casualties and economic impacts. ''�'" 3. A range of mitigation alternatives are evaluated to identify those with �wr the greatest potential to reduce future damages and losses in Renton, ;�„ and to protect facilities deemed critical to the community's well-being �r that are desirable from the community's political and economic perspectives. � �r � wr City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-1 December 2011 �+rr � � � � The purpose of Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan is to address only the � mitigation of hazards that originate within the City of Renton and those that have an effect in Renton. Response to disasters and emergencies are `"� covered in detail in Renton's Comprehensive Emergency Management "� Plan. v,�,► �r Furthermore,this plan addresses only the mitigation efforts the City can and will take in accordance with the legal limits of its authority. Although � some of the recommendations within the plan are made for infrastructure "'�'` providers that are not part of City of Renton government, individuals, v� businesses and other government agencies are responsible for protecting � their own property from hazards and disasters. Private and public entities � alike are encouraged to review this plan and consider making mitigation efforts as appropriate. Additional mitigation information resources for �'` Renton residents and businesses are available by contacting the '� Emergency Management Office located at Renton City Hall. � � 1.2 Why is Mitigation Planning Important for Renton? � Mitigation simply means actions that reduce the potential for negative impacts "�"`` from future disasters including: future damages, losses and casualties. vvir■r � Effective mitigation planning will help the residents of Renton deal with natural � and manmade hazards realistically and rationally. It will help identify specific locations in Renton where the level of risk from one or more hazards may be �" unacceptably high and then find cost effective ways to reduce such risk. Mitigation `� planning strikes a pragmatic middle ground between unwisely ignoring the � potential for major hazard events on one hand and unnecessarily overreacting to �, the potential for disasters on the other hand. � Furthermore,the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) now requires '"�'`` each local government entity to adopt a multi-hazard mitigation plan and to � update that plan every five years to remain eligible for future pre-or post-disaster �, FEMA mitigation funding. An significant objective in updating Renton's Hazard � Mitigation Plan is to maintain eligibility for FEMA funding and enhance Renton's ability to attract future FEMA mitigation funding. �"` � This Plan is specifically designed to help Renton gather the data necessary to �,r► compete successfully for future FEMA funding of mitigation projects. FEMA � requires that all FEMA-funded hazard mitigation projects must be "cost-effective" (i.e., the benefits of a project must exceed the costs). Benefit-cost analysis is an � important component of mitigation planning, not only to meet FEMA �` requirements, but also to help evaluate and prioritize potential hazard mitigation � projects in Renton, regardless of whether funding is from FEMA, state or local ,,,�,,, government, or from private sources. � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-2 December 2011 "�` � �rr � �r �rr � 1.3 Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan �"'"" This Plan is built upon quantitative assessments,to the extent that data allows, of �r each of the major hazards that may impact Renton including their frequency, �,,. severity and areas of the City likely to be affected.The hazards addressed are: �..r floods, severe winter storms, earthquakes, landslides, volcanic events, coal mine hazards, hazardous materials incidents and terrorism/civil disturbance. Other '�" hazards, including extreme temperatures, drought and wildland/urban interface "�" fires are briefly addressed, but are not considered in detail, because they pose less � significant risks to Renton. � Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan also includes a qualitative or quantitative �lrr� assessment on the vulnerability of buildings, infrastructure and people possibly "�" impacted by each of these hazards,to evaluate the likely magnitude of future � disasters on Renton. � � The review of hazards and the vulnerability of Renton to hazards is the foundation of the mitigation plan. From these assessments, specific locations where buildings, """ infrastructure and/or people may be at high risk are identified. These high risk ""�" situations then become priorities for future mitigation actions to reduce the �r negative impacts of future disasters on Renton. � Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan deals with hazards realistically and rationally and � strikes a balance between suggested physical mitigation measures and planning �" measures. The overall goal is to reduce the negative impacts of future disasters �r and better prepare the community to respond and recover from disasters. � � 1.4 Key Concepts and Definitions �'" The central concept of mitigation planning is that mitigation reduces risk. Risk is �"' defined as the threat to people and the built environment posed by the hazards � being considered.That is, risk is the potential for damages, losses and casualties �„ arising from the impact of hazards on the built environment. The essence of mitigation planning is to identify high risk locations/situations in Renton and to � evaluate ways to mitigate (reduce)the impacts of future disasters on these high "�`' risk locations/situations. � �,,,, The level of risk at a given location, building or facility depends on the � combination of hazard and exposure as shown in Figure 1.1 below. �r � � � �rr vr City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-3 December 2011 �rr � � � � Figure 1.1 Hazard and Exposure Combine to Produce Risk �` � HAZARD EXPOSURE � � Frequency Value and and Severity ♦ Vulnerability of - �" of Hazard Events Inventory v� �r � Risk is generally expressed in dollars (estimates of potential damages and other •rrr economic losses) and in terms of casualties (numbers of deaths and injuries). �„�,,; v�r► There are four key concepts that govern hazard mitigation planning: hazard, exposure, risk and mitigation. Each of these key concepts is addressed in turn. `� � HAZARD refers to natural or manmade events that may cause damages, losses or � casualties (e.g., floods, winter storms, landslides, earthquakes, hazardous material ,,,�, spills, etc.). Hazards are characterized by their frequency, severity and the geographic area affected. Each hazard is characterized differently, with � appropriate parameters for the specific hazard. For example,floods may be `""'` characterized by the frequency of flooding, along with flood depth and flood �° velocity. Winter storms may be characterized by the amount of rainfall in a 24- � hour period, by the wind speed or by the amount of snow or ice associated with a ,�, storm. Earthquakes may be characterized by the severity and duration of ground motions and so on. � � A hazard event, by itself, may not result in any negative impacts on a community. � For example, a flood-prone five-acre parcel may typically experience several ,,� shallow floods per year, with several feet of water expected in a 50-year flood � event. However, if the parcel is wetlands, with no structures or infrastructure, then there is no risk. That is,there is no threat to people or the built environment '"� and the frequent flooding of this parcel does not have any negative impacts on the � community. Indeed, in this case,the very frequent flooding (i.e.,the high hazard) ,� may be beneficial environmentally by providing wildlife habitat and recreational ,�, opportunities. � The main point here is that hazards do not produce risk to people and property `'�"' unless there is vulnerable inventory exposed to the hazard. Risk to people, �r► buildings and/or infrastructure results only when hazards are combined with ;,,,�,, exposure. � EXPOSURE is the quantity, value and vulnerability of the built environment i"�"` (inventory of people, buildings and infrastructure) in a particular location subject `� to one or more hazards. Inventory is described by the number, size,type, use and � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-4 December 2011 ''� � �r � �.r � � occupancy of buildings and by the infrastructure present. Infrastructure includes roads and other transportation systems, utilities (potable water, wastewater, ""�`" natural gas, and electric power), telecommunications systems and so on. � � Inventory varies markedly in its importance to a community and thus varies ,�, markedly in its significance for hazard mitigation planning. Some types of facilities are identified as "critical facilities" due to their import to the community, '� particularly during disaster situations. Examples of critical facilities include police '"" and fire stations, hospitals, schools, emergency shelters, 911 centers and other � vital buildings. Critical facilities may also include infrastructure elements that are ,,�,,, essential links or nodes in providing service to large numbers of people such as a � potable water source, an electric power substation and so on. "Links" are elements such as water pipes, electric power lines and telephone cables that �"' connect portions of a utility or transportation system. "Nodes" are locations with � crucial functions, such as pumping plants, substations or switching offices. �rrr �, For hazard mitigation planning, inventory must be characterized not only by the quantity and value of buildings or infrastructure present but also by its � vulnerability to each hazard under evaluation. For example, a given facility may or �" may not be particularly vulnerable to flood damages or earthquake damages, wr depending on the details of its design and construction. Depending on the hazard, ;�,, different measures of the vulnerability of buildings and infrastructure are often � used. �' RISK is the threat to people and the built environment-the potential for damages, � losses and casualties arising from hazards. Risk, which results only from the ,�, combination of Hazard and Exposure as discussed above, is illustrated �r schematically in Figure 1.2 below. � Figure 1.2 � Risk Results from the Combination of Hazard and Exposure � R�� . . � � �rr� � .�ic.'1 O Oo � �� +�r O tif� �+ �� IYr' �+WI� Hazard � � � Exposure �r � +�✓ City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-5 December 2011 +�r � � � � A disaster event happens when a hazard event is combined with vulnerable inventory. The highest risk in a community occurs in high hazard areas (frequent � and/or severe hazard events) with large inventories of vulnerable buildings or "'�"` infrastructure. `r�► �r► However, high risk can also occur with only moderately high hazard, if there is a ,� large inventory of highly vulnerable inventory exposed to the hazard. For example, seismic hazard is lower in Washington than in the seismically active areas of � California. For some buildings the seismic risk in Washington may be comparable "�` to or even higher than the seismic risk in California, because some of the building .�w inventory in Washington is much more vulnerable to earthquake damages. ,,�, Conversely, a high hazard area can have relatively low risk if the inventory is resistant to dama es e. � g ( g., elevated to protect against flooding or strengthened to minimize earthquake damages). �"' � MITIGATION means actions to reduce the risk due to hazards and reduce the �„�,, potential for damages, losses and casualties in future disaster events. Repair of ,� buildings or infrastructure damaged in a disaster is not mitigation because repair simply restores a facility to its pre-disaster condition and does not reduce the � potential for future damages, losses or casualties. Hazard mitigation projects may `'�'� be initiated before a disaster, or after a disaster has already occurred. In either � case,the objective of mitigation is always to reduce future damages, losses or ,,�; casualties. �rr A few of the most common types of mitigation projects are shown below in Table �` 1.1. '�w' Table 1.1 � Common Mitigation Projects `�" Hazard Mitigation Project `�'" Flood Build or improve levees or flood walls �r Improve channels for flood control Improve drainage systems and culvert capacities � Create detention ponds for storage ''�" Relocate, elevate or floodproof flood-prone structures � Acquire and demolish highly flood-prone structures Winter Storms Add emergency generators for critical facilities � Improve redundancy of utility systems "�" Trim trees to reduce failures of utility lines �, Earthquakes Upgrade seismic performance of buildings Upgrade seismic performance of infrastructure � Landslides Remediate slide conditions � Relocate utility lines or structures ,,�, Wildland/Urban Interface Fires Increase fire safe construction practices Vegetation (fuel load) control �` General Enhance emergency planning and mutual aid �r Ex and ublic education ro rams ,� City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-6 December 2011 �►'° � +nrr. � ��r' � The mitigation project list above is not comprehensive and mitigation projects can � encompass a broad range of other actions to reduce future damages, losses and � casualties. � ,,�,,, 1.5 The Mitigation Process �r The essential aspect of all hazard mitigation projects is that they reduce risk. The � benefits of a mitigation project are the reductions in risk, or the difference in `"�'" expected damages, losses and casualties before mitigation versus after mitigation. �rrr These important concepts are illustrated below in Figure 1-3. � Figure 1.3 "'�"' Mitigation Projects Reduce Risk �rr� +�r� rrr+' � ,�„ BENEFITS �„ OF MITIGATION �r '"�' REDUCTION "'�'` RISK IN RISK � AFTER �,,, MITIGATION �r � Quantifying the benefits of a proposed mitigation project is an essential step in '�'' hazard mitigation planning and implementation. Only by quantifying benefits is it � possible to compare the benefits and costs of mitigation to determine whether or ,,�, not a particular project is worth doing or economically feasible. Real world mitigation planning almost always involves choosing between a range of possible � alternatives, often with varying costs and varying effectiveness in reducing risk. �rr �r Quantitative risk assessment is central to hazard mitigation planning. When the �,,,, level of risk is high, the expected levels of damages and losses are likely to be � unacceptable and mitigation actions have a high priority. Thus, the greater the risk the greater the urgency of undertaking mitigation. � �` Conversely, when risk is moderate both the urgency and the benefits of �. undertaking mitigation are reduced. It is neither technologically possible nor ,�,, economically feasible to eliminate risk completely. Therefore, when levels of risk are low and/or the cost of mitigation is high relative to the level of risk,the risk � may be deemed acceptable (or at least tolerable). Proposed mitigation projects � �rr City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-7 December 2011 � � � � � that address low levels of risk, or where the cost of the mitigation project is large � relative to the level of risk, are generally poor candidates for implementation. � The overall mitigation planning process is outlined in Figure 1.4 below. � � Figure 1.4 � The Mitigation Planning Process � � Mitigation Planning Flowchart ``� � � Risk Assessment ;,,�, Quantify the Threat � to the Built Environment � Is Level of Risk � Acceptable? � � � Risk Acceptable? Risk Not Acceptable? '� Mitigation Not Necessary Mitigation Desired � � Identify Mitigation Alternatives � Find Solutions to Risk � � Prioritize Mitigation Alternatives "'� Benefit-Cost Analysis `"� and related tools `�'` � Obtain Funding � Implement Mitigation Measures ,�,; Reduce Risk � �r The first step is a quantitative evaluation of the hazards (frequency and severity) � impacting Renton and of the inventory (people, buildings and infrastructure) ,�; exposed to these hazards. Together the hazard and exposure data determine the v� level of risk for specific locations, buildings or facilities in Renton. � The next step is to determine whether or not the level of risk posed by each of the '�" hazards impacting Renton is acceptable or tolerable. Only the residents of Renton � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-8 December 2011 "� � � �rr� � � � can make this determination. If the level of risk is deemed acceptable or at least tolerable,then mitigation actions are not necessary or at least not a high priority. � �' On the other hand, if the level of risk is deemed not acceptable or intolerable, ,o,,,,,, then mitigation actions are desired. In this case, the mitigation planning process ,�, moves on to a more detailed evaluation of specific mitigation alternatives, prioritization, funding and implementation of mitigation measures. As with the � determination of whether or not the level of risk posed by each hazard is """' acceptable or not, decisions about which mitigation projects to undertake can �w only be made by the residents of Renton. +�r � 1.6 The Role of Benefit-Cost Analysis in Mitigation Planning � Communities, like Renton, that are considering whether or not to undertake � mitigation projects must answer questions that do not always have obvious � answers, such as: � What is the nature of the hazard problem? ''"`' How frequent and how severe are hazard events? �' Do we want to undertake mitigation measures? �r What mitigation measures are feasible, appropriate and affordable? � � How do we prioritize between competing mitigation projects? �,,, Are our mitigation projects likely to be eligible for FEMA funding? ..r,.. Benefit-cost analysis is a powerful tool that can help communities provide solid, ,� defensible answers to these difficult questions. Benefit-cost analysis is required for all FEMA-funded mitigation projects, under both pre-disaster and post-disaster w�r mitigation programs. However, regardless of whether or not FEMA funding is '"'�'� involved, benefit-cost analysis provides a sound basis for evaluating and �► prioritizing possible mitigation projects for any natural hazard. wr �, Benefit-cost analysis software, technical manuals and a wide range of guidance documents are available from FEMA at no cost to communities. A Benefit-Cost � Analysis Toolkit CD which contains all of the FEMA benefit-cost materials is `"�'' available from FEMA. The publication What is a Benefit? Guidance for Benefit- � CostAnalysis is particularly recommended as a general reference. This publication �,� includes categories of benefits to count for mitigation projects for various types of buildings, critical facilities and infrastructure and has simple, standard methods to � quantify the full range of benefits for most types of mitigation projects. � �..• �r �wr �r �rr° City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-9 December 2011 �r � � t�r► `�„` 1.7 Hazard Synopsis �w To set the overall context of hazard mitigation planning, we briefly review the 'w" major hazards that impact Renton. Some hazards affect the entire city, while some � hazards have more localized impacts. � � Renton has several areas of flood plains mapped by FEMA. These include areas along the Cedar River, Green River, Springbrook Creek, May Creek and their �" tributaries. Other portions of Renton, outside of the mapped floodplains, are '"'�'' subject to flooding from local storm water drainage. �r � The entire City of Renton is subject to the effects of winter storms, including wind, vr�� rain, snow and ice, as well as secondary effects such as power outages. � The entire City of Renton is subject to the impacts of earthquakes on the Cascadia '+�►►� Subduction Zone off the Washington coast, on the Seattle Fault and other faults � within Washington. ,,�, Portions of the hilly areas of Renton are subject to landslides or mudslides, which � may affect buildings, roads and utilities. `"�"` �rr Historically, several areas of Renton had active coal mines. Although none of these ,�,�; mines are currently active,the old mine sites pose risks from possible collapses � and the release of underground water. �r The entire City of Renton is subject to volcanic hazards from eruptions in the `�' Cascades, although the impacts are likely to be very minor ash falls. � �rrr Hazardous material releases are possible nearby or downwind from fixed site concentrations (e.g., industrial sites) as well as along transportation corridors from � truck or rail accidents. "�'" .�r+ Terrorist incidents or other deliberate malevolent actions by vandals, disturbed ,,,,�,, individuals, or employees or members of organized groups could affect Renton. � There are several other hazards, including extreme temperatures, drought and "�'�` wildland/urban interface fires,which pose only minor threats to Renton. Renton's '� moderate climate indicates that extremes of temperature (either hot or cold) � sufficient to have major impacts are very unlikely. Similarly,the high average ,,,�, rainfall indicates that potential droughts are not a major concern. Renton and the surrounding communities are largely built out, with very limited areas of high fuel �" load vegetation, making the potential for major wildland/urban interface fires is � low. These hazards pose only minor threats to Renton and are not considered � further in this mitigation plan. ,,,�: � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-10 December 2011 '''�" � � �r � vrr � The approximate level of risk posed to Renton by each of the hazards covered in this mitigation plan is summarized below in Table 1.2. This ranking is based on ""'� quantitative/qualitative judgment about the likely long-term average annual � damages and losses from each hazard,taking into account the probability of � hazard events and the severity of damages and losses when such events occur. � Table 1.2 � Relative Risk to Renton from Hazards +r�r Hazard Relative Risk to '�' Renton ,�, Earth uakes Hi h Floods Hi h ""'�'" Winter Storms Moderate ,r,,,Y Landslides Moderate Coal Mine Hazards Moderate ''�"` Hazmat Incidents Moderate „�„ Terrorism Low Volcanic Events Low �"` Extreme Tem eratures Ve Low +rrr Wildland/Urban Interface Fires Ve Low � Drou ht Ve Low � The remaining chapters of the Renton Mitigation Plan include the following: � �. • Chapter 2 provides a brief community profile for the City of Renton. � rr • Chapter 3 documents the community involvement and public process involved in developing this mitigation plan. � "r"' • Chapter 4 outlines the mitigation plan goals, mitigation strategies and wr action items. �r �rr • Chapter 5 documents the formal process of plan adoption, implementation and maintenance. � �'` • Chapters 6 through 13 cover each of the major hazards addressed in �r this mitigation plan, including: floods, winter storms, earthquakes, ,,�, landslides, volcanic hazards, coal mine hazards, hazmat incidents and terrorism. +Wr ''�"` The Appendices include synopses of FEMA mitigation grant programs and benefit- +�r cost analysis. � +rrr �r +�rr �.■► City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-11 December 2011 Wrr v�r � ��r* wrr' ,�,,, 2.0 COMMUNITY PROFILE: RENTON � 2.1 Population, Geography, Hazards and Climate � �r The City of Renton is located at the southern end of Lake Washington in King �,. County, about 10 miles southeast of downtown Seattle. Renton, which was � founded in the 1850s and incorporated in 1901, occupies an area of 23.79 square miles. � �Keln�kns � O � �1%a�vet , '-� � ��-a.nwm �. 'ore &NVqiamSf .. .: Vkmrb� � . . �� -,. i4 � `�S�sttk SPO�� °s� i� <, r:. 1�+ Teeomi I� i �k 4 � �� ' y� p� I�i iy I �i,I'I I��i��I'i I�il' O-" �,I �� '�', ^ccwtii ,�`"° t' ��c4' 1�� .. q �i yE�SM!` �.';� .. � ��E��° 8w�rg.C�, N� wewo . . 'I�emctiaW ' .:'�wz°M°°U 1a4s.,.., 9�I1` ��s°.. 4"a°rr." '� ive�vwa. : . :e ��,. � �4CONC2ak . : ca � '� �hdl�� V .. � Kemya°4 �� ' .. �tAnYN P89f s{ . Rmlort .. ... �� `�� a.+ra.vww M�nfeiql � ��p� � w � � seiaw�a.. � � �Ra,e� �, �� . Wvanon. T�nl[ �.-'"�� a �..�q�y.ntl. Bu�mn �.. ' M'b°"°°°�"�r�,. .. s..nk.T.com�srs�$: � wa.a .�, " �� v ,4 �vaMwooe M+pe pNy� ��'1°.3- p�yj� f CaeesOY�F�uaootl��pV �r @� . � t.� �._ ms .. �P qr The 2010 population in Renton was recorded as 90,927 by the US Census Bureau. �,,. Renton is the 4th largest city in King County and the 8th largest city in Washington. �r Renton has experienced rapid population growth in recent years with the 1990 population of 39,340 more than doubling by 2008. �r �' Renton's dominant natural landscape features are Lake Washington and the Cedar �,r. and Green Rivers. The Howard Hanson Dam provides flood protection for the � Green River, but recent needed repairs to the dam highlighted the vulnerabilities of the dam/levee system. The topography of Renton varies, with generally flat � areas near Lake Washington and hilly areas in eastern and southeastern Renton. "�"' Elevations in Renton range from about 45 feet at Lake Washington to about 400 � feet in the hills. � Earthquakes and floods pose the greatest risk for Renton. The entire city is subject � to the effects of winter storms and to volcanic hazards. Portions of Renton are ""'" subject to landslide hazards, coal mine hazards, and wildland-urban interface fire � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-1 December 2011 +�r � � � � � hazards as well. The city is also exposed to risks from human-caused hazards, � including hazardous materials or terrorism incidents. � The climate for Renton is moderate. Mean daily temperatures range from highs of �` about 77 degrees and lows of about 55 degrees in July and August to highs of � about 47 degrees and lows of about 35 degrees in December and January. The ,,�, average annual rainfall is about 38 inches. Average monthly precipitation varies from nearly 6 inches in November through January to about 0.75 inches in July. � Average annual snowfall is about 12 inches. "'�` � 2.2 Demographics �„�„ � Demographic data for Renton from the US Census Bureau is shown below in Table 2.1. The age and ethnicity categories in Table 2.1 intentionally include overlapping �` subsets for planning purposes. `'�" � Table 2.1 Population Demographics � (2010 US Census Bureau) '�Ir � Demographic Data ,,,�,� Age ;,�,, Under 5 years 7.8R�o � Under 18 years 23.2�0 18 years and over 76.8% '`� 18 years to 65 years 66.49'0 ''�" 65 years and over 10.13'0 � Race and Ethnicity of Households v� W hite 49% ,,� African American 109�0 �rr` Asian/Pacific Islander 229'0 Hispanic/Latina 13% �" Two or more races - 5�'0 """"' American Indian/Alaska Native 19'0 +� � For emergency planning purposes, children, elderly adults, the disabled, people � whose primary language is not English and low income residents are considered '�' special needs populations. Based on census data, Renton has a substantial � population of children and elderly adults. As shown in Table 2.1 above, about 23% ,� of the population are children less than 18 years old, while about 10% are adults over 65 years old. About 14% of the population 5 years or older is classified as � disabled, per the census data. "'�" � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-2 December 2011 ,� � � �w � � � Renton has large populations of Asian/Pacific Islander(22%) and Hispanic/Latino �"' (13%) households. Overall, about 25%of Renton's residents were born outside the � United States; for most of these residents, English is a second language. Nearly ,,;� 33%of the residents 5 years or older speak a language other than English at �, home. � According to 2005-2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, about 7% �'" of families and 11%of individuals residing in Renton are below the poverty line. �r �;,; The US Census website (www.census.�ov) has a vast amount of demographic data �r for Renton and for King County. See the website for additional demographic data, including school enrollment, educational levels, disability status and other '�"'` categories of demographic data useful for planning purposes. �r. �„ 2.3 Transportation, Employment, Economics and Housing � Renton is situated at the center of a regional and international transportation � network, surrounded by freeways and in close proximity to air, sea and rail "'�'' transportation hubs. Renton is at the center of the regional highway �rrr transportation network with three interstate highways and four major state „w,. highways in or near Renton. � Seattle-Tacoma International Airport is located only six miles from Renton. In � addition, Renton maintains its own airport, Renton Municipal Airport-Clayton � Scott Field which has a runway just over one mile in length capable of serving �, most types of aircraft from general aviation to corporate jets and turboprops. The ,�; airport is also home to the Will Rogers and Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base on Lake Washington.The seaplane base provides land access for amphibian aircraft � of all types, and a few businesses at the airport provide floatplane launch/retrieval °"�""" services. Renton Municipal Airport is also home to The Boeing Company's 737 � with more than 5,000 deliveries and 7,000 orders. All new 737 aircraft produced in �,,, the factory depart on their maiden voyage from the Renton airport. � Renton has a broad, diversified employment base with over 2,700 employers and �"' nearly 45,000 employees in the city. The Boeing Company is the largest employer � in Renton, providing approximately 30%of the jobs in the City. Renton has been � the home of Boeing for over 65 years. In addition to The Boeing Company, � Renton's leading aerospace companies include AIM Aviation, Aero-Plastics, Harper Engineering, Renton Coil Spring, Honeywell, Worldwind Helicopters and the `"'` regional headquarters of the Federal Aviation Administration. �r �i.► � �rrr City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-3 December 2011 arr �' � � � � Other major private sector employers in Renton include: PACCAR Inc., Wizards of � the Coast, Seattle Seahawks,TOPICS Entertainment, Providence Health &Services, ER Solutions, IKEA, Wal-Mart,Young's-Columbia of Washington, Kaye-Smith �" Business Graphics, Fry's Electronics and Sam's Club. Major public sector employers '� include: Valley Medical Center, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (Seattle � Branch), Federal Aviation Administration, Renton School District, City of Renton ,� and Renton Technical College. � Overall, Renton's economic condition is robust, with median household income, �"` average household income and per capita income all above the national averages. vrw Summary US Census Data for Renton's housing stock is given below in Table 2.2. � � Table 2.2 r� Renton Housing Data (2005-2007 American Community Survey Estimates,US Census Bureau) �` � Housin Data Occupied Housin Units (25,524 � Sin le Famil , Detached 48.0% � Sin le Famil , Attached 6.0% Apartments 2 to 9 units) 17.7% �``�`' Apartments(10 or more units) 25.8% � Mobile Home or Other 2.6% Year Structure Built � 2000 or later 16.4% � 1990s 17.5% ,� 1980s 15.9% 1960s or 1970s 30.1% �"�'' 1940s or 1950s 17.1% ,,�, Before 1940 3.1% � The census website (www.census.gov) has a vast amount of other economic data `�"' for Renton. See the census website for additional economic data. rr 2.4 Land and Development � �wr' The City of Renton is located at the south end of Lake Washington, between „� Seattle,Tacoma and Bellevue. Renton covers 23.79 square miles and is bordered by King County, Kent,Tukwila, Newcastle, and Bellevue, with downtown Seattle � 20 miles to the north. Two major freeways bisect the City- Interstate 405 and `"� Highway 167. �rrr The overall pattern of land use and development in Renton is shown in Figure 2.1 �' on following page,the Renton zoning map. '�'�'" � � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-4 December 2011 ,� '�" �.r �rr � �rr� Figure 2.1 � Renton Zoning Map(9/19/2011) � i'� — s' pA.a.ww. �w..,A.u..�..:i..,e:, �u,o�,.a.,M.r � �oea�+.w...ww..b. �e�rn�wwrr«aa.wa�r ��a..rtwaw �" � ��t� �f`� Renfian� �i �p�,� :��.��._��. < -.,..��,... �.�. ��. . ,�, aw».w....w.� ia�n,un.as„rs., trpM..wM,.w.� , , ; t t, «ae . z • ! u.,., , ,�� w�aww.wr..r�w.+�ew..l�nu�Dw+.c«+«wrx �1.uYr.�w.r . : � � ' P�4�M�YtO�J�la ��L¢t1w,wOMMw �� '� .,_��6 ��„E , `.. �.1PR-tee.�w�ru�r.e �O�aoomww�r�«u.tiw ..f.. e.., i � .,. -, . ,r, � � ' .. . .. , .. . . - : : ; . .` •. '. , • •,. . . " e NEtYCASi�E - „ . � � ,�� , ,.v .r , - , . . _�. . , - ,:�..» ,. . ,. �„ „ „ . ._ , "� � ..�.,� � � . � . . `` . ._ ' . . �^ M _ M , � � � � � M � tq '��.� �{�,� 4 �v Sf ✓.(� � � ,:�:,,w �`��`-��,°�-. Y�t N+'`+M`. � ��.- �..�. .e4l �� .`�-��M � �� ' . fi� :!N � � .. , » , „,�, �` ' �� : � , �� ,� N SE��iTtE` `� ' �� . }'��'' ` w��, ` � `i' � 'M� w4 . ' � �� ti . � �' � +-} ! e .M � ��_�. _ � �s N' � « ;�,,, , ,, � � 1 ��.0 — _e. , . t _ � � ._ , _ ; � � ,a, � �. � i F , r A . _ „,„ . _.., �. -rd'_ .., M. . ^ A ' t � �� } . �,� . A� �� ,� � � 'M M � �'� S.. � �. �t � N � � !!k`� C 1�. :H �F �em��. .c � �� .. N �y, �''^ ''" L i +.� �,S' y� � s �, r{ F,�^..• '�� , : . s�" f f y �t Sbr . �� .�1 4� .�� 7.� '�gW�� £'��'�a�w��+'��3`� I + .� : � �.. ��. ;� �, l�y,y- M 7r"�''M r�� M � � ��.� �� .-r•—, � t� ��+' �'S's » ,-. 1NM'�� T.� ,�T'�� ..Y:k N ��: � � ��.• ••�y. 4 _ a"Y��s��y`�� M � 't �t� '� b.�' � .t^, c *> , a �� A ,��:i��, i :i� } � . , . _ - �� +.�' wix ., -- ,. o, :. . `" e.r..:� ;� ',` .., t � ��... �r ��r,�� t�; M «�,�,r , �Nt�l�,i�,� � � — �� ,, � � �� Mr�� vrr �x�� "� �, ,�, a , ,__ 4rt�..� t� '�rr' �� ` , . ., „ � , ; , , �f -�c. '�°` t'. �� sT '��--+�,� � a � � ��,r^ : : w ��y "�`P� "� � # . �y � _ .^� � M n \ .:' . t a.n' �,. y.L � ,t�M •�°M IN •a � � . � . � 4wri 9.. ,� "� ' .` �� N�µ'� ' '� ,r , 111 . � ,._ . 1}� —' , ` � ,r .�. .�. .�., : . ` �M . . . , `..;�� L.�� M -� 7 _.. M , . � ,,. # � .,.,,..F, ` M '.M. _M . � h �°'"„�, � � � . � .. . ..._ ' a..,„ ^ , _- `;. TUKWILA�y�. M ,". _ .. 1... .___ � , „' , : : k_ ! � � x� �� a k� -- � � „ . � _ �. , a� M o � r a�, .. � , . �,°"�w� ,a r � ° ` °'s ' "' � ,. . . '�' , _; � _ . � 9 `�� . M � � w _ w r,.� = » �� , � � � �� M i � ��. _ <; ' � �. �. , , �� a� �r �: . ,.�.,. ... — �`" y, .rf. . '. . � a�'� ' M� � ,31�.... e `" p F 43 r . .... �+ � � , _ .. . I � :� i� i .-<', d M ¢uA � � c <.., .. ! `._ Af : � `,#9 -: ..�_ , _._...m rIf~ t . � 'MF M� `Ri� j �b... °'iey. . �. _: � i-��e�. . t.� �' `�* - - '`iR ,... . �� }� �jY'*�$� `a h � ... ��'=. . ... . . � �� .r.� ' ' ,.^"' _ �' ° V�illd al�f�fmI1CB'.»s � 4�.:. N,.. "' ,. . �.... . M56�S.�i6026FOQ/�6�Zt � ."".�5.� v� t� ,.E. _ �-� �: .., a „ ehd eRecNva aS of , . `_ � - " � �:-4 �,, .o.. S�p[em�79 ffi71 � �- �, ' M .—`^.� ' i „� n �m. 1 ' ,.�... �-= ° F �� ' . - i ,.. ' .�....._ :::.. "' :. ....... . i:if�00G> ... � i �e. .. '� .., . 6 ,+ �'� : " �t �.' �.r � 5�< <. �: ' . •w�rr Gommunity&Economic Deuebpment � , K E N r ' ,�, �we�h.Aam�,t�or _ � � .._ __ •_ �� dIi1N Abf1AlONC14 f�ill��lla MAl11C�7�.�H 1�. � � - � .��.r��{�� s l} f � t � �4- j ; �'u.yr.3��.� ,�, rr.�Men iNdrs'.:.:'.. � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-5 December 2011 � vrr' � � � � Renton has a mix of land uses throughout the City. The land uses within the City include industrial and commercial uses located primarily in the downtown areas of � Renton. Boeing and the Renton Airport are located on the southern end of Lake '�"` Washington in northwestern Renton, at the mouth of the Cedar River and the site � of past severe flooding. Also downtown are mixed use residential and commercial � land uses, with a mix of single and multi-family homes. Single family residences �, dominate the eastern and southeastern portions of the City. In addition, in those areas there are pockets of mixed-use commercial centers aimed at providing � services for residents living along the eastern edges of the City. `''�"` w� Southwest Renton, west of Highway 167, is a mix of commercial office space, light ,,,�,� and heavy industrial and resource conservation lands. To the east of Highway 167, in southern Renton, is a mix of low-density single family, multi-family infill lands, � single family homes and commercial office space. "�`` �wrr' The Comprehensive Plan provides a vision of Renton development 20 years into „� the future.The vision includes infill into existing neighborhoods on vacant lots ,� with an increase in multi-family housing in the downtown areas, again with the emphasis on infill rather than on urban sprawl. Resource conservation lands are �`` located along major rivers and creeks in areas associated with critical areas '�" (wetlands, aquifer protection areas,fish and wildlife habitat, frequently flooded +�rr and geologically hazardous areas as defined by the Growth Management Act and ,,,� RMC 4-3-050, Critical Area Regulations) and in the Valley (south of SW 16th Street and west of Highway 167) where significant wetlands exist. � � Some existing development occurred in hazard areas prior to the adoption of '� current zoning and development standards regulating development in sensitive ,,,w,,, areas. According to the City of Renton Zoning Map (October 30, 2009), much of � the hazardous and sensitive areas are zoned to allow only very low-density residential uses. The exception is building within the areas where soil conditions � and the potential for liquefaction or lateral spreading increase seismic hazards, ''�"'` since seismic hazard areas encompass much of downtown and southwest Renton. � Multi-family infill development has increased over the past ten years to �; accommodate the growth expected within the City. Much of the downtown � increased seismic hazard area is designated as a mixed-use downtown center. While this accommodates the growth expected for the region it may also increase ""'�' both the day and nighttime populations of downtown Renton. Single-family `�` residential growth is occurring in eastern Renton, largely outside of hazard zones. � � The City currently controls development of lands that are identified hazard areas in several ways. The Critical Areas Regulations, adopted into zoning in 1999, � protect lands with identified aquifers, flood hazards, steep slopes, geologic '� hazards, and wetlands. Lands that are mapped in these designations, and lands �i�rr � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-6 December 2011 +� � � �rw '+1�/ � that are identified as "critical areas" based upon adopted criteria upon site- +rr specific review, are subject to restrictive standards and additional environmental �"' analysis. Development regulations require that critical areas be deducted from the �► buildable area of the land in question for regulated hazards. For lands with „�, characteristics below regulated thresholds, additional technical analysis—such as �„ geotechnical reports or wetlands analysis—is required to ensure that development adequately addresses hazardous conditions. � �` Analyzing Development Trends � ,,�, The Puget Sound Regional Council's population and employment forecasts project � growth for the City. Over the twenty-one-year interval from 2001 to 2022 they estimate an increase of 9,723 households and 33,600 jobs. Growth targets i""" adopted by the Growth Management Planning Council anticipate 6,198 �" households and 27,597 jobs. Both forecast growth and targets are well within the � City's estimated land capacity of 11,261 units and 32,240 jobs established through ,�,, the Buildable Lands requirements of the Growth Management Act (GMA). Renton is planning for its regional share of forecast growth over the next 20 years at the � high end of the range, and the adopted target at the low end of the range. In the "�'" first nine years of growth management actual growth in Renton exceeded targets, �.r but was within the range predicted by the forecast growth assumptions. With � external factors, including the regional economy, state/federal transportation � funding and the GMA regulatory environment remaining constant or improving, Renton's growth is anticipated to continue. � � Table 2.3 summarizes Renton's forecast growth, targets and land-use capacity. �r Table 2.3 � Renton's Forecast Growth � �.r Incorporated Renton Adjusted Target/Capacity Reflecting 2001-2011 Growth/Annexation/Land Use Changes '�"r in 2001 and 2002 v� 9,723 Units � Forecast 33,600 Jobs None � Growth 22,266 Population � 6,198 Units � Growth 27,597 Jobs 4,253 Units � Targets 14,194 Population 26,736 Jobs �r � �r � �► City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-7 December 2011 +r�r � � � � ��rw 2.5 Parks and Recreation � Renton has an extensive park, open space and urban trails system. The City's park � system includes: � . 28 developed public parks � • 12.5 miles of trails (including a 4.5-mile paved trail along the Cedar River) �„� • 732 acres of open space for hiking, wildlife viewing and enjoying nature � . Maplewood Golf Course, an 18-hole, 190-acre, public golf course `�'' • 45-acre Ron Regis Park includes a lighted regulation sized baseball/softball �` field and all-weather soccer field, lighted basketball court and opportunities "'�'` for future baseball/softball and soccer field expansion. wr� • Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park, a beautiful 55-acre park with nearly 1.5 � miles of Lake Washington waterfront and a public boat launch, is the most � popular city park with 1.5 million visitors each year. Additional amenities ,� include two restaurants, 1.5 miles of shoreline and over-water walking paths, picnic facilities and a large children's play area. � � . The public has additional water access at the mouth of the Cedar River on Lake Washington where the Cascade Canoe and Kayak Center offers canoe and � kayak rentals. "�` � In addition, the City has a unique combination of recreational and cultural ,,,�; opportunities and facilities that make Renton a quality community where people � choose to live, work and play, including: � . The Henry Moses Aquatic Center which features two separate pools, a 9,000- s uare-foot leisure ool and a 3 300-s uare-foot six-lane la � q p , q , p pool. The leisure pool includes popular features such as a zero-depth entry, wave machine, � water spray play area, lazy river, island lagoon, water slide,toddler water area, '�w► large sun and shade spaces, a bathhouse and a concession area. � . A skate park, community center, two neighborhood centers, senior center, � two King County library branches and a history museum. �, • The City's historic walk-- "History Lives Here" a self-guided tour of 22 markers � highlighting historically significant places, people and events in Renton. ,,,� Brochures along with a brief summary, historical photographs and pictures of ,� related memorabilia are available at the King County Library located in downtown Renton as well as at City of Renton buildings. �' � � � � v� � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-8 December 2011 � � �.r � � ++rr �, 3.0 PLANNING PROCESS �"' 3.1 HistoricalOverview �r ,�, Renton has always considered hazards as part of the community planning process. Hazard maps are maintained at Renton City Hall in a common area for � public review. Formal consideration of flood hazards is an integral part of `'"'` Renton's participation in the National Flood Insurance Program; with about 951 � flood insurance policies currently in place in Renton. �ww Renton's first hazard mitigation plan was developed as a result of the Disaster �" Mitigation Act of 2000 and was authorized by City Council Ordinance No. 3680 ``"�"' adopted on December 22, 2003. � � The first hazard mitigation plan was developed prior to the creation of The Office of Emergency Management. The Office of Emergency Management was created '�" as a part of the Renton Fire & Emergency Services Department in 2007 when �' Renton's first Emergency Management Director was hired. In 2008,the Office of �,,. Emergency Management was expanded to include an Emergency Management ,,�, Coordinator and AmeriCorps VISTA volunteer. In 2009,the most recent addition was an Administrative Secretary I, shared with the Community Risk Reduction � Section of the Department. �rr ,,,,,, Prior to 2007 emergency management work was completed by staff with other � duties. The creation of the Office of Emergency Management has allowed for dedicated personnel assigned to emergency management work. Since the `'�''� development of the office, hazard mitigation planning has been conceptually '�" incorporated into Renton's Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan +wr (CEMP),the latest revision of which was authorized by City Council Ordinance �, No. 3988 adopted on December 8, 2008. The Basic Plan portion of the CEMP provides a listing of the major hazards posing threats to the City of Renton. Each � Emergency Support Function includes a supportive statement and """ encouragement to apply mitigation measures appropriately. As the Office of �r Emergency Management has expanded and become a fixture of the City of ,,,,, Renton more work is being done to further incorporate hazard mitigation �r planning in all city plans. "�"' 3.2 Planning Process �rr The development of the new City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan was vr► coordinated by the Office of Emergency Management and the Hazard Mitigation �"'" Steering Committee, with the assistance of consultant Ken Goettel. The work �+' began in late 2008, with ten steering committee meetings from November 2008 � to April, 2010. � �r +wwr City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-1 December 2011 � � � � � The City of Renton's Emergency Management Group functions as the Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee in Renton. The Emergency Management Group � meets monthly and carries out the full spectrum of emergency management """' coordination topics including mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. w� Although the composition of the group is primarily City staff, the local hospital �,,,�,,, and college have been included in the membership. All members of the Office of � Emergency Management participate in this committee. � The first hazard mitigation plan was used as a guide in the drafting of this plan. � Historical information and mitigation actions listed in the original plan were � considered in the rewrite. Mitigations actions not completed were evaluated and � included in the new plan if deemed valid by the affected department and/or the Emergency Management Group. In nearly all cases lack of funds were `"� responsible for mitigation actions identified in the initial plan not being "� completed. � Through the Emergency Management Group each department was asked to � participate and, based on their expertise and knowledge, add details into the '"�'' new plan. Internal and external studies as well as historical information were �► included in the chapters related to the hazard addressed.The initial drafts of the �, new plan were created by the consultant. Reviews and changes were completed � by the Emergency Management Group during planning meetings and in contact with Emergency Management staff. Final wrap-up of the plan was completed by "� the Office of Emergency Management based on input from the Emergency '� Management Group,the public and Washington State Emergency Management. � The inclusion of public input and the planning meetings held are detailed below. � During the current revision of the Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan,two public "�"` workshops were held at Renton City Hall.The first public workshop, held April 9, � 2009, presented the expired Hazard Mitigation Plan to the public and initiated � dialogue for suggestions on improvements to the plan. After extensive �. coordination within the Emergency Management Group and with other City staff to develop revision recommendations, a second public workshop, held on March �" 16, 2010, provided an opportunity to review and comment on the first draft of "'�'` the plan. Additionally,the plans were posted on the City of Renton website for �r► public review and electronic comment. ,,,�„ These public workshops in Renton gave both public-sector and private-sector '``�" stakeholders in Renton opportunities to contribute the City of Renton Hazard "'�` Mitigation Plan. These public workshops were advertised on the rentonwa.gov w,�; website and in the local Renton newspaper. City staff with subject-matter �„ expertise were in attendance at the two workshops with maps and other visual displays to explain the hazards, answer questions and engage in dialogue with � members of the public. ''f°"'` � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-2 December 2011 '� � � � vr. � � As a result of the Hazard Mitigation Plan development process, and the desire to further involve the public in planning,the Emergency Management Group has '�"' recommended the formation of a separate group, the "Community Risk � Reduction Committee". This committee will meet at least twice yearly to gain ,,;�„ more external and public participation, on an ongoing basis, for prevention and � mitigation activities citywide to better inform the Emergency Management Group on mitigation issues and progress. �w � Hazard mitigation planning and public meetings conducted during the ,�,,, development of the Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan are summarized below. � Meeting attendees are listed in Section 3.3 at the end of this chapter. Scanned copies of the meeting minutes, sign-in sheets, and advertisement for public �" meetings, where available, are included in Appendix 4. � �, Following the completion of the final draft,the plan was submitted to the State of Washington Emergency Management Division (EMD)for review as to FEMA � requirements for Hazard Mitigation Plans. Recommendations made by the WA "'"'' State EMD were incorporated into the plan by the Office of Emergency �r Management. The plan was then submitted to FEMA for final review and ,,,,,, approval. Recommendations made by FEMA were incorporated into the plan by � the Office of Emergency Management prior to submittal to City Council for adoption. �rr +�r. Planning Meeting#1 (November 6, 2008) � The Emergency Management Group was introduced to the Hazard Mitigation � Plan revision needs on November 6, 2008 at Renton City Hall. A brief discussion � emphasized the importance of hazard mitigation planning and garnered � participation from the key contributors to the plan revision. � Planning Meeting#2 (March 3, 2009) � ,�,,. The Community Services Department set up a meeting with consultant Ken ,� Goettel for advice on Hazard Mitigation Grant Program applications. Additionally,the smaller meeting group entertained a verbal proposal to have � him compile and put narrative to the hazard mitigation planning efforts of the � City's Emergency Management Group. � � Planning Meeting#3 (March 5, 2009) �' The third planning meeting was held on March 5, 2009 to identify the hazards �,,, most significant for Renton and to begin the process of identifying mitigation ,�, goals, objectives and action items. Consensus opinions and suggestions from � this meeting included: � � �r City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-3 December 2011 � � � � � • The greatest losses to the City would be caused by earthquakes and floods. � • Power outage is a potential in all disasters and can also be the primary ''� disaster in and of itself. The December 2006 windstorm highlighted the need �rrrr for backup power for City facilities to protect critical services. ,,� • Public input in this plan is important and a meeting for input should be held `� soon. "� � Planning Meeting#4(April 2, 2009) � Considerable internal coordination and information sharing with the consultant "'�+` occurred between the third and fourth planning meeting. The fourth planning � meeting was held on April 2, 2009 at Renton City Hall. This meeting followed up ,� on action items proposed in Meeting#2. Participants also reviewed and discussed the relative merits of two grant project proposals being considered for "� submission under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. City staff were ""�"` confirmed for their roles in the scheduled April 9, 2009 public meeting to present �ww the expired mitigation plan to the public and solicit input and concerns to guide �,,,� plan development. � Public Meeting#1 (April 9, 2009) ""�" � The first public meeting with representatives of the planning team was held on � April 9, 2009 at Renton City Hall. Major topics addressed included: � • Purpose of a Hazard Mitigation Plan. � � • Identification of the major hazards within the City of Renton: floods, winter storms, earthquakes, landslides and debris flows, abandoned coal mines, �`' hazmat incidents, volcanic eruptions and terrorism. "�'` � • Explanation of mitigation measures and solicitation of input into plan �, revision. � Planning Meeting#5 (May 7, 2009) wirr � The fifth planning meeting was held on May 7, 2009 at Renton City Hall. Only a portion of the Emergency Management Group meeting was devoted to the �`' Hazard Mitigation Plan and focused on general updates on the status of the '�'" consultant's work and outstanding information needs to be satisfied by planning � team members. ,� � � �r � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-4 December 2011 ''�► � � � �r �rrr �rr Planning Meeting#6 (June 4, 2009) '�'" The sixth planning meeting was held on June 4, 2009 at Renton City Hall. The first � draft of the Hazard Mitigation Plan from the consultant was available for review. �,, Emergency Management Group members went through a page by page review � of the plan and identified missing information and discussed action items. �' Planning Meeting#7 (July 2, 2009) � The seventh planning meeting was held on July 2, 2009 at Renton City Hall. � Between the sixth and seventh planning meetings, Emergency Management `"�" Group members worked on their narrative assignments and provided them to +r the Emergency Management Director for compilation in advance. The second �, draft of the Hazard Mitigation Plan was presented to the group members for �- another detailed review. Additional clarification was made through discussion on various topics as they were systematically reviewed. Follow up assignments were "'` given to specific team members. +frr „�, Planning Meeting#8 (August 6, 2009) �"' The eighth planning meeting was held on August 6, 2009 at Renton City Hall. � Only a portion of the Emergency Management Group meeting was devoted to � the Hazard Mitigation Plan and focused on final edits needed to the plan. � Planning Meeting#9 (February 4, 2010) � ,,,,,r. The ninth planning meeting was held on February 4, 2010 at Renton City Hall. wr Only a portion of the Emergency Management Group meeting was devoted to the Hazard Mitigation Plan and consisted of a last call for final edits needed to � the plan before presentation at the March 16, 2010, public meeting. �r �,, Public Meeting#2: Presentation and discussion of Public Review Draft Hazard wr Mitigation Plan (March 16, 2010) �"` The Public Review Draft of the Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan was presented and �.,► discussed March 16, 2010, at a specially scheduled public meeting at Renton City ;�, Hall. The context and purposes of the plan were discussed, along with goals, objectives and action items. Additional public comment was encouraged. �.r �► Planning Meeting#10 (April 1, 2010) � The tenth and final planning meeting was held on April 1, 2010 at Renton City � Hall. The group reviewed and considered public comments received during the �"" open comment period and incorporated them appropriately into the plan before � submission. � � �rr' City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-5 December 2011 +�rr � � � � 3.3 Planning Participants � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Planning Team '�+�' � Kelley Balcomb-Bartock, Executive, City of Renton Kelly Carey, Fire & Emergency Services, City of Renton � Kent Curry, Police, City of Renton `�` Dennis Conte, Community Services, City of Renton � Suzanne Dale-Estey, Community& Economic Development, City of Renton � Jeff Dosch, Security& Emergency Management, Valley Medical Center ,� William Flora, Fire & Emergency Services, City of Renton Abdoul Gafour, Public Works, City of Renton � Lisa Garvich, Executive, City of Renton ''� Gregory Hartman, Fire & Emergency Services, City of Renton �rr► Gina Jarvis, Finance & Information Services, City of Renton ,.,� Adriana Johnson, Community& Economic Development, City of Renton Kayren Kittrick, Community & Economic Development, City of Renton � Bob Mac Onie, Public Works, City of Renton `'�" Mindi Mattson, Fire & Emergency Services, City of Renton �' George McBride, Finance & Information Services, City of Renton � Elman McClain, Emergency Management, Renton Technical College ,�; Norma McQuiller, Community& Economic Development, City of Renton Sonja Mejlaender, Community Services, City of Renton � Rachel Myers, Fire & Emergency Services, City of Renton '"� Deborah Needham, Fire & Emergency Services, City of Renton rrrr� David Pargas, Fire & Emergency Services, City of Renton ,;,�„ Robert Robertson, Human Resources & Risk Management, City of Renton Tracy Schuld, Finance & Information Services, City of Renton � Colleen Shannon, Human Resources & Risk Management, City of Renton "�` Preeti Shridhar, Executive, City of Renton ''�+' Raymond Sled, Public Works, City of Renton � Michael Stenhouse, Public Works, City of Renton ,,� Ron Straka, Public Works, City of Renton Rocale Timmons, Community& Economic Development, City of Renton � Timothy Troxel, Police, City of Renton "`�` Chip Vincent, Community& Economic Development, City of Renton � Donnaann Visneski, Finance & Information Services, City of Renton ,,� Neil Watts, Community & Economic Development, City of Renton v�v Marty Wine, Executive, City of Renton Cindy Zinck, Finance & Information Services, City of Renton � v� Distribution List for Notices and Planning Materials � Renton Hazard Mitigation Planning Team members listed above "� Renton Reporter �„ � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-6 December 2011 "'� � �rr +rrr d111" � �r► 300 Emergency Worker Volunteers 350 Neighborhood Leaders �rr http://www.rento nwa.gov � �,,,,,,, Planning Meeting#1 (November 6, 2008) �•► Kelley Balcomb-Bartok, Communications Specialist, Executive ,�„�,,. Dennis Conte, Facilities Supervisor, Community Services � Jeff Dosch, Security& Emergency Management, Valley Medical Center Abdoul Gafour, Water Utility Supervisor, Public Works � Jim Henriksen, Emergency Prep, Public Health �'"' Kayren Kittrick, Engineering Supervisor, CED �„w Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency �, Services Norma McQuiller, Neighborhood Program Coordinator, Community& Economic � Development '�"'` Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services w Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency ;,,�„ Services �rr Linda Parks, Director, Finance & Information Services Robin Robertson, Risk Manager, Human Resources & Risk Management � Karl Rufener, Fire Battalion Chief/Safety Officer, Fire & Emergency Services "�" Mike Stenhouse, Director, Public Works �rw Clark Wilcox, Sergeant, Police � Planning Meeting#2 (March 3,2009) � � Leslie Betlach, Parks Director, Community Services Todd Black, Capital Project Coordinator, Community Services � Kelly Beymer, Golf Course Manager, Community Services �'"" Ken Goettel, Consultant wr Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services �„ Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency �.r Services Peter Renner, Facilities Director, Community Services � � Planning Meeting#3 (March 5, 2009) `"' Daniel Carey, Surface Water Engineer, Public Works +� Kent Curry, Commander, Police/Patrol Services �„�,,,. Dennis Conte, Facilities Maintenance Supervisor, Community Services � I. David Daniels, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator, Fire & Emergency Services � Jeff Dosch, Security& Emergency Management, Valley Medical Center "'�" Bil) Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services �rr �wn' �rr City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-7 December 2011 �rr � � � � Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency � Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services � Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency '� Services �r Robin Robertson, Risk Manager, Human Resources &Risk Management ,� Mary Roy, Admin Sec I, Finance & Information Services Ray Sled, Water Maintenance Manager, Public Works � Preeti Shridhar, Communications Director Administrative,Judicial and Legal '�' Services 'w� Ron Straka, Surface Water Engineer, Public Works � Planning Meeting#4(April 2, 2009) � � Kelley Balcomb-Bartok, Communications Specialist, Executive Todd Black, Capital Projects Coordinator, Community Services � Kent Curry, Commander, Police '"�" Suzanne Dale-Estey, Economic Development Director, Community & Economic � Development � Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services � Steve Lee, Surface Water Supervisor, Public Works Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency � Services ""�` George McBride, Information Services Director, Finance & Information Services � Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services ,�,, Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services � Linda Parks, Fiscal Services Director, Finance & Information Services `"�" � Public Meeting#1 (April 9, 2009) � I. David Daniels, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator, Fire & Emergency � Services � Victor Eskenazi � Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Jennifer Henning `��` Katie McClincy, Commander, Police '��` Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Inter, Fire & Emergency Services � Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency ;��,. Services Gary Palmer � King Parker, Renton City Council Member �" Don Perkins � Peter Renner, Facilities Director, Community Services ,� Dallin Slaugh � �rrf City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-8 December 2011 � � �.r ir`►' � � �rr Ron Straka, Utility Engineering Supervisor, Community Services "�"� Planning Meeting#5 (May 7, 2009) � Kelley Balcomb-Bartok, Communications Specialist, Executive """' Mark Baldridge, Facilities Technician, Community Services/Facilities � Jeff Dosch, Security& Emergency Management,Valley Medical Center ,�,,,� Floyd Eldridge, Commander, Police � Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Fire & Emergency Services � Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency �"''" Services �r George McBride, Information Services Director, Finance & Information Services �„ Joan Montegary, Assistant to the Chief, Fire & Emergency Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services � Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency `�""" Services �► Preeti Shridhar, Communications Director, Executive �,,,. Marty Wine, Assistant Chief Administrative Officer, Executive � Planning Meeting#6 (June 4, 2009) vrr � Mark Baldridge, Facilities Technician, Community Services Jan Conklin, Development Services Representative, Community & Economic � Development "'� Kent Curry, Commander, Police ,,,� I. David Daniels, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator, Fire & Emergency ,� Services Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services � Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Fire & Emergency Services "'r"'' George McBride, Information Services Director, Finance & Information Services w�. Norma McQuiller, Neighborhood Coordinator, Community& Economic ,�,, Development �w Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency '�" Services � David Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services � Mark Peterson, Deputy Fire Chief, Fire & Emergency Services � Mary Roy, Administrative Secretary, Finance & Information Services Ray Sled, Water Manager, Public Works � Preeti Shridhar, Communications Director, Executive � �rr Planning Meeting#7 (July 2, 2009) ''�"` Dennis Conte, Facilities Supervisor, Community Services �r Kent Curry, Commander, Police � +r�' City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-9 December 2011 � � � � � I. David Daniels, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator, Fire & Emergency Services � Jeff Dosch, Security& Emergency Management, Valley Medical Center "'�"'` Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services � Abdoul Gafour, Utility Engineering Supervisor, Public Works � Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Fire & Emergency Services ,� Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency � Services `�' Ray Sled, Water Manager, Public Works wrr� Pauletta Sulky, Risk Analyst, Human Resources & Risk Management „�,: Planning Meeting#8 (August 4, 2009) � � Dennis Conte, Facilities Supervisor, Community Services Kent Curry, Commander, Police � Suzanne Dale-Estey, Economic Development Director, Community& Economic `"� Development � I. David Daniels, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator, Fire & Emergency � Services � Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Abdoul Gafour, Utility Engineering Supervisor, Public Works � Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Executive Department '�` Peter Hahn, Deputy Administrator, Public Works vr�r Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency ,�, Services George McBride, Information Services Director, Finance & Information Services � Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services � Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency �►* Services ,,,�r Linda Parks, Fiscal Services Director, Finance & Information Services �; David Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Tim Troxel, Deputy Chief, Police � Ray Sled, Water Manager, Public Works "'�` Pauletta Sulky, Risk Analyst, Human Resources& Risk Management � Clark Wilcox, Commander, Police ,,�; Greg Zimmerman, Administrator, Public Works � Planning Meeting#9 (February 4, 2010) `01�`` Kelly Carey, Administrative Secretary, Fire & Emergency Services � Dennis Conte, Facilities Supervisor, Community Services "'� Kent Curry, Commander, Police �rr Suzanne Dale-Estey, Economic Development Director, Community& Economic � Development � ��rw City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-10 December 2011 °'�M" � � +�rrr wr� �rrr � Sonja Mejlaender, Community Relations Specialist, Community Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services ``�"i Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency � Services � David Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services „�, Colleen Shannon, System Technician, Human Resources & Risk Management Ray Sled, Water Manager, Public Works �rw "'�"' Public Meeting#2: Presentation and discussion of Public Review Draft Hazard �rr Mitigation Plan. (March 16, 2010) �'' Dennis Conte, Facilities Supervisor, Community Services ;�r Kent Curry, Commander, Police ,r�, Roy Gunsolus, Fire Battalion Chief/Safety Officer, Fire & Emergency Services � Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services "`�"` Ray Sled, Water Maintenance Manager, Public Works +N�► Ron Straka, Engineering Supervisor, Public Works „�,,,,. Chip Vincent, Director, Community& Economic Development � Dennis Wood `�" Planning Meeting#10 (April 1, 2010) � Craig Burnell, Plan Reviewer, Community& Economic Development "� Kelly Carey, Administrative Secretary, Fire & Emergency Services "�` Suzanne Dale-Estey, Economic Development Director, Community& Economic ,,,� Development �; Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Abdoul Gafour, Utility Engineering Supervisor, Public Works � Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Executive Department ""�" Gina Jarvis, Fiscal Services Director, Finance & Information Services �r Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency �,,, Services �rr Sonja Mejlaender, Community Relations Specialist, Community Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services `�"' Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency �` Services ,�„ Ann Nielsen, Assistant City Attorney, City Attorney ,,�, Preeti Shridhar, Communications Director, Executive Ray Sled, Water Manager, Public Works � Tim Troxel, Deputy Chief, Police � �r � vlrr � vr City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-11 December 2011 � � � � � ��,, 4.0 MISSION STATEMENT, GOALS, OBJECTIVES and ACTION ITEMS � 4.1 Overview �w "�" The overall purpose of Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan is to reduce the impacts of �� future natural or human-caused disasters on Renton. By reducing the vulnerability to �,,,, disasters and enhancing the capability of the City and its citizens to respond effectively to, and recover quickly from, future disasters Renton will become more disaster � resistant and disaster resilient, � � Completely eliminating the risk of future disasters in Renton is neither technologically ,,,,� possible nor economically feasible. However, substantially reducing the negative �, impacts of future disasters is achievable with the adoption of this Plan and ongoing implementation of risk reducing Action Items. �r ""�"' Incorporating risk reduction strategies and Action Items into Renton's existing programs �r and decision making processes will facilitate moving Renton toward a safer and more �,, disaster resistant future. This Plan provides the framework and guidance for both short �r and long-term proactive steps that can be taken to: ,�,,, • protect life safety, � • reduce property damage, '"�"'' • minimize economic losses and disruption and � • shorten the recovery period from future disasters. wrrr wrr In addition, Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan is intended to meet FEMA's (Federal �; Emergency Management Agency) mitigation planning requirements so that Renton �.. remains eligible for pre and post-disaster mitigation funding from FEMA. "'�"' This Plan is based on a four-step framework that is designed to help focus attention and �" action on successful mitigation strategies: Mission Statement, Goals, Objectives and �,,, Action Items. � • Mission Statement.The Mission Statement defines the purpose and primary � function of the Plan. The Mission Statement is an action-oriented summary that """"" answers the question "Why develop a hazard mitigation plan?" � • Goals. Goals identify priorities and specify how Renton intends to work toward "i"'" reducing the risks from natural and human-caused hazards. The Goals represent the �w guiding principles toward which the community's efforts are directed. Goals provide ,,,�,� focus for the more specific issues, recommendations and actions addressed in �r Objectives and Action Items. yrr � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-1 December 2011 � �rr � � � � • Objectives. Each Goal has Objectives which specify the directions, methods, � processes or steps necessary to accomplish the Plan's Goals. Objectives lead directly to specific Action Items. `�` vwrr • Action Items. Action Items are specific well-defined activities or projects that work to reduce risk. The Action Items represent the steps necessary to achieve the �` Mission Statement, Goals and Objectives. '"�" � 4.2 Mission Statement � The mission of Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan is to: ''�" � Proactively facilitate and support community-wide policies, practices and programs that make Renton more disaster resistant and disaster resilient. � � This Plan documents Renton's commitment to promote sound public policies designed �rr to protect citizens, critical facilities, infrastructure, private property and the ,� environment from natural hazards by increasing public awareness, identifying resources for risk assessment, risk reduction, and loss reduction and identifying specific activities � to help make Renton more disaster resistant and disaster resilient. ""�'` � 4.3 Mitigation Plan Goals and Objectives �, Mitigation plan goals and objectives guide the direction of future policies and activities `"�"` aimed at reducing risk and preventing loss from disaster events. The goals and w� objectives listed here serve as guideposts and checklists as the City, other agencies, ,,,� businesses and individuals begin implementing mitigation Action Items within Renton. � Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan goals and objectives are based broadly on and are '"'�" consistent with the goals established by the State of Washington's Hazard Mitigation v� Plan. However,the specific priorities, emphasis and language are Renton's. These goals .,,�,; were developed with extensive input and priority setting by Renton's Mitigation Plan � Steering Committee (the Emergency Management Group) and the other stakeholders and citizens of Renton. `"�' � Goal 1: Reduce the Threat to Life Safety "�" Objectives: `� A. Enhance life safety by minimizing the potential for deaths and injuries in future "'�` disaster events. '� B. Enhance life safety by improving public awareness of earthquakes and other � natural hazards posing life safety risk to the Renton community. � � � �rrr City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-2 December 2011 � � �' � �r+ �IM' +�' � Goal 2: Reduce the Threats to Renton Buildings, Facilities and Infrastructure �,, Objectives: � A. Identify buildings and infrastructure at high risk from one or more hazards. �" B. Conduct risk assessments for critical buildings, facilities and infrastructure at �+�rw high risk to determine cost effective mitigation actions to eliminate or reduce ;�, risk. � C. Implement mitigation measures for buildings, facilities and infrastructure which �r pose an unacceptable level of risk. ,�„ D. Ensure that new buildings and infrastructure in Renton are adequately designed �r and located to minimize damages in future disaster events. � Goal 3: Enhance Emergency Response Capability, Emergency Planning and Post- �"'' Disaster Recovery � Objectives: � A. Ensure that critical facilities and critical infrastructure are capable of """` withstanding disaster events with minimal damages and loss of function. � B. Enhance emergency planning to facilitate effective response and recovery from �"'' future disaster events. � C. Increase collaboration and coordination between Renton, nearby communities, � utilities, businesses and citizens to ensure the availability of adequate emergency � and essential services for the Renton community during and after disaster ,�„r events. �r �r Goal 4: Vigorously Seek Funding Sources for Mitigation Actions �, Objectives: �,,,, A. Prioritize and fund Action Items with the specific objective of maximizing �rr mitigation, response and recovery resources. ,.�,, B. Explore both public (local, state and federal)funding and private sources for .rr� mitigation actions. � Goal 5: Increase Public Awareness of Natural Hazards and Enhance Education and "�"' Outreach Efforts "'r Objectives: � A. Develop and implement education and outreach programs to increase public � awareness of the risks from natural hazards �rr B. Provide information on resources,tools, partnership opportunities and funding �"` resource sources to assist the community in implementing mitigation activities. � "�'' City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-3 December 2011 � � � � � � C. Strengthen communication and coordinate participation among and within +�rr` public agencies, non-profit organizations, business, industry and the public to encourage and facilitate mitigation actions. "� � Goal 6: Incorporate Mitigation Planning into Natural Resource Management and „�: Land Use Planning � Objectives: �, A. Protect the aquifer supplying Renton's potable water and environmentally v� sensitive areas within Renton. ,� B. Balance natural resource management, land use planning and natural hazard � mitigation to protect life, property and the environment. ,�„ C. Preserve, rehabilitate and enhance natural systems to both improve habitats and ,,,� serve natural hazard mitigation functions. � 4.4 Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Items �'` � The Mission Statement, Goals and Objectives for Renton are achieved via � implementation of specific mitigation Action Items. Action Items may include refinement of policies, data collection to better characterize hazards or risks, education, �` outreach or partnership-building activities, as well as specific engineering or ''�" construction measures to reduce risk from one or more hazards to specific buildings, v�r facilities or infrastructure within the Renton community. ,�,; Many of the high priority Action Items focus on facilities which are critical or essential �' for Renton. Critical facilities are facilities necessary for emergency response and '�' recovery activities, especially public safety facilities and hospitals. Essential utility .,,� services such as electric power, water and wastewater are also extremely important to ,,�, communities, especially after a disaster. Such utilities are often characterized as "lifeline" utilities because they are so important to a community for life safety (e.g., � services to hospitals) and for the economic recovery after a disaster. Although not "� included, additional infrastructure important to the City, region and nation are also � present in Renton, including the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. � Critical facilities identified by Renton are shown below in Table 4.1 � � Action items identified and prioritized during the development of the Renton Hazard � Mitigation Plan are summarized in Table 4.2. Individual action items may address a �, single hazard (such as floods, or earthquakes) or they may address two or more hazards concurrently. The first group of action items is for multi-hazard items that address more �` than one hazard, followed by groups of action items for each of the hazards considered �'' in this plan, as addressed in more detail in Chapters 6 to 13. Prioritization,funding and +�rr inclusion of action items in City planning are addressed in Chapter 5. ,,,�, � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-4 December 2011 � `�fri' � �' +�rr � � Table 4.1 '� Critical Buildings and Infrastructure for Renton � Infrastructure and Capital Source/Type of Facility �'` Facilities � City of Renton Water System . 10 Wells � • 1 Spring • 12 Booster Pump Stations `�+'" • 9 Reservoirs � • 9 Metered Connections to Outside Sources • 2 Water Treatment Facilities � • 290 Miles of Water Main „r,, City of Renton Wastewater • 23 Lift Stations System • 4,219 Manholes � • 180 Miles of Sewer Main �w City of Renton Surface Water • 2 Pump Stations �, Utility • 225 Miles of Storm Sewer Main • 83 Water Quality and Detention Facilities '� • 1.25 Miles of Levees and Floodwalls � Seattle Public Utilities • 5 Water Transmission Mains �r�w+ King County Wastewater • 7 Sewer Interceptors(trunk lines) Treatment . 1 Treatment Plant ''�' Public Safety • 1 Police Facility,including jail services and facilities �, Fire Facilities • Station 11-211 Mill Ave.S.98057 • Station 12-1209 Kirkland Ave. NE 98056 � • Station 13-18002 108`h Ave.SE 98055 � • Station 14-1900 Lind Ave.SW 98057 � • Station 16-12923 156`h Ave.SE 98059 • Station 17-14810 SE Petrovitsky Rd.98058 '"'r'' • Fire District 25—King County Station,serving the east � portion of the City City of Renton Facilities FACILITIES '� • Renton City Hall:1055 S. Grady Way-262,884sq.ft. v�r • Old City Hall:200 Mill Ave.S-51,OOOsq.ft. • Renton Community Center: 1715 Maple Valley Hwy. � (Potential Shelter)36,OOOsq.ft. �+' • Renton Senior Activity Center:211 Burnett Ave. N., �, (Potential Shelter)22,150sq.ft. • Carco Theatre: 1717 Maple Valley Hwy.,(Potential Shelter) �" 11,090sq.ft. ;;�,, • Highlands Neighborhood Center:800 Edmonds Ave. NE, (Potential Shelter) 11,960sq.ft. � • North Highlands Neighborhood Center:3000 NE 16`h St. �rr (Potential Shelter)4,430sq.ft. • Tiffany Park Neighborhood Center: 1902 Lake Youngs Way � SE,(Potential Shelter) 1600sq.ft. � • Spirit of Washington Events Center:233 Burnett Ave.S. � (Potential Shelter) 11,780sq.ft. • Main Library: 100 Mill Ave.S.-22,400sq.ft. '1'�"` • Highlands Library:2902 NE 12th St.-6,580sq.ft. �, • Facilities Shop: 107 Williams Ave. N.-3,850sq.ft. � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-5 December 2011 � � � � � � • Park Maintenance Shops: 100 Bronson Way N.-3,850sq.ft., and 105 Williams Ave.N.-7,500sq.ft. � • Public Works City Shops Bldg.A�B�C�D�Bc F:3555 NE 2�d St.- � 52,400sq.ft. � • Boathouse: 1060 N. Riverside Dr.-8,900sq.ft. • City Center Parking Garage:655 S.2�d St.-179,243sq.ft. '"� • Renton Historical Museum:235 Mill Ave.S-5,300sq.ft. �, • Maplewood Golf Course/Clubhouse/Driving Range:4040 Maple Valley Hwy.,(Potential for Shelter with open `� Spaces)27,OOOsq.ft. +�r PARKS/OPEN SPACES WITH RESTROOM FACILITY � • Cedar River Park:1703 Mapie Valley Hwy.—450sq.ft. v� • Cedar River Trail/Park: Riverside Drive&6th St. ,� • Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park: 1201 Lake Washington Blvd. N.,(Open Spaces and Picnic Structures) � • Henry Moses Aquatic Center: 1719 Maple Valley Hwy.- ,�,; 6,320sq.ft. • Cedar River Park: 1703 Maple Valley Hwy. �` • Jones Park:Wells Avenue S.&the Cedar River v� • Kennydale Beach Park: Lake Washington Blvd.and N.36tn St. � • Kennydale Lions Park:2428 Aberdeen Ave.NE +� • Kiwanis Park:815 Union Ave. NE ,�y • Liberty Park: 1101 Bronson Way N. • Maplewood Park:3400 SE 6`h St. '�` • Heritage Park:233 Union Ave. NE � • Philip Arnold Park:720 Jones Ave.S � • Riverview Park: 2901 Maple Valley Hwy. • Talbot Hill Reservoir Park:701 S. 19th St. '� • Thomas Teasdale Park:601 S. 23`d St. „�; • Windsor Hills Park:432 Windsor Way NE • NARCO Property: 1500 S. Houser Way(18 acres, `�"` undeveloped) ,� • Edlund Property: 17611 103`d Ave.SE(15 acres, undeveloped) `� Utilities: Electricity • Bonneville Power Administration +�r 0 5 Transmission Circuits • Puget Power � o Talbot Hill Station, High Capacity Lines '�► Utilities: Natural Gas • Puget Sound Energy ,�, o SWARR Station&Gate Station o Network of high pressure mains and distribution lines "'�` Utilities Fuel Product • Olympic Pipeline +�r Pipelines o Central monitoring station at 2319 Lind Ave.SW o Petroleum enters and leaves Renton via 2 pipelines �` Hospitals • Valley Medical Center(169 beds),includes an emergency � room � Schools • 36 schools and related facilities Airport • Renton Municipal Airport � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-6 December 2011 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Table 4.2 Master Action Items Table Plan Goals Addressed � -c � v A V (� d L � � ; � � a � a � o � Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline �o y- a � � oc �, '� 3 N o � '� �a � � c Source Q a n � � v �; � `-' � �'i .� c 'i y o � � .c a� c � � y � � � a a �++ � z a Multi-Hazard Mitigation Action Items Establish a formal role for the Renton All Hazard Short-Term Mitigation Planning Committee(Emergency Hazard Mitigation Planning LOC81 #1 Management Group)to develop a sustainable Committee-Emergency Ongoing X X X Funds process to encourage,implement,monitor,and Management(EM)Group evaluate citywide mitigation actions. Short-Term Identify and pursue funding opportunities to City staff Ongoing X Local #2 implement mitigation actions. FUndS Short-Term Develop public and private sector partnerships to Hazard Mitigation Planning LOC81 Ongoing X X #3 foster hazard mitigation activities. Committee-EM Group Funds Local Short-Term Develop detailed inventories of at-risk buildings and Hazard Mitigation Planning 1-2 Years X X FUnds, #4 infrastructure and prioritize mitigation actions. Committee-EM Group Gfent Funds Local Funds, Long-Term Develop education programs aimed at mitigating the Hazard Mitigation Planning On oin X X x Grant #1 risk posed by hazards. Committee-EM Group g g FUnds (EMPG, HMGP) Long-Term Integrate the Mitigation Plan findings into planning Hazard Mitigation Planning On oin X X Local #2 and regulatory documents and programs. Committee-EM Group g g Funds Local Funds, integrate hazard,vulnerability and risk Mitigation Grant Long-Term plan findings into enhanced Emergency Operations EM Group Ongoing X #3 planning. (EMPG, HMGP) City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-7 December 2011 Plan Goals Addressed � y f�0 � Q, G! N C � C � O `' N N �+ � � � � Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline � � o � t � �' � v = Source av� L +� � c v ai � � � J �i .� C � y O � 'd � ��'' � � £ t�n f�'6 � a O C. W y z a` � Flood Mitigation Action Items: Within FEMA-Mapped Floodplains Complete an inventory of structures,critical facilities Short-Term and important transportation or utility system Community Services(for City 1-2 Years X X LOCeI #1 components within mapped floodplains,including facilities), Public Works Funds elevation data and structure/facility information. Local Identify and implement cost-effective mitigation FundS, Long-Term measures for high risk structures,with the highest Community Services(for City Cepitel #1 priority for critical facilities,transportation and utility facilities), Public Works Ongoing X X Funds, components. Grant Funds Identify and implement measures and policies to Long-Term Community and Economic LOC81 #Z increase Renton's Community Rating System score to Development,Public Works Ongoing X X X FundS reduce flood insurance rates. Continue to be a member of the National Flood Insurance Program to enable property owners in Long-Term Renton to purchase flood insurance from FEMA and public Works Ongoing X X X LOC81 #3 allow the City to receive flood disaster funding to Funds repair damages due to flooding following a federally declared disaster. Continue to require new construction of structures in the floodplain to be constructed in accordance with Long-Term FEMA standards and the National Flood Insurance Community and Economic On oin X X X X LOC81 #4 Program requirements,including requiring Development,Public Works g g FUndS compensatory floodplain storage for filling of the floodplain. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-8 December 2011 � �- � � � � �- � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �: � � � � � � � �: � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Plan Goals Addressed �a �a � Q, v a, a� � �, a c y > L � 3 � 3 9 Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline a � a. � a 5 a � ° � Fundin I Q N o N i � � � � � Source d a a � � u ;� � c LL L° � � -c i 3 � °+.' = e�o E �- � eco a o a w y Z a � Implement the Reasonable and Prudent Measures Long-Term identified in the NOAA Fisheries Biological Opinion Community and Economic On oin X X X X LOCeI #5 regarding FEMA's National Flood Insurance Program Development,Public Works g g Fullds as required by FEMA. Continue to enforce,maintain and update the Long-Term Community and Economic LOCaI #6 Renton Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Development,Public Works Ongoing X X x Funds Master Program requirements. Continue to perform maintenance dredging, Local Long-Term maintenance of floodwalls and levees associated Community and Economic Ongoing X X X FundS, #7 with the Army Corps of Engineers Cedar River Development,Public Works USACE Section 205 Flood Hazard Reduction Project. Continue to implement the Surface Water Utility programs related to flood hazard management, Long-Term which include the Capital Improvement Program, Community and Economic On oin X X X LOCeI #8 engineering program,maintenance and operations Development,Public Works g g Funds program,public education and customer service programs. Adopt storm water design standards equivalent to the Ecology 2005 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington to better control the Long-Term quantity and quality of storm water runoff from new Community and Economic On oin X X X X LoC81 #9 construction and redevelopment projects and meet Development,Public Works g g FUnds the requirement of the Phase II National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)permit requirements. Integrate flood hazard reduction with other objectives related to water quality protection, Long-Term habitat protection and habitat restoration efforts Community and Economic On oin X X LoCal #10 including complying with the Clean Water Act NPDES Development,Public Works g g Funds Phase II permit,the Endangered Species Act and the regional salmon recovery efforts. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-9 December 2011 Plan Goals Addressed � � d a �, � � y � � v Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline c��o � �, 3 a c �, � � � Funding 3 y o � r � � � � Source g a � �' = d ��,' '3 N w i C � � � � 'a � � � � A � N � � p, O d W d Z a` oc Long-Term Continue to be consistent with the King County Flood Community and Economic LOC81 Ongoing X X X X X X #11 Hazard Reduction Plan. Development,Public Works Funds Continue to participate in the King County Flood Long-Term Warning System and the King County Flood Control Community and Economic Ongoing X X X X X X LOCeI #12 Development,Public Works Funds Zone District. Continue to be a member of the FEMA Community Long-Term Community and Economic LOC81 #13 Rating System that enables property owners to Development,Public Works Ongoing X X X Funds obtain flood insurance at a reduced rate. Long-Term Re-evaluate future land use and zoning designations Community and Economic LoCal #14 in FEMA mapped 100-year floodplain areas. Development,Public Works Ongoing X X x Funds Flood Mitigation Action Items: Outside of FEMA-Mapped Floodplains Complete an inventory of structures,critical facilities Short-Term and important transportation or utility system Community Services(for City 1-2 Years X LOC81 #1 components in locations with a history of severe or facilities), Public Works Funds repetitive flooding. Evaluate and improve notification,evacuation and Short-Term response planning for areas within the potential Fire&Emergency Services,Police, 1-Year X X X X X X LOC81 #Z inundation area for failure of the Hanson Dam. Public Works Funds For locations with repetitive flooding and significant Long-Term damages or road closures,determine and implement LOCaI Public Works,Community Services Ongoing X X X X #1 mitigation measures such as upsizing culverts or Funds storm water drainage capacity. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-10 December 2011 � � � � � � �. � � � � � � � � � � � � �_ � � � � � � �; � � � � �, � � � � � � � �: � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Plan Goals Addressed ', � > � � � `" I �+ T � � � aai � ; v I � �. o v+ i a�i " o � a � a v o � Funding ! Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline � @ � y t •— �' � �, 'a 3 N a � ` = c � cc = Source V VOl- �'i �i G! � � '� � � .:1 � � � � G! O i � � a` � a u�i '" `0 � a m � z Dam Safety Mitigation Action Items Maintain copies of high resolution maps of dam Short-Term failure inundation areas and update emergency Fire&Emergency Services,Police, On oin X X X LOCaI #1 response plan,including public notification and Public Works g g FUnds evacuation routes. Research seismic vulnerability assessments for Short-Term Howard Hanson Dam and Chester Morse Dam and LOC81 #2 lobby dam owners to make seismic improvements as F�re&Emergency Services Ongoing X X x Funds necessary. Plan Goals Addressed a c �, a'Ci �,', � � 0 3 °N' °1 " o L a � a a � � Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline 3 � L �... �' oc � 'a Q � � ; � 3 � N � � Source a� c c � � o L -o J M � a` � a W � ° � a � � Z Winter Storms Mitigation Action Items Short-Term Enhance tree trimming efforts especially for PSE,Community Services On oin X X x PSE, Local #1 transmission lines and trunk distribution lines. (secondary support) g g Funds Short-Term Encourage property owners to trim trees near PSE,Community Services On oin X X X X PSE, Local #2 service drops to individual customers. (secondary support) g g FUndS Lon Term Ensure that all critical City facilities in Renton have g- PSE, Local #1 sufficient backup power and emergency operations Community Services 5 Years X X X FUndS plans to deal with power outages. Consider upgrading lines and poles to improve wind/ice loading,undergrounding critical lines,and Long-Term adding interconnect switches to allow alternative PSE,Community Services 5 Years X X x PS E, Local #2 feed paths and disconnect switches to minimize (secondary support) Funds outage areas. Long-Term Encourage new developments to include Community and Economic on oin X X X X Local #3 underground power lines. Development g g Funds City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-11 December 2011 Plan Goals Addressed -c v '^ � f0 v � a o � � °i � � � Q. � a a N � Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline 3 N o � s :� _ °C � c SourCe ¢ o, � � � v ��," `3 = 'w � c � �° � � � � � � c � £ y � � a a a u, � Z Earthquake Mitigation Action Items Local Evaluate the seismic vulnerability of critical city- Funds, Short-Term owned buildings,utilities and infrastructure and Grant #1 establish priorities to retrofit or replace vulnerable Community Services 1-2 Years X X x Funds facilities to ensure adequate seismic performance of critical facilities. (EMPG, HMGP) Local Conduct a sidewalk survey of residential,commercial Funds, and industrial buildings in Renton using FEMA's Short-Term Rapid Visual Screening to identify especially Community and Economic 1-2 Years X X x Grant #Z vulnerable buildings,raise awareness and encourage Development FundS (EMPG, mitigation actions. HMGP) Disseminate FEMA pamphlets to educate Short-Term homeowners about structural and non-structural Community and Economic LoCal 1-2 Years X X X X #3 retrofitting of vulnerable homes and encourage Development FUnds retrofit. Local Funds, Ensure that all critical City facilities in Renton have Grant Long-Term sufficient backup power and emergency operations Community Services 5 years X X X FundS #1 (EMPG, plans to deal with power outages. HMGP, SHSP, UASI Local Long-Term Obtain funding and retrofit important public facilities Funds, #2 with significant seismic vulnerabilities. Community Services 10 years X X X X Grant Funds (HMGP) City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-12 December 2011 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �: � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �' � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Plan 6oals Addressed � ,a N a � T � f. f0 i O � N a c a�, � �. � °' a � � Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline � � a � L •— �' oc �, � Q �, o N ` � � � � � Source � J � _ � � � o � v � c a o a u�, � Z � a � Landslide Mitigation Action Items Short-Term Complete the inventory of locations where buildings Community and Economic LOC81 #1 or infrastructure are subject to landslides. Development,Public Works 1-2 Years X X Funds Long-Term Consider landslide mitigation actions for slides LoCal Public Works 5 Years X X X #1 seriously threatening buildings or infrastructure. FUIIdS Long-Term Limit future development in high landslide potential Community and Economic LOCeI #2 areas. Development Ongoing X X X X Funds Plan Goals Addressed �o o��i � ai C Q. a�i v c � ea � o � °�,' ai +�'. '� � u� tip a u > > 9 Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timetine 3 N Q, � _ � � � � -a Fundin o .. � -a � � � Source a a` N � � � °y' 'J° u ;«.' '�° c ��„ L° � :° -a 3 � � = c�a � ,�' � A a o a "' v Z a oc Volcanic Hazards Mitigation Action Items Short-Term Update public emergency notification procedures for Fire&Emergency Services 1-2 Years X X X X LOCaI #1 ash fall events. Funds Community Services,Fire& Short-Term Update emergency response planning for ash fall Emergency Services,Police,Public 1-2 Years X X X LOC81 #2 events. Funds Works Evaluate capability of water treatment plant to deal Short-Term with high turbidity from ash falls and upgrade public Works,METRO 1-2 Years X X X X METRO #3 treatment facilities and emergency response plans to deal with ash falls. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-13 December 2011 Plan Goals Addressed � � v c �' v � d o � °N' �' � a�+ �', a � a d � � Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline �a � a � r •— �' cc �, 'o Q �, ° � i c � � � � Source u ;� a � c � �° � :° -a � _+ � _ � d o � c a o a u�, y 1° � a � Z Coal Mine Hazard Mitigation Action Items Require geological or geotechnical engineering Long-Term studies before permitting new construction in Community and Economic Ongoing X X X X LOC81 #1 identified coal mine hazard areas. Development FUnds Pian Goals Addressed �a -o '" � f0 a c � > � a �, � � f6 � C � w Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline a � Q. = L � � � � � Funding Q �, a N ` � � y � � Source a+ a, � �C J a7 C t' � N O L 'a Q � C 10 a O a W N Z a � Hazmat Incident Mitigation Action Items Short-Term Ensure that first responders have readily available LoCal #1 site-specific knowledge of hazardous chemical Fire&Emergency Services 1 year X X x Funds inventories in Renton. Local Enhance emergency planning,emergency response Funds, Short-Term Fire&Emergency Services,Police, Grant #Z training and equipment to address hazardous public Works Ongoing X X X Funds materials incidents. (SHSP, UASI) City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-14 December 2011 � � � � � � � � � � �. � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �, � � � � � �: � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Pian Goals Addressed -o �, -a a y, L � � o � y � � a�, � Q � °' a � � Funding H a z a r d A c t i o n I t e m C o o r d i n a t i n g O r g a n i z a t i o n s T i m e l i n e � � a 3 s �' � �, 'a Q �, o N ` � � � � � Source a+ a a, � � v� � � � J N C �'' � Gl O L 'O a r � �a a o a u� v Z a � Terrorism Mitigation Action Items Local Enhance emergency planning,emergency response Funds, Short-Term training and equipment to address potential Fire&Emergency Services,Police Ongoing X X X X X GfBnt #1 incidents of terrorism. Funds (SHSP, UASI) Local Upgrade physical security detection and response Fullds, Long-Term capability for critical facilities,including water Community Services,Police Ongoing X X X X Grant #1 system. FUnds (SHSP, UASI) Long-Term Evaluate and implement hardening measures for 5-10 LOCeI #2 highly vulnerable criticai facilities. Po�ice,Community Services Years X X X X FUnds Local Funds, Long-Term Identify and establish secure surveillance cameras Police,Community Services,Public Grant 5 Years X X X #3 and monitoring at all critical infrastructure. Works FUndS (SHSP, UASI) Local Chemical,eiological,Radiological,Nuclear and Funds, Long-Term Explosives(CBRNE)Detection and security police,Community Services 5 Years X X x Grant #4 devices/elements integrated at critical city Funds infrastructure. (S H S P, UASI) City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-15 December 2011 � � � � �,r,,, 5.0 PLAN ADOPTION, MAINTENANCE and IMPLEMENTATION �` 5.1 Overview �r �,,, For a hazard mitigation plan to be effective, it has to be implemented gradually over time as resources become available, continually evaluated and periodically � u dated. Onl throu h develo in a s stem which routinel incor orates lo ical p Y g p� g Y Y � p g� "'�"` thinking about hazards and cost-effective mitigation into ongoing public and �► private-sector decision making will the mitigation action items in this document be � accomplished effectively. The following sections depict how Renton has adopted � and will implement and maintain the vitality of Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan. `�`` 5.2 Plan Adoption +Wrr � Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan was adopted by Renton's City Council on ....TBD......, making this the effective date of the plan. A copy of the resolution is � attached in Appendix 4. �r �,,,, After adoption by City Council, FEMA approval will be sought. FEMA approval � means that Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan meets national standards and that the City will continue to be eligible for hazard mitigation funding from FEMA's �"` mitigation grant programs. �r ,�,, Renton has the necessary human resources to ensure this Plan continues to be an active planning document. City staff have been active in the preparation of the � plan, and have gained an understanding of the process and the desire to integrate �"' the plan into Renton's Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan. Through this �► linkage, the plan will be kept active and be an ongoing working document. � Recent major high-profile disasters and the growing understanding of the threats � posed to Renton from various national and anthropogenic hazards, have kept the �'"' interest in hazard mitigation planning and implementation alive at the City Council �+° and city staff levels, among private sector entities and among the citizens of ,,,,, Renton. � 5.3 Implementation �r �,,, Coordinating Body '� The Renton Emergency Management Group, led by the Emergency Management �"'" Director, will coordinate the implementation of the plan and be responsible for �r periodically monitoring, evaluating and updating the plan. The City will continue ,,,,, to provide staffing to accomplish this. Consistent staffing allows for well-organized � meetings and will ensure that the right people are involved. The existing active interest in mitigation and emergency planning that exists within Renton will help � to ensure the successful implementation of the plan. � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-1 December 2011 � � � � � � Integration of the Hazard Mitigation Plan into Ongoing Programs, Policies �rr► and Practices ``�" � The mission statement, objectives, goals and action items outlined in this Plan ,;�, provide a strong framework and guidance for the identified mitigation priorities for Renton. However, the Plan is a guidance document, not a regulatory � document. Implementation of the objectives, goals and action items can only be "�"' accomplished by fully integrating this guidance into ongoing city-wide programs, '� policies and practices. � The City of Renton relies on comprehensive land use planning, capital � improvements planning, and building codes to guide and control development in ""�' the City. After the City officially adopts the Hazard Mitigation Plan,these existing � mechanisms will, as appropriate, include and integrate mitigation strategies ,,�,; identified in the Plan. �r After adoption of the Plan,the City will address hazards in the comprehensive '"�" plans and land use regulations. Specifically, one of the goals in this Plan is to +�rr► protect life and property from natural disasters and human-caused hazards. The ,,�,; Community and Economic Development Department will review the City's comprehensive plans and land use policies, analyze any plan amendments, and � provide technical assistance in implementing these requirements. ""�" � The capital improvement planning that occurs in the future will also contribute to � the goals in Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan. When projects are being planned mitigation measures will be considered and prioritized as part of the project based �` on the cost benefit analysis and available funding. The Community and Economic "'�"' Development Department will work with capital improvement planners to secure � high-hazard areas for low risk uses. �, � Within six months of the effective date of the Mitigation Plan,the mitigation activities listed in Chapter 4 will be incorporated into the process of existing �` planning mechanisms. Incorporation of hazard mitigation actions has been "�" addressed with and agreed to by the administrators of each department. In � addition, the Emergency Management Director is the Fire & Emergency Services ,,�; representative at all City planning meetings. The Emergency Management Group will be the mechanism for communication between individual departments and � Emergency Management and have the responsibility to include hazard mitigation "� actions in planning and budgeting for their departments. '�rr � When hazard mitigation grant opportunities become available they will be ,� brought to the Emergency Management Group so that the hazard mitigation actions remaining can be evaluated and prioritized. The Emergency Management '� Group has identified standing criteria to rank the mitigation activities including: '� City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-2 December 2011 � � � �rr� � � Wrr° � life safety, likelihood of occurrence, benefit/cost analysis, regional impact, public vs. private property, duration, achievability, cumulative risk and size of impact. � These criteria will be used to rank and prioritize all hazard mitigation actions that �' have not been funded. These priorities will be brought back to the department by ,,, group members to continue to bring their importance to the forefront. � Cost Effectiveness of Mitigation Projects � �,.. As Renton and other entities, public or private, within the City consider whether ;,�, or not to undertake specific mitigation projects or evaluate how to decide between competing mitigation projects,they must answer questions that don't � always have obvious answers, such as: �r.° What is the nature of the hazard problem? �rr �r How frequent and how severe are hazard events? � Do we want to undertake mitigation measures? � What mitigation measures are feasible, appropriate and affordable? "'��'' How do we prioritize between competing mitigation projects? �"' Are our mitigation projects likely to be eligible for FEMA funding? � �,,,. Renton recognizes that benefit-cost analysis is a powerful tool that can help � communities provide solid, defensible answers to these difficult questions. Benefit-cost analysis is required for all FEMA-funded mitigation projects, under � both pre-disaster and post-disaster mitigation programs. Benefit-cost analysis `�"' provides a sound basis for evaluating and prioritizing possible mitigation projects �rr for any natural hazard. Renton will use benefit-cost analysis and related economic .,�,, tools, such as cost-effectiveness evaluation,to the extent practicable in prioritizing and implementing mitigation actions. See Appendix 2 at the end of this � Plan for details on the benefit-cost analysis process. � �rr. STAPLE/E Approach rr Renton will also use the STAPLE/E to help evaluate potential mitigation actions. `""� Using STAPLE/E criteria, mitigation activities can be evaluated quickly in a +`►' systematic fashion based on Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, �,,,, Economic and Environmental (STAPLE/E) considerations. The STAPLE/E approach ,�„ is helpful for doing a quick analysis of mitigation projects. Most projects that seek federal funding and others often require more detailed benefit/cost analyses. +�rr �+° The following are suggestions for how to examine each aspect of the STAPLE/E �, Approach. �r � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan S-3 December 2011 +�Irr �wr�' � � � � Social: Community and Economic Development and Community Services staff, � local non-profit organizations or (ocal planning groups can help answer these questions. � • Is the proposed action socially acceptable to the community? '�+` • Are there equity issues involved that would mean that one segment of the � community is treated unfairly? (Or one segment more favorably?) „� • Will the action cause social disruption? � Technical: Public Works, Community Services, and Community and Economic `'�` Development Staff, Police, and Fire & Emergency Services staff can help answer v� these questions. ,,�, • Will the proposed action work? � • Will it create more problems than it solves? • Does it solve a problem or only a symptom? `� • Is it the most useful action in light of other goals? ''�►" � Administrative: Elected officials can help answer these questions. ,,� • Is the action implementable? • Is there someone to coordinate and lead the effort? � • Is there sufficient funding, staff and technical support available? '"�" • Are there ongoing administrative requirements that need to be met? � � Political: City Council members and planning officials can help answer these � questions. • Is the action politically acceptable? �" • Is there public support both to implement and to maintain the project? ''�` � Legal: Include legal counsel, land use planners and risk managers in this discussion. � • Who is authorized to implement the proposed action? `�` • Is there a clear legal basis or precedent for this activity? ''�" • Are there legal side effects? Could the activity be construed as a taking? � • Is the proposed action allowed by the comprehensive plan, or must the ,�,, comprehensive plan be amended to allow the proposed action? • Will the City be liable for action or lack of action? `� • Will the activity be challenged? '"�'` � Economic: Community and Economic Development and Finance and Information � Services Department staff, civil engineers, building officials, and the County Assessment and Taxation office can help answer these questions. � • What are the costs and benefits of this action? '�` • Do the benefits exceed the costs? v� • Are initial, maintenance and administrative costs taken into account? ,�,; • Has funding been secured for the proposed action? If not, what are the potential funding sources (public, non-profit, and private)? � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan S-4 December 2011 � � � � � � � � • How will this action affect the fiscal capability of the City? • What burden will this action place on the tax base or economy? '� • What are the budget and revenue effects of this activity? '+�' • Does the action contribute to other goals, such as capital improvements or v„ economic development? �, • What benefits will the action provide? (This can include dollar amount of damages prevented, number of homes protected, credit under the CRS, � potential for funding under the HMGP or the FMA program, etc.) � ,�,,: Environmental: Public Works and Community and Economic Development staff, �„► environmental groups, land use planners, engineering, and natural resource managers can help answer these questions. `�" • How will the action impact the environment? "°�" • Will the action need environmental regulatory approvals? �.. • Will it meet local and state regulatory requirements? ,�, • Are endangered or threatened species likely to be affected? � 5.4 Plan Maintenance �r � Periodic Monitoring, Evaluation and Updating � The City of Renton has developed a process for regularly reviewing and updating �"' the Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Emergency Management Group will serve as the � Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering Committee and members will be responsible for ,,,,�„ overseeing the progress of the mitigation actions in the Plan.The Emergency � Management Group is led by the Emergency Management Director and composed of representatives from all City Departments and two external agencies. �r "�` The Emergency Management Group will review and evaluate the plan for progress �. each year. During the annual review the Emergency Management Group will ,,�, update information in the Plan, remove outdated items and completed actions, as well as recognize the success of the community in implementation of action items. � Annual revisions of the Plan will be summarized for the Public Safety Committee '""'� of the City Council for formal acknowledgement as part of the Plan's maintenance wr and implementation program. � �r. A full review of Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan will be conducted every five years. The Emergency Management Group will have lead responsibility for the �"' formal updates of the plan. Renton chose this cycle and process in order to �' provide a sufficient time horizon for mitigation actions to take effect and show �.- results. � � During the full review every five years the Emergency Management Group will determine if: �r � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-5 December 2011 �r � � � � � • The goals and objectives address current and expected conditions. � • The nature or magnitude of risks has changed. • The current resources are appropriate for implementing the plan. � • There are implementation problems, such as technical, political, legal or `� coordination issues with other agencies. �r► • The outcomes have occurred as expected. � • The agencies and other partners have participated as proposed. ;� The Emergency Management Group will then review the results of the Plan � assessment, identify corrective actions, and recommend to the Emergency "'r"' Management Director what actions are necessary to bring the Plan back into � conformance with the stated goals and objectives. Emergency Management ,,,�; Group members will then update and make changes to the plan before submitting �; it to City Council and the State Hazard Mitigation Program Manager. � As documented in Chapter 3, this plan is a complete re-write of the first hazard ''�' mitigation plan adopted in 2003. Changes to the first plan were too extensive to � document analysis and alterations on a section by section basis. Any future ;�,, revisions of the City of Renton Hazard Mitigation plan will include documentation � and/or a matrix that identifies which portions were reviewed, analyzed and revised as a part of the of the update process. Section 5.5 details progress on goals ""�' and action items specified in the 2003 plan. Future revisions will include similar � detail on the progress made on goals and action items in this plan. „� � Continued Public Involvement and Participation � Implementation of the mitigation actions identified in the Plan must engage the �" community. The participation that led to the Plan was the result of existing � community networks, and these networks will continue to participate as the �;, community-wide mitigation activities identified in the plan are implemented. Some projects can be done at the volunteer level while others will require � technical expertise. The stakeholders in the planning process will become project '"� partners, as needed, on specific items. �rrr► � The City of Renton is committed to involving the public directly in the continual � reshaping and updating of the Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Emergency Management Group members are responsible for oversight of the plan. Since � members of external agencies and the public are not significantly represented on �'` the Emergency Management Group, an additional committee will be implemented �r in 2012, one which actively engages residents, businesses, and other stakeholders. „�, This committee will address integrating prevention and mitigation into the City's relevant activities, and will provide ongoing advice and input to the Emergency � Management Group regarding the Hazard Mitigation Plan. `'�' � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-6 December 2011 � � � +rir � � � � Copies of the plan will be catalogued and kept on hand at the King County Library System . The existence and location of these copies will be publicized on the City '�" web site. Contained in the plan is the address and phone number of City staff �' responsible for keeping track of public comments on the plan. � �, In addition, copies of the plan and any proposed changes will be posted on the City website. This site will also contain an email address and phone number to `�` which people can direct their comments or concerns. The City will further """ publicize the Plan availability on the City web site through various sources �+rr including:the Renton Reporter (newspaper), Channel 21 (Renton cable station), �,,,,, neighborhood association newsletters, Renton School District, Piazza Renton (downtown business association) and Renton Chamber of Commerce. Citizen � comment and interest will be solicited and directed to the Emergency �"" Management Group via the Emergency Management Director. �rr �,,,, At the discretion of the City, a public meeting may be held after each review of the ,�,, plan by the Emergency Management Group. When the plan is revised every five years the City will hold at least two public meetings. The first meeting held when � the plan is opened for revision and the last meeting will be held following the ""' revision for final review prior to revision. These meetings will provide the public a � forum for which they can express concerns, opinions or ideas about the plan. The ,,,�,,. Fire & Emergency Services Department will publicize and host this meeting, and �r any updates will be posted on the City web-site allowing for additional public input. +.r � 5.5 Update from 2003 Plan �rr �, Considerable progress has been made in addressing the goals and action items from the 2003 Hazard Mitigation Plan. Detailed below are the goals and action "r items in that plan and the progress made. � �.r Goal 1—To protect aquifers used by the City and the City water supply system �,,, from contamination by hazardous materials and other hazard effects � Actions: a. Continue to implement and maintain the Aquifer Protection Plan `"' b. Continue Risk Assessment Methodology for Water Systems Process; �' implement measures as appropriate �r. �, The Aquifer Protection P/an and the Risk Assessment Methodology for Water Systems Process have been implemented and maintained since 2003. Their �` implementation and maintenance are ongoing. +rr �.► Goal 2—Minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific ,,�,, a reas � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-7 December 2011 � � � � wrr� � Actions: a. Continue to enforce, maintain and update Renton Critical Areas � Regulations, development regulations, and Surface Water Management �` Design Standards; �w�' � These regulations have been enforced, maintained and updated since 2003. „� This work is ongoing. � b. Continue to perform maintenance dredging, when needed, and '"�` maintenance of the levees and floodwalls associated with the Army Corps v�r of Engineers Cedar River Section 205 Flood Hazard Reduction project; ,�, �r This maintenance has been performed since 2003. This work is ongoing. � c. Develop criteria for and conduct hazard-susceptibility assessments of rr` business and public facilities (baseline and changed conditions); �r � An assessment has been completed for the City and was utilized in the development of this plan. Going forward these assessments will be updated � when conditions change. `'"�"" � d. Enh�nce and continue drainage system maintenance; ,,�,, Drainage system enhancement and maintenance has been performed since � 2003. This work is ongoing. � � e. Avoid/reduce instances of non-underground extensions of utility lines � which may create debris dams during floods; ,�, As much as possible instances of non-underground extensions of utility lines � have been avoided and/or reduced since 2003. This work is ongoing. `"�"" � f. Evaluate and reconcile competing goals and practices regarding habitat ,,,�,, protection and flood mitigation; � This work is ongoing. � � g. Maintain and enhance the City of Renton Flood Hazard Reduction Plan; � � The City of Renton did not develop an independent Flood Hazard Reduction Plan. lnstead the City is following the King County Flood Hazard Reduction � Plan and is assistinq in its maintenance. "'� � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-8 December 2011 � �r► � � �rs �rr �rr h. Continue to participate with King County in the King County Flood Warning �vr► System and the Green River Flood Control Zone District Administration. � � Participation has occurred since 2003 and will continue. Siqnificant „�, additional coordination has occurred in 2009 and 2010 as a result of the � increased risk of potential f/ooding on the Green River due to damage at the Howard Hanson Dam. wr �""" Goal 3—Minimize damage due to natural hazards ww ;,�, Actions: � a. Conduct hazard-susceptibility assessments of business and public facilities ""' Assessments have been completed.Assessments will continue as facilities �° change or are developed. � ,�, b. Identify, assess, and maintain critical transportation routes within the City; `�"` This work was completed in 2009 with the development of the Evacuation � Annex to the Comprehensive Emergency Management P/an for Renton. �+ Ongoing transportation analysis is occurring through the City's participation �„�„ in the Regional Catastrophic P/anning Team which is exp/oring transportation/lifelines in the Greater Puget Sound Area. The routes will be � reassessed when the plan is updated. � � c. Develop objective criteria and conduct seismic preparedness and retro-fit .� of critical public and private facilities; � Progress has been made on this since 2003. Most recent/y Fire Station 11 was �"" retro fitted to Zone 4 compliance.A detail of current seismic preparedness of `�'` critical facilities is provided in Chapter 8—Earthquakes. �.► ,�,,, d. Re-enforce utility infrastructure and connections; � Progress has been made since 2003. This work is ongoing. wr � e. Implement slope stabilization measures in steep/unstable areas; � � Progress has been made since 2003. This work is ongoing. �`' f. Use HAZUS Loss Estimation tool kit to identify and assess vulnerabilities to "�" earthquake damage. � ,��,,, This was completed. The HAZUS report is available in Appendix 3. �` City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-9 December 2011 � � � � � � Goal 4—To minimize impacts on critical habitats and wetlands from natural or man-made � disasters � Actions: `'� a. Assess vulnerability of critical habitat and wetland areas to disaster � damage; ,;,�„ b. Assess capacity for critical habitat and wetland areas to serve as mitigation buffers for floods; � c. Incorporate habitat and wetland mitigation enhancements into drainage "� maintenance program; wir► d. Evaluate and reconcile competing goals and practices regarding habitat ,,,� protection and flood mitigation. v� Progress has been made on these since 2003. This work is ongoing. `�` � Goal 5—Minimize the impact of technological or man-made disasters on the City �, (e.g., hazardous materials incidents,terrorist attack, civil disturbance, ,�, etc.) � Actions: "� a. Robust systems �rr► • Retro-fit critical facilities for blast-resistance and resistance to forced � entry; � • Protect utility lifelines (water, power, communications, etc.) by concealing, burying, or encasing; � • Develop backup control center capabilities; '`'�"' b. Security/Safety � • Incorporate vehicle barriers such as walls, fences, ponds/basins, � plantings, sculptures into site planning and design; design grounds and � parking facilities for natural surveillance; • Ensure adequate site lighting; � • Locate critical assets (people, activities, systems) away from entrances, '�'r'` vehicle circulation and parking, and loading and maintenance areas; wv • Separate high-risk and low-risk activities; separate high-risk activities � from public areas; ,� • Install public and employee screening systems and closed-circuit television (CCTV) security systems. � c. System Redundancy "'�` • Implement separate emergency and normal power systems; ensure � that backup power systems are periodically tested under load; � • Ensure provision of primary and backup fuel supplies; provide secure ,,�,� storage; • Install exterior connection for emergency power; � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-10 December 2011 � � �rrr � � �w � � • Enhance communications and information management capabilities: o Update the telecommunications capabilities of City government �r offices. "�"" o Create redundant/backup capability for landline telephone system. ... o Develop off-site backup of information technology systems. „��,, d. Enhanced Emergency Response �rr • Maintain access (ingress and egress) for emergency responders, including large fire apparatus, and for resident evacuation; �' • Develop and maintain comprehensive emergency response and �" recovery plans; �r • Conduct regular evacuation and security drills; � • Regularly evaluate emergency equipment readiness/adequacy; +�r • Develop backup control center capabilities; �""' Progress has been made on these since 2003. This work is ongoing. wr � ,�,, Goal 6—Enhance the City's capability for gathering, organizing, and displaying �r. spatial data regarding hazards, vulnerabilities, critical facilities, and vital statistics. �.r �r Actions: �. a. Maintain comprehensive hazard maps; � b. Create critical facilities database information for use in future mitigation strategies. � c. Obtain and integrate HAZUS Loss Estimation tool and ArcView GIS with �"' existing City GIS geospatial programs. � ,�,, These have all been completed. The information continues to be updated with � new studies and technology. � � � � � � � �► .r. � �. � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-11 December 2011 � �rr � wrr► � � a�,, 6.0 FLOOD HAZARDS �` The City of Renton is subject to flooding from several flood sources, including: � 1) over bank flooding from the Cedar River, Green River, Springbrook Creek, May '� Creek and their tributaries, � 2) local storm water drainage flooding, and � v.r 3) floods from dam failures. �`"` Major flooding events in Renton generally result from large late fall or winter storms �' with a combination of intense rainfall, leaves clogging inlets and exacerbated by snow- �,r melt runoff. Larger rivers whose drainage basins include higher elevations experience ,� flooding in late winter to spring, due to large contributions from snowmelt. Flood events often result in simultaneous flooding on all rivers and streams in an affected �' area. Based on previous history we can reasonably expect flooding to at least some `'"'" degree every year. However, because of differences in drainage areas, slopes and other � watershed characteristics, the severity of flooding in any given rainfall event often �,,, varies significantly from stream to stream and basin to basin. This chapter uses FEMA � Flood Insurance Studies combined with historical data to provide estimates of flood events within as well as outside of mapped floodplains. � �' 6.1 Historical Floods in Renton � „� Flooding has occurred in the Renton area throughout the recorded history of the area. The FEMA Flood Insurance Study for King County, including the City of '� Renton, dated April 19, 2005 has a brief history of major historical floods in the '�"" area. � � Cedar River wr Flooding along the Cedar River is of special concern to Renton. As noted in the �"' Flood Insurance Study, significant flooding along the Cedar River has occurred � every 5 to 10 years when the discharge exceeds about 4,000 cfs (cubic feet per � second). The flood of record on the Cedar River, which was somewhat greater �„ than a 100-year event, occurred in November 1990 with a peak discharge of � 10,600 cfs. `'�"" More recent major flood events on the Cedar River occurred in 1990, 1995, 1996, �.r 2006 and 2009. The last four flood events were Presidentially-declared disaster „�„ events.The 1990 flood caused about eight million dollars in damages to the +�rr Renton Airport, Boeing facilities and Cedar River Park. The 1995 and 1996 floods also impacted the Renton Airport, the old Renton City Hall (200 Mill Ave. S), ""`� Renton Community Center, Carco Theatre, Renton Senior Activity Center,the � Cedar River Trail Park and the Boeing Plant. The 2009 flood caused over four � million dollars worth of damage to the Cedar River Trail system,the Elliot City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-1 December 2011 � � � � rrr� � Spawning Channel and associated infrastructure. The eastern half of the Maplewood Golf Course and portions of the City's Ron Regis Park are located � within the FEMA designated 100-year floodplain. The typical golf course damage `'�" from flood events (both 2006 and 2009) have been caused by the Cedar wr overflowing the channel and depositing heavy amounts of sediment across holes �„ number 5 and 7 necessitating golf course closure and loss of revenue. The 2009 ,� flood event engulfed the entire four holes located on the east side of the river (#4 -#7), and a river formed through the golf course exiting onto the Cedar River Trail. �` This flood water caused significant washouts and buckling of the trail (approx. 150 "�'` yards) and undermined the fill material that supports Highway 169's westbound +� approach to the bridge over the Cedar River, causing the support panels and ,,�,, bridge ramp fill to slump and fail. The westbound lane crossing the bridge of Highway 169 and the Cedar River Trail was closed for approximately 9 weeks until � repaired by WSDOT. "� � Green River � � Historically, the lower Green River Valley from Auburn to Renton has been inundated by large floods, such as those that occurred in 1933, 1951 and 1959. "�`� However, the potential for major floods has been largely mitigated by '''�'` construction of the Howard Hanson Dam on the Green River.The storage capacity � of the dam allows the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to limit flows to no more than ,,,� 12,000 cubic foot per second (cfs), as measured at the Auburn gauge,to prevent flooding. Per the Flood Insurance Study, the Howard Hanson Dam provides � approximately a 500-year to 600-year level of protection against overbank "'�`' flooding from the Green River. There are levees located on the lower Green River '� within the Cities of Auburn, Kent,Tukwila and areas of unincorporated King � County. These levees protect the valley floor from flooding up to Green River �,; flows of 12,000 cfs. Other than the Tukwila levee that protects commercial and industrial areas in Tukwila on the left bank, the Green River levees are not FEMA � certified. The King County Flood Control Zone District is responsible for the �''�`' maintenance, repair and improvement of the Green River levee system. Renton v� has no Green River levees within its jurisdiction, but flooding could occur in � Renton if a levee failed on the right bank (east side) of the Green River between river miles 11 and 26. � � Although the Howard Hanson Dam ordinarily provides a good level of flood ''�` protection, damages sustained in the flooding of January 2009 resulted in a +�r significant reduction in the flood control capabilities of the dam. Due to the +�rwr damage,the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)reduced the storage capacity in the reservoir upstream of the dam. Without a fully functional dam,the � USACEmight have been forced to release water from the dam in excess of 12,000 i'�'` cfs at the Auburn gauge.This could have resulted in levee overtopping, breaching � and flooding in the Green River Valley including Renton. In the fall of 2011 the �„ USACE announced that the dam had been repaired and the valley had been � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-2 December 2011 `�11�' '� � wr �rr � � returned to its original 1 in 140 risk of flooding. Unrelated to the dam repair issue, in the unlikelyevent of a failure of the Howard Hanson Dam very severe flooding '�"` could occur along the Green River. The worst case scenario for flooding is �+ indicated by the inundation map for failure of the Howard Hanson Dam. � �, Other Flood Sources `� The FEMA-mapped floodplains for Renton include areas along Springbrook Creek "i"�"' and May Creek, as well as their tributaries and the tributaries of the Green and w Cedar River. These areas have also experienced frequent flooding in the past. �r �v 6.2 Flood Hazards and Flood Risk:Within Mapped Floodplains �"` 6Z.1 Overview �rr � Flood prone areas of Renton include the FEMA-mapped floodplains the Cedar �,. River, Green River, Springbrook Creek, May Creek and their tributaries. The FEMA floodplain maps delineate the 100-year floodplain boundaries. (The 100-year flood � is the flood with a 1%chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year.) �'` Detailed floodplain boundaries are shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps. w�r► �,. Figure 6.1 shows the current FEMA approved mapped floodplains developed in 1995. Renton's floodplains are currently being reconfigured by FEMA to match � current floodplain information. Figure 6.2 shows the proposed FEMA floodplain '�""` map currently under review. When the floodplains are finalized these maps will be � updated with the official floodplains. Figure 6.2 should not be used for flood � insurance rating until it is approved. � For Renton,the FEMA floodplain maps include the following types of areas: +tir � 1. AE: Areas with a 1% annual chance of flooding with detailed flood hazard data ,�,,, including base flood elevations (the elevation of the 100-year flood). '�r 2. A: Unnumbered A-Zones, within 100-year flood plain, but without detailed � flood hazard data (no base flood elevations). �r. �w 3. X: Areas outside the 1%annual chance floodplain, areas of 1% annual chance ;,,�, of flooding where average depths are less than 1 foot, areas of 1% annual chance stream flooding where the contributing drainage area is less than 1 '�" square mile, or areas protected from the 1% annual chance flood by levees. � � �r.� �rr � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-3 December 2011 �rr► v�+ � � � �rr> Figure 6.1 Current FEMA-Mapped Floodplains in Renton � � �.; e �. j . ��, ,,, ,. � r � s . ' �'' n ar� ,_,� � I � � +rw► ��__ � 7 e �'�' �'� = � : r�_ � .. . � , rx � . „ ., t � , s �� f �" .o., pa �;� " t � � S �T�h � E'x3�:r'1 •1+ �� ', �ii.. F� � ^ � (J 4 �4 �* : a .i. ��y� +E r'S .., ".i.. � 8`.y£� ... � �� ! r� �r ��i .. .. \ `}�"��., B�`t: 3�� S�� `�. i . � _ '... '�"` ` �, �; .�,: , � ' 'r�► ,�. fist,y�x �, i r a.'/ }� ,�.`,"',, Iy Y N3Ah51 i �• � 2��:� � ,�+'. ��- � 1 3r�d 3k� 4 .. �, 1�` � � I � ¢ t y i . �_ �� ' �� ' N3dW�y s 8'?..;a"; �Y��f / 7`• " M� - � -..w3� � �;J � �;, ,.�'R" � . .� �I �` ' y� _ ,., . , .. �� . . , . .' . .n � � � . ` .. ' , { -•._- . r EP@I�h'^wr ri Pd � °:. " .� �.. �1 y�..�E�h`i . aMrt IE,Jk�< M Y �i;. ar 1 `t � E:�,n� � I f r,�er= i �j �i` � i r �t �; �� _� , �., ,� � �� = s. E� ��_ + ; � � . , ; � �� z ;. t�a �� ze= ti, E §�' � � , "� � . t -w\" � ,r s U ..r � . � 1"s _ � � � y �,� � �` .� . . �-�+ .�. -...� F-D 4 ` ._n._ � ..�. �.,�� ... , . �, x, H �" G ( st . f/�� l s_ � . � IA'n�t �rt. :.� , �:.F�'h�i----� '^ `3 t �� - 1 4 e: . �i'�..t�"�..'. ._ il � _,�```, �% �.dh�N.x w . ��S '4 ! �� .'t . c � ..`�' i g Alf ` � ` Sn�. - j'� �fii � # T � � � '<-E�,a'3..1 �,_ # m , h�" �- ` �, �f � � ' ,ye�,��n ��,r._ � `� ��.,^� t � : * s a,cn f � � �` � � �� . e v�F, � .a�� e . � .�. � - � �n'��-� }_ �' �� fi = '� Y � � ' :� S K y E ri J � v'C`tY h1 �� ' �f t''�•i � t ��} # _ i � , � T�^� � W .� . . 4 _ t m.f � '� � 5 ,� c ' � �� M6aw.a � �. ,� � � �'�� '� , . �,. :�r .� 'Y� ` ' .la. � t�^ � ,� z � �,-� �. f�"'"4 \ � s .T�'�� p �{+�� a" �1�Y+.'. t'B� N MRa � �..� I E!h �pt'�y+ 1� n � ��,• '�p�yy �. d.tan Fr � ! �n £ .�� " � �3�tl'N . � wc �- S.JS...a°.. -,�.�,., � F i Yar..*.` ! . � . 4;yf ' � ��s � nh\ . L N?M f .,,5� !F_nu.t (1 �` \� y�—� y +�3th� - '-F- - �3 S�. , � -.,��,y , .'A't I -r�3 a �+� .�� a. � .... }r . �r�-.. .;�^�d'"`. ^ � { t. i . �� {$�� 0. . t 4 3�u i .i �..^ry. ��* ... r&_rtJ t p� �q 5 Ra t�� `�.� t ..:c y � � .� A .. '"e.S , f � I Q} " - ` i `'`� �.[f&u�� .� A , �S-Mh 3t .� � 2 � RN f � -� .� � �....�..... fy `� y:�..} . ' .�` °M 71(_ k � d,. y � 6tiuFr � * �5fih t. a� � +�'� .,�1.1"^f'3��1 . Einb:fi �LMSt � : � �s3. Sy'�'i �Sth St„ ., � ,��µ'.�f t` L � ^r. i x � �� , � � ,Yp � �� W � � "�74 `. 4f M h aCy\.��."� €. .�. . Ar ; .. � �2 r' � � ' . ,� _ . � M �_ �, ,ar� 4 . b. �` � �. :,a, � ,�n s,� ,. . ` �� 'a-' ' - � � i. ..�..� ..._:. �,� ,- � ° .�.�,� {y . a , z�, ' * �'++ z, � � �� e. `o , �,.�.` �i ��€� �•:<f�, �� " a. � � ,:" '� � .y ,E:t i�1 �',..�.��.. SE �:t 3 � 7,� :.- ,�.. .. k �. �%, � y LC k� � ,5�1-i�a 5c+ �� SErs�tn t �,��' R <£•..v,+'Y. , - e ,r � R t. \ E " _ �: � �'f � 1 tl'M�.f �1 k'. .. . - Yi .. a �M ' . s !�, e�° ( � �,� � nn t e + :f w � �� , ; af.._�a � � r ` . � � nh � � � � . � � � '. � t ,.' y E �. . .� . ' `i�'.R ...: ` ' .� g �' , � . E`!3a M.. 'S C� �W,x 1 y.. �[ S i ,��,� � 3 � =mi st \ �..E�cK l�f � d�w �� . 4 � ^ f , ��:«� � � t - = 4 -�.-5_ �. � E d t 1 .. �. `s k . '' �_ y�y� . . �y�N �. ef�+ ]tl�t'\ � '�� K[ � �.� + �. C `�YT 1�- ti�� 1 � Y \ �s � �Si 4 � '£ "9Y�+� � 581�:e i ;�,'� --� �:E' tt' `.t ��t � ��" ' a � �'' � . t3JfN Siti49A !1 �ll � . : E�IXN3 �' .�3Meit eek 4 ��"�ei�$�t:i � � � � � a � .. Mw .......� . r . . 1�� ,� :. .. � .a St n E i i�a 1� S �g '�.,�µ �' . � �� _e�� rc4,� �..{ �hh'Y �� _ 5 .th� � ! .. �E d IM1 cS Y _ 3Y q�.,,�'_'_, � + � @`� � ' y n � j ..� E�iRkhGi E9Tt�"t�'�'" � 91&P.;£I ��••� r �( l:,a ,� � . . } � ��y I' .-.._.. � s� �1 � ti : t � � �, . �Y *� -� �- r., 1 � E 188��t � h i{ � v J�. � � j ,� " 1'"_v i fiA Y�v n T y ' �3�nri �`� �r' j i 'Mun ' S3�i'fi1p kp' �"E�t1.t .. ! r,� ! 1 � q. � F�2� R W a�J .f3 -�._._..� , .�....._ �_ � ��; -_ VI� Jfn^� � . "'. $ e:5� ! �� u�� \� � Y�. . Y 1 �• aacna I ��. �u, , SEIF�n k+ -� �_ x S � � � �.. ., -- � _-.._ , '6� � > � . ' � f� a <, - �'y , .." �Y�' Otl-z �...�31. '' { g E AN EY ��rr�� F y , _, _ a ,. .. ...� !� , a � o _ a, �_n r� ...nH � a e__neFt. +� �a�t � q F vh 3, ... eF.�q � � i! � - �' r'�r� � iEiC#iiF l'' uE��YxVI_. y�� - • 7 \ FEMA Mapped Floodplains in Renton N�� `� � 0 0.5 1 Miles �Remon cp umits ti PotentialAnnerz�tlonArea 8oundary This map is 6asad uponthe M�y 16,1995 �. i._..J FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps for Rentan. -Exlstinq Frood Huard�rea F EMA is in tha procass of publishing naw Flood �.�� Insuronce Rate Maps in 2010which will change � r i yz•, the informa6vn shown on this map. ------'"''-��.`�'�..r�'r�S1�� Suriaa�W�t�r UtIIIN 1 0.D�I fl m arb�P tlMe�an 03AM010 � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-4 December 2011 � '�' � � � +�rr Figure 6.2 Proposed FEMA-Mapped Floodpiains in Renton � ,e. � �, , �,� � . � . .Ef�ti ��r� �� o� �w' � ° „ . t ` ., _ , ;� � t �� g � � .�., �° k � � � _ �X e . � �� (: � . � a ) � �.,. $, r � 3 t� � �`,-�,- � � ,` �' �� $ , ' � �,�-^ a . Y t . ;s.t.�\� A - � f,�.-. � .�'''� ,''� � '�� ,an. ¢'�f° _ � �i.;�>,�,o ��t �1� � .� ,'� •:°�ti � . � • ,� ,,j � �l ,, - > � , � � � p✓:. �A k � '�,✓ fr.. �y, Y� t� � � �{u`t �, i `\ � :r a e �, ,�- `^w. 1 k �m < �� s�s r �� a T�. � { `S �'�"'�r �� :.r 3"fist�.�� c�. :EaF.n}�,1 i �'Y.,,f �r4\ �' � � ' :° � ;�',�' :m�st a � , " -� y�y�r ; �'�s,� , ��, r s � ,a.v sr ��; i.� .�''.` ,,, . + � / . �� . ,� ¢.� ..� / ` :�' y� �- t �* n�ea,.st,e "�,yr-� r `a'� .✓ �''t.� e.�;�,c r.� `-� v,�^s � < ��. y;`.:. ' r.'�yS�;,k ""�i r�t�,e. ". '�`' � +z T?�c+� � ^/ " � �:, 4 ...� �-.:,�.�._.,� �E a�cn.:��`Z^ � ae r n � '. r k �.`�"� Y.t w. NE NM:t � "a J1d k µ � � , � �� ,..: .�' k 4 � '� � 4 x �E:De h` � �� 1 �.. � \ 3N 51 2 d: \ ' '� �.; � d'' ��..1 "ti yw L� � .4 E 9t ,i� Y �� - � �, dr �� S- f z � r + et,:� f i : � i ��i �� `n"ra~\ ��3 � �.;a > ��' � �'# <r s�. 'c>, {�� : � f� ,� � '��, �� aR� x �`y �.� 5��} '' '��.�� '� : � _`-.--��' i,�'., _,� ...# - �-•t - ,�. � I � . _ �-: � • 3� ;� ,�- < u �a x 1 � �` -\ 8� � rr -` k+� ,�i�1' . ,rtn ai . w . i tv .f '� ^�i �� :*�( � b y �. .5. t oxr��., � �� i ai»h?� �� ..j � ^t i ax � �a n- x t t � �_ �� sr x : _ .p�3 �,,,� N�va� � � . i FdY � � _� � t .q k.s r.'. s r � . � 'S ��x Yu� ' tt6emx .� .a,en.� a a . • . . , �� :��, a.... ' � rm. `s .�; wafs� � �' :.�� .. wl .:., i� @.. ... �,R�` - .� ._ . • .:� x«: � .' t ;m �n R .� Z� '� .„ � a.., �e EiN:¢ � . ,aEh1F?- ' I.� � '5 \ r.:a < .. _. x ,- �» � � t .9_.m.; 1_8,z� ,;, , � < �$ � � i;t � " r�s� i.! - i _� _ � �'u�y $ �� N6db�� 3� � �..,�,....4�M�4 i y G .f„ ' : �& € . �-� _. x ' . � � , m ( ..� = ew'n �t � ' � � �p. i '� s " `:t a 'N, S, i 3 ,g � ;Y�, � x �_ ,.._:� �'� �( � ns w�n,n� ^�'� ��r,a t., �::.� � riEin 1 " } �, �� s axm�P., � �'`r � €� �'� �'�� `� �� vei�ace }��'---#--��7- .e;_se_z t�:� �n 4,;, < s;• x = � n z��t ,.��--'"'•- `� + 3 J �` .fr 3�-.,e,�'-__- `\ _ "'j�'�., _ _ '�........: tE,� NF:naSt 'y*�E}ttY`{-i 4E�3Y S Y a 'E�'�h �.! �d`�. 3� ...�� ._ � . �,y iL ��'1Krsi i`� � .. y. s�� .� �hd� �aS W � :.5� 3 _ �N� c 5 t �. � �� v.'�J"3'3 9 '�opt5 i Sjd � Ce.*d fi Bs:ra '3 .. . � ._ �:skr: y ,�,<.� \� ,�s� �_�St ' `� ,t.,� '"� i 3}� c ;� . -�-"g s.ani� �� zs�,� �z v�,r�.r ��Y tn�'�"" ,.. . . . �.ek�5� � ., "" , � �x s a+'�*i'�!�Ff a s�ia;ACa [E r'i*'�s,' '� � � sr ZH�t�" * r w� ..�j'� + `4 � ru . .3 �. r � , , , g • � � `. � "� ;� u . . �. � r -ie+.+w�i . T � � T'�>. °�Iil e : .t.�:�-'` E-Y .`�: x, � � � � ..� � ._ �e \. � �t l.� .. 14�'� ��` �p � ,,>'" i�u,3 _•� � "' " �,. - ';k � g fi#Y / �, 4r �j1 � � � )1,-R ��.� F ��. �'+o�� .P ' '�" � +� �r "� S .".f#'n ..t ��.� �'4' � 8 an f �f... �; �. t� � t 'w"E �'�?. � ��i s �s � �A 4R�.v 5E�taa� � "' 11 2 N, _- y. �C J " , x � � •�r t �'"� �`y a Y s�dm - _ e�nan.r " �, �'� _ �,ti:�nei.. ._ . R , . °' �.: �� a . � 1j y.,+a t �€-'^ q, _ � �,z� � � . �p �Y _'+� 4 Gf'th+Y 18iF;1 �'. �, �� ,� :f� f$ ^ :nkPlV4 � .. �o. � k L T � 4� .� � c�� + P ,! � r. r . ... 6 a(• J Y ,,, � +( -. � d - y ' . w ". � �+,:� y g ':' i... i �, . �' ' S.i:mi 9+ c �+5-' E�d3v.S v� i2a� ... � + � �m_ E Ctr t + t M S . f _ s � ( y ... �.. $ Y17" ;E�J i t+l �;.� t �F 'G,�'' , �. �� ':z � `1 - ' �r,, �.r: : i na 9r ` t ' �i b 14 {�. w � , .� ,r+l 9 ,., 1 � S � � q '� �@ f 3 A11h^t s,v+�s817fik:s ��' "- � .�„ :y'A w W�' � f �t ,�,+�/' .* P M Rh ( �Y � ..�� "_ �, .F�tkh�'� �3[nn•.t .,,� S��+- ,y d;. ..: I ... ' � .....�� r+ ' u . � �� • .2nq 9t » E ',.nd 3t @ i• ..,� n n E I-, y T '�r .. � ••5 3h 4t \j � - j(P 12tnt 9t 6 E i k �j\ ; � 4q�iSf'<�""�r�t- � �, i�... j k IBc�n Vt ! ..E A�t�N� \!ih"`1'.P r . �. ., ..w \ ' ��..� '..��.� a d .a . .�3 �ifos � \.. � J 5 n $ :.,_.� s ��. �+ ��J µT.. �° � I .. � n � E�6Hri'Y '�� -, .. � .. � s£�dBl� � r.-n4�I � � ' ... E I41 si�1 � �� J -. r d PI � �r .� , M+x ,� p. �: --� -'--�-� ,..�.� �E'� ha k , �,. .. �.x : •k.tNtar e � �� r� � . x � t yv ;e rx n ' �R: �` ' {. p r�.. x�. , • 1� ! � �� v� q \yl 9� r 1 � (( a� � � F,� '.� �J -r�f tt. � �� %�� SE�DOtI1G'�� - �� 7 � ., . i � � �:s.7a � ; � r. �� s ^�ear. f'�� "-��,�h � � . :70.'Msa �.. � E.�G4t SY �" , ! `Y�t� �' � . , � � i�r ' :.., .a.� �,. �,`m . �i ,, SE.^UathCl �+: \ � Rentan Current Flaod Hazard Map �� .5 1 Miles �RentonCityLinHs *m.,..r��.a�.�o.�e.wnn.�.�.ir.+o�.o..,rRun rea.iw�.an rN r...�row�er ee.ue.m.�.w.. `��PotenNalAnnaxaflonArea6oundary ,r�rndreernw..��a,in.�eoa�a,r,,....� � i M4nw W�ib��sbv�a�tM��mn�[w�efkc�M rbai -Flood H�zattlAtea w.n�,�M��„�„ei.,Mte:m,�,wo,�,e� y�p -_r''r r� +ee��e�. M�u�[br�ewrn�wfRilw�tnu�se�p�lemeuo. /� t�� w��AMr�vY•Rlqrounqumain��wrr,�pe�tvaµNmY�oa " I ��.�� OrAM�-CIt�o1l�TsnPoe�MYqR�M�fpv�itlNyoftMlw�rCN�rMir-up1Nm�RO>mM�lenCk�YmL-A�TCAxqek�mn.A�r1:00i 3� r.rycm�-urnawei.iwe��.n.wrrqs.�erin.ns�r�nrl,WMce.my.v.unpan.ps��.na«�an�;niac��a.qn.�emuyx.�.t yr�m.r.g�n.v� �y Sui/ao�WMerUUYNI0.DelResada�P�iMe0en0.103/2010 v •��1�.n�ikieni�`e�arrw�nrvYe.ie.w�en�Asurmmilqvn�rw,�enia.xore City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-5 December 2011 � �rrr i�� The FEMA Flood Insurance Study and Flood Insurance Rate Maps for Renton include a large number of acronyms. A good summary of the terms used in flood � hazard mapping is available on the FEMA website at: `'� http://www.fema.�ov/pdf/floodplain/nfip s� appendix d.pdf � � 6.2.2 Flood Hazard Data ,�, For mapped floodplain areas, the flood hazard data included in the Flood �"` Insurance Study (FIS) allowed quantitative calculation of the frequency and ''�"� severity of flooding for any property within the floodplain. � � Table 6.1 � Flood Hazard Data � Cedar River: Renton USGS Gauge Vicinity of the Bronson Way North Bridge(RM 1.6)NAVD 88 Datum �` � Flood Frequency Discharge Elevation �, ears cfs feet 10 5,940 34 ''�" 50 9,860 36 � 100 12,000 38 500 18,400 40 �` � The stream discharge data shown above for the Cedar River is from the April 2006 �,,, Flood Insurance Mapping Study of the Cedar River (Lake Washington to Renton ,��; City Limits) for the City of Renton. Stream discharge refers to the volume of water flowing down the river and is typically measured in cfs. � � The flood elevation data is from the Cedar River—Main Channel Flood Profile � Figure 2 of the Flood Insurance Study. Flood elevation data varies with location � along the reach of the river and thus separate flood elevation data points must be � read from the graph at each location along the river. The data shown above is for approximately 1.6 miles above the mouth of the Cedar River immediately � downstream of the Bronson Way N Bridge over the Cedar River at USGS gauge site '�'' number 12119000. �r � Quantitative flood hazard data is very important for mitigation planning purposes because it allows for quantitative determination of the frequency and severity � (i.e., depth) of flooding for any building or other facility (e.g., road or water '�' treatment plant) for which elevation data exist. Such quantitative flood hazard r�rr data also facilitates detailed economic analysis (benefit-cost analysis) of mitigation ,;,�, projects to reduce the level of flood risk for a particular building or facility. � For a given neighborhood, the level of flood risk varies dramatically with the first �` floor elevation of each house. If the building's first floor elevation is below the "�+� 100-year flood elevation,the building could experience flooding above the first .�ir City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-6 December 2011 � � +�rr � � � � floor more frequently. However, a building with a first floor elevation above the 100-year flood elevation has a less than 1%chance of being flooded in any given "'� year. � � 6.2.3 Caveats for the Renton Flood Insurance Study � The Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for Renton is quite recent (2006). Over time, flood � hazards may change because of increasing development upstream, changes in �`" stream channels, improvements (or degradation)of flood protection measures �wr over time and so on. Simply because an FIS is old does not mean that it is � outdated or inaccurate. However, the older a study is, the more likely it is that �r channel or watershed conditions have changed over time. "�"'` Another caveat is that flood studies are inevitably less than perfect, due to � incomplete data and modeling uncertainties.Thus, in some cases, mapped � floodplain boundaries may underestimate or overestimate the actual level of �, flood risk at a given location. � 6.2.4 Interpreting Flood Hazard Data for Mapped Floodplains � +w�► The level of flood hazard, or the frequency and severity of flooding, is not ;� determined simply by whether the footprint of a given structure is or is not within the 100-year floodplain. A common error is to assume that structures within the � 100-year floodplain are at risk of flooding while structures outside of the 100-year i`�"" floodplain are not. This simplistic view is simply not true. Some importance �+° guidance for interpreting flood hazards is given below. �.► � A. Being in the 100-year floodplain does not mean that floods happen once every 100 years. A 100-year flood simply means that the � probability of a flood at the 100-year level or greater has a 1% chance "� of happening in any given year. � � B. Within or near the 100-year floodplain,the key determinant of flood �r hazard for a building or other facility is the relationship of the elevation of the structure or facility to the flood elevations for various flood "�"' events. Thus,for example, homes with first floor elevations below or � near the 10-year flood elevation have drastically higher levels of flood � hazard than other homes with first floor elevations near the 50-year, �► 100-year, or higher elevations. � C. Flooding happens outside of the mapped 100-year floodplain. � a. The 100-year flood is by no means the worst flood possible. Floods `'�"' greater than the 100-year flood will affect many areas outside of � the mapped 100-year floodplain. �r City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-7 December 2011 � � � � � � b. Areas protected by levees may flood if the levees fail. � c. Many flood prone areas flood because of local storm water ,� drainage conditions (see Section 6.3 below) and have nothing to do with the 100-year floodplain boundaries. � � 6.3 Flood Hazards and Flood Risk: Outside of Mapped Floodplains � � This section applies to the portions of Renton that are outside of FEMA-mapped floodplains. � � Many areas of the United States outside of mapped floodplains are subject to `� repetitive, damaging floods from local storm water drainage. Nationwide, more � than 25% of flood damage occurs outside of FEMA-mapped floodplains. „�, In most cities, storm water drainage systems are designed to handle small to �` moderate size rainfall events. Older Storm water systems were designed to handle """` 10-year flood events, and are rarely designed to handle greater amounts of +� rainfall. The current design standards require storm water drainage systems to be � designed for a 25-year event with consideration for how the system functions � during a 100-year event, but flooding could still occur during flood events greater than a 25-year event. New development and other land use changes result in `'�"" increased runoff that could cause the capacity of existing storm drainage systems `� to be exceeded and result in flooding. � � For local rainfall events that exceed the collection and conveyance capacities of the storm water drainage system, some level of flooding occurs. In many cases, � local storm water drainage systems are designed to allow minor street flooding to `01�` carry off storm waters that exceed the capacity of the system. In larger rainfall � events, flooding may extend beyond streets to include yards. In major rainfall �;,,, events, local flooding can flood buildings. In extreme cases, local storm water � drainage flooding can result in several feet of water in buildings, with correspondingly high damage levels. `�"` � Other portions of Renton outside of the mapped floodplains are also at relatively v� high risk from over bank flooding from streams too small to be mapped by FEMA. ,,� The following is a list of some of the flooding locations due to insufficient storm � drainage system conveyance capacity: � • NE Fifth Place and Edmonds Avenue NE "'� • Lake Avenue S. and Rainier Avenue S. r�► • Oakesdale Avenue SW and SW 415t Street-Springbrook Creek Culvert ,,� • N Eighth Street and Garden Avenue N. � • May Creek Culvert Removal at NE 315t Street • Hardie Avenue SW Railroad Underpass � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-8 December 2011 � � � �r+ � w�r �r► • Monroe Avenue NE and NE Fourth Street • SW 43rd Street and Lind Avenue SW � • Rainier Avenue S. Railroad Underpass "'�''` • East Valley Road between SW 27th Street and SW 415Y Street �" • NE 43rd Street and Lincoln Avenue NE � �, 6.4 Dam Failure Flooding � The Chester Morse Masonry Dam on the Cedar River could inundate residential, �"' commercial and industrial areas of Renton should it fail. Likewise, failure of the �r Howard Hanson Dam on the Green River would inundate commercial, industrial ;;,,�,, and residential areas as well as roads and byways. There are almost no residential � areas in the Green River Valley that would be affected by a failure of the Howard Hanson Dam. "'r"° 2009 damages to Howard Hanson Dam heightened concerns regarding dam � safety. Although the damages at Howard Hanson Dam have since been repaired � and the dam has been returned to full operating capacity for flood control, ,�, considerable proactive measures were taken in 2009 and 2010, including: developing and improving inundations maps and evacuation routes, as well as � notifying the public of the increased risk and encouraging them to secure flood "�'` insurance coverage. The City partnered with neighboring cities and the county to �r ensure a coordinated message and response in the event of failure. These dam ,�,, mitigation action items are included in Table 6.3 Flood Mitigation Action Items at � the end of this chapter. � 6.5 Inventory Exposed to Flood Hazards in Renton � � 6.5.1 Flood Prone Inventory � The total area of floodplain in Renton is approximately 1,125 acres. There is 7.5% � of the City within the floodplain based upon the current effective FEMA floodplain �,, maps. The total number of parcels in the current FEMA effective floodplain is 574 which includes 534 structures with a total assessed value of$1,274,871,700 � including$728,598,400 in improvement value. FEMA is in the process of updating �"r" the floodplain maps for King County including Renton. This update will v.► significantly increase the amount of area within the FEMA floodplain in Renton in ;�, the Green River Valley area. This is due to the fact that FEMA does not recognize � the Green River levee system as providing 100-year flood level protection, since the levees are not certified levees. � � Figure 6.3 shows Renton's critical facilities overlaid with areas at risk for flooding. � �rr � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-9 December 2011 � <rrrr � v� � � Figure 6.3 Critical Facilities Overlaid with Flood Hazards � ! � �� i � ,r. �� t., �` '� � �' �`� HAZARD CONDITION ' `""�` .``~�,� �` i r y� �l, ,' � � ` !i"'11.�Fiaod ' !� '� v� � •..; _ I � i f ,� ` rfr '�wr (�4 �"'� �� r-�� '� `°t-, �, � �'�.t •...Mj '�'��r,�,��, '1� '~— : � __``. r ti ( .~ ,' + 1.. �:.. �'/} `1�" t� � � {� �'`` -.,.`� '� ��.' � � � � l.f I �,/"/-r/,� .��.J `�r.� r "'�"� � . i� L._' ��,.�� Ilr � � � � �f - I ,. �._� '� ` ._�.� ri�r � .� I � � � � '• • . .. P� � ___I`'��.. �`-`� i � � P � ��.._. '__..�.I i ~ �S 1 _t""} � �'i � �._.i r,} t ♦ �i . .'�ji .�..� �'i a � �� { � f��-t.�C. f � . � � � �'S� + � - �"...:"'1 L � jTi """; t.._� r� � �� '//,�,P�' f`� � " � ��f i .� � � �i ^ � :�� ---� ti--� ° -�_ , � � ; �._..----� ,�: �� w ' � ...._...._.1 i �,. � � �- �t ._.._!�` �► � ..1.'� �1 `i�' �,� � � "L'� I N �.i `� � ' s �� ,�• '�,f�'I f--' i,'�tf � �'�" �� % � �' �, ,�j .;' � �:�v �" ,,� x �� %/J� r� �l•r � .__..-------•- f �' '`�' � � i �� { �_. �rr fnformabon Technology-GIS �----•� Printed on 03103/2010 �____� City of Rentan �' Police Oepartment ,j� Schoois � Dals Saroas:Cily of FtaMon.Kirg Canly n�a+��a a a.aw��a�:w,uen.�m��MKe � Fire Stations � Metro Plant � '°w"""'°""aojan°�°aed°"'"�°o�"'°�°" SeatNe Water Line awtUNe�s of ths dsle shown-This�rtwp k iManJat fcr Gva�wrww�gaMr � Army Resenre Center Sewer � __,�r Ciryof� �., 0 Production Welts Otympic Pipelines `�' _'__,,..,✓ ��°��'{��i, r� Water Utiliy Reservoir � High Pressure Gas Line � Valley Medical Center � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-10 December 2011 �r � � �� +w �+rr �r The critical facilities in the mapped floodplain are comprised of: • Fire Station 14, � • the sewer lift station, °"�"' • 4 water production wells, �r • 10 water monitoring wells and �. • 8 water utility structures. � The floodplain is crossed by high pressure gas lines, sewer lines and the Olympic pipeline. Roadways in the Renton portion of the Green River Valley, including Lind � Avenue SW, Oakesdale Avenue SW, SW 41St Street, SW 43�d Street and East Valley � Road, would be impacted by flooding. �r ,�,, In the event of Cedar River flooding the critical facilities impacted would be the Maplewood Golf Course and the multiple City owned trails and facilities along the � river. The following bridges would be subject to damages and road blockages: `""" Houser, Bronson, Williams, Wells and Logan Avenue. �rr ,�, 6.5.2 Flood Insurance Data � FEMA's National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) maintains a nationwide database � of flood insurance policies and repetitive loss properties. The City of Renton has ,,,,, no properties on FEMA's national repetitive loss or severe repetitive loss lists. � FEMA records indicate three paid claims in Renton since 1978, for a total of $21,175. v.r `'�"' The City of Renton has participated in FEMA's Community Rating System since �r► 1992 and currently holds a class 6 rating. There are currently 613 flood insurance �,,, policies in Renton, 71 of which are written for properties in the current floodplain. The total premium paid in Renton is $497,927, with an average premium of$783. � The average premium would be approximately$1,100 without Renton's class 6 """ CRS rating. The City's Class 6 rating is due to the adoption of floodplain � development regulations that exceed the minimum NFIP standards, such as �,,. elevating structures to be 1-foot above the base flood elevation and requiring � compensatory flood storage for filling in the floodplain.The City also gets credits for other programs that reduce flood risks and control runoff that are managed �` through the Surface Water Utility and other departments. The other programs � include the Surface Water Utility storm system maintenance program, public � education and outreach;floodplain mapping and critical area mapping; and open ,r, space acquisition of areas within the floodplain. � NFIP insured properties are often given high priority for flood mitigation actions """"' such as elevation or acquisitions (which are always voluntary and at the owner's �.• discretion). � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-11 December 2011 +rr � � � � � Table 6.2 below details further NFIP information. � Table 6.2 "w"' NFIP Information for Renton ,,�„ Regular Entry Current Map Last CAV Date Total Policies in Tota)Insurance in Date Date Force Force � 5/5/1981 5/16/1995 4/7/2010 613 $202,060,800 � � 6.5.3 Flood Damage Estimates "`�" � To quantify the level of flood hazard for properties in the FEMA floodplain, it is ,�. necessary to determine the elevations of these structures. Only by determining the first floor elevation of each of these flood prone structures can the level of � flood hazard be calculated accurately. Acquiring such elevation data is `'�' recommended as a high priority. Similarly, acquiring elevation data for additional � structures within the 500-year flood plain as well as in other flood-prone areas ,,,�,,; outside of mapped floodplains would greatly increase the accuracy of hazard, � inventory and vulnerability assessments. � The most accurate structure elevations (first floor elevations) are those � determined accurately by surveying. Flood insurance certificates generally include ,,,� survey elevation data. Absent survey data useful estimates of elevations for structures can generally be made by reference to elevations of nearby structures � or public infrastructure with surveyed elevation data. `""�'" � In addition to elevation data, quantifying the level of risk faced by these structures �r requires basic data about each structure, including square footage, number of � stories, with or without basement, and information on the type and function of the structure. �` � As noted above, some areas of Renton outside of the mapped floodplains are also � subject to relatively high levels of flood risk. To quantify the level of flood risk ,,,� posed by these areas, historical data should be compiled to determine frequency and severity of flooding. Severity of flooding can include estimates of past � damages, if available, and/or simple narratives reporting whether the flooding in a �` given area is limited to street flooding, and/or affects yards or buildings as well. '�► � In 1995, prior to the construction of the Lower Cedar River Section 205 Flood Hazard Reduction project that included dredging and construction of levees and � floodwalls along the lower 1.25 miles of the Cedar River,the Corps of Engineers `�' conducted a study of the public and private buildings, infrastructure and economic `wrr impacts to business that would be affected from a 100 year flood event on the � Cedar River. Based upon the 1995 channel conditions and in 1995 dollars, � approximately$8 million in annual damages could have resulted under the � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-12 December 2011 � � � � � � � "without project" condition. Most of the damages would result on the Renton Municipal Airport and the Boeing 737 Renton Plant site. �r � FEMA's HAZUS regional loss estimation software was used to assess the likely .�r damages in Renton from a Cedar River 100 year flood event. Summary results vr�r from the HAZUS report are shown below in Table 6.3. �r Table 6.3 �r Scenario Flood Impacts on Renton �,,, Scenario Flood �r. Return Period 100 Damages& Other Losses $24.39 million � Sheltering 473 people '"'' Debris Generated 2,261 tons � �r The HAZUS report is available in Appendix 3. � 6.6 Common Flood Mitigation Projects �rr .r• Potential mitigation projects to reduce the potential for future flood losses cover a ,�, wide range of possibilities. For any of the mapped flood sources, it would be � theoretically possible to reduce future flood losses by improving existing levees or flood walls and/or by adding new levees or floodwalls. Flood losses could also, in �"" principle, be reduced by adding additional upstream storage (dams or detention �r basins). In practice, however, such projects are often very expensive and have a ,,,,,. host of environmental and other regulatory hurdles. � For areas of Renton subject to flooding from storm water drainage, various ''"'" improvements to water drainage systems may be desirable. Typical improvements � include upgrades to the size of drainage ditches or storm water drainage pipes as „�, well as upgrades to pumping capacity (for pumped portions of drainage systems) or construction of local detention ponds. Making storm system improvements to � reduce flooding and adopting new surface water design standards to better ""'' control the flow of runoff from new development, re-development and +�+►� construction sites will help prevent existing flooding problems from getting worse, �,�,,, avoid new flooding and protect the water quality and habitat in the City. � For critical facilities at low elevations with high flood risk, construction of berms �"'` (raised barriers) or floodwalls to protect the facilities may be desirable. For �r residential, commercial or public facilities at high flood risk, elevation of structures �,,,,, is a mitigation action. For structures at very high flood risk acquisition and demolition are potential mitigation options. Elevation and acquisition (especially) � are expensive mitigation options that are generally not cost-effective unless the �""' levels of flood hazard and flood risk are rather high. These mitigation options are � most attractive for structures deep in the flood plain (i.e., with first floors below �,,. the 10-, or 20-, or 30-year flood elevations). For structures outside of mapped City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-13 December 2011 � ,�wr' � � � � floodplains, elevation or acquisition would likely be cost-effective only for structures with a strong history of major, repetitive flood losses. � � For structures near the fringe of the 100-year flood plain, near the 100-year flood � level, or with some history of repetitive flood losses, various small scale flood loss � reduction measures such as elevation of furnaces and utilities may be desirable. � The following table,Table 6.4 Flood Mitigation Items, includes flood mitigation � action items from the Master Action Items Table in Chapter 4. � � � � v�rr +� � � � � � � � � � � � v� � � � �rr� � � � � � � � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-14 December 2011 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Table 6.4 ' Flood Mitigation Action Items Plan Goals Addressed �� v � �i `N^ 'c° c Q- � c�i I . . � i. (� L Q �' y� I L � �, ' �^ � a � 'o � Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline �o � a � °' _ �; cc �, a a y a � ` � � � � � Source � •� � � ,3i ;iD = L �o 3 � v c � � fl, � c � o, o a u, �, z a` oc Flood Mitigation Action Items: Within FEMA-Mapped Floodplains Complete an inventory of structures,critical facilities Short-Term and important transportation or utility system Community Services(for City 1-2 Years X X LOCeI #1 components within mapped floodplains,including facilities), Public Works Funds elevation data and structure/facility information. Local Identify and implement cost-effective mitigation Funds, Long-Term measures for high risk structures,with the highest Community Services(for City On oin X X C8pit81 #1 priority for critical facilities,transportation and utility facilities), Public Works g g Fullds, components. Grant Funds Identify and implement measures and policies to Long-Term Community and Economic LOC81 increase Renton's Community Rating System score to Ongoing X X X #2 reduce flood insurance rates. Development,Public Works Funds Continue to be a member of the National Flood Insurance Program to enable property owners in Long-Term Renton to purchase flood insurance from FEMA and public Works Ongoing X X X LOC81 #3 ailow the City to receive flood disaster funding to Funds repair damages due to flooding following a federally declared disaster. Continue to require new construction of structures in the floodplain to be constructed in accordance with Long-Term FEMA standards and the National Flood Insurance Community and Economic On oin X X X X LOCeI #4 Program requirements,including requiring Development,Public Works g g Funds compensatory floodplain storage for filling of the floodplain. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-15 December 2011 Pian Goals Addressed -o ,'"n c�o -a a, a�i a 41 �, L �� y � . L 4J � � � � � a � '' d � � Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline � @ a � t � cc d 'o Q � o � ` � � � � � Source .c '' a�i c � � °1 ° � � � o a u�i d Z a � 4 Implement the Reasonable and Prudent Measures Long-Term identified in the NOAA Fisheries Biological Opinion Community and Economic On oin X X X X LOC81 #5 regarding FEMA's National Flood Insurance Program Development,Public Works g g FUndS as required by FEMA. Continue to enforce,maintain and update the Long-Term Renton Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Community and Economic Ongoing X X X LOC81 #6 Master Program requirements. Development,Public Works FUndS Continue to perform mainienance dredging, LoCal Long-Term maintenance of floodwalls and levees associated Community and Economic Ongoing X X X FundS, #7 with the Army Corps of Engineers Cedar River Development,Public Works USACE Section 205 Flood Hazard Reduction Project. Continue to implement the Surface Water Utility programs related to flood hazard management, Long-Term which include the Capital Improvement Program, Community and Economic On oin X X X LOC81 #8 engineering program,maintenance and operations Development,Public Works g g FundS program,public education and customer service programs. Adopt storm water design standards equivalent to the Ecology 2005 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington to better control the Long-Term quantity and quality of storm water runoff from new Community and Economic LOCeI #9 construction and redevelopment projects and meet Development,Public Works Ongoing X X X X Funds the requirement of the Phase II National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)permit requirements. Integrate flood hazard reduction with other objectives related to water quality protection, Long-Term habitat protection and habitat restoration efforts Community and Economic On oin X X LOCaI #10 including complying with the Clean Water Act NPDES Development,Public Works g g Funds Phase II permit,the Endangered Species Act and the regional salmon recovery efforts. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-16 December 2011 � � � � � � � � � � � �: � � � � � � � � � � � �, � �: � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � f �. � � � � � � � � � � � � �� . �� . � �. �,. � � � � �� Plan GoalsAddressed � � N v `6 �+ c a°', > L a� � d � � a � a d o � Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline � �- a 3 � � � 'a Q H o � i � � �; oc � Source �+ a d � �+ u ••. � G � G7 O 3 = .n � G�! C t' I 7 +�+ �C � y � � i . Q. a n. YJ � Z I Long-Term Continue to be consistent with the King County Flood Community and Economic LOCeI �� #11 Hazard Reduction Plan. Development,Public Works Ongoing X X X X X X Fu►1ds Long-Term Continue to participate in the King County Flood Community and Economic LOCeI #12 Warning System and the King County Flood Control Development,Public Works Ongoing X X X X X X Funds Zone District. Continue to be a member of the FEMA Community Long-Term Rating System that enables property owners to Community and Economic Ongoing X X X LOCeI #13 obtain flood insurance at a reduced rate. Development,Public Works FUndS Long-Term Re-evaluate future land use and zoning designations Community and Economic On oin X X X LOC81 #14 in FEMA mapped 100-year floodplain areas. Development,Public Works g g Funds Flood Mitigation Action Items: Outside of FEMA-Mapped Floodplains Complete an inventory of structures,critical facilities Short-Term and important transportation or utility system Community Services(for City 1-2 Years X LOC81 #1 components in locations with a history of severe or facilities), Public Works Funds repetitive flooding. Evaluate and improve notification,evacuation and Short-Term response planning for areas within the potential Fire&Emergency Services,Police, 1-Year X X X X X X LOC81 #2 inundation area for failure of the Hanson Dam. Public Works Funds For locations with repetitive flooding and significant Long-Term damages or road closures,determine and implement LOCaI #1 mitigation measures such as upsizing culverts or Public Works,Community Services Ongoing X X X X Funds storm water drainage capacity. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-17 December 2011 Plan Goals Addressed � -a `" c �' � R � o � v�i L ,��, � � m a ; o � Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline �o � a � °' � �' ac �, 'a Q N a N '� � � � � Source � � y tJ w i C u�• � C � 'G � �i w N O 3 C 3 'a' � � � � fr6 � a O G. W y z a` oc Dam Safety Mitigation Action Items Maintain copies of high resolution maps of dam Short-Terrn failure inundation areas and update emergency Fire&Emergency Services,Police, LOCaI #1 response plan,including public notification and Public Works Ongoing X X x Funds evacuation routes. Research seismic vulnerability assessments for Short-Term Howard Hanson Dam and Chester Morse Dam and Fire&Emergency Services Ongoing X X X LOC81 #2 lobby dam owners to make seismic improvements as Funds necessary. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-18 December 2011 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �: � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �r � � �rr� �,,, 7.0 WINTER STORMS � 7.1 Overview �rr �rr Winter storms affecting Renton are generally characterized by a combination of �,,,,, heavy rains and high winds throughout the City and surrounding areas, sometimes � with snowfall, especially at higher elevations. Heavy rains can result in localized or widespread flooding, debris slides and landslides. High winds commonly result in � tree falls which primarily affect the electric power system, but may also affect �'' roads, buildings and vehicles. Winter storms may also result in significant ice � accumulation, which primarily affect the electric power system and �, transportation. This chapter deals primarily with the rain, wind, snow and ice � effects of winter storms. (Larger scale flooding is addressed in Chapter 6.) """"' The frequency, severity and impacts of other severe weather events, including �r severe thunderstorms, hail, lightning strikes and tornadoes are generally negligible „�,,,,,, or minor for Renton, compared to winter storm effects. Thusly, these types of � events are not considered further. `�""` Winter storms can affect the area directly with damages in Renton, or indirectly "�" through damage outside the City that affects transportation and/or utility services � (especially electric power). Historically, Renton has often been subject to both ,�,,, direct and indirect impacts of winter storms. '� The winter storms that affect Renton are typically large cyclonic low pressure ""'" systems moving from the Pacific Ocean that usually affect large areas of �r Washington and/or the whole Pacific Northwest. They are not typically local �,,,,, events affecting small geographic areas in the City. � The three most recent major winter storm events affecting Renton occurred in ""'`� December 2008—January 2009, December 2006 and December 1996—January "� 1997. �rr � The 1996-1997 winter storms started with two days of heavy snow and ice, with over eight inches of snow. Large numbers of tree falls resulted in failures of power � lines and widespread outrages which affected over 120,000 Puget Sound Electric ''�`' customers. The second phase of the storm included heavy rain which, combined � with snow melt, resulted in widespread flooding on small streams and major ;,,�,, rivers, including the Cedar River. There were numerous landslides throughout the � Puget Sound area although none occurred in Renton. °""'' The 2006 Windstorm resulted in numerous and prolonged power outages, felled �' trees, blocked roads, downed power lines and damaged homes, necessitating the �. setup of an emergency shelter for a number of Renton residents. � +�+►° City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-1 December 2011 � � � +�r� � The December 2008 storm was characterized by several serial snowfall events. � Very little damaged occurred but high overtime and equipment costs were incurred during snow removal. Some residents were snowbound and experienced `'�"" difficulty in getting their basic needs met. '�' � 7.2 Rain Hazard Data ,�„ Severe winter storms in Renton often include heavy rainfall. The potential impact � of heavy rainfall depends on both the total inches of rain and the intensity of '�''' rainfall (inches per hour or inches per day). In the context of potential flooding, � "rainfall" also includes the rainfall equivalent from snow melt. Flash floods, which �,,, are produced by episodes of intense heavy rains (usually six hours or less), or dam � breaks are rare in Renton (and western Washington) but do represent a potential meteorological hazard. � � Larger drainage basins like the Cedar or Green River typically have longer response �,. times. The total rainfall amounts (plus snow melt) over several days or more are ,,,�1 what determines the peak level of flooding along large rivers like these. Smaller rivers and larger streams may reach flooding levels in several hours or up to a day � or two. Smaller, local drainage basins may reach peak flooding rainfall totals over ''�"` a period of an hour to a few hours. � � Renton annual rainfall data are summarized in Table 7.1 below. ,� Table 7.1 `�' Renton Rainfall Data � � Average Annual Lowest Annual Highest Annual period of Location Precipitation Precipitation Precipitation � (inches) (inches) (inches) Record � SEA-TAC 38.09 23.78 1952 55.14 1950 1931-2006 � Western Regional Climate Center website: www.wrcc.dri.edu virr � Average annual rainfall amounts are moderately high in Renton, about 38 inches �,,, per year. As shown above, there are also substantial variations in annual rainfall � from year to year. � The rainfall data shown in Table 7.1 gives a general overview of the potential for "�` winter storm flooding in Renton, but whether or not flooding occurs at specific � sites depends heavily on specific local rainfall totals during individual storms and � local drainage conditions. For example, 3" of rain in one area may cause no damage at all, while 3" of rain in a nearby area may cause road washouts and � flooding of buildings. �` � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-2 December 2011 '"�` � +�rr� � � �tilr' �wr For Renton, identification of specific sites subject to localized flooding during winter storms is based on historical occurrences of repetitive flooding events �"` during past winter storm events. Most of these sites affect roads rather than °�"' buildings. � � A list of some of the most problematic sites for localized flooding in Renton � is given below: � 1) 200 Mill Ave. S.: Old City Hall - 51,OOOsq.ft. ,,,� 2) Renton Community Center: 1715 Maple Valley Hwy. (Potential Shelter) �, 36,OOOsq.ft. ;�„ 3) Renton Senior Activity Center: 211 Burnett Ave. N., (Potential Shelter) � 22,150sq.ft. ,�,,, 4) Carco Theatre: 1717 Maple Valley Hwy., (Potential Shelter) 11,090sq.ft. �r, 5) Monroe Avenue NE and NE Second Street �' 6) NE Fourth Street Crossings �"'' 7) Lincoln Avenue NE Culvert � 8) Rainier Avenue Pump Station � �r 9) Puget Drive SE at Rolling Hills Avenue Culverts � 7.3 Snow and Ice Hazard Data for Renton �r "'�'' Winter storms can also involve ice and snow in Renton. The most likely impact of •��.• snow and ice events in Renton are road closures limiting access/egress to/from ,,�,,,, some areas, especially higher elevations. Winter storms with heavy wet snow or high winds and ice storms may also result in power outages from downed � transmission lines and/or poles. � �' Average annual snowfalls in Renton are generally low, shown below in Table 7.2. +.r Table 7.2 ""'` Snowfall Data for Renton(SEA-TAC Data) vrr �,, Average Annual Lowest Annual Highest Annual Period of Location Snowfall Snowfall (inches) Snowfal (inches) Record "'�' (inches) �"` SEA-TAC 11.80 0.00 man ears 67.5 1968-1969 1931-2006 "'�' Western Regional Climate Center website: www.wrcc.dri.edu � '� Average snowfall in Renton is relatively low, only about 12 inches, with some �„„ years experiencing no snowfall. However, the maximum annual snowfall in Renton � �.w° City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-3 December 2011 �r � � � � was 67.5 inches in 1968-1969. In addition, snowfall was 63.6 inches in 1949-50, � with seven other years recording more than 20 inches. � In addition to snow events, Renton is also subject to ice storm and freezing rain ''�' events. However, the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) database shows only � one freezing rain event for King County between 1950 and 2006. ,� Website addresses for NCDC and the state and county storm event databases are: � • www.ncdc.noaa.�ov and � • http://www4.ncdc.noaa.�ov/c�i-win/wwc�i.dll?wwevent�storms. � � Probabilistic ice storm data showing ice thicknesses with return periods from 50 � years to 400 years are given in a recent American Lifelines Alliance report: � Extreme Ice Thicknesses from Freezing Rain (2004). The 50-year return ice � thickness map shows about 0.25 inches for Renton. The 400-year ice thicknesses for Renton are about 0.5 inches. Using ice thickness scaling relationships, ice �` thicknesses for 25-year and 10-year ice storms in Renton would be about 0.185 "'�' inches and about 0.125 inches, respectively. �w � For Renton, ice thicknesses in a 50-year or more severe event are high enough to cause widespread significant damage, especially to trees and utility lines, with the � possibility for widespread power outages. Smaller events would likely result in '"'�'` minor damages to trees and utility lines with localized power outages. '� � 7.4 Wind Hazard Data � Wind speeds associated with winter storms vary depending on meteorological � conditions, but also vary spatially depending on local topography. For Renton, `"�" given the limited topographic relief,the wind hazard levels are relatively uniform v� across the City. �,�,, The design wind speed for construction of new buildings in the greater Seattle � area is based on a three second gust of 85 miles per hour, the 50-year return � period wind speed.Typically, three second gusts are roughly 30% higher than the `�►' sustained wind speed. � � Using the scaling algorithm used for building design, probabilistic wind hazards for Renton are shown below in Figure 7.1. � � � � � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-4 December 2011 '�° � �r +�rv' �r � Figure 7.1 �` Probabilistic Wind Hazard Data for Renton �rr I`_ --- — ---- �� 140 � ��, vi�r � h 130 ` ` ` � � � _ � x 120 � �a , r... +��', �` 110 L � y. 9�� t t � � 3 ��' x , � : � .. ��.. � � �� ..�" �,� �-�.�t ? �. � 3t�l " � ' � ; �,�: t +rrr� �7 g� �;� �. � � r., _ � �:d� .� � >� „�� r ;a � ,�r� � � '� � � O �� 3 � '�9 �� 'X� �J� � N i � 5^ M 70 � 't� � CO : '? t° x� •' V �` � � � A � � � 5$� �� 50 �F �� z � ,�, 40 1 10 100 1000 10000 +irr Return Period(years) +r�r +�w 7.5 Winter Storm Risk Assessment � `'�" Winter rain, snow, ice and wind storms may affect both infrastructure and � buildings. Localized flooding from winter storms commonly affect the � transportation system, especially roads. Severe winter storms may result in numerous road closures due either to washouts or the depth of water on road � surfaces. Such localized flooding may also affect buildings in the flooded areas. � �►° The most common effect of snow and ice storms are disruption of transportation. ;,�,,, However, more severe events may results in tree falls and damages to above ... ground utility lines, with the possibility of widespread power outages. �"` Wind impacts from winter storms arise primarily from tree falls, which may affect �`" vehicles and buildings, but whose primary impact is often on utility and power �r.� lines. Wind damages may result in widespread downing of trees or tree limbs with ;,,;r,,, resulting widespread downing of utility lines. Such tree-fall induced power outages primarily affect the local electric distribution system, because � transmission system cables are generally less prone to tree fall damage because of '""' design and tree-trimming maintenance. � � �r.v rr � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-5 December 2011 � � � � � Table 7.3 Probable Impacts of Winter Storms on Rentonl � � Invento Probablelm acts Entire City may be affected by road closures or loss of electric "'�'° Portion of Renton Affected power;otherwise direct damages to buildings and infrastructure are ,� likel to be localized and relativel minor Buildings Isolated minor damage from tree falls,wind or heavy snow loads; a v� few buildin s ma be affected b localized flood dama e Road closures due to tree falls and flooding; limited impact because � Streets of short detour routes within communities � Potential closures of some roads and major highways due to snow, Roads to/from Renton localized flooding and tree falls. Road closures from landslides or ''�" debris flow also likel near Renton. � Loss of electric power may be localized or widespread due to tree Electric Power falls on local distribution lines or very widespread if transmission �► lines fail. Generally minor or no impacts on other utilities from winter storms, `� Other Utilities exce t for ossible effects of loss of electric ower � Casualties Potential for casualties(deaths and injuries)from tree falls or contact with downed ower lines or from traffic accidents. ''�'' � 1These winter storm impacts include localized flooding and the effects of wind,snow and � ice. � For more quantitative risk assessment of localized flooding and wind damages '�' arising from winter storms,the best approach is to systematically gather data on ,,,� sites where damages occurred repetitively due to localized flooding or wind ,�; damages. By documenting (and mapping using GIS)the sites of repetitive damage events, along with the type and cost of damages and losses,the most seriously � impacted sites can be clearly identified. Repetitive loss sites with significant � damages would be likely candidates for future mitigation actions. v�rr r Based on the location and historical information available, Renton has the � potential to experience a winter storm every year. Records of the impact and places of repetitive damage have not been kept by the City of Renton to allow for �'' GIS mapping and further assessment. The development of the Office of '�►' Emergency Management and incorporation of hazard mitigation planning into City �, planning will allow for advanced recordkeeping and advanced estimates of winter � storm risks in the next edition of this plan. � 7.6 Mitigation of Winter Storm Impacts '''� � Potential mitigation projects for winter storms may address any of the aspects of ,,,� such storms, including rain, flood, winds, snow and/or ice. � For winter storm flooding, the mitigation measures discussed in Chapter 6 (Floods) �" for flooding due to local storm water drainage systems are exactly the mitigation '� measures for the flood aspects of winter storms. Common mitigation projects �r include: upgrading storm water drainage systems, construction of detention � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-6 December 2011 `�'' � � � � � �rr basins and structure-specific mitigation measures (acquisition, elevation and flood-proofing) for flood-prone buildings. For roads subject to frequent winter � storm flooding, possible mitigation actions include elevation of the road surface ""�' and improved local drainage. For utilities subject to frequent winter storm � flooding, possible mitigation actions include improved local drainage and �, elevation or relocation of the vulnerable utility elements to non-flood prone areas � nearby. '"�"" For wind effects of winter storms,the most common and effective mitigation � action is to increase tree trimming, because a high percentage of wind damage to �,,,. utilities, buildings, vehicles and people arises from tree falls. However, economic, � political and aesthetic realities place limits on tree trimming as a mitigation action. Future wind storm damage in Renton could be almost eliminated by cutting down ""�'� all large trees along roads or in populated areas. Obviously, such an extreme � mitigation measure is neither practical nor desirable. � „� Effective tree trimming mitigation programs focus on limited areas where tree falls have a high potential to result in major damages and economic losses. High � priority areas include: � 1) Transmission lines providing electric power to the area. � � 2) Major trunk lines providing the backbone of the electric power distribution system within the area. �r �r 3) Distribution lines for electric power to critical facilities in the area. ,�, 4) Specific circumstances where falling of�arge trees poses an obvious threat to � damage buildings and/or people or close major transportation arteries. "'r`' Mitigation measures for snow and ice are limited, although tree trimming efforts, � discussed above under wind, also reduce the impact of snow and ice on trees, �,,,,,, roads, and utility lines. For the most part, dealing with snow and ice storms are �, dependent on proper planning, response and recovery actions. � The following table,Table 7.4 Winter Storm Mitigation Action Items, contains "'r" winter storm mitigation action items from the Master Action Item Table in � Chapter 4. wr � � +�r wr+ � � +�rrrr +r City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-7 December 2011 �r Table 7.4 Winter Storm Mitigation Action Items Plan Goals Addressed -o H d f0 y c °� > u d � d � � a�, � a � �, a N � Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline � � a 3 r •- � oc � 'a Q H a � ` � � � � � Source � � u ;il � C � al O � 'C � � � � � � � R � a O a W y Z a` � Winter Storms Mitigation Action Items Short-Term Enhance tree trimming efforts especially for PSE,Community Services PS E, #1 transmission lines and trunk distribution lines. (secondary support) Ongoing X X X LOCeI Funds Short-Term Encourage property owners to trim trees near PSE,Community Services PSE, #2 service drops to individual customers. (secondary support) Ongoing X X X X LoCal Funds long-Term Ensure that all critical City facilities in Renton have PSE, #1 sufficient backup power and emergency operations Community Services 5 Years X X X LOCeI plans to deal with power outages. FUflds Consider upgrading lines and poles to improve wind/ice loading,undergrounding critical lines,and PSE, PSE,Community Services Long-Term#2 adding interconnect switches to allow alternative (secondary support) 5 Years X X X LOC81 feed paths and disconnect switches to minimize Funds outage areas. Long-Term Encourage new developments to include Community and Economic LOC81 #3 underground power lines. Development ongoing X X X X FUndS City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-8 December 2011 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �. � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �: � � � � � � � � � ,�, 8.0 EARTHQUAKES � The greater Seattle area, including Renton, is one of the most seismically active areas in '�'` the United States. The area is subject to large earthquakes on the Cascadia Subduction wnr Zone and on several nearby crustal fault systems. The greater Seattle area has �,,. experienced three significant earthquakes in the past 60 years: � • 2001 Nisqually Earthquake, Magnitude 6.8, 1 death, 407 injuries, about $2 billion � in damages. � • 1965 South Puget Sound Earthquake, Magnitude 6.5, 6 deaths, about $100 million �,, in damages (2006 dollars). wr • 1949 South Puget Sound Earthquake, Magnitude 7.1, S deaths, about $300 million ,,,,,, in damages (2006 dollars). �rr Although the above earthquakes caused significant damages, more damaging �,, earthquakes are possible on the Cascadia Subduction Zone with magnitudes up to 9.0 as well as on the Seattle Fault which passes directly through highly developed areas. �r �"'' Before reviewing the levels of seismic hazard and seismic risk in Renton, we first present � a brief earthquake "primer" that reviews some basic earthquake concepts and terms. � �, 8.1 Earthquake Primer � An earthquake is located by its epicenter-the location on the earth's surface �'' directly above the point of origin of the earthquake. Ground shaking may not � necessarily be stronger at the epicenter, depending on the geology of the area „�, and the nature of the waves generated by the seismic rupture. � The magnitude (M) describes the relative size of the earthquake. In the popular `"�' press, an earthquake is still sometimes described in terms of its magnitude on the � Richter scale. Scientists no longer rely on that scale, which does not adequately �,, define all aspects of earthquake magnitude, but rather quantify it using several �.. different magnitude measures. The details of those different measures are beyond the scope of this discussion and will be referred to simply as magnitude. � �'` It is important to recognize that the magnitude scales are not linear, but rather �.r logarithmic. A M8 earthquake is not twice as powerful as a M4, but rather �„ thousands of times more powerful. A M7 earthquake releases about 30 times more energy that a M6, while a M8 releases about 30 times more energy than a � M7 and so on. Thus, M8 earthquakes may release thousands of times more � energy as do moderate earthquakes in the M5 or M6 range. � �, The public often assumes that the larger the magnitude of an earthquake, the � "worse" the earthquake. Thus,the "big one" is the M8 or M9 earthquake and � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-1 December '�rr' 2011 �r � � � � smaller earthquakes (M6 or M7) are not.This is true only in very general terms. � Larger magnitude earthquakes do affect larger geographic areas, with much more widespread damage than smaller magnitude earthquakes. However, for a given ""�''' site, the magnitude of an earthquake is not a good measure of the severity of the `�' earthquake at that site. The intensity of ground shaking at the site is a better a„�,. measure and is dependent upon the magnitude of the earthquake, the depth of vr the earthquake, and geological factors at the location of the observer. � Earthquakes at or below M5 are not likely to cause significant widespread ''�'" damage. Earthquakes between about M5 and M6 are likely to cause some v�r� damage at the point of greatest intensity, with the extent of damage typically „�„ being relatively minor. Earthquakes of about M6.5 or greater can cause major � damage (e.g., Nisqually), with damage usually concentrated fairly near the epicenter. Larger earthquakes of M7+ can cause damage over increasingly wider "� geographic areas with the potential for very high levels of damage near the � epicenter. Great earthquakes with M8+ can cause major damage over wide v� geographic areas. For example, a M8+on the Cascadia Subduction Zone could ,�, affect the entire Pacific Northwest from British Columbia,through Washington and Oregon, and as far south as Northern California. � � The intensity of ground shaking varies not only as a function of magnitude and vrr distance but also is affected by soil types. Soft soils may amplify ground motions ,,,� and increase the level of damage. Thus, for any given earthquake there will be contours of varying intensity of ground shaking. The intensity will generally � decrease with distance from the earthquake, but often in an irregular pattern, `�` reflecting soil conditions (amplification) and possible directionality in the ""� dispersion of earthquake energy. v,�r � There are many measures of the severity or intensity of earthquake ground motions. A very old, but still sometimes used, scale is the Modified Mercalli � Intensity scale (MMI) a descriptive, qualitative scale that relates severity of ''�'` ground motions to types of damage experienced. MMIs range from I to XII. v�rr More useful, modern intensity scales use terms that can be physically measured ,,,� with seismometers, such as the acceleration, velocity or displacement � (movement) of the ground. The most common physical measure, and the one used in the Renton Mitigation Plan, is Peak Ground Acceleration or PGA. PGA is a �' measure of the intensity of shaking, relative to the acceleration of gravity (g). For '"�` example, 1.0 g PGA in an earthquake (an extremely strong ground motion) means �r that objects accelerate sideways at the same rate as if they had been dropped ,,�, from the ceiling. 10%g PGA means that the ground acceleration is 10%that of gravity and so on. � � Damage levels experienced in an earthquake vary with the intensity of ground � shaking and with the seismic capacity of structures. Ground motions of only 1%or ,,,�,;F � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-2 December 2011 11�' � � � +rrr � �rr 2%g are widely felt by people; hanging plants and lamps swing strongly, but damage levels, if any, are minimal. Ground motions below about 10%g usually �"' cause only slight damage. Ground motions between about 10%g and 30%g may "�► cause minor to moderate damage in well-designed buildings, with higher levels of � damage in poorly designed buildings. At this level of ground shaking only �, unusually poorly designed buildings would be subject to potential collapse. Ground motions above 30%g may cause significant damage in well-designed � buildings and very high levels of damage (including collapse) in poorly designed `°""' buildings. Ground motions above about 50%g may cause high levels of damage in �r most buildings, even those designed to resist seismic forces. � � 8.2 Seismic Hazards for Renton '" Earthquakes in Washington State, and throughout the world, occur �► predominantly because of plate tectonics-the relative movement of plates of � oceanic and continental rocks that make up the rocky surface of the earth. �, Earthquakes can also occur because of volcanic activity and other geologic processes. � '�' The Cascadia Subduction Zone is a geologically complex area off the Pacific �r Northwest coast from Northern California to British Columbia. In simple terms, �,,, several pieces of oceanic crust (the Juan de Fuca Plate, Gorda Plate and other � smaller pieces) are being subducted (pushed under) the crust of North America. This subduction process is responsible for most of the earthquakes in the Pacific �" Northwest as well as for creating the volcanoes in the Cascades. � �,,,,, There are three source regions for earthquakes that can affect the Renton area: �° 1) "interface" earthquakes on the boundary between the subducting oceanic �,,,. plates and the North American plate, � 2) "intraslab" or "intraplate" earthquakes within the subducting oceanic ;,,,� plates, and wr 3) "crustal" earthquakes within the North American Plate. � The "interface" earthquakes on the Cascadia Subduction Zone may have � magnitudes of 8 or greater, with probable average recurrence intervals of 500 to � 800 years. The last major earthquake in this source region occurred January 26, 1700, with an estimated magnitude of 9.0, based on current interpretations of � Japanese tsunami records. Such earthquakes are the great Cascadia Subduction �'" Zone earthquake events that have received attention in the popular press. These � earthquakes occur offshore from the Pacific Ocean coastline. Ground shaking ,,,,,,, from such earthquakes would be very strong near the coast and strong ground � shaking would be felt throughout the greater Seattle area, including Renton. � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-3 December �rr 2011 � � � � � The "intraslab" earthquakes, which are also called "intraplate" earthquakes, occur � within the subducting oceanic plate. These earthquakes may have magnitudes up to about 7.5, with probable recurrence intervals of about 500 to 1000 years `� (recurrence intervals are poorly determined by current geologic data). These '�` earthquakes occur quite deep in the earth, about 20 to 30 miles below the � surface with epicenters that would likely range from near the Pacific Ocean coast �; to about 50 or 60 miles inland. The Nisqually earthquake was the most recent earthquake of this type. � � "Crustal" earthquakes within the North American plate are possible on faults that w�► are mapped as active or potentially active as well as on unmapped (unknown) � faults. The major crustal faults, mapped by the United States Geological Society, � near Renton are shown below. � Figure 8.1 � Crustal Seattle Faults in the Greater Areal � ,� , .� �- � ,_�� _�� +;� �� , ,� ' ��.Y ��a � �� a � .��.v. � '� ;�` � "�� '� � � � � � � � - � � � a � �� r � � .� � �k �,r.a` �' - � , �+ K �� '�� `� �"� �� '� ',��-�" ��r�"�" �. ; '�' ,'-� � ..� �� .R ,8� 4 �� 4�: � ;f�_ a�,�' � �1 .��xr�'� p `�' �. .V� 1!��CM�` -Y � 1 Scenario for a Magnitude 6.7 Earthquake on the Seattle Fault(2005) � � The nearest crustal faults to Renton are the Seattle Fault Zone (SFZ) and the ,�,;; Tacoma Fault Zone (TFZ) shown on previous page. The SFZ, which runs from Seattle through Mercer Island to Bellevue, poses the greatest threat to Renton. � The scenario earthquake study referenced above documents the expected levels `'�' of damages and casualties for a M6.7 earthquake on the Seattle Fault. The �r impacts for this earthquake scenario include more than 1,600 deaths, 24,000 � injuries and $40 billion in damages. This earthquake would result in damages that ,� greatly exceed that of the 2001 Nisqually earthquake. � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-4 December 2011 ''�' � � +�rr �rr �r � According to the peer-reviewed evidence that forms the basis of the 2008 version of the USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps used below, there is a 14%chance that � in the next 50 years, the entire length of the Cascadia Subduction Zone (Cape �" Mendocino to Vancouver Island) will rupture in a magnitude 9 earthquake. � Figures 8.2 and 8.3 show the contours of seismic ground motions (in PGA as a � percentage of"g" the acceleration of gravity) with a 10% and 2%chance of being exceeded in a 50-year time period, respectively. The values shown on the map are � for rock sites; ground motions for soil sites will typically be higher. � �r Figure 8.2 USGS 2008 Seismic Hazard Data � (PGA,%g,with a 10%chance of exceedance in 50 +�rr years) �rrr tr �+�rr �' p �` �' � t x . '� � .;� `�w w� s. �^� ' � �� ,'�r�� . *a� � 'ri' � �" ; � �� , '� • ' ",� a.��,� � � `' Figure 8.3 �r ` �a�° USGS 2008 Seismic Hazard Data �+'' - � �'� (PAG,%g,with a 29�chance of exceedance in �. �_ � �� M 50 years) � � � � .�;,�� - �` �� "� �� ' � � _,_ �,. � -�.�' y ��`�,� -- �� 4 . ";�.�..c. �,.s`a,r. ,^�,,�, . ' � . � � � �` �� ;;� �. :.�: ., �' � � �♦ 1� �� t ` t �, �� .�� F�:: �rr �� ' >� ; �� 'e�•* _ �— � ; r 1 ��`'� s =� � \�� ,, �r'�� ,,w�.,,�� E �"�^��x. —,_ "�III► i,�� +IWr+ City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-5 December �r 2011 � � � � � Work done since 2008 suggests that instead of one magnitude 9 earthquake, � somewhat shorter segments of the subduction zone could rupture in magnitude 8-8.7 earthquakes. This idea will be considered more thoroughly by the USGS in r°"' the next version of the Hazard Maps, which are updated every 6 years. '��` wrr� For Renton, the 10% and 2% in 50 year PGA values are approximately 30%g and � 60%g, respectively. These levels of ground shaking are roughly three to six times higher than those experienced during the Nisqually earthquake. At these high � levels of shaking, damages in Renton would be tremendously higher than those � experienced in the Nisqually earthquake. Overall,the level of seismic hazard is � very high for Renton. ,,�, 8.3 Other Aspects of Seismic Hazards in Renton � � Most of the damage in earthquakes occurs due to ground shaking affects on � buildings and infrastructure. However, there are several other aspects of ,,,�„ earthquakes that can result in high levels of damage in localized sites: � liquefaction, landslides, dam failures and tsunamis. � 8.3.1 Liquefaction, Settlement, Lateral Spreading,Amplification "�" � Liquefaction is a process where loose, wet sediments lose strength during an ,,,� earthquake and behave similarly to a liquid. Once a soil liquefies, it will tend to � settle and/or spread laterally. With even very slight slopes, liquefied soils tend to move sideways downhill (lateral spreading). Settling or lateral spreading can cause � major damage to buildings and to buried infrastructure such as pipes. '�' � Figure 8.4 on the following page shows areas in Renton where soil conditions �, suggest high probabilities of liquefaction, settlement, lateral spreading and/or amplification of earthquake ground motions. These areas of greater earthquake � risk largely follow the main river and stream drainage channels; as these are areas "'�'` with loose, wet sediments. Liquefaction does not occur in all areas or in all v� earthquakes. However, in larger earthquakes with strong ground shaking for a ,,� long duration shaking, liquefaction is likely in these areas. Settlements of a few � inches or more and lateral spreads of a few inches to several feet are possible. Even a few inches of settlement or lateral spreading is likely to cause significant to � major damage to affected buildings or infrastructure. `'�" � � � � � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-6 December 2011 '�' '� � -. . . � . � . . ...rw.��.�- y►• f:� ' � }F"�� ,�k � � �� "� . s � �� . '�- � - � �`��'� �i� ,�,"�: '�� /� ��;�;�; � /� A w� , � .. �� • d�'� ► � �',�� a� '�' �, ��, -�� +t�, � �� ,� �-� �� y i�� `,� � . p��.+w,,_ ��-, i.E.cti.-�.. �:, `� �� 1��=� ��:.�. �� , �. .,,. �� - � �� ;�:��;, �; ��I�� ,�1�� ,��. 1 :�� ;��.,,�;�� ,�: a�� ,;�,�. ��:� . ��.� '�F —� . ��`��...��,� _.. ,�.�•�,�� _.�.�,� � ��_ .��,:. � �i� � ��,� -�,. +� �� j�'�� r.,:Q� C�.��J� ,rs�I�aWZ� 1�1[`� ��i� � ,, � �1�� " �' � . �1�� (,LF�I�A�` �+�?'!►.�� ' � �I- . ��,��e•a �� st, � ,r�,il,��? � � .�!l�� .y � .�, � i, �_: Ej:_.�� ,rC �—� w\\�� .• � �- �� .�i , ..� . R �: : �� ,-�..� �� :.��x�r� ,��i�_��r,i� �.• �- '�. ,�i�._��`�1#' .,�� _ � � �� n�j�,�3�•� � �\ {�� '''+ti ` �, �_ i� � � . �,.�. � f �� 11 �! ..,�-�-'� �� '�' � �� `J a \ C . . . ' -•;` .�,�,•' �•. �F t 1 �� i�! '�t�� "p� _ � _ ' ;f �� . �� I' .�� t"� 'I'1.��.. . ' �t��E �� y` R� �,�� r,�,F y � � �� 1 � � �� .�nirtl � � � r 1. " �;�,��'j� � �`��''� , :_ ''�� !� � ��`-�'�' :tr�► �I'� ��. -� ��,,--� - ■�[r, � � � , '�"��e �:t�,�,��,a� . L � r D * � A �C.?! '�. �► �+ ;��lp�� . •� �,�� ° ��a� '�, `�`' �� ,.�,! •��,,� � � ��,� � � � , „-�- . i. �� .. '�,� � . - ; �� "� � � � _ 1l�� , , ,� � ,�,�.. ; �� ,�- �' � �_ "�� , �� . �,� � .�., �.��; - � �T ' _ . �� a �� R �� '`,. F� � ' �� ' � � a � � ; � ' � � �� , � � ��`�� `��, '""`�� ,,, � ��,�o� � - . � --- � � ��r�l�t, ��r��.u�.�..►��.� � , � i , j i ` �y�ar,� _ rEJ?'i . • • • � �- �- 1 � �' � � Figure 8.5 on the following page shows areas of high liquefaction risk overlaid � with critical facilities. The following critical facilities are in areas considered to have moderate to high risk for liquefaction: `� • Fire Stations 11 and 14 '�' • Sartori Education Center � • Renton High School ,,�, • St. Anthony's School ,� • King County Metro Sewer Treatment Plant • 7 Water Utility Production Wells � • 99 Water Monitoring Wells �' �r In addition to these, the following critical facilities are in areas of low to moderate „�,, risk of liquefaction: Kennydale Elementary School and one Water Utility � Production Well. � 8.3.2 Landslides "'�" � Earthquakes can also induce landslides, especially if an earthquake occurs during „�, the rainy season and soils are saturated with water. The areas prone to earthquake-induced landslides are largely the same as those areas prone to � landslides in general. Areas of steep slopes with loose rock or soils are most prone �' to earthquake-induced landslides. In the Nisqually Quake in 2001, a large �r► landslide on the Jones Road area temporarily blocked the Cedar River. Because of ,,,� rapid reporting by a resident volunteer and the swift action of Public Works staff, �; flooding was narrowly averted.This slide also destroyed one single family residence. �' � Figure 9.5 in Chapter 9 (Landslides) shows areas of Renton subject to earthquake- � induced (and other) landslides. See Chapter 9 for further discussion of landslides. ,,�,, 8.3.3 Dam Failures � � Earthquakes can also cause dam failures in several ways. The most common mode 'wrw of earthquake-induced dam failure is slumping or settlement of earth-fill dams �, where the fill has not been properly compacted. If the slumping occurs when the ,� dam is full, then overtopping of the dam with rapid erosion leading to dam failure is possible. Dam failure is also possible if strong ground motions heavily damage � concrete dams. In a few cases, earthquake induced landslides into reservoirs have "�'�" caused dam failures. The Chester Morse Masonry Dam on the Cedar River and the �rr�rw Howard Hanson Dam on the Green River could potentially be affected by an ,,� earthquake. � � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-8 December 2011 '"�' `r1� �rr r�lr+ �11r" �rr° Figure 8.5 ''� �iquefaction Hazards Overlaid with Critical Facilities HAZARD CUNDITI4N � �� { �.%� �• .� � Liquefaction SusceptibiUty ., � `� � ��` �� high l �fi �' ��`� � � f � T' _�rnaderate to high � `s�, :+�5 /� ! . low to moderate f '� � �` .r .�, ..� � , �. , � r M'<� � , ,� -----..,� wrr �� - - � \\� �\� Q �.�� '�-'�� "!_..T�\'�;i � —� r 1 " � j � i� ``�--�,�,.'h� i f' `,,� � 1., �_' , . �rr �� t' i �� rr � �, i�� ; t._. �✓ , i i ,,� ' �: � t r ( � wr iq+r s..3 i � -----'1 r..� �� : I �' � � 9' � I � � `j I �> �....w � i� � � 4;� ;--. � . ��,n � . � P � t��..�,� � � � '�� p �r'� �'---�-�� i� ^'! �" b`. � R -- .I�a."�.�� i..�� yv � � '�' J;� �._�.. ? ��. ``t ! �` .,. «. ; d :, ; �, ` � ., , � . _ . � -� , m� � . � `--- - �► �+� �� _""'� �� al � � �'; � �" �s* i � � ��i�� 7'e :�` �,� � ii, "-�/ ^, ;- __ '�r ! ' ,i N �' �4' � . . un . ,�",�`' �° �„ � F . � � �i ; �� _ �,§ t"'_. �._7 '4 .�3 � � l t .. ._�J_.. � ! �r� � . � `^._.i �"_".l �� 1 s � �a � ��' '� � �� '�I►" r. <-.! I� �1"S Y � � �� ?, � f._..�- � + �� f� � •�% # �+' !� + � / trrr ; j s<� m l +�r i ' ..._._ � _ '� � �1 �rr• infonnation Technology-GIS -~---� r P�nted on 03f0312010 �,___s Gity of Renton '� Police Department � Schaols � oau s«.�:c�y�r R�a�,K��ca,My iMaaccaimeMhaqrephkrepresenlatlan,nayusreMaed � Fire Stations • �tro Piant '°""`�"""°"`'','"°�°°�.°°"`h°°�'"`°'"""°" -a-= Seattle Water Line �r s�siraa as a me m�a� nus mep n�mereea wr � q�y Reserve Center � �r�r wm�«�r- $EVlrer �"` -- 0 Production Welis �y cuyat; , . � Qlympia Pipelines �r .�,__.,......�"�"'� �' � + i �@'�`• Water Utit' Reservoir �-�.�,,�� .;. � -� High Pressure Gas Line �, Q Valley Medicai Center City or rcenton nazara iviiugauon rian ts-y uecemoer v�rr 2011 � � � � � � 8.3.4 Tsunamis and Seiches � Tsunamis, which are often incorrectly referred to as "tidal waves," result from `� earthquakes which cause a sudden rise or fall of part of the ocean floor. Such � movements may produce tsunami waves, which have nothing to do with the ,�; ordinary ocean tides. In the open ocean, far from land, in deep water,tsunami waves may be only a few inches high and thus be virtually undetectable, except � by special monitoring instruments. These waves travel across the ocean at speeds '"'�" of several hundred miles per hour. When such waves reach shallow water near � the coastline, they slow down and increase in height. � �rr� Tsunamis affecting the Washington coast can be produced from very distant earthquakes off the coast of Alaska or elsewhere in the Pacific Ocean. For such `'� tsunamis, the warning time for the Washington coast would be at least several "� hours. However, interface earthquakes on the Cascadia Subduction Zone can also �r produce tsunamis and the warning times would be very short (only a few ;� minutes). Because of this extremely short warning time, emergency planning and public education is essential before such an event occurs. Since the City is not � located on the coast it would not be affected directly by tsunamis on the `�'` Washington coast. A tsunami affecting Puget Sound would have little effect on �rrr Lake Washington through the channel connecting the sound and the lake. ,,,,,� � A more significant earthquake related phenomenon is "seiches": waves from sloshing of inland bodies of waters such as lakes, reservoirs or rivers. In some `� cases, seiches have caused damages to shorefront structures and to dams. Areas `''�" of Renton near Lake Washington are subject to damage from seiches in the lake. � The Seattle Office of Emergency Management website notes that a seiche in Lake ,,�; Washington from the 1964 Alaska earthquake damaged boats in Lake Washington and that an 1891 earthquake near Port Angeles caused an eight-foot seiche in the � lake. Boats, dock facilities and near-shore structures are at some risk from '"� seiches. � � 8.4 Risk Assessment for Scenario Earthquakes � Earthquake damage in Renton from the three significant earthquakes in the �` greater Seattle area in the past 60 years has been minor. The low level of damage "�"` in Renton in these earthquakes reflects the locations and magnitudes of the wrr earthquakes. In any future earthquakes that are larger (i.e., Cascadia Subduction ,�, Zone earthquakes) or closer to Renton (i.e., earthquakes on the Seattle Fault) will result in damages in Renton far greater than we've seen before. � � Renton sustained minor damages restricted to masonry structures during the '� Nisqually Quake including: City Hall, Carco Theatre, Fire Stations 11 and 16, Public ,� � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-10 December 2011 � � � � � � ,�r, Works Shops and the Main Library experiencing damages on the exterior walkways, foundation, interior stacks and suspended ceiling. � "�"'" FEMA's HAZUS regional loss estimation software was used to assess the likely �wr damages in Renton from a crustal earthquake along the Seattle Fault. w�r �.. Summary results from HAZUS are shown below in Table 8.1. The Hazus report is available in Appendix 3. � .r Table 8.1 � Scenario Earthquake Impacts on Renton '"" Scenario Earthquake � Parameter Seattle Fault °""' Ma nitude 6.7 � Latitude 47.59 �,,,, Lon itude 122.19 Dama es $1,414.90 million � Other Losses $370.88 million `"'� In'uries 769 �►° Deaths 45 � ;�,,, The probable impacts of major earthquakes on Renton vary with the magnitude � and location of the earthquake. However, the following paragraphs summarize the likely impacts on Renton. For any major earthquake, the levels of damage will �"' likely be greater in the soft soil, high-hazard areas shown Figure 8.4 compared to � the rest of the City. � �. Buildings �" The vulnerability of buildings depends on the structural system and the extent to `�'" which seismic design was incorporated into the building. Regardless of structural �. type, buildings with soft first stories, building on steep slopes and/or in areas ;,�, subject to soil failures or landslide generally have higher damage levels. Table 8.2 below is the seismic inventory for the City of Renton buildings. It details year of '"� construction and code compliance. � �r. �rr � �sr� vr� � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-11 December �+' 2011 � � � � � Table 8.2 City of Renton Public and Operational Facilities Seismic Inventory `�' Facility Year of Construction Code Compliance '�r� City Hall 1988 Zone 4 Compliant � 1055 S.Grady Way Retrofitted in 1998 Fire Station 11 1979 Zone 4 Compliant '� 211 Mill Ave.S. Completed in 2010 '� Fire Station 12 2004 Zone 4 Compliant ,,� 1209 Kirkland Ave. NE Fire Station 13 2007 Zone 4 Compliant � 18002 108th Ave. SE '"�'° Fire Station 14 1996 Zone 3 Compliant ,�,,, 1900 Lind Ave.SW Fire Station 16 1974 NA � 12923 156th Ave. SE "�" Fire Station 17 1970 NA v� 14810 SE Petrovisky Rd. Historical Museum 1939 NA � 235 Mill Ave. S. "r`` Renton Community Center 1989 Zone 3 Compliant +�r 1715 Maple Valley Hwy. � Highlands Neighborhood 2000 Zone 4 Compliant Center `'�" 800 Edmonds Ave. NE � North Highlands 1942 NA Neighborhood Center � 3000 N E 16th St. `� Main Library 1967 NA v�r 100 Mill Ave. S. � Highlands Library 1973 NA 2902 N E 12th St. `�` Old City Hall 1968 NA � 200 Mill Ave.S. ,��, The Facilities Division recognizes the need to upgrade all city facilities to meet the current code �"�"` requirements.The Community Services Department will attempt to complete this by contracting � engineering services to do a seismic survey and recommendation on one site every three years, �„ provided the budget has been appropriated.The department will also seek grants to meet these goals. `'�' � Most wood frame buildings perform relatively well in earthquakes. Damages to ,,,�. wood frame buildings will be concentrated in the most vulnerable types, including � older buildings with sill plates not bolted to the foundation or with cripple wall foundations. � � � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-12 December 2011 '�" � �tr '�rr° `�fil � � Other building types likely to experience higher levels of damage include: ,�,,, • Unreinforced or lightly reinforced masonry buildings, �w • Older pre-cast, tilt-up and concrete frame buildings and """ • Concrete and steel frame buildings with unreinforced masonry infill walls. � „�, Infrastructure � Utility and transportation infrastructure is also subject to major damage and loss � of service in earthquakes, including: � • Water and wastewater systems—damage to treatment plants and pipe breaks �"' (especially in soft soil areas). Service outages may be widespread and occur �+' for a long duration. ""'` • Natural gas systems—pipe breaks (especially in soft soil areas) but typically �+' fewer than for water or wastewater systems. Service outages may be � widespread and for a long duration. *�'` • Electric power—damage to substation equipment is common. Service outages �• may be widespread but typically for a shorter duration than other utility �, systems. � • Bridges—damage to older bridges, especially multi-span bridges, may be � extensive with disruption of surface transportation routes. � • Dams, especially older dams designed to lower seismic standards, are subject �, to damage or even complete failure in earthquakes. The worst case scenario � includes inundation of downstream areas. �. 8.5 Earthquake Hazard Mitigation Projects: General Examples � "�' There are a wide variety of possible hazard mitigation projects for earthquakes. �.r The most common projects include: structural retrofit of buildings, non-structural ;;�,,, bracing and anchoring of equipment and contents, and strengthening of utility � systems, bridges, dams and other infrastructure components. �""" The seismic hazard (frequency and severity of earthquakes) is high in Renton. � However, the risk (potential for damages and casualties) is not uniformly � distributed throughout Renton. It is instead concentrated in the most vulnerable � buildings and infrastructure. "'� Structural retrofit of buildings should not focus on typical buildings but rather on """" buildings that are most vulnerable to seismic damage. Priorities should include �r buildings on soft soil sites, subject to amplification of ground motion and/or ,�,, liquefaction, along with critical service facilities such as hospitals, fire and police � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-13 December �r' 2011 � � � � � stations, emergency shelters and schools. � Non-structural bracing of equipment and contents is often the most cost-effective ""r'` type of seismic mitigation project. Inexpensive bracing and anchoring may protect � expensive and/or critical equipment such as medical diagnostic equipment in � hospitals, computers, and communication equipment for police and fire services ,� and so on. For utilities, bracing of control equipment, pumps, generators, battery racks and other critical components can be powerfully effective in reducing the �` impact of earthquakes on system performance. Such measures should almost ""�'' always be undertaken before considering large-scale structural mitigation � projects. +,� The strategy for strengthening bridges and other infrastructure follows the same � principles as discussed above for buildings. The targets for mitigation should not `'�` be typical infrastructure but rather specific infrastructure elements that have '�` been identified as being highly vulnerable and/or are critical links in the lifeline � system. For example, vulnerable overpasses on major highways would have a � much higher priority than overpasses on lightly traveled rural routes. � Earthquake mitigation action items from the Master Mitigation Action Items "'�'� Table in Chapter 4 are shown below in Table 8.2 Earthquake Mitigation Action �rr Items. � � � r�irr � :� � � � � � '�. � � � � � �r�r � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-14 December 2011 '''�" � :. :., � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Table 8.2 Earthquake Mitigation Action Items Plan Goals Addressed .. -o `" c �, � � � � o � °n I�I v *' 0 2 a c �, � � � Funding ! Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline � � L +� ¢ y �; L � _ � �; cc ; Source I � � � c.,, c c " � o :' v � a` � a W � ° � a � � Z Earthquake Mitigation Action Items Loca I Evaluate the seismic vulnerability of critical city- Funds, Short-Term owned buildings,utilities and infrastructure and Grant establish priorities to retrofit or replace vulnerable Community Services 1-2 Years X X X #1 facilities to ensure adequate seismic performance of (EMPG, critical facilities. HMGP) Conduct a sidewalk survey of residential,commercial LOC81 and industrial buildings in Renton using FEMA's Rapid FUndS, Short-Term Visual Screening to identify especially vulnerable Community and Economic 1-2 Years X X x Grant #2 buildings,raise awareness and encourage mitigation Development FundS actions. (EMPG, HMGP) Disseminate FEMA pamphlets to educate Short-Term homeowners about structural and non-structural Community and Economic LOCeI 1-2 Years X X X X #3 retrofitting of vulnerable homes and encourage Development FundS retrofit. Local Funds, Ensure that all critical City facilities in Renton have Grant Long-Term sufficient backup power and emergency operations Community Services 5 years X X X Funds #1 plans to deal with power outages. (EMPG, HMGP, SHSP, UASI) Local Long-Terrn Obtain funding and retrofit important public facilities Funds, #2 with significant seismic vulnerabilities. Community Services 10 years X X X X Grant Funds (HMGP) City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan g_15 December 2011 � +� �rw �rr �, 9.0 LANDSLIDES AND DEBRIS FLOWS � 9.1 Landslide Overview and Definitions �w.► � The term "landslide" refers to a variety of slope instabilities that result in the ,,,� downward and outward movement of slope-forming materials, including rocks, � soils and artificial fill. Four types of landslides are distinguished based on the types of materials involved and the mode of movement. These four types of landslides � are detailed below and illustrated in Figures 9.1 to 9.4. �r �rr Rockfalls are abrupt movements of masses of geologic materials (rocks ,�,, and soils)that become detached from steep slopes or cliffs. Movement occurs by free-fall, bouncing and rolling. Falls are strongly influenced by � gravity, weathering, undercutting or erosion. � �r► Rotational Slides are those in which the rupture surface is curved �,,,,. concavely upwards and the slide movement is rotational about an axis � parallel to the slope. Rotational slides usually have a steep scarp at the upslope end and a bulging "toe" of the slide material at the bottom. '� Roads constructed by cut and fill along the side of a slope are prone to �" slumping on the fill side of the road. Rotational slides may creep slowly .r► or move large distances suddenly. � Translational Slides are those in which the moving material slides '� along a more or less flat surface. Translational slides occur on surfaces ""'' of weaknesses, such as faults and bedding planes or at the contact � between firm rock and overlying loose soils. Translational slides may �,,,,, creep slowly or move large distances suddenly. � Debris Flows (mudflows) are movements in which loose soils, rocks `"' and organic matter combine with entrained water to form slurries that � flow rapidly downslope. ^�r �, All of these types of landslides may cause road blockages by dumping debris on road surfaces or road damages if the road surface itself slides. Utility lines and '�"� pipes are prone to breakage in slide areas. Buildings impacted by slides may suffer "� minor damage from small settlements or be completely destroyed by large ground � displacements or burial in slide debris. Landslides may result in casualties �,,,. depending on the (ocation, amount and speed of the slide. � There are three main factors that determine susceptibility (potential)for "'� landslides: slope, soil/rock characteristics and water content. �+. � �w � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-1 December 2011 � � � wr� +�rr Figures 9.1 to 9.4 Major Types of Landslides � � � .t//�' 'f aa�� wtw�1 +� 1 � l �,�„ FIRM 9EDDED ROCK � �" 1,,�, / ` f , �r �, ��J� !� � W �rr ,� /�/ � `��. �<<�,- �° � , , r � f � �.�.;.�, �r► I�� j/� �4 F!� ,�� / `.. � - /�/f J// � "G„,��,� �� "�r' �� f�/ / '�� f /� SOFT ERODIBLE ROCK '�' � Figure 9.1 Rockfall Figure 9.2 Rotational Landslide v� � ORKANIIL t1�tOlI1D SU��CE ��'�pp. �Y f �+ ��i� � l'I��I � � � \�� .Sa— � � � t e� N g11P +� 1 ��I Su�4Ce �� I� � �� TRANSVERSE � —(' til� CNAUC9 � 1 �r��' �i ��r�r�� ; Figure 9.3 Translational Landslide � \ril,� �f,/� ,,, "� r �L`�ilt i °e rz � +� Soi I or Co!I uvium � ` � � Scar (areo of inifiial failure) �-��`�=�� ,'�' i �f � Trock(m+ay or may na#be ero�ded) , � : !� � i ,,� 1 ., � i Zone of depositi�n (fan) ,/• �� ` �f oG '� �- , �� `� .�=-.w '� � ',�"`�� <.Y',i' �/ � � Figure 9.4 Debris Flow `� � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-2 December 2011 ''�` � . � � � � � Steeper slopes are more prone to all types of landslides. Loose, weak rock or soil is more prone to landslides than is more competent rock or dense, firm soils. Finally, �'�"' water saturated soils or rock with a high water table are much more prone to �''' landslides because the water decreases the shear strength of the soil and �„r► increases the probability of slidinge � As noted above,the water content of soils/rock is a major factor in determining � the likelihood of sliding. Most landslides happen during rainy months, when soils �"' are saturated with water. However, landslides may happen at any time of the �r year. +rr � In addition to landslides triggered by a combination of slope stability and water content, landslides may also be triggered by earthquakes. Areas prone to �"'' seismically triggered landslides are the same as those prone to ordinary (i.e., non- '�' seismic) landslides. As with ordinary landslides, seismically triggered landslides are � more likely when soils are saturated with water. � Human activity such as road cuts or removal of vegetation may also increase the � potential for landslides at affected locations. � wrr 9.2 Landslide Hazard Assessment for Renton �rrr v� Specific areas with landslide risk include hill slopes along the Cedar River and Maple Valley Highway in eastern Renton; along the Benson Hills and South Puget "'� Drive in south Renton, and along the southeastern banks of Lake Washington in � Eastern Renton. There is also a small area of very high landslide risk along Rainier �,,. Drive N. in the vicinity of NW 7th Street. .r� Most of the landslide hazard areas with the highest risk in Renton are located in � undeveloped areas alongthe Cedar River. Slides in these areas may result in "�"' temporary dams with subsequent flooding that may affect developed areas � nearby. One such slide event with subsequent flooding occurred along the Cedar ,,�,. River in east Renton as a results of the 2001 Nisqually Earthquake. �r Areas with high landslide potential within Renton are shown in Figure 9.5. The "�"� mapped landslide hazard areas include all slopes of 15° or higher. Figures 9.6 and � 9.7 show critical facilities overlaid with areas at risk for landslides or erosion �rr respectively. � �r � � � � �r City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-3 December 2011 � � � � � Figure 9.5 Landslide Hazard Areas in Renton � , , "d, c = �.' '� � '^ a • cr <,,.�. v�:... �� ,.'; f •Y � a . rs r.xr.s �[.�:. s � �8 I _ L .. . , ,� �� - �,�.� . �y 'w�'wdsa�T ��g � �f�'{�... _ , ��: �e� - .tM� � � �`.4' __'""�.* 7 . i� `. e � a L�.� ..r ' A' ' w,nq "r"ww...�.. � _.,.� � F $ !r . �. , ;M wta St.� tj �t .i...w^t.�♦ �,` � y' �",<�% * �,r ! � . .. . .�„, , q., _... � . ��.. � ,�,• ^;:,,�- .. f . g.. � ..'; � .� -: -+4+\�� .� v'� t � �;, r s� � . , � � _...- �`�.' � �.Y- * Yrn �`� y�4�� , ,}� ' . . � �, aw, F . � � ZI �A � w � p�r. � - t � _�- � �M+ � '__ K � w` �� .: .• `� Td"��w.i h..Y � ..., .. 4w � L -�+ '�1► � ,---�' " ., � � . -..^ i';- +asy�, � � L_�"�'1 .� , , � z . Y�7 �1-,._ '`- '�,r�¢o � � ,�+« ' - ��i� � , r t . �,,,., .,:�r a>. : �- �t.. ��; _.M1 �._t. r� ._�! ..,4t i �.` �..� ' F�� `S. , ��'�t a �""'�.r +..:"4 �?" ' " b `� t � � � � � .� � ' � � � �� * r A �_} � j ; t"_,� ;� MY��'.: n,�1 � ` '��A� _. � � �V .T1 j R'" Y . _ 3_ �5.��.F �;S',`��,, ,' _ �} K� —.,.;� b..�.,.,,,, , . x� �:: � . ". •t....t�! p t , '., , . x �� i« _ � . 1' � . , f � ' il 1`" . y. � � 1 t . �� .A , .♦ r k ' ! r '� r�` 7 �t. � . b ,�' � `` � � l.-r...� �Y � t � .. S �_ _ ,. _ � . ��\t , i,..��:: �`^�R i .,.... � �' � � 3 � " � r� � ::.... �f, . y '..t -_ a ..'v.,� t .*{� ` � . -� • 1._ � M a ,•�- -i�, \i�-� , _ :.. � ... � �� . '; f r '� ._.�, � ,rw�Y � � ` : ` ii� � . � - � � � � + !, "v f S " . ' �.y:x � � 'r -7 a �.� � . '�'" � �' s ,.� ,s S 1 a` ! "�."' � . �' e ' �t • �� -�r : � ,�a, r:, � �t' t- �cv� _'" .,»' _ 57�y S�7- �.. V �� .j � �:� -.�� i 1 � � � �' �^+��°�.. � � ' �,,. - A.. 4 F�. , �4 � � lti,`.�: �. _ i{ . .� 1 ' .� �•w,,, .-�. �,. -f.�� `�.Fl . ._� :.._r �e r r . _ . . '1 �� - � # w.a � a T� k.- � .,... �' • ' _ '* .. C M1 ,J °�''� � :� M.' * . � r�+f f �d, d� �.., � �rt' q1 r - w :.a"w., 2. ( '� � '- . � i F ^ti....,,.� , S ,..4 �� " j•�[ •r-`_�'}�� sr_Y_} . t ' X xe '1„ �� ! £a r� . " ,' .w.x _� _y7�• ..1 --�� k�� t t rr tj _ �� P � �� * .3F �_ � _ '� ... �.. �- ,..,:. .M S .. .: » , . ,. t .y-� r t�tj��• ' . ��.%r '-1 ; � t �. � � 1 .�, h3(�'' y, ♦� . ��4� ��' � � � ��Sµ t} � � � i 1fA' t�:.. � ai �f- J� i,��i _ , ,! � � .* ..��.,� u'a� °.,- j . �,``� �+,� -, a�-'a,-... � �' ��' _ � ,£ s "�'i� " '�� 'A``+e+.,:1" �*�.t .✓ `;��\ a ��'+£q ��ti. '� ,� ` � .� t y�! '� p� � ., r�'l�,;;�t i : ,� , '�` _� � ^ f y.�^''� 7. ��# I�t. 1 s`�,�y S� `p��J�i� � �a.._ Tl aY .i+ a,` �..�i"' � �1 , : :'? � � - .. = JJ� .- ,I �� ~ � �� , .. �r��1`.: i �: ! v � �� . * r � r �t3 •. � `�' . �.. arw� .. +Yf !' �, 'll" �� f _ .. - T ' „ j' . - ---.. - � . r � � r . ; 1_ i �� '".,,t L A �: � .+..� �� s.wa�..` .� w �f��. 1e.+ � _ � �. Y �L °t''"4 rsrM i e ". , � R�� ' f , f - 4 c'� `� x t � + '� � : � � _.ti - � � a �, a 4� �`a,� e� s � r,. �,r _�._. .� y- � : �� 3#f 1 s�rs� 'j .�, .�^+�. r-"�� ..�. � ' ~ � � _ � � �� a"" `�.�,�a ,r,. _ �.,�. � � s�"' v�r � � � � � -`"k � E. _.. ,.. � . -a �....�e -�. .= e, N �}��` � ' +� � � �:,,.r � ,! +" - t" � t., , � »,—+ ''� °�t,�::. 'F s"S�i:� �. >., + j.�s;: �r ;....a - � l . r.�:� pa - : � tr.�. � , .�. . , � � _ . 4 . �� " f * �� : '' t' ��_. � w^ � '�� .�r x_X � „ j! 1 f!F �.ff i g � �� 9�� 1? � �.� i � '� � � � , � . j} p ;.`. . a w....� . � f�� r .r.• �S M 7 �~ " `� � � x4 � t r � .r¢ t.` ' ._�t. �^1� ..1a �� ' . ��t y � . !j / !�"T " �� ,.r 'r'r'y��..' � . ,'. wnN�;j .5 " � !_. . rw� ...�'�n`i�4An..�I y � �• ,� f t .x `( g +rs�� s�w.... S �� •� S :,�,. � ` , .. ,�.a w. .r" ♦ � � # ' TP i W! x000' r � ` _ w � r - M � - -€ . : . :,.,,.a ..�.. ...,. � t . - ,. .w. : ,� . •�.,.- . ,: � • � ` ' �. . ; .; , , � f " ��:�.�' d'+�^h . ss - ' : _. �� ; . � s : � �� Y, 7�'� T �. � t j. , - "'°�. i k. t , � ,< , � �,.t�• - � '""- - � x �� t . x�, a,�, I � �� - �'� & � �� . � � � �� •ti.,�f' ."� L 's .{�_S " `� I �t � . �- � . -t. c e "'�,ri , � � ::,.: • , . , � _. � . . .. � ,`�,-� 1' *, '�l +��_ Y .�_ � � h • +.�.,. »�.+w, c,, � r,"" n r�,.* ..;t r. � t 1 1 i - - �.�, f__. \ »,,.3..., a. — � tnforma�on Technology-GIS �''"�1de H'� a;�M��,��,��5 Landslide Hazards ;,��, � �..��.�=�. . .,,�« � a�,�r, �°°f"�„ ,� _-_--•''''''"i,ti?�,t"C'� Ct ��1 �,�� ..�E�^«��.. �rrr� City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-4 December 2011 `�` � �rw v�r' � � Figure 9.6 ''� Areas at Risk of Landslide Overlaid with Critical Facilities � � � / f ` � � HAZARD CCINDITIQN ` ,� j '�t .a �,'`� Landslide Hazatds '��r �� ,�'�� Y � -YERY HIGH w�r ,• / iP. �l_� f � � r �HIt3N ,p� � \ + `;MODERATE UNCLASSIFEII '� " . ..-� ' , ; � ° '�r`- ! --..._.« �` � ':� • '{�'" "�,,,�„ ' �"""t� �I � � � ��1 "'� g�, --'_`�, � i r`' � s� �-J ��` � * (.. a i..._. '� � � ' • ,,, ,.� , � i � ` ,� ~ ,� 1..: �I�` � ��` � � � �—� "�'' ~ '` � � " �,iL ,�, � �� `1 . ( vr�n ;"� j � . � � � ! i �` +' 1 .�. ,y ... ..��. r. �� .�.__7 •�.�...�„�, �Aq �t ....I � . y� � . . �� „ .. � .J"*a.�.—..� �_. �--� r--� � . � 1- . ... ,,.'.. k w�� 1 i ♦ k � � . � ' �$� , h�� , � V�� w.e^..�r � `� ,,.. .<.� ' i .�'.�, �w� V��i�"� � �` � � �^ � � L_i � � � � � � , . �t �� r � �. , , � . , , . _ . y� �� f � �"_' !�,-y'��` _-�_ . '� � � . ' r... 1 • ,�r,, � �, , �-..:- ----�----a <` � I �r f + yi i •r•� � , ,ii °'�.� � + ' F�� r , � � � ! .�� '-_ � ��° �' �' �; ,;, � ! �y + ! r '+�y/ � � r '�, ! �__._..---- `••� '�~-1 . � � , � . � �. +y�r tnformation Technolagy-GIS —��---� Pnnted on 03l03/201Q (____;City af Renton � Police Department � Schoots � Dam Sources�City of Ren�on,K'ug Cwrny TM��e•s��«•a««�.�«w�•a �, FiteStations � MetroPiant ro�r,«�,.�r.w�wxe��n��u mro�»u� v�r �+��+u»d.�•snw�-T�s�.n�a memaea ro. Seattle Water L'tne `"''��"""'"°°"'"'TM Q Artny Resenre Ce�ter ,�, Sewe� c,,��r� � Producti4n Welis � �,�,�r+��° ��'�� Olympic Pipe{ines --�""""�f f� -�l �'(��r �" l�,'��' Water Utility Reservoir High Pressure Gas line �,,. Q Valley Medical Center wr City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-5 December 2011 `�rr � � � � Figure 9.7 Areas at Risk of Erosion Overlaid with Critical Facilities � , � �� % HAZARD CfJNDITION ' � ''� �` (� �,H�a . ` � �~ �!� � . J °��rw r � r 1� ,,`�.n. �, � .�%�" ��,` � ,�� ., � �� r �� r—�� s �---i '�r ,,�., 'p�. � � � _� ,� +► . ��' • - '�'' � tk � i.`� + (`� �� # "�_� j�! I j '� ,... : ! � ` i' � � � � �._ .� � ` � r� �-----�� ...! `_ "�- J��.-----• �-'"'7 '� . � — l__j, �► `�_i i • � i � :."_--, �;; � �_ P d — � � � �` 4 �.' � � ., � ,� � r . �1 • .�. ,�; I �...7� � '� i + � ._'s.� � � t `i �� j r i + �'t• �' \ ! T• f� ( � `'�' � � r , , � �� ' � �' �`• � � v�Nr i � r ''�. f + r � � � .._.._.------- �i �'` � i ` � � �rr► Information Technolagy-G!S -��1 Ci of Renton �► p Schaals � Printed on 03103@010 j,_,.„; tY Polioe De artment j oa�:so�rcex cNy or R«na,,King cwrny • Metro Plant `'� mr�a�,nnas,�ran��wosma.�,n�+qw�,�,c�e � Fire Stations u wrvev+��Y,an0 k buaM on Me Des�wqurm�don � ,�,.u�eb�ore�eo.�.sr�.m�s�v��eearor �^ Seattle Water Line �'y�''y�apOQ"'�° ,� Army Reserve Center Sewe� �, �y�,�� GJ P�oduction Weils �� _� � Olympic Pipelines C �,,�'°E'1'C��'�� Water Utility Reservoir � �*-�-�--�' �-■ High Pressure Gas Line Q Valley Medical Center � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-6 December 2011 � � � � �rr �w � � In mapping landslide hazards the following criteria were used. �,,, • Very High—All locations of mass wasting and landslide deposits as well as �r two previous landslides on public record. „r,,,,. • High—Areas with a slope greater than 40% and areas with slopes between � 15 and 40%where the surface soils are underlain by low permeability geologic units. �rr � • Moderate—Areas with slopes between 15 and 40%where the surface soils are underlain by permeable geologic units. �rr � • Unclassified—Areas that have not been surveyed. �"`" The total square mileage of all levels of landslide hazard is 3.37, which is .14%of '�' Renton's total square mileage. There are 10 structures in very high risk areas, +wrr 1,387 structures in the high risk areas, 2,253 structures in moderate risk areas, �„ and 319 structures in areas of unclassified risk. There are no streets in the very high risk areas, 18.05 miles of street in the high risk areas, 19.70 miles of street in � the moderate risk areas, and 2.45 miles of street in areas of unclassified risk. ''�" There are no critical facilities in the very high risk areas. There are seven Renton � water system facilities in the high risk areas and three in the moderate risk areas. �, The Seattle water line, sewer line, Olympic Pipeline and high pressure gas line all wr cross tF�rough the high and moderate risk areas. '�'` In mapping erosion risk the following criteria were used. � • Hazard—All surface soils on slopes steeper than 15 %. � There is one Renton water system facility in the erosion hazard areas. The Seattle `�'' water line, sewer line, Olympic Pipeline and high pressure gas line all cross `�' through the erosion risk areas. � ,�, 9.3 Landslide Risk Assessment for Renton �' Winter storms with intense rainfalls are the most common trigger for landslides in �• Renton. Major storms with intense rainfall can result in numerous landslides in „�,. slide-prone areas. `� It is difficult to make quantitative predictions of future landslides damages which "'r'` depend on the: � 1) extent of landslide susceptible areas, �wr 2) inventory of buildings and infrastructure in landslide susceptible areas, �rr. a�rr 3) severity of winter storm event (inches of rainfall in 24 hours), ,� 4) percentage of landslide susceptible areas that will move and the range of �rr movements (displacements) likely and �„ 5) vulnerability (amount of damage for various ranges of movement). +rw City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-7 December 2011 �r � � � +rl�` For Renton, however,the most likely impacts of landslides are damages to � buildings, roads and utilities. Severe landslides may also result in injuries or """�"'` deaths. Small landslides are likely to affect one building or small number of �' buildings and/or a single road location. Larger landslides may affect numerous � buildings and/or roads. � In addition to direct landslide damages within Renton, the City is also subject to � the economic impacts of road closures (e.g., Interstate 5) or utility outages from `"'�'' landslides outside of City limits. �r �► 9.4 Mitigation of Landslide Risk �rr Mitigation of landslide risks is often quite expensive. Slope stability can be `� improved by drainage to reduce pore water pressure, construction of appropriate �'' retaining walls or other types of geotechnical remediation. In some cases, � buildings can be hardened to reduce damages. An alternative mitigation strategy �, for already built buildings or infrastructure with high potential for landslide losses is to relocate the facilities outside of known slide areas. � � Mitigation of landslide risk can also be accomplished by effective land use � planning to minimize development and the location of critical utility lines in slide- ,,,r,, prone areas. Generally, such land use planning requires rather detailed � geotechnical mapping of slide potential so that high hazard areas can be demarcated without unnecessarily including other areas of low slide potential. �" ,rrr The impacts of slide damage on road systems can also be partially addressed by � identifying areas of high slide potential or of repetitive past slide damages so that �„ alternative routes for emergency response can be pre-determined. � The following table,Table 9.1 Landslide Mitigation Action Items, includes landslide ""�"' mitigation action items from the Master Action Items Table in Chapter 4. wir � � � � v�r► � � � � v� � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-8 December 2011 '+�`' � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �, � � � � � � � � � � � � Table 9.1 Landslide Mitigation Action Items Plan Goals Addressed -a �, -o a � ; � � o � �, L d a, � a � °' a � � Funding ' Hazard Action Item Coordinatin Or anitations Timeline � r- a � 'o I g g 3 N o L N � c � � � Source a o, � a, �, `� � w :° c u3. �° c � -a � � d = � � vfl'i � � ta � a o o. �++ a+ z a � Landslide Mitigation Action Items Short-Term Complete the inventory of locations where buildings Community and Economic LOCeI #1 or infrastructure are subject to landslides. Development,Public Works 1-2 Years X X Funds Long-Term Consider landslide mitigation actions for slides LOCeI #1 seriously threatening buildings or infrastructure. Public Works 5 Years X X x Funds Long-Term Limit future development in high landslide potential Community and Economic On oin X X X X LoCal #2 areas. Development g g Funds City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-9 December 2011 � � � �rr ;,�, 10.0 VOLCANIC HAZARDS "'�'` 10.1 Overview � � The Cascades, which run from British Columbia through Washington and Oregon into northern California,contain more than a dozen major volcanoes and hundreds of "�"' smaller volcanic features. In the past 200 years, seven of the Cascade volcanoes in the �rr United States have erupted: Mt. Baker, Glacier Peak, Mt. Rainier, Mt. St. Helens, Mt. �,, Hood, Mt. Shasta, and Mt. Lassen. During this time period, the most active volcano in the Cascades has been Mt.St. Helens with about 14 major eruptions and many smaller � eruptions. �rr► ,�, Many other volcanoes are deemed active or potentially active.The Smithsonian Institution's Global Volcanism Project lists 20 active volcanoes in Oregon and 7 in � Washington.The 7 active volcanoes in Washington are listed below in Table 10.1. �rr Table 10.1 "`� Active Volcanoes in Washington � Volcano T e Last Eru tion �irr Mt. Baker Stratovolcano 1880 Glacier Peak Stratovolcano 1700 + 100 � Mt. Rainier Stratovolcano 1825 (?) �` Mt. Adams Stratovolcano 950 AD (?) ,�, Mount St. Helens Stratovolcano 1980 - 2008 West Crater Volcanic Field 5760 BC (?) �` Indian Heaven Shield Volcanoes 6250 + 100 B � A great deal of general background information on volcanoes in the Cascades and on � volcanoes in general, is available on several websites as detailed below in Table 10.2. � � Table 10.2 Volcano Websites �.. Institution Website �" United States Geological Survey �r (USGS) - eneral site �W•usys.qov USGS Cascades Volcano "'�'" Observator http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov ;,,� Smithsonian Institution (Global WWW volcano.si.edu v�r►, Volcanism Pro'ect) Washington State Department of '`� Natural Resources (see: Geology www.dnr.wa.gov �r and Earth Resources Division) wtrr ,�, The numerous volcanoes of the Cascades differ markedly in their geological characteristics.The largest volcanoes are generally what geologists call composite or "'� stratovolcanoes.These volcanoes may be active for tens of thousands of years to �" hundreds of thousands of years. In some cases, these large volcanoes may have �,,, explosive eruptions such as Mt. St. Helens in 1980, or Crater Lake in Oregon about � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-1 December ++�" 2011 vr � � � rrr 6,850 years ago.A more common type of volcano, with more regular activity, is what geologists call mafic volcanoes.This type of volcano is typically active for much shorter �` time periods, up to a few hundred years, and generally forms small craters or cones. ''�" Mafic volcanoes are not subject to large explosive events. � 10.2 Volcanic Hazard Types � � In this area, awareness of the potential for volcanic eruptions was greatly increased by � the May 18, 1980 eruption of Mt. St. Helens. In this eruption, which killed 57 people, lateral blast effects covered 230 square miles and reached 17 miles northwest of the � crater. Pyroclastic flows covered six square miles and reached five miles north of the `"� crater while landslides covered 23 square miles. Ash accumulations were about 10 v� inches at 10 miles downwind, 1 inch at 60 miles downwind and % inch at 300 miles � downwind. Lahars(mudflows) affected the north and south forks of the Toutle River, the Green River and ultimately the Columbia River as far as 70 miles from the volcano. � Damage and reconstruction costs exceeded $1 billion. '� � Volcanic eruptions often involve several distinct types of hazards to people and property. Major volcanic hazards include: lava flows, blast effects, pyroclastic flows, �` ash flows, lahars and landslides or debris flows. Some of these hazards(e.g., lava '�► flows) only affect areas very near the volcano. Other hazards may affect areas 10 or 20 ;,� miles away from the volcano,while ash falls may affect areas several miles downwind of the eruption site. � � Lava flows are eruptions of molten rock. Lava flows for the major Cascades ,,,�„� volcanoes tend to be thick and viscous,forming cones and thus typically affecting areas only very near the eruption vent. However,flows from the � smaller mafic volcanoes may be less viscous flows that spread out over "'�'` wider areas. Lava flows destroy everything in their path. v�w Blast effects may occur with violent eruptions. Most volcanic blasts are �" largely upwards. However,the Mt. St. Helens blast was lateral,with +��r impacts 17 miles from the volcano. Similar or larger blast zones are � possible in future eruptions of any of the major Cascades volcanoes. � Pyroclastic flows are high-speed avalanches of hot ash, rock fragments and gases. Pyroclastic flows can be as hot as 1500°F and move downslope at � 100 to 150 miles per hour. Pyroclastic flows are extremely deadly for ""�" anyone caught in their path. vr� Ash falls result when explosive eruptions blast rock fragments into the air. "�'�'` Such blasts may include tephra (solid and molten rock fragments).The �v largest rock fragments(sometimes called "bombs")generally fall within � two miles of the eruption vent. Smaller ash fragments(less than 0.1") typically rise into the area forming a huge eruption column. In very large `�` eruptions,ash falls may total many feet in depth near the vent and extend '+�'` for hundreds or even thousands of miles downwind. �, � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-2 December 2011 '"�' � � �vrrr � �wr Lahars or mudflows are common during eruptions of volcanoes with heavy � loading of ice and snow.These flows of mud, rock and water can rush "'�" down channels at 20 to 40 miles an hour and can extend for more than 50 �rr miles. For some volcanoes, lahars are a major hazard because highly �r populated areas are built on lahar flows from previous eruptions. � Landslides or debris flows are the rapid downslope movement of rocky � material, snow and/or ice.Volcano landslides can range from small movements of loose debris to massive collapses of the entire summit or ""� sides of a volcano. Landslides on volcanic slopes may be triggered by �r eruptions or by earthquakes or simply by heavy rainfall. ;�„ 10.3 Volcanic Hazards for Renton � Several of the active volcanoes in Washington are located relatively near Renton, �r including Mt. Rainier and Mt. St. Helens.Approximate distances from Renton to four „��„ relatively nearby volcanoes are shown below in Table 10.3. �" Table 10.3 ;� Distances from Renton �r Volcano Distance miles �+r Mt. Rainier 48 Mt. St. Helens 89 � Mt. Baker 93 �+r► Mt. Adams 94 �, Glacier Peak 68 �"` Among these relatively nearby volcanoes, Mt.St. Helens is the most active. Mt. +�rr Rainier, Mt. Baker and Glacier Peak are definitely active and Mt. Adams is potentially ;,�,, active. �"" Renton is approximately 48 miles from Mt. Rainier and about 68 to 94 miles from the �rr other relatively nearby volcanoes. �r The USGS analysis of Volcano Hazards from Mt. Rainier, Washington, was published in """� 1998(Open-File Report 98-428). As shown in Figure 10.1, the proximal hazard area is � the area subject to the most intense volcanic hazards including lava flows,tephra �, flows, pyroclastic flows, landslides and debris flows and lahars. Fortunately,this high risk area is predominantly within the national park boundary with very low population. ""� Lahars are the primary volcanic hazard which extends into populated areas downslope �' from Mt. Rainier.The area at risk from lahars extends as least as far as Tacoma and ,,,, Auburn. '`� Renton is outside the geographic areas at high risk from lahars from Mt. Rainier. � However, as shown in Figure 10.2, Renton may be at some risk from extremely large � lahars in the Green River Valley. If so, the return period for such events is likely several Y.r thousand years or longer. �.r � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-3 December �r 2011 +�r � �' � � Figure 10.1 Mt.Rainier Volcanic Hazards Map �` � � Q�''`_� Fed�ai• ubum dAI �' ° � �ti,x.,, • •�'1, � � � ,• 1'acoma: Enumclaw ''�" Ni v u�,�,,�;��, �7,� �}tltF �r �` ik�p'- ��'r _ 5t�nner � � � `� �Butk Mud Greenwater C�ncy `�, °g W�n Maru��tir � � D� Cou�ty � Carhonado v� t�raham � d � G ��0�R�ver � r.�...�.. ,,....,�.�.._ �'oYff4 � tlouat Ram�tr ,'atlanal Park Boundaty ♦ '�` �� 0.+ l '��,�„ �r*��S`��, � � � � �,�� 1 $� �` 4g �t' � � �� e�2 �` � � �c r �ata�a�e y�' 1[��tINT ' irr � �fNIER „�; Tn��ma��,� � ;�� . � �� Dam Thurscan Cauncy �"�r Ashtad � �'� "� ° `'�' �- , - • -- db@ � �'�� `�v :,...,..,. „�� M' ��. Ler��s Gaunty �`� —�.. ..+�+ � ,..,�� .` •► • r r�. EXPIANATION ■ SmaM lah�s w�h rewRence "'�" iuerval<10(!years(Case 3) � Nbderate tah�s wid�recurcence �eval 100-500 y�ars(Case 2) �, ❑ l�ge lahars wdh recurr� PAckwood inteival 5Q0.1000 years(Case 1) � � Are�a most I�efy to he�fec:tted by � lava fbws and pyrodasiic flows �� ckwraod '�` � PosN�arsedim�ta6an Randke eow�� wdr �`"�� V� �,�� 0 5 10�MILES Rtt!'e Lake �: 0 5 14 KIIOMETERS � xacv�s.—rrszara�orres ror rat�rs,tava nows.ana pyroc�astfc Rows r7am Mounc Ra�n+er(Noahtt araf ottters,7998, �` US Gec�togrcal Survey Opert-Fite RepM 98-d28). � � '� City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-4 December 2011 ''�'' v� � � � +�Irr � rlrr' Figure 10-2 � Mt.Rainier Lahar Map wr� ��° Areas inundated by � �eattle mudflows �green� at � ? � Rerrton ��unt Rainier in the ,�, Tacoma last 5,fi00 years � Kent �r .r Auhurn Pacific � ,�,,, Enum+daw � t Puyallup �,,, McA►lillan �►hite � �rting Buckley Rraoer � � Electran � McK�nna Mount Rainier Fuya!lcrp �„ Nisguafty Ria�r � Riwer ,�, glaciers � E�� Ashford � "�`� 15 miles Natianal � � ��+� Topinka,US6S/G VO,200?;lNaclified from:Sisson,?995,US6S Open-file Repart 95-642 � � � � � +�11+' � ir► � � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-5 December �► 2011 � � � � � For Renton,the most significant volcanic risk is ash fall. In addition to effects from Mt. Rainier, ash falls from volcanic activity at Mt.St. Helens or any of the other active � volcanoes could also affect Renton. Depending on the volume of volcanic ash ejected "'�' by an eruption and on prevailing wind directions at the time of eruption,various � thicknesses of ash falls may affect Renton. The impacts of ash falls on Renton include: � a) Clean-up and ash removal from roofs,gutters, sidewalks, roads and ,,,,� vehicles. � b) Clogging of filters on vehicle engines,furnaces, heat pumps, air �, conditioners and other engines and mechanical equipment, with possible damage to the engines or equipment. � c) Possible respiratory problems for at-risk population such as elderly, � young children or others with respiratory problems. "'�` d) Possible impacts on public water supplies drawn from surface waters, �` including degradation of water quality(high turbidity) and increased � maintenance requirements at water treatment plants. ,�,,, e) Possible electric power outages from ash-induced short circuits in v�,r distribution lines,transmission lines and substations. � f) Possible disruptions of air traffic from the Renton Airport, Sea-Tac ,,� Airport and/or other airports in the Pacific Northwest region. � The extent of volcanic hazards for most of Renton appears limited to the possibility of ""�" ash from a Mt. St. Helens' eruption. Ash falls would likely be very minor with an inch or � less of ash likely. In the 1980 Mt. St. Helens' eruption, Renton received less than 1" of ,� ash. Even minor amounts of ash fall can result in the significant impacts noted above. � The following maps show probabilistic data on ash fall in Washington,taking into � account all of the active volcanoes(USGS Open File Report 9-437, Plate 1, 1999). ;,,�, Interpolating between the map contours of Figure 10.3,the annual probability of 1 � centimeter(about 0.4 inch) or more of volcanic ash is about 1/2000 Renton. In other `"�`` words, the return period for such ash falls in Renton is about 2,000 years. r„rr► � Interpolating between the map contours of Figure 10.4,the annual probability of 10 centimeters(about 4 inches) or more of volcanic ash is about 1/4500 in Renton. So, the `�` return period for such ash falls in Renton is about 4,500 years. �r � The low probabilities of significant ash falls(i.e., long return periods)arise because ash falls in Renton require volcanic eruptions producing ash and wind directions that � deposit ash westward from the volcanoes. "'�` �' � � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-6 December 2011 '�' vr� , .rr �rr' �rr� +i�r' Figure 10.3 `°w"` Annual Probability of 1 Centimeter(about 0.4 inch)or More of Volcanic Ash � � � �m�rr , , �n 1 in 100 . ♦MouM�aker � � �' � � __ _` �� f , ___,__l �� y i � 1 in 5+0� � ' �i� � � � � � .�-- ; ____ _ ' � � t � �'',-,�.°'; 3 �h �.oao „�. ___ _ f- r � �, 'j,��1 f' r_{ ( i "�rr ; � j _� ""_-2f' {----- --- s--. 1 in 5.000 l , , v�'' 1� _ �� 1�« !�t' � 1 , 1 '1 .�-•�. _ �,�-_.._-.� ' . 1 in iO.d40 +wr - � � --.. �.�St�Helet� ' � t 1� I �� tess than Moutlt Ad R�8 �, , � 1 in 10,OOd �` ,� �----- -� �t a � �rr ` �t ,� � t_ y r6 11 ,,,r,, f7�`;�'r-- �cw�PH�sbdi � ,' ` .y i +� "X � t_ � ��I�� ` !� � � ��r..�r � �..-.. ` j �� .��f..� _r.�.�.�'_F_-� .. � .-_,_ ""�._�_.__� �` �, 1 �"' ��'" -,Z Mount Jef�erso� �� ++ � Figure 10.4 "�" Annual Probability of 10 Centimeters(about 4 inches)or More of Volcanic Ash �r (same scale as Figure 10.1 above) �r , � iMount�aker ' � � �r � ______ , � `�Y `c ` � _i � � tacier P, .•, ; r w _ _ r �� - _,U' — ---- ! i 1' ''�� -----1 - T '� _ (� , I ; �' -.�_�- G_ � f "�..... S , j � �{ainl�+r �" � - --�-� � � ---- � _� � H lensY i r. w�r' � -T- - St. �, Mou�rt dan�s 1 �. , ,�--_— ----i �+rr -`�" i I ' �� , r -=1y�14�ourrlrHarbd I �'� , � t` F� 1 r � t s i. _� t , '� � --� `� ,`> �'`�-- '--- ,�,, , -�`---� ,` � - -,L----- � � �, t�--;E�- �- � J ersa , S {" ,�"�_ � ' --r '. t_ � _s'__�� j.,_r--� EC$ � - , * • �. , �_`_., iy..—_�'"_ � ' ' `-�-_ � wb�t 1Yotcana i �----+�---� r�r _ -� �__ . City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-7 December +�r► 2011 � � � � � 10.4 Mitigation of Volcanic Hazards � Mitigation of volcanic hazards is predominantly in the areas of monitoring volcanic `"�` activity, warnings, evacuation and emergency response.There are few practical �,► physical measures to mitigate the direct impacts of volcanic activity. ,�, The USGS actively monitors volcanic activity in the Cascades via networks of seismic °1�` sensors (which can detect earthquakes related to magma movements) as well as very � accurate ground surface measurements.The USGS also has a volcanic warning system ,,,� with several levels of alert as a potential eruption becomes more likely and more � imminent. � For the Cascades, the USGS volcano warning system has three levels. Level One � (Volcanic Unrest) means anomalous conditions that could be indicative of an eventual ,� volcanic eruption. Level Two (Volcanic Advisory) means that processes are underway that have a significant likelihood of culminating in hazardous volcanic activity, but the � evidence does not indicate that a life-or property-threatening event is imminent. Level � Three (Volcano Alert) means that monitoring or evaluation indicate that precursory ,;�, events have escalated to the point where a volcanic event with attendant volcanologic or hydrologic hazards threatening to life and property appears imminent or is � underway. ''�"" � For most of Renton, which is located well outside of any of the likely direct hazard �, zones for any Cascades volcanic events, mitigation for volcanic activity is a low priority. In the event of a minor ash flow, public warnings directing people (especially those `"� with respiratory problems)to remain indoors and cleanup are likely the only responses � necessary for most volcanic effects impacting Renton. In addition,water treatment ,,,�, plants should be evaluated to ensure that they can handle possible high turbidity events from volcanic ash falls into water supplies. � � The following table,Table 10.4, includes the volcanic hazards mitigation action items � from the Master Action Items Table in Chapter 4. ,;� � � � � � � � � � w�rr► � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-8 December 2011 "�` � W::.a : � � � � � � � � � � t t t � � � � �' � � � � � � � � � t" t � � � � � � f � � � t � � � ; Table 10.4 Volcanic Hazards Mitigation Action Items Plan Goals Addressed -o �o `^ w `0 �+ c y > � v � � ` f0 � � d a�i �', a � a a � � Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline � � a 3 s �' oc � 'o Q v, o � ` � � �; �c � Source '� ;� a :° c � �° � L �a � �' a _ R E °- � � � a a a �++ � z Volcanic Hazards Mitigation Action Items Short-Term Update public emergency notification procedures for Fire&Emergency Services 1-2 Years X X X X LOCeI #1 ash fall events. Funds Short-Term Update emergency response planning for ash fall Community Services,Fire& LOCeI #2 events. Emergency Services,Police,Public 1-2 Years X X x Funds Works Evaluate capability of water treatment plant to deal Short-Term with high turbidity from ash falis and upgrade public Works,METRO 1-2 Years X X X X M ETRO #3 treatment facilities and emergency response pians to deal with ash falis. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-9 December 2011 �r �° �rrr � ,�, 11.0 COAL MINE HAZARDS ""` 11.1 Overview �rr �,, Coal mining was an important industry in Renton from the 1870s when Renton Coal Company was organized through the 1930s. Most of the large coal mining operations � were closed in the late 1930s or soon thereafter. Small scale coal mining operations "�" continued into the 1960s. � �, There are no active coal mines in Renton.There are four mapped abandoned coal mines and smaller unmapped mines may also exist. Historical coal mining areas in Renton are `��` shown in Figure 11.1. Most of the coal mining areas, and all of the high hazard areas, are ""�' located in the vicinity of South Puget Drive, Renton Hill south of Cedar River Park and +.r east of Benson Drive. There has been significant residential development above or �„ nearby these coal mining areas and abandoned mines. "� 11.2 Coal Mine Hazards +�r �,,, When mines in or near developed areas were closed, mine openings were typically �rr plugged with whatever materials were readil�r available including: mine waste, land clearing debris and car bodies. Rarely, if ever, were the coal mines properly sealed with � engineered plugs prior to the 1950s. Given the timing of the closures, nearly all � openings to abandoned coal mines in the Renton area should be considered improperly �,,, sealed. � Abandoned underground coal mines pose four main hazards: subsidence, collapse, � release of gases and release of water. � • Areas above mine workings are subject to gradual subsidence (movement of surface �'"' as it shifts downward), with potential damages to buildings, roads and utility �w systems. Subsidence can occur for all underground mines, whether the workings are „�, deep (>200 feet) or shallow (<200 feet). �,,, • Sudden localized collapses can occur, especially for shallow mine workings. Collapses ,� may result in major damages as well as injuries or deaths. ,� • Underground coal mines often release methane and/or carbon dioxide. �r o Methane is a colorless, odorless and lighter than air gas that rises through the � ground or through tunnels and shafts. Methane can accumulate in enclosed � spaces and result in fires or explosions if ignited. ;�, o Carbon dioxide is a colorless, odorless heavier than air gas which descends downward through mines and may exit from downward sloping tunnels. �` Accumulation of carbon dioxide in enclosed spaces may result in asphyxiation. �.. • For mines that have filled with ground water, failure of plugs may result in '""" unexpected and sudden outbursts of water in unanticipated locations. Collapses or � � �r City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 11-1 December 2011 � � � v� � sudden outbursts of water pose life safety risks as well as threats to buildings and infrastru cture. � � Failures of abandoned coal mines may occur at any time of year under any conditions. However, failures are more likely during periods of heavy rainfall as slope stability may �` be diminished. Mine failures may also be triggered by landslides or earthquakes. `�"' �rrr 11.3 Coal Mine Hazards: Risk Assessment � Overall the risk from abandoned coal mines is fairly low. As discussed in the last section, ""�'' there is potential for damages and possible life safety impacts from subsidence, � collapse, releases of gases or releases of water. Any such events would most likely be ,,,�, localized and affect a small geographic area. Larger events affecting several or more buildings are also possible. � � Figure 11.1 shows the mapped coal mine hazards area in Renton. Coal mine hazards � may also exist in other areas of Renton because the identification and mapping of ,�, abandoned coal mines is incomplete. � The definitions of moderate and high coal mine hazard areas are as follows: � • Moderate hazard. Areas where mine workings are deeper than 200 feet (steeply '"�' dipping coal seams) or deeper than 15 times the thickness of the seam or workings � (gently dipping seams). These areas may be subject to subsidence. � • High hazard. Areas with abandoned and improperly sealed openings and areas � underlain by mine workings shallower than 200 feet (steeply dipping seams) or „�, shallower than 15 times the thickness of the seam or workings (gently dipping seams). These areas may be subject subsidence and collapse. � � The total square mileage of coal mine hazards in Renton is 1.61, or .07%of the City's � total square mileage. There are 175 structures in high risk areas, 1,809 structures in ,,� moderate risk areas and 161 structures in unclassified areas.There are .84 miles of street in high risk areas, 18.99 miles in moderate risk areas and 1.07 miles in areas of � unclassified risk. "'�'` � Figure 11.2 shows an overlay of the mapped coal mine hazard areas with critical ,�� buildings and infrastructure. The mapped coal mine hazard areas include two water reservoirs as well as Nelson Middles School and Spring Glen Elementary. The hazard � areas are crossed by the Olympic Pipeline, Seattle water line, and high pressure gas ''"�"` lines. There are no recorded coal mine failure events for Renton. v�rr► � 11.4 Mitigation Action Items �rr► Mitigation action items for coal mine hazards are summarized below in Table 11.1 Coal � Mine Hazards Mitigation Action Items. ,,,� � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 11-2 December 2011 `�' � � � � � �+r. Figure 11.1 � Coal Mine Hazard Areas in Renton x �; r �;. � .. , r � , ;P' M'"° 'f� ' � ' � � = a ; ��t� �;,�� g� _ �~ � -` ,� �. � = G: `�ir" �'� i >s�3 i � „�`,,� ,�.�., � �, t �*.. � "�..�� "� �'z; -; {'= i �*�.4 `�" iC'� �k..�e �rr. N �t ,--� , :� �:. ,�.� ��_'.+. __ {_-�� 4 [ # . � "' � � . FI .��' �r � �� .. - . '+�t- � � � � . . js y � �• _ � .f ...[ '�^* ,+ tR "'� t`-- �.,.. ,. �,..`ti . � r ''-.. '„ • �` �t. . + � .;:.;.. �..% *'*'. _:., 'y��. �-�r ... . - .,..., � . ,.,.... „ . _ ..T , � . � ... - 'i� t'FS\�4; .. .. . . `, _" j.. �(�• �� 3 .� ` "" �' ...., �� 4��.._. 6 i l 'f � S �f . . � . ' ..1 N- R i '�. _ {F2��."'�Yt��4\ � . � � t �- �� ;,.�;. d1 i � ._ r � Li': w+w� � �j 3 i�k° t '''�;�.'d+�} � � .�' � 4w � � � � ' �yr i' �5" � T.' d � � . ' � . . � - . .. � , �"y, � �. ' - " :..� ,'.^....,,, _ '��"»'��' t�� • v� �m„"-� � ° _ � ' a�c � `i.��` �._ . . � � _ . � � F�,r t �! p ...J �.�r t r...» ..♦ } . r �. .w#e� j y� � �. . 1 "'`.._ �- � �,.,4�� j � "� �� y�. ,y,�,�y ?� . . w y �' ♦ � t': � '� t � �J'�`� T. xR�; t � '�,.. .. . _ A • y. .{. '+� �� w� �� 4i7 t�. , r �V T �'� . � �� 6 Y +�" . � ��a� t � I • � � _ 4 t� r �j -,y��t y� � .-a t . � f .,� !; � ' ` � ..�a t � - r I . � �. '�, f � i_ �V .� ._ H[! w au:.'�'�� }, - vs"_�- y r �',-. ;� ,.c - r� F �ti ' r � �(J � � .'�� e e'� +F+c -i`:�� t �. �.. � t w +_ f,� �F1�y m,, � �,�' � -t �r„ r �,� �_ .� � �� j �.�� .�,.s.s� -R � «�� x k- � , i ,.,.� � . « r i. . ,� _ ..,a ,. � � i � ..a. « ,�+� �,_ � �_ � �+�, �'> �1 � _ xM .... �{ > ,. � i �+.�� `!'^}"' � 1( � .. t' 7 . �K+C ' � ;�-1� �'w �� "/ .�'t� � ,}M�i�t:� �Si+ j�M . � 1� Y L�.�� TW T�� i � ' � ^-. J ♦ . ...a. .:�n � -- °'w' �ir�Z ' �J, � � , -�__ �L� � �` � � �..: �' yy} -f�. �z�� r, - .u. . $'f ��S"`� �s- x . � � ��.. � �� j � Y^X` � � � "R� � !. � a �e�� 11M�� r � _.. _ p ,, l'�� - � �( , _ �y � .'!. " y" � .. �• ! � t S �- _ � E ��_ ��-✓ r �� eT't �rk��' �ig�M 7'Y'� � k� \ � � � �` �! � i �, _ 1 . CIt�_.1 �i ` H`�� _ .- . - � a :: . , ��a yM�" � ' $� t��.{f�' � �' . `: ' � 1ak� � ��'+2..,. ; � y , � � -__ I : -'� b Ny ,� X� � ��...+".� r� � ' s �y '7' 3j �..i.. t - '� ��'�1 _�I � _c.n'i�. � < .s , '�� . � S'' j. C� a'�. 'n� M�.,,� � _ � ` � , � A-'�� : ,� � s1 ��y t_..._ �,'� • : �� . i! !.-� ; � t�, `,t.. � .� �-� � � _ �7 �. r+� � , F � �- i�' ...�—v � ^ ° 1 7 , � ,�''Y�t,�j M^�-' �,« � � ��a _.� i 1! ,""' t� rtr r � F .., ,. .� ��4'.Ed�� ,:. � � � . _ R _ 1 ,- r � , 2^a "t 0 . .... s 4� i ..� mw�a� f � ' � � _� .. I►1 �t� `w� � S.. t x r � <. � t.l r � ` .. ' ' ..}, �`-r 3 txr �..a •� �s� .. � `w a.r . .. °� 14�s d}4 } I �+ ' '�. ; - . _ « rt�` n � N '�/' r • ....«.; / . :_- .+ � � _�♦ ^.+c ^x.� ' , }� t, Y. . j�, }"' �. . � �y� , , . p pj tt f � � . � .�i ,.». ��-� . ; � 4 � � � !x;. .«. v�+ ` 3 F�� j • . . . "._ . ._: , � , . ti : ...� 2 r.e- •as. ' . ,J;i .-..: . n'^ wf� w� � • t < �' ��1yy � ° ' ; � . ., . + =�:w+.. i '""y. ..,.w -� �K�' � �! �"'�'�` . K... +Yrin ,r = ,. . � „�„� -1 • *.,e„-. +.y. ' .. . a � � � - j . . . . �. . . _. . ,.i+w.� � .t^'^a ;, ` y, Y' �. � x , [� — _ b � ._.i.». � � , T - ' � 1- ' ` . . � . ... . i •s� q`, F .. � - �� "�..:.'b' ' y. ` � � ti'd�i, ' 3` ' .Mr. i � � y K� a ..,., . , _. ` .-e e -. � .. �z � � � � . . � „ �'� , , M.r.. t w �� S, �i�, .. ...+..� F M!.e, .:. -+ � +'•. „r�.,,. � +`..w.e.« � .. . �'.... . f�..: .., a,,.y., s. � Info►mation Technology-GIS � � � °�� '�°�°��S Coal Mine Hazards �" �. "=��` __._ cM:��. aq�r, �rr —..""'�'�"S "'�,t��r�';� '� ;s :� � � �r � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 11-3 December 2011 wrr � � � � Figure 11.2 Overlay of Critical Facilities with Coal Mine Hazards Areas � �,� �� r%�s } HA2ARD CONDITION ,� . ; ;� �, � � �\� CGoI MIM SYYHitY '�,� , —� .,,� �►�� , � � ! �Moo�v,� � � ' ' Pf • UNGIASSlFIED � . : ��.._. �. ; . . � f •,.,, . � � I � ` 1 '�` ,� t � y .._"1� ��`"`---., 'rl� �.� � �t1 .�-ij `"�-` i ,,�� ; � ``�'' "�' , _ ! �Ir ~.� J"'�`" '� � � i.1'1 � Ilt . t,, �• # ��`� '�' � � . f� 1;\ � i ��,.1 �, +�: �_.i 1, � �i„�r � �' R i '�` + t i w, ;. ; ..P�" '�,� • - .�►_----,---_.��z.r . +� � l�l. �,, ? ` ',�' ♦ � �_, � f.�� i �' 14 _. '---=-'t � � �--� � .�%' � .� + � ,.r ,R ! � ! �� ` �: � � r---- �--� '�- �--, � , � ��, � � ! f "_—'-� ,�17' ��;� �1 � f � ri'��'��'��4� i '� Y; � ! �-_..--`' ,r� � � � ! � � , �� ,i, ,� , r�' � � � � � � ._.._..._.._.._ ��, ��. � � � � � InfortnaticnTechnology-GIS r----t �' Police Department ,� Schools � P�tnted on o3/o3E2oto �..__„� City of R�nton v� oah s«,ruu:c�y a R«,c«�.Ki�c�mr � Fire Stations • Metro Plant '��go��w«+.�9,�.��a � Seatde Water Li�e v� u swver.ocusoy,ana b ab.o on t�.oea hrarervWcn ��„��.,,�„�,�„�„,�„� �: Artny Reserve Center S� � C�I Producdon Welis plympic Pi�lines ��r�'� Wate�Utility Resenroir `� —�� ;�'�+�`�'�, �^, (`�;. �-- Nigh Pressure Gas Li�e -� -.�-�-��--� •�� ] Valley Medical Genter ,� � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 11-4 December 2011 "�` � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � i e E � � � e � i � � � � � � � � � � Table 11.1 Coal Mine Hazards Mitigation Action Items Plan Goals Addressed �o a � v v �, � � v � L v 0/ � a�+ � a � a � N � Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline � � a � t �— �' � �, 'a 3 H o �, ` � � � � � Source ¢ � at^ � � °' � `9 t? `n" i C LL � � i 'O 3 J � = �o � v�'i c�o f° a o a u� a z a` � Coal Mine Hazard Mitigation Action Items � Require geological or geotechnical engineering I Long-Term studies before permitting new construction in Community and Economic Ongoing X X X X LOC81 , #1 identified coal mine hazard areas. Development FundS , r2 1 I City of Renton Hazar� Mitigat��n �lan 11-5 �ecem�e • 1 � +rr. +r�rr � ,�„ 12.0 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS � 12.1 introduction �w �r For mitigation planning, hazardous materials may be defined simply as any � materials that may have negative impacts on human health. Exposure to these � materials may result in injury, sickness or death.The impacts of hazardous materials may be short-term with negative effects immediately, in seconds, `�"` minutes or hours or they may be long-term with negative effects starting in days, �` weeks, or in some cases years after exposure. �r �, Hazardous materials vary widely in their toxicity to humans. Some hazardous materials are highly toxic and even brief exposures to small amounts may be �" dangerous or fatal. Other hazardous materials are much less toxic and negative '�'" effects may occur only after exposure to large amounts over long time periods. �r The technical term "toxic," which is widely used to describe hazardous materials is � simply a synonym for the more common terms "poison" or "poisonous." +�r• Hazardous chemicals are widely used in heavy industry, manufacturing, '"�'` agriculture, mining,the oil and gas industry,forestry, transportation, medical `�► facilities, and commercial, public and residential buildings. There are literally � hundreds of thousands of chemicals that may be hazardous to human health to ;��, some extent. A typical single family home may contain dozens of potentially hazardous materials including: fuels, paints, solvents, cleaning chemicals, � pesticides, herbicides, medicines and others. � � For mitigation planning purposes, small quantities of slightly or moderately �,,. hazardous materials being used by end users are rarely the focus of interest. � Rather, interest is focused primarily on larger quantities of hazardous materials in industrial use and on hazardous materials being transported, where the potential �""` for accidental spills is high. Situations involving extremely hazardous materials or � large quantities of hazardous materials in locations where accidents may result in � significant public health risk are of special concern. � The toxicity of particular hazardous materials is an important measure of the � potential impact of hazardous materials on affected communities for mitigation �"' planning purposes. Other characteristics of hazardous materials, especially the wr quantity of material and the ease of dispersal, may be as important as, or more ,,,,��, important than, toxicity in governing the level of potential threat to a community. � For example, a small quantity of a very toxic solid hazardous material in a research laboratory poses a much smaller level of risk than a large quantity of a less toxic '"� gaseous material in an industrial site upwind from a populated area. � +�r wrr• +�w' City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-1 December 2011 � � � � � The severity of any hazardous material release incident for an affected community depends on several factors: � � a) the toxicity of the hazardous material, �r b) the quantity of the hazardous material released, �, c) the dispersal characteristics of the hazardous material, �„�i► d) the local conditions such as wind direction and topography, and � e) the efficacy of response and recovery actions. �` � 12.2 Effects of Hazardous Materials on Humans �,; � There are three principal modes of human exposure to hazardous materials: � 1. inhalation of gaseous or particulate materials via the respiratory � (breathing) process, � 2. ingestion of hazardous materials via contaminated food or water and � 3. direct contact with skin or eyes. ,,�,, Exposure to hazardous materials can result in a wide range of negative health � effects on humans. Hazardous materials are generally classified by their health '"� effects. The most common classes of hazardous materials are summarized below. �w � Flammable materials are substances where fire is the primary threat, although explosions and chemical effects listed below may also occur. Common � examples include gasoline, diesel fuel, and propane. ''�` � Explosives are materials where explosion is the primary threat, although fires and chemical effects listed below may also occur. Common examples include � dynamite and other explosives used in construction or demolition. '"�` vrr Irritants are substances that cause inflammation or chemical burns of the eyes, nose,throat, lungs, skin or other tissues of the body in which they come � in contact. Examples of irritants are strong acids such as sulfuric or nitric acid. '"�` � Asphyxiants are substances that interfere with breathing. Chemical asphyxiants are substances that prevent the body from using oxygen or � otherwise interfere with the breathing process. Common examples are carbon "�` monoxide and cyanides. Simple asphyxiants cause injury or death by displacing �r the oxygen necessary for life. For example, Nitrogen is a normally harmless gas � that constitutes about 78%of the atmosphere. However, nitrogen release in a � confined space may result in asphyxiation by displacing oxygen. � � � +� City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-2 December 2011 "�` � � �rr. �1ir' +�r► � Anesthetics and Narcotics are substances which act on the body by depressing the central nervous system. Symptoms include drowsiness, weakness, fatigue �` and loss of coordination, which may lead to unconsciousness, paralysis of the �" respiratory system and death. Examples include hydrocarbon and organic �r compounds. � Hazardous materials may also have a wide variety of more specialized impacts on � human health. Other types of toxic effects are briefly summarized in Table 12.1. �rr �,,. Table 12.1 Other Types of Hazardous Materials �r �r Type of Hazardous Effects on Humans ,,,�,, Material � Hepatotoxin Liver damage Nephrotoxin Kidney damage �""` Neurotoxin Neurological (nerve) damage "'■'"` Carcinogen May result in cancer � Mutagen May produce changes in the genetic material of cells .,,�„ Teratogen May have adverse affects on sperm, ova or fetal tissue � Radioactive materials May result directly in radiation sickness at high exposure levels or act as carcinogen, mutagen or teratogen � Infectious substances Biological materials such as bacteria or viruses that may `�"` cause illness or death � � Much of the information above was summarized from Chapter Six of the Handbook of Chemical Hazard Analysis Proceduresl. The first few chapters ofthis � handbook contain a concise summary of many of the technical aspects of '�""" hazardous materials. These chapters may be useful to readers seeking a more +�+` technical introduction to the nomenclature and science of hazardous materials. � ,�, 12.3 Classification System and Emergency Response Protocols � A standardized system is used to classify and identify hazardous materials. The '"�" Emergency Response Guidebook (A Guidebook for First Responders During the � Initial Phase of a Dangerous Goods/Hazardous Material Incident2) is an extremely „�, useful reference book that outlines the classification system, provides � standardized first response protocols and detailed reference sheets for the most common classes of hazardous materials. � �•► Hazardous material releases are predominantly accidental results of traffic �,,, accidents, equipment failures or human errors. In rare cases, hazardous material �, releases may result from deliberate actions of sabotage or terrorism. � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-3 December 2011 �rr � � � � First responders for hazardous material incidents are generally public safety personnel (police or fire). The standard protocols for first responders are briefly ' � summarized below, as garnered from the Emergency Response Guidebook. �` v�r The primary guidance for first responders is to: r„�,r a) resist rushing in, � b) approach the incident site from upwind, uphill or upstream, and `'"�'` cj stay clear of all spills, vapors, fumes and smoke. � � Upon approaching the incident site, a three-step procedure is recommended: +�r 1. Investigate—from a safe distance try to determine if there is a leak, smoke, "'�" visible fumes or vapors, which direction the wind is blowing, if there are �v victims or potential victims, and if those victims can be rescued without ,,�, entering the atmosphere. � 2. Identify the material—from a safe distance, with binoculars or by a „�,, representative, obtain the name of the material, or the four-digit ID number from a placard or orange panel. � � 3. Isolate—using the DOT Emergency Response Guidebook guideline for the product, create a safe zone around the incident area to keep the public, � non-responders and non-equipped personnel a safe distance away from '"�" the hazard. +�rr+� � Identification of hazardous materials can be accomplished by finding: � a) the four-digit ID number on a placard or orange panel, ,,,�,, b) the four-digit ID number on a shipping document or package, or � c) the name of the material on a placard, shipping document or package. '� � Once identified by ID number or name material specific information can be ;;� located using the ID number or name index. The procedures and precautions outlined in the guide for the identified class of material are then carefully � followed. For each class of material,the guides have critical information on "'�` potential hazards, suggested evacuation distances for small and large spills and � recommended emergency response actions to include first aid. For further � technical details see the Emergency Response Guidebook. �, The emergency response to hazardous material incidents typically involves first � responders (local fire departments) and then specialized emergency response "� teams if the severity of the incident warrants such a response. � � First responders are generally public safety staff trained in basic procedures for the initial response to hazardous materials incidents. The responsibilities of first � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-4 December 2011 ''� � � � wrr � �I�r' � responders include securing the incident scene and making a preliminary assessment of the potential severity of the incident and the level of threat, if any, � to persons in and near the hazardous materials incident area. Emergency response � teams are specialized teams, composed primarily of public safety staff, with �,,, higher-level training and more specialized equipment for dealing with hazardous �, materials incidents. '� Response planning for hazardous materials incidents is often characterized by a "�"'" three level response classification. The distinction between Levels I, II, and III ww depends on: `� a) class of hazardous material, "r" b) size of container, � c) fire/explosion potential, � � d) leak severity and container integrity, and ,�,; e) threats to life safety. � Level I Responses are those incidents readily controlled or stabilized by � first responders. The HazMat Emergency Response Team personnel .r may provide technical assistance via telephone or on-site assistance, ,,�,�; but full response by an Emergency Response Team is not required. �""" Level II Responses are those incidents that require response from a �r HazMat Emergency Response Team for control or stabilization of the ,,,�,, spill. Depending on the event the response level may be 2-4 personnel, � or even a small response team of 6-8 personnel for identification of the material and guidance on appropriate response actions. � „�„ level III Responses are those incidents that require special resources, including one or more full Emergency Response Teams and possibly � other outside agencies for support. �rr �►° 12.4 Statutory and Regulatory Context � � Hazardous Materials—General Provisions are covered in Chapter 27 of the International Fire Code. Additional restrictions and requirements for particular � classes of hazardous materials are referenced in additional chapters. �r► � The manufacture, storage, use,transportation, and disposal of hazardous �,, materials are subject to a myriad of federal, state, and local regulations. In the context of mitigation planning and emergency response, we focus on reporting � requirements for chemicals subject to mandatory risk management planning and �'` extremely hazardous substances subject to additional reporting and planning � requirements. � �rrr City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-5 December 2011 vrr � � � wi� Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act Amendments was designed to prevent � accidental releases of hazardous substances. The rule establishes a list of ""�` chemicals and threshold quantities that identify facilities subject to subsequent � accident prevention regulations.The listed substances have the greatest potential � to pose the greatest hazard to public health and the environment in the event of ��;, an accidental release. � Hazardous materials may be released to the environment during manufacturing `�"` and other ongoing processes or accidentally. Certain types of businesses are v�► required to report such releases annually for a specified list of chemicals. There � are additional reporting and planning requirements for materials deemed to be extremely hazardous. � � 12.5 Fixed Site Hazardous Materials Locations in Renton � � There are over 15 facilities within City limits that have significant hazardous � chemical quantities. These facilities store,transport or use these chemical in a variety of inethods. Any release of these products could trigger a significant `� response. A major release could activate the EOC,trigger evacuations and `�" sheltering plans, and involve more than one department or jurisdiction. � � 12.6 Hazardous Materials Transport: Truck Shipments, Rail Shipments and Pipelines � Hazardous materials may be transported once or many times during their "life ""�" cycle" of raw materials, manufacturing, incorporation in other products, wholesale `w� and retail trade, use, waste disposal and recycling. The transport of hazardous �► materials may be local, across a state, across the country or internationally. ;� Shipment of hazardous materials by truck within or near Renton includes �' shipments on Interstates 5 and 405, along with shipments on local streets. ''�" � The main rail line between Portland and Seattle passes through Tukwila,just west ,;�,; of Renton. Current average daily train counts are 60 trains per day on the segment between Auburn and Seattle. Many of these trains contain shipments of � hazardous materials. "'�` � There are three types of major fuel pipeline systems in or near Renton. �, 1) The Williams high pressure natural gas transmission line which runs from � British Columbia,through Washington and Oregon to California. ;,,� 2) The natural gas distribution systems run by utilities in most cities. � 3) The BP/Olympic liquid fuels pipeline that carries most of the gasoline and fuels �'�" used in the region, including jet fuel for Sea-Tac Airport. � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-6 December 2011 � � � �r � � �rtrr The Williams gas transmission line runs north-south through Issaquah and Renton. '"""' The BP/Olympic liquid fuels pipeline runs directly through Renton. Renton also has '� a natural gas distribution system and pumping station within the City operated by � Puget Sound Energy (PSE). PSE also operates a large underground 1.5 million �r gallon propane-only storage facility. `�"' The natural gas pipeline systems of local gas utilities, including the Renton system, �"' almost always follow road and street patterns because of established utility rights �w. of way and the need to connect with each building served. For areas served by „�,,, natural gas,the local street network is essentially identical to the natural gas �r distribution pipe network. "'�'"` The propane storage facility lies in a valley in close proximity to apartments, � homes, office buildings, major power lines and a major transportation corridor. A �„ significant retease could easily reach the I-405 area as well as the commercial � district near Talbot and Grady. The release of even one 40,000 gallon tank is significant, and there are 36 in-service tanks present. A catastrophic release could "�"`� liberate many tanks resulting in a huge dispersal area. �r �r Overall, the safety record of natural gas pipelines is good with relatively few „�, significant accidents. Natural gas is not toxic (i.e., not poisonous) but it can be an asphyxiant if it displaces oxygen in an enclosed space. Natural gas burns readily � when ignited, but only when gas concentrations are between 4% and 15% in air. In """'� its pure state natural gas is both colorless and odorless. The strong odor normally � associated with natural gas is an odorant called mercaptan, deliberately ,,,r,� introduced at low concentrations to serve as a warning of the presence of natural :�,, gas. Mercaptan is generally added to natural gas at the local distribution level by local gas utilities. � � Fires and/or explosions from natural gas leaks in pipelines are rare. In part, the �r rarity of fires and/or explosions is due to the fact that natural gas is about one- ,;,,�,,, third less dense than ordinary air. Leaking natural gas does not accumulate near �r the ground or"pond" in low-lying areas (as heavier gases such as liquefied propane gas or gasoline fumes may do). Instead, leaking natural gas rises rapidly `""'" and is dissipated by dilution in the atmosphere. The fires and/or explosions that �►° do occur from natural gas leaks are generally in buildings where the confined �,,, space allows leaking gas to accumulate until ignited. � Pipeline breaks due to natural causes may occur due to landslides or earthquakes. � Earthquake induced pipe breaks for natural gas transmission lines are most likely '"'�` to occur in areas of soft soils subject to liquefaction and/or lateral spreading which �r cause significant pipe displacements. The most likely locations for such breaks „�„ during an earthquake are on slopes of soft ground near where pipelines cross � rivers or streams. � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-7 December 2011 �r � � � � Smaller i elines are fre uenti dama ed b di in without callin for a locator � p�p q Y g Y gg g g to where the pipeline location. Most breaks of this type occur in local distribution '"�"'`° lines. Pipeline breaks can also be caused by deliberate acts of sabotage or � terrorism. Although pipelines are not symbolic targets with political, historical and ,,,,�, cultural significance,they are potential targets for terrorist actions. Major pipeline ,� breaks could disrupt gas service over wide areas and result in significant economic impacts. � � Natural gas utilities and local emergency responders are generally well prepared wr to deal with natural gas breaks, because such incidents occur relatively frequently � with well-standardized response procedures. Evacuations for natural gas pipeline ruptures are generally limited to the immediate area of the break. � � 12.7 Summary and Mitigation Strategies ''�� 12.7.1 Planning and Response ,� Effective mitigation planning and emergency response planning can help reduce � the number or frequency of hazardous materials incidents as well as reduce the '�' severity of incidents that occur. In combination,these benefits can significantly � reduce the negative impacts of hazardous materials incidents on affected „�, communities. The genera) principles of mitigation planning, emergency response planning(and training) are well standardized and practiced by King County and the � City of Renton. �` � Perhaps the single most critical factor in enhancing both mitigation planning and � emergency response planning is specific inventory awareness for major hazardous � materials sites within each jurisdiction. Specific inventory awareness means detailed knowledge of the types, quantities and locations of all sites in a � jurisdiction with significant quantities of hazardous materials. What constitutes a ''�'` significant quantity varies depending on the toxicity of the material,the dispersal � characteristics and the nature and population of nearby areas likely to be affected. ,,,� The complexity and overload of information for hazardous materials is � compounded by numerous labeling, placarding and classification systems, with `'�' countless cross references to guide numbers, material safety reports and so on. "�` Because of this vast amount of complex information, effective mitigation planning � and emergency response planning must occur before an incident occurs, not after. ,�, During an incident,the most effective response is impossible to achieve if emergency personnel are thumbing through databases trying to figure out what � hazardous materials are at a given location and what the appropriate response `"�"' precautions and protocols are for the specific materials involved. � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-8 December 2011 �' � �. wrrr �` � +11�r' ,� Specific inventory awareness means that for every site with hazardous materials of sufficient toxicity, dispersal characteristics and quantities to pose a significant � fife safety risk to on-site employees and nearby residents must be identified in '"�" advance. Ideally, Renton should have specific inventory awareness of every �wr significant fixed site in its jurisdiction. Similarly, each jurisdiction should have �,, specific inventory awareness of the most toxic, most common, large volume shipments of hazardous materials within and throughout the jurisdiction. For each � hazardous material deemed to pose a significant life safety threat, the necessary "'� chemical data, response protocols, initial isolation distances, protection distances � for small and large spills, and all other data necessary for safe and effective � response should be compiled and readily available before incidents occur. � 12.7.2 Mitigation Measures � � Specific inventory awareness is one cornerstone of reducing the potential for w�r negative impacts from hazardous materials incidents by helping to optimize �,, emergency and response planning. The other cornerstone is pro-active mitigation actions to reduce the number and severity of hazardous materials incidents. A � dedicated staff position within the Fire & Emergency Services Department is �""" responsible for the inspection of facilities that store, handle,transport, �r manufacture or use hazardous materials for compliance with International Fire �,�,,, Code requirements, and to serve as a technical advisor at hazardous material �r incidents. ""'� The most common mitigation measures for reducing the potential of damaging '�" hazardous materials incidents are briefly summarized below. � „�. 12.7.2.1 Physical Safety Measures '� The tanks, storage containers and transfer systems (valves, pipes etc.) for ""�`" hazardous materials are frequently subject to damage in earthquakes, with a � correspondingly high potential for accidental releases. Proper seismic design, �,,, bracing and anchoring of storage systems for hazardous materials can greatly � reduce the potential of accidental releases during earthquakes. Bracing and anchoring measures for storage containers and transfer systems (e.g., piping) are r"'" often relatively inexpensive, with a large improvement in seismic performance. '�'' For small quantities of materials stored in bottles or jugs on shelving, bracing � shelving and restraining containers so that they do not fall in earthquakes are �,, particularly important. �' Over time the storage containers and other material handling elements for ""' hazardous materials may change many times. In some cases, later modifications wr.� may not be designed to the same seismic standards as the original installation or �,,. later modifications may compromise the seismic stability of the original � '�+` City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-9 December 2011 �Irr � � � � installation.Therefore, periodic review and inspections of seismic design, bracing � and anchoring are highly recommended for all hazardous material facilities. � For facilities located in mapped flood plains or other areas subject to floodwaters ''� there are two important physical safety measures. First, any containers subject to � floating should be properly restrained. In many floods, improperly restrained ,�, tanks break free and float downstream, with high potential for negative impacts including fires and accidental releases of hazardous materials. Second, special '� precautions should be taken with water-reactive materials. Such materials should ''"�'� never be stored in low-elevation areas subject to flooding or in locations subject � to water from storm water drainage or plumbing failures in a facility. � �rr� 12.7.2.2 Standard Operating Procedures � Standard operating procedures for storing,transporting and handling hazardous � materials should be strictly enforced at all facilities. Appropriate training for all � staff, with review courses and appropriate protective gear is essential for safety. ,,� Rigorous inspection and enforcement of hazardous materials regulations (federal, state and local) are an important part of the overall process of ensuring safety. � � 12.7.2.3 Mitigation and Emergency Response Planning '� � Effective pre-event mitigation planning and emergency response planning can � help reduce the severity of hazardous material incidents. From the mitigation planning perspective, specific inventory awareness of the types and quantities of �` hazardous materials present at each facility is particularly important. Local fire `�" departments and other responders should be thoroughly familiar with the specific v�rr inventory at each facility containing hazardous materials and with the appropriate ,�, response protocols for each hazardous material. First responders and emergency response teams must both have the full range of protective gear and equipment � necessary for their respective roles in responding to hazardous materials `� incidents. "''�` �ww�► Emergency response planning should include thorough training in all aspects of � hazardous materials response, including appropriate response protocols (procedures, protective gear and equipment). Frequent refresher training and � frequent exercises (both tabletop and full field exercises) are essential for safe and �° effective emergency response. Training exercise should include both first v�rir responders and emergency response teams,to help ensure appropriate �,,, coordination of efforts during actual hazardous materials incidents. rwi► The following table,Table 12.2, contains hazardous materials mitigation action �' items from the Master Action Items Table in Chapter 4. "'�` � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-10 December 2011 '� `�II1M' �,; � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Table 12.2 Hazardous Materials Mitigation Action Items Plan Goals Addressed -a �a a ° � � � @ � o � H � � a�, � a � a v � � Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline 3 � o � ,� .a � °C � c Source a a � � � a+ ,�,,- " c� •� � _ �i L° c � -a :� � � a o 3 c 3 +�+ � t�0 � v�'1 f�'p � a o a u� d Z a � , Hazmat Incident Mitigation Action Items Short-Term Ensure that first responders have readily available LOCeI #1 site-specific knowledge of hazardous chemical Fire&Emergency Services 1 year X X x Funds inventories in Renton. Local Funds, Enhance emergency planning,emergency response Short-Term training and equipment to address hazardous Fire&Emergency Services,Police, Ongoing X X x Grant #2 materials incidents. Public Works FU�ds (SHSP, UASI) City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-11 December 2011 � � � � References ,,,� 1. Handbook of Chemical Analysis Procedures, Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. ""'�` Department of Transportation, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Government '� Printing Office, 1988. �+ � 2. 2008 Emergency Response Guidebook (A Guidebook for First Responders During the Initial Phase of a Dangerous Goods/Hazardous Material Incident), developed jointly by the U.S. � Department of Transportation,Transport Canada, and the Secretariat of Transport and '"�"' Communications of Mexico, 2008. '�' � � � � � � � � � � r�r► � � � � � � � i�r► � � � � � � � � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-12 December 2011 "�' � � � � � wrr ,;�, 13.0 TERRORISM � 13.1 Overview � �rr For mitigation planning, terrorism is broadly inclusive of a wide range of deliberate ,�, malevolent acts intended to damage buildings, infrastructure or to result in deaths and injuries. The probability of international terrorist organizations targeting Renton, is not "91'� zero, but is low. Renton is certainly subject to deliberate malevolent acts from many �' sources including vandals, mentally disturbed individuals, domestic terrorist groups (e.g., ,,,� eco-terrorists), disgruntled residents and past or present employees. � The range of possible malevolent actions includes vandalism, arson, explosions and armed �"` attacks as well as the use of chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear materials. �rr Chemical attacks include deliberate release of on-site chemicals as well as deliberate �,, dispersal of transported hazardous materials. Biological attacks include deliberate dispersal of biologically active materials (e.g., anthrax) capable of causing sickness or � death. Radiological attacks include deliberate dispersal of radioactive materials, via dirty � bombs (conventional explosives laced with radioactive materials) or other methods. �rr Nuclear attacks include explosion of nuclear devices and the radioactive fallout from such � explosions. �"�' The range of possible malevolent actions also includes cyber-terrorism or deliberate �` disruption/damage of computer systems and data. Especially for utility systems, cyber- � terrorism can also result in loss of service due to disruption/damage to automated � Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems widely used by utilities. �`" 13.2 Threat Spectrum � �,; For purposes of mitigation planning we will consider three sources of terrorist (malevolent) actions: outsiders, insiders and hackers. In each case we consider three �' levels of attack.The levels reflect the number of individuals involved, the level of technical "'�*" knowledge or expertise and the level of equipment or tools available.This threat � spectrum is summarized below in Table 13.1. +rr In Table 13.1, outsiders refers to anyone who is not an employee of the facility under `"�'�` potential terrorist attack. Outsiders could be vandals, disturbed individuals or members of irr domestic or international organized groups. For Renton, the most likely terrorist or ,�,, malevolent acts are minor vandalism or actions by disturbed individuals. Deliberate terrorist actions are most likely from domestic groups, including eco-terrorists and are � unlikely to be from international organizations. �r �.r In Table 13.1, insiders refers to anyone who is an employee of the target under potential �, attack.Acts of vandalism,theft and other relatively minor actions are common. Larger scale malevolent acts are less common but still occur with some frequency. Such acts '�` include larger scale damage, arson, explosives and contamination of water supplies. �rrr �' +r' City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 13-1 December 2011 � � � � � � In Table 13.1, computer hackers refers to individuals or groups using remote access to � explore,vandalize or destroy websites, computer databases and such. For utility systems, hackers can also impact SCADA systems and may affect system operations directly. "�" � Table 13.1 ,,�y Threat Spectrum for Terrorist Actions �' Adversar Number of Level of Knowledge Equipment Weapons Objectives v�Ir y Adversaries Toots Extensive knowledge of hand tools, handguns or automatic Extensive damage to critical v�r security systems, Outsider:high level 1 to small group facilities and modes of Power tools, weapons,incendiary devices, facilities,widespread attack vehicles explosives,contaminants damage or casualties 'r�v Limited knowledge of hand tools, � security systems, ower tools, handguns,incendiary devices, Damage or casualties Outsider:medium level 1 to 3 facilities and modes of P explosives,contaminants attack vehicle `�` Minimal knowledge of � security systems, Vandalism,damage or Outsider:low level 1 or 2 facilities and modes of hand tools None casualties � attack Extensive knowledge of On site tools, � handguns or automatic Insider:high level � security systems, chemicals, Weapons,incendiary devices, Damage or casualties � facilities,operations, equipment, explosives,contaminants policies and procedures vehicles � Moderate knowledge of On site tools, � security systems, chemicals, handguns,incendiary devices, Dama e or casualties Insider:medium Ievel � facilities,operations, equipment, explosives,contaminants g � policies and procedures vehicles � Limited knowledge of On site tools, security systems, chemicals, Vandalism,damage or � Insider:low level � facilities,operations, equipment, handgun or none casualties policies and procedures vehicles �' Full knowledge of IT Sophisticated Destruction of data and � Hacker: high level 1 to small group infrastructure,security hacker tools N/A systems,business systems,SCADA and methods operations `�' s stems Moderate knowledge of Moderately Denial of servcie or `'�' IT infrastructure,security sophisticated N/A disru tion of some business Hacker: medium level 1 or 2 systems,SCADA hacker tools P � services s stems and methods Limited knowledge of IT �' Hacker: low level � infrastructure,security N/A N/A Minor cyber-vandalism to systems,SCADA non-critical business areas � s tems � The probable impacts of terrorist events on the City of Renton are summarized below in �r Table 13.2. For Renton, the most likely terrorist events are very small scale events ;,;�,, (vandalism or minor damage events by insiders, local outsiders or computer hacking events) rather than major terrorist actions by outsiders. � � � �' � � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 13-2 December 2011 `'�" � � � sw✓ � � Table 13.2 � Probable Impacts of Terrorist Incidents on the City of Renton � „�: Inventor Probable Im acts Portion of Renton affected Localized impacts for minor incidents, large portions or the entire City for � extremely unlikely major incidents. +�r Localized impacts to a single building or a few nearby buildings, except Buildings ,�, for extremely unlikely major incidents. Streets within Renton Some incidents may include temporary street closures. � Roads to/from Renton Some incidents may include temporary road closures. � Electric power Some incidents may include temporary loss of electric power in localized ;,�,, arts of Renton or for the entire Cit . Some incidents may include temporary loss of utilities in localized parts of � Renton or for the entire City. Major damage to water or wastewater Other Utilities v�r,r treatment plant could result in full or partial loss of service for extended �rr time periods. Casualties Ma�or events ma result in si nificant casualties (deaths and injuries). � +ir► 13.3 Mitigation Actions � +yr Evaluation of the threat of terrorist or other malevolent actions generally includes several steps: `'""" 1) determine critical facilities and other risk targets, � 2) identify the specific adverse consequences to be avoided, �„ 3) review the likelihood of malevolent actions, 4) evaluate existing countermeasures and � 5) implement a prioritized risk reduction plan. �r �,,, Critical facilities in Renton include key elements of the water system, electric power � substations, other facilities with hazardous materials (cf. Chapter 12) and important public facilities such as police and fire stations. �r+� �rr Important non-municipal facilities include the Boeing facilities and the major regional ,�,,, wastewater, natural gas and liquid fuels lines which pass through or near Renton. � The most likely adverse consequences are vandalism and minor destructive actions by �'" outsiders, insiders or hackers.The evaluation of existing countermeasures should include: � �, 1) Phvsical securitv measures-fencing, locks and key control, structural integrity of critical assets, detection capabilities such as intrusion detection systems, alarms, � operational alarms for utility systems and general security/access. � � 2) Cvber securitv measures- protection measures for business/operational computer � systems and SCADA systems, fire walls, security policies and protocols, vendor access, system diagnostics, etc. � � � �+` City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 13-3 December 2011 � �wr � � � � 3) Securitv procedures and policies- personnel security, physical security, key and ,� badge control, system control and operational data, chemical and other vendor deliveries, and security and emergency response training, exercises and drills. """'` � For Renton,vigilance and modest upgrades to existing physical security, cyber security ;,�, and security procedures and policies are probably all that are reasonably required. � The potential impacts of terrorism or other malevolent deliberate actions in Renton can '�` also be mitigated by improving emergency planning and emergency response capabilities. � For some types of events, such as fires or explosions, the emergency response actions are � self-evident and emergency responders are well trained for dealing with such situations. Other types of actions such as release of radiological materials, bioterrorism,or �' contamination of water or food supplies may not be immediately recognized. For such v�r► types of actions, close cooperation with public health officials and awareness of the ,,�,, possibility of deliberate actions are important. Such situations also commonly require � specialized expertise and equipment to detect and identify the radiological, biological or chemical materials used in an attack. Emergency response plans should be updated and "'�'` expanded, as necessary,to include protocols for public notifications and information v� about appropriate public responses such as shelter in place or evacuation. �; The following table,Table 13.3 Terrorism Mitigation Action Items, contains terrorism � mitigation action items from the Master Action Items Table in Chapter 4. '"�'` � � � � � v� � � v� � � � � � � � � � � +w� City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 13-4 December 2011 "�`` '� � : � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Table 13.3 Terrorism Mitigation Adion Items Plan Goals Addressed � a � � � y � 3 v a � o. � �+ °° a � o � Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline � �- ° :• _'' � u oc �, 'a Q � a ` � � � � � Source � � a,�,, c c �. a`�i o � � a � a u�i a ° � a � � z Terrorism Mitigation Action Items Local Funds, Short-Term Enhance emergency planning,emergency response Grant #1 training and equipment to address potential Fire&Emergency Services,Police Ongoing X X X X x Funds incidents of terrorism. (SHSP, UASI) Local Funds, Upgrade physical security detection and response Long-Term capability for critical facilities,including water Community Services,Police Ongoing X X X X Grant #i Funds system. (SHSP, UASI) Long-Term Evaluate and implement hardening measures for 5-10 LoCal Police,Community Services X X X X #2 highly vulnerable critical facilities. Years Futlds Local Funds, Long-Term Identify and establish secure surveillance cameras Police,Community Services,Public 5 Years X X x Grant #3 and monitoring at all critical infrastructure. Works Funds (SHSP, UASI) Local Chemical,Biological,Radiological,Nuclear and Funds, Long-Term Explosives(CBRNE)Detection and security police,Community Services 5 Years X X x Grant #4 devices/elements integrated at critical city Funds infrastructure. (SHSP, UASI) City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 13-5 December 2011 � Z Q � � � Q � X � � � � W Q � � � o Z N W � V� N a O O � a � a a `" a � a O Z � � � �► � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �► � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �► � � � � � � FEMA FUNDING POSSIBILITIES FOR RENTON ,,�,, � Overview v� For public entities, such as the City of Renton, FEMA funding possibilities fall into two "�" main categories: `"� • The post-disaster Public Assistance Program which covers not less than 75% of '"�'` eligible emergency response and restoration (repair) costs for public entities who v� suffer damages in a presidentially-declared disaster. The Public Assistance � Program also may fund mitigation projects for facilities damaged in the declared � event. � • Mitigation grant programs (either pre-disaster or post-disaster) which typically � cover up to 75%of mitigation costs. � � FEMA Public Assistance Program `� � The objective of FEMA's Public Assistance (PA) Grant Program is to provide assistance to � State,Tribal and local governments, and certain types of private nonprofit organizations, so that communities can quickly respond to and recover from major disasters or "�` emergencies. "'�` �rr+ Through the PA Program, FEMA provides supplemental Federal disaster grant assistance � for debris removal, emergency protective measures, and the repair, replacement or restoration of disaster-damaged, publicly owned facilities and the facilities of certain `� private non-profit (PNP) organizations. The PA Program also encourages protection of "�`` these damaged facilities from future events by providing assistance for hazard mitigation � measures during the recovery process. � For Renton, PA assistance would be available only for future presidentially-declared � disaster events which resulted in damage to Renton facilities. Further details of FEMA's ""'�"` PA programs are available at: `'�' http•//www fema.�ov/�overnment/�rant/pa/index.shtm `'� � FEMA Mitigation Funding Sources � � FEMA has several mitigation grant programs which provide federal funds to supplement `� local funds for specified types of mitigation activities. The FEMA grant programs typically �r provide 75%funding with a 25% local match required. In very limited cases, FEMA grant „�, programs may provide 90%or 100%funding. � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan A1-1 April 2010 `�' � � �rr �rr � � � The five primary FEMA mitigation grant programs are summarized below: � Hazard Risk Mitigation +rr► Grant Program Frequency Mitigation Assessments Projects Hazards Plannin `� Hazard Miti ation Grant Pro ram Post-Disaster YES YES YES ALL � Pre-Disaster Miti ation Annual YES NO YES ALL Flood Miti ation Assistance Annual YES NO YES Flood � Re etitive Flood Claims Pro ram Annual NO NO YES Flood � Severe Re etitive Loss Pro ram Annual NO NO YES Flood � These FEMA grant programs have specific eligibility requirements and application � deadlines. All of these grant programs have specific requirements including definitions of "'� ineligible projects which are excluded from the grant programs. All mitigation projects � (but not planning projects or risk assessments) must be cost-effective, which means that � a benefit-cost analysis using FEMA software and following FEMA guidance must � demonstrate a benefit-cost ratio >1.0. � These grant programs are not entitlement programs, but rather are competitive grant `� programs which require strict adherence to the eligibility and application requirements � and robust documentation. Robust documentation is especially critical for the Pre- ;,,�, Disaster Mitigation grant program which is nationally competitive. � The Hazard Miti ation Grant Pro ram is initiated within a g g given state only after a '`�"' Presidential Declaration of Disaster;thus,there is no fixed schedule. A given state may �.r have several declarations in a given year or go several years without any declarations. �,�,,, Specific application deadlines are established for HMGP funds generated by each disaster ,�, declaration. '�`�"` The other four mitigation grant programs are annual programs with specific deadlines, �" which vary from year to year. For FY 2009 grants, the application deadline for all four �.rr programs was December 19, 2008. For FY 2010 and later years, deadlines are subject to ,�„ change, but would likely be similar to the FY 2009 deadline. Please note that,these applications are reviewed and ranked by Washington State Emergency Management staff � before they go to FEMA for review. Washington State deadlines are typically about six �"'' weeks before the FEMA deadlines. � y,r,,, The three flood-only grant programs—Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA), Repetitive ,�, Flood Claims (RFC) and Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL)—are narrowly defined grant programs which apply only to properties insured under the National Flood Insurance � Program (NFIP). Renton would be eligible for these grants only for properties with NFIP `�" coverage. For the RFC and SRL programs Renton would be eligible only if the properties �,r also meet repetitive loss requirements. :� � �rr '"�` City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan A1-2 April 2010 +rr � � � � �r The most likely FEMA funding sources for seismic mitigation projects are the Hazard ;�, Mitigation Grant Program and the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program, as well as the Public Assistance Program if Renton suffers damage in a future presidentially-declared disaster ""�` event. `"�` � Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) ,,� The HMGP is a post-disaster grant program. Funds are generated following a � Presidential Disaster Declaration for a given state, with the amount of funding "�` being a percentage of total FEMA spending for various other FEMA programs. '� � FEMA regulations allow HMGP funds to be spent on any mitigation project in the � state,for any hazard, regardless of whether or not an applicant was located in a declared county for a specific presidentially-declared disaster. Historically, � Washington State Emergency Management has often given priority to the '�'" declared counties and to the hazard (e.g., winter storms)that resulted in the � presidential declaration. However, mitigation projects outside of the declared � counties and for other hazards have also been considered. � HMGP funds are limited to a given state and are competitive only within each "'�` state. Each state manages the HMGP process, including setting state priorities � and selection of projects for funding. FEMA reviews applications only to ensure ,,� that selected projects meet all of FEMA's eligibility requirements. HMGP is the most flexible grant program - grants are possible for any natural hazard and may � include hazard mitigation planning and risk assessments as well as physical `�' mitigation projects. States have wide latitude in setting priorities and may restrict �' grant eligibility to specific counties to which the disaster declaration applies �► and/or to specific hazards or types of mitigation activities. Washington State ,� Emergency Management has great influence over HMGP grants within Washington, subject to the requirement that all grants meet FEMA's minimum � eligibility requirements. The amount of HMGP funding in a given disaster can '�` range from less than $100,000 to more than $1 billion for large disasters (e.g., � Hurricane Katrina). v�rr � For Washington, declared disasters are relatively common, often with one or more declarations in a given year for winter storms, floods or other disasters. The �` total amount of HMGP mitigation funds available for mitigation projects (absent a � major hurricane or earthquake) will vary from year to year and disaster event to +�° disaster event. HMGP mitigation grants do not have pre-set maximums on grant „� sizes. � � � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan Ai-3 April 2010 �' � �,: � �rr� � � ;� Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program � The Pre-Disaster Miti ation PDM g ( ) grant program is a broad program which `"'r'" includes mitigation projects for any natural hazard as well as mitigation planning �r. grants for the development of a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. PDM is a nationally- ,�,,, competitive annual program. The annual amount of grant funds available has � ranged from approximately$50 million to $250 million. The congressional appropriation for FY 2009 is about$100 million, although congressional earmarks �"' have pre-allocated some of the available funds. Funding levels in future years will � depend on congressional appropriations. � � PDM grants cover 75%of the costs of mitigation projects up to a maximum federal share of$3,000,000 per project. � "�'` Flood Mitigation Grant Programs � ,��,, The three flood-only mitigation grant programs have annual appropriations specific to each state. As noted above,these programs are applicable only to NFIP � insured properties; and for the RFC and SRL programs, only to properties which "'�" also meet the repetitive flood loss criteria. � � Each of these programs has their specific guidance, outlined in the Hazard +� Mitigation Assistance unified guidance discussed below. However,the overall grant requirements are similar to those for the HMGP discussed above. � �" The likelihood of getting a Flood Mitigation Assistance grant in Renton appears �r modest. There may be a few homes or other buildings at sufficient flood risk to �,,, have elevation or acquisition projects potentially eligible for FEMA grant funding. Absent any properties on FEMA's national repetitive loss list, Renton would not be � eligible for either of FEMA's repetitive flood loss grant programs. .rr � Mitigation Grant Guidance and Requirements �rr �rr° Detailed program guidance and the specific requirements for each of the five grant programs discussed above are posted on the FEMA website �r► (www.fema.�ov). The guidance and requirements for the four annual grant '"�' programs have recently been combined into a uniform hazard mitigation guide v�r (Hazard Mitigation Assistance Program Guidance,June 19, 2008). New uniform ,,�„ hazard mitigation guidance is expected in mid-2009. �r �wr � � �r ''�"' City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan A1-4 April 2010 � �rrr � � � �w�' Mitigation Project Grant Applications �, All of FEMA's mitigation grant programs are competitive, either within a given `� state or nationally. Successful grant applications must be complete, robust and ''� very well documented. The key elements for successful mitigation project grant �r applications include: � • The benefits of the project are carefully documented using FEMA benefit- v� cost software, with all inputs meticulous�y meeting FEMA's guidance and „�, expectations. A benefit-cost analysis that meets FEMA's requirements is often the most critical step in determining a mitigation project's eligibility � and competitiveness for FEMA grants. � � • Project locations within high hazard areas. � • For utility mitigation projects,the majority of benefits often accrue from reductions in the calculated economic impacts (using FEMA standard � methodologies) of the loss of utility services. � • Project facilities which have major vulnerabilities which pose substantial � risk of damages, economic impacts and (especially for seismic projects) "�" deaths or injuries. "'� • Mitigation project scope and budget are well documented. �"�'` � A further eligibility requirement for mitigation project grants is that the local "'�"' applicant must have a FEMA approved local hazard mitigation plan. Renton will �° continue to be eligible to apply for FEMA mitigation grants, once FEMA approves v,� this updated Plan. ,,,�; � � � � � � � � � � �rr � � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan A1-5 April 2010 `"� �► � � � O V � �— N �'�' W X Z N c, � W N o � � � N Z � J � �"�'1 O Q •� a cn Z � Q a Q W J � V Z oC a � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � :� � � � � � � � � � Benefit-cost analysis is the tool that provides answers to a central question for hazard ,�, mitigation projects: "Is it worth it?" If hazard mitigation projects were free, individuals and communities would undertake mitigation with robust enthusiasm and the risks from ""'�' hazards would soon be greatly reduced. Unfortunately, mitigation is not free, but often '�' rather expensive. For a given situation, it must be determined if the investment in �„�r mitigation is justified? Is the owner (public or private) better off economically to accept ,� the risk or invest now in mitigation to reduce future damages? Benefit-cost analysis can � help a community answer these difficult questions. v� In the complicated real world of mitigation projects,there are many factors which � determine whether or not a mitigation project is worth doing or which of two or more ,� mitigation projects should have the highest priority. Consider a town which has two flood ,� prone neighborhoods and each neighborhood desires a mitigation project.The two neighborhoods have different numbers and values of houses as well as different `"'�'� frequencies and severity of flooding. The first neighborhood proposes storm water "'�' drainage improvements at a cost of$3.0 million. The second neighborhood wants to r�r elevate houses at a cost of$3.0 million. Which of these projects should be completed? „�„ Both? One or the Other? Neither? Which project should be completed first if there is only funding for one? Are there alternative mitigation projects which are more sensible � or more cost-effective than the proposed projects? � � In determining whether or not a given mitigation project is worth doing, the level of risk ,,,� exposure without mitigation is critical. Whether or not the project is worth doing ,� depends on the level of risk before mitigation and on the effectiveness of the project in reducing that risk. For example, if the before mitigation risk is low (a subdivision street "�` has a few inches of water on the street every couple of years, or a soccer field in a city "�' park floods every five years or so)the answer is different than if the before mitigation risk v�yr is high (100 or more houses are expected to have flooding above the first floor every 10 ,�,,. years, or a critical facility is expected to be shut down because of flood damages every � five years). � All well-designed mitigation projects reduce risk, but just because a mitigation project � reduces risk does not make it a good project. A$1,000,000 project that avoids an average ,,,� of$100 per year in flood damages is not worth doing, while the same project that avoids ,�, an average of$200,000 per year in flood damages is worth doing. � The principles of benefit-cost analysis are briefly summarized here. The benefits of a �"` hazard mitigation project are the reduction in future damages and losses. To conduct +�r benefit-cost analysis of a specific mitigation project the risk of damages and losses must �,, be evaluated twice: before mitigation and after mitigation. The difference between the � two are the benefits. � The benefits of a hazard mitigation project are the future damages and Iosses avoided "�►' because a mitigation action was implemented. � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan A2-1 April 2010 ��11' � � � � �r �1rr � Because the benefits of a hazard mitigation project accrue in the future, it is impossible to "� know exactly what they will be. We do not know when future floods or other natural 'r"" hazards will occur or how severe they will be. We do know, however,the probability of �,.► future floods or other natural hazards (if we have appropriate hazard data). The benefits ;,� of mitigation projects must be evaluated probabilistically and expressed as the difference � between annualized damages before and after mitigation. � To illustrate the principles of benefit-cost analysis, we consider a hypothetical single � family home in the town of Acorn, located on the banks of Squirrel Creek. The home is a ,;r,,, one story building; about 1500 square feet on a post foundation, with a replacement �, value of$60/square foot (total $90,000). We have flood hazard data for Squirrel Creek (stream discharge and flood elevation data) as well as elevation data for the first floor of '� the house. We can use these figures to calculate the annual probability of flooding in `"r"' one-foot increments, as shown below. � �„ Table A2.1 Damages Before Mitigation �rr� � Flood Depth Annual Probability Scenario Damages and Annualized Flood �r (feet) of Flooding Losses Per Flood Event Damages and Losses �` 0 0.2050 $6,400 $1,312 � 1 0.1234 $14,300 $1,765 '�rr 2 0.0867 $24,500 $2,124 � 3 0.0223 $28,900 $673 � wr�`r' 4 0.0098 $32,100 $315 ;�, 5 0.0036 $36,300 $123 ,�,,, Total Expected Annual(Annualized)Damages and Losses $6,312 �rr ,�, Flood depths shown above in Table A2.1 are in one foot increments of water depth above the lowest floor elevation. Thus, a "three" foot flood means all floods between two and a � half feet and three and a half feet of water depth above the floor. We note that a "zero" �" foot flood has, on average, damages because this flood depth means water plus or minus +�rr six inches of the floor. Even if the flood level is a few inches below the first floor, there � may be damage to flooring and other building elements because of wicking of water. � The scenario (per flood event) damages and losses include expected damages to the �"' building, content and displacement costs if occupants have to move to temporary � quarters while flood damage is repaired. � �r � �► City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan A2-2 April 2010 � � _ VI� � � � The annualized (expected annual) damages and losses are calculated as the product of ,�; the flood probability times the scenario damages. For example, a four foot fiood has slightly less than a 1%chance per year of occurring. If it does occur, we expect about `�` $32,100 in damages and losses. Four foot floods are therefore expected to cause an "'�'" average of about$315 per year in flood damages. Note that the smaller floods, which vrr► cause less damage per flood event, actually cause higher average annual damages ;,�; because the probability of smaller floods is so much higher. By combining this data we � are able to determine that the house is expected to average approximately$6,312 per year in flood damages. This expected annual or "annualized" damage estimate does not `"�'` mean that the house has this much damage every year. Rather, in most years there will '� be no floods, but over time the cumulative damages and losses from a mix of relatively � frequent smaller floods and less frequent larger floods is calculated to average $6,312 per � year. � Now, let us consider the owner deems this expense as unacceptable and explores '''�'' mitigation alternatives to reduce the risk by elevating the house four feet. Table A2.2 � below shows the estimated damages after raising the house four feet. ,,,,�,, Table A2.2 � Damages After Mitigation � � Flood Depth Annual Probability Scenario Damages and Annualized Flood (feet) of Flooding Losses Per Flood Event Damages and Losses � � 0 0.2050 $0 $0 � 1 0.1234 $0 $0 � 2 0.0867 $0 $0 ,��; 3 0.0223 $0 $0 � 4 0.0098 $6,400 $63 � 5 0.0036 $14,300 $49 � Total Expected Annual(Annualized)Damages and Losses $112 � � By elevating the house four feet,the owner has reduced his expected annual or annualized � damages from $6,312 to $112 (98% reduction) and greatly reduced the probability or � frequency of flooding affecting his house. The annualized benefits are the difference in the � annualized damages and losses before and after mitigation or$6,312- $112 = $6,200. � Is this mitigation project worth doing? Common sense says yes, because the flood risk "'�" appears high and the annualized damages before mitigation are high ($6,312j. To answer v� this question more quantitatively, we complete our benefit-cost analysis of this project. One ,,� key factor is the cost of mitigation. A mitigation project that is worth doing at one cost may � � vrr+ City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan A2-3 April 2010 "'�` � � �r � � � ;�,, not be worth doing at a higher cost. Let's assume that the elevation costs $20,000. This $20,000 cost occurs once, up front, in the year that the elevation project is completed. � ''�" The benefits, however, accrue statistically over the lifetime of the mitigation project. tirr Following FEMA convention, we assume that a residential mitigation project has a useful ,��,,, lifetime of 30 years. We then compare the present value of the anticipated stream of �rr benefits over 30 years in the future to the up-front out-of-pocket cost of the mitigation project. Money (benefits) received in the future has less value than money received �" today because of the time value of money. The time value of money is taken into account �'' with a present value calculation. Simply multiplying the annual benefits times the lifetime � would ignore the time value of money and give an incorrect, spurious result. � A present value calculation depends on the lifetime of the mitigation project and on what � is known as the discount rate. The discount rate may be viewed simply as the interest `'�" rate you might earn on the cost of the project if you didn't spend the money on the �.r mitigation project. Let's assume this mitigation project is to be funded by FEMA, which �, uses a 7% discount rate to evaluate hazard mitigation projects. With a 30-year lifetime and a 7%discount rate, the "present value coefficient" is 12.41. That is, each $1.00 per �rrrr year in benefits over the lifetime of the project (30 years) is worth $12.41 now. The �"'` benefit-cost results are detailed in Table A2.3. �rr � Table A2.3 Benefit-Cost Results irrf `�'" Annualized Benefits $6,200 � Present Value Coefficient 12.41 � �rr' Net Present Value of Future Benefits $76,942 ++irr,r Mitigation Project Cost $20,000 "'�"' Benefit-Cost Ratio 3.85 �rr �,,, These results indicate a benefit-cost ratio of 3.85. In FEMA's terms the mitigation project ,� is cost-effective and eligible for FEMA funding. `� The above discussion of benefit-cost analysis of a flood hazard mitigation project is ''w'" intended to illustrate the basic concepts. Very similar principles apply to mitigation �r projects for earthquakes or any other natural hazards. For tornado and earthquake �,�,,. mitigation projects, one of the major benefits is life safety. For the purposes of benefit- � cost analysis, the statistical values for deaths and injuries must be included in the benefit- cost analysis. The current FEMA statistical value for human life is$5.8 million. Given this �'" high value, many tornado shelter mitigation projects and many seismic mitigation °�+ projects are deemed cost-effective and eligible for FEMA hazard mitigation grant funding. � �rw � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan A2-4 April 2010 �r� �r � � � � The role of benefit-cost analysis in prioritizing and implementing mitigation projects in ,�, Renton is addressed in Chapter 5 (Plan Adoption, Maintenance and Implementation). � Although benefit-cost analysis is a powerful tool for helping to evaluate and prioritize '�"` mitigation projects, and a requirement for all FEMA hazard mitigation grants, benefit-cost � analysis should not be considered the sole determinant for mitigation actions. In some ,�. cases,the potential for negative effects from a particular natural hazard may simply be deemed unacceptable, such as the potential for deaths and injuries, and mitigation may � be undertaken without benefit-cost analysis. �` � � v� v�r � � � � � � � +r� � �w � � � � � � � � � � � � �rr � � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan A2-5 April 2010 "�` � � •rw � � � w�r► i+�rrr` � � '� � � � APPENDIX 3 � � � � � � � HAZUS REPORTS � � � � Earthquake—Seattle Fault � �,,, Flood — Cedar River (100 year) �wr► � � � �r � �r � � � � � �'�"'' March 10, 2010 � � �r � � � � vr� � HAZUS-MH: Earthquake Event Report � � � Region Name: RentonEQ � � Earthquake Scenario: Run 1 Seattle Fault Mercer Epi '�" �' Print Date: April 03,2009 � � � � �r � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Totals only reflect dafa for those census tracts/blocks included in the user's study region. �` Disclaimer: `� The estimates of social and economic impacts contained in this report were produced using HAZUS /oss estimation methodology software which is based on current scientific and engineering knowledge. There are uncertainties inherent in any /oss estimation technique. � Therefore, there may be significant differences between the modeled results contained in this report and the actua! social and economic losses following a specific earthquake. These results can be improved by using enhanced inventory, geotechnical, and observed ground � motion data. � � � � � � �' � Table of Contents �r �r' � „� Section Page# �+► General Description of the Region 3 � Building and Lifeline Inventory 4 "�"' Building Inventory °�'' Critical Facility Inventory "�+" Transportation and Utility Lifeline Inventory �+` Earthquake Scenario Parameters g +�" Direct Earthquake Damage � "'�+"' Buildings Damage "�" Critical Facilities Damage +� Transportation and Utility Lifeline Damage `'�► Induced Earthquake Damage 11 '�' Fire Following Earthquake �` Debris Generation '�'" Social Impact 12 ``�' Shelter Requirements �" Casualties "'�+�'' Economic Loss 13 �'' Building Losses '"�' Transportation and Utility Lifeline Losses �'" Long-term Indirect Economic Impacts ��r► "'r"' Appendix A:County Listing for the Region '"�'`' Appendix B:Regional Population and Building Value Data � '�11r' � � '�t' � � � �' '�' '�►' � Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 2 of 20 � � � � �� =�x�� a - � � � .� ��d.�r ,�w e `"';��. . ,y'�� *&4a' ' > ��. `u z. ^'�a w �e7`�� ' x� �.�,°�� " � � 8 � �k �`� �� ' � ��s�' �:� � � �"�'� ��,�y o � �a � a`�� w i� �`� �� ` ��'� � ��,� : � � 'e� �...�.°x�r`�` �` ' ""�';�� u�a'. , ,�..,_,'�,.a°. . . � xia"�.,. �a,,�,k,"�e� �?` _ �`� . .�?`"a a�'�';kw��'4, .... _ .._ �: <„ , � . � , �,,� ��.n.a,s.. ...,.�., ,. m,�,��. . ., k ,- - , . - � � .�..... .. ��..._ . < , , ., ._� � HAZUS is a regional earthquake loss estimation model that was developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency v� and the National Institute of Building Sciences. The primary purpose of HAZUS is to provide a methodology and software application to develop earthquake losses at a regional scale. These loss estimates would be used primarily by local,state � and regional officials to plan and stimulate efforts to reduce risks from earthquakes and to prepare for emergency response � and recovery. The earthquake loss estimates provided in this report was based on a region that includes 1 county(ies)from the following � state(s): '� � Washington � Note: � Appendix A contains a complete listing of the counties contained in the region. � The geographical size of the region is 114.11 square miles and contains 41 census tracts. There are over 78 thousand � households in the region and has a total population of 199,627 people(2000 Census Bureau data).The distribution of population by State and County is provided in Appendix B. +r� There are an estimated 60 thousand buildings in the region with a total building replacement value(excluding contents)of �r 16,252(millions of dollars). Approximately 97.00%of the buildings(and 77.00%of the building value)are associated with residentiai housing. � The replacement value of the transportation and utility lifeline systems is estimated to be 3,843 and 815 (millions of � dollars), respectively. '�► � � � � �' � � � � � � � � � � � � '�' � � � � � Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 3 of 20 i� � ++rr � � � � � � �� s � � � a �� ., x �� a�`' � ��*��`�`� ' � � � ��`� re v� �� , .. .�C�.� ,.''�`ce., ,. .��.«�'�.��k,�� +_� �i�'�a"�� w a-.s:t� '� w� �+• �.i s: �� ';�� ,. � ... . , r. ,...E.,2 . S.»m.aax� . .,, . .�.,�.ax� ,. &.��.w.�e., �wa,�� .sA.,�"`�� , . _ .r . �. "�'_�'%,1,.+_ Buildina Inventorv �r' HAZUS estimates that there are 60 thousand buildings in the region which have an aggregate tota�replacement value of � 16,252(millions of dollars).Appendix B provides a general distribution of the building value by State and County. � "i1M`'" In terms of building construction types found in the region,wood frame construction makes up 90%of the building inventory. �r►+ The remaining percentage is distributed between the other general building types. *�+ Critical Facilitv Inventorv '� HAZUS breaks critical facilities into two(2)groups:essential facilities and high potential loss(HPL)facilities. Essential �„ facilities include hospitals,medical clinics,schools,fire stations, police stations and emergency operations facilities. High potential loss facilities include dams, levees,military installations,nuclear power plants and hazardous material sites. � For essential facilities,there are 1 hospitals in the region with a total bed capacity of 204 beds. There are 80 schools, 2 fire "'�'` stations, 5 police stations and 0 emergency operation facilities. With respect to HPL facilities,there are 6 dams identified within the region. Of these,2 of the dams are classified as'high hazard'. The inventory also includes 112 hazardous °�" material sites,0 military installations and 0 nuclear power plants. �ww" � Transportation and Utilitv Lifeline Inventorv � ,� Within HAZUS,the lifeline inventory is divided between transportation and utility lifeline systems. There are seven(7) transportation systems that include highways, railways, light rail,bus,ports,ferry and airports. There are six(6)utility '�r systems that include potable water,wastewater, natural gas,crude&refined oil,electric power and communications. The lifeline inventory data are provided in Tables 2 and 3. � � The total value of the lifeline inventory is over 4,658.00(millions of dollars). This inventory includes over 176 kilometers of highways, 121 bridges,3,254 kilometers of pipes. � � � � � � � �irr � ��r` .virr � '�rr +rrr `vrrr � � �✓ � +�rr�' Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 4 of 20 � � � � Table 2:Transportation System Lifeline Inventory � ' #locations/ `. Replacement value "�" System Component #Segments (millions of dollars) `'�' Highway Bridges 121 2,930.80 Segments 40 . . 774.90 _ '� Tunnels 1 0.90 "�' _ _ _ �� ..��:�. ;, __ . 3,706.6�_._ � � Railways Bridges 1 0.10 __ _ _ _ ,,, _. ___.. � Facilities 3 ': 7.2� Segments _ 29_ _ . 52.80 �` Tunneis 0 . 0.00 `�` _.. __ _ � , _. _ _.... ��«��;��V.�... _ 60.10 _ a . . . __ _.__.. '�' Light Rail i Bridges 0 0.00 _. _ _ _.__. . . _..__ Facilities 1 0 i 0.00 � _ _.. _ ., _ __ ..� Segments , 0 0 00 � _,.. . , _ _ �. , �. . Tunnels 0 . 0.00 �, -- _ _. � , Sub�o`'f�"'�'�;�'�� 0.00 _ . _ "�MI� Bus Facilities 0 : 0.00 �btotal""��"��. .,� _ _ 0.00 v�c _ _...._ Ferry ; Facilities o o.00 �P _ � __. .._.__. . . y�l�t!*�+��';"�,�"�"�r8',a... 0.00 ... .... ....._. ._.... .. . .. . :. - . . ... ._,.� .. .,._ _. . �. Port Facilities . 1 . 2.20 �_�,....._.. �` ��1 � .'�r��s 2.20 _.. - - _:. , �_ __,. Airport Facilities 1 6.00 � __ i . � , _.. Runways 2 � 68 40 '�' Subtc+��;��i; n .... 74,40... � _. _ _ _ '��ti� `��'*�:� � 3,843.30 � �wlr � � +�r w� � � �wr � � � � � �rr � � �► � Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 5 of 20 � �� +Wr �rr � Table 3: Utility System Lifeline Inventory � #Locations/ � Replacement value System � Component +il�r Segments : (miilions of dollars) Potable Water Distribution Lines NA 32.50 � _ ': Facilities 3 `.. . . 109.90 � _ ' Pipelines 0 0.00 � �� ' 142.40 , . ..__ ., � �,.,. ..,.�� , . , ,.�,.. . �' Waste Water Distribution Lines i NA = 1 g.50 Facilities _ _ _3 _ _ 219.80 'il�l►' � . ...... ..... ... : �.... ,..... . . ... . . .._ .. ... . . . ._. .. .. . ,.. ._... ...... ... ... ; Pipelines 0 � 0.00 a._. �. � , 5� �_ _ . . _... _ . .. ._._ � �� i __. _ . � � ...._ __. ��, �.�z.4�,�,�ti,�� e. 239.30 �v NatuPal Gas ` Distribution Lines d NA ' � 13.00 � m ..., __ . _ ,,,..__ _..,_�, Y , �, ; Facilities 1 1.20 � . �� . _. _. , _. __,. ' Pipehnes 0 0 00 +�' �.� , _._ _ � _ _. ._. ,. ...:, .�r.�.�, , � ��.��,.�. � � 14.20 +w' Oii Systems j Facilities p �-, 0.00 s..__ _ ..,__. _ , __.� .� .._. _ ._.____ �_..._.. .., e,. __. � , Pipehnes 0 i 0.00 _ _ _..., . _.,. _ __, .. . .__ �_. _. ......_ _. _�. ..-s,.�,.��.:�� :�� .�. . 0.00 � Electrical Power = Facilities ' ' >,. . .. � _ _. 4 ` 484.00 }. ,...... ._,, . . _...,__. _,._..._ _ � _ �_ro�.��. ��3.,. . _ 4�4.00 ..__ � �.. _., . ..._. . �� . ._ . _.,_��. _ ,�,. Communication � Facilities 8 � 0.90 „._ ... __ , ,_. �fD" _ _ ' # ��'� � _ . __ � _ _ �.��..�« �. �.��,��, . . 0.90 � �� .. 880.80 �rn �wr � � �nr. �wr +�r► +wr � � +rrr � �r '�r.� � +�r � `�r' rrr � �rr � Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 6 of ZO � � �° � ' �' �;� ,��,v� x`�< � ti� +��- "F�k"�, '�.a °`e��+s�"'��"' t .,�df - - ; -. 5 � � �k � � �, � � -, � �.� �v � � �� a � � a� �wp � � `� �,'a s� � a�a �, '�� : v��`�"�$n��a��. a�a-w�`P�s��s�� t�� xa� �`� � a � '�., - �� * �� a�`� � �: z�.�� .� �� ,� + ��a tf > , A �"�""�"' � �"e '�a�"�t �� .,.t,. . .�a.= �„ ?�. . � � S'�r x,o.��,A+ ..�>.. ��,�.s, . .�..,�'a . ,.. . , �.,;k:`•.»�'�., ...�xrw , . , e.�,.,t . , .. .. . �.,,r, w � '��" HAZUS uses the following set of information to define the earthquake parameters used for the earthquake loss estimate � provided in this report. �` Scenario Name Run 1 Seattie Fault Mercer Epi � Type of Earthquake Arbitrary 'i111►e Fault Name NA � Historical Epicenter ID# NA � Probabilistic Return Period NA � Longitude of Epicenter -122•19 � Latitude of Epicenter 47.59 � Earthquake Magnitude 6.70 `� Depth(Km) 10.00 � Rupture Length(Km) 25.59 `� Rupture Orientation(degrees) 90.00 � Attenuation Function WUS Shallow Crustal Event-Extensional '� � � '� � � � `�" � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � "'� Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 7 of 20 +wiW► � � �rr � � � �� ¢Y�� r r�"Y��g ��`�'�� .�-�^ F *s ��A:��`'� � �,��'��r��,�-��s�.�. : ��=�q �� „�"�:�'`��?� k��,.��,�'�„�;r��`� � :, . .+ '�'r'r�. i � ,cy=e y, 1�r � 5 �'1 y; , s �. „ .._.,u�,,T'�� . ., vt..s.'�33 . . .. <.. . «�k7. ,r<.,a . , rcx �: 'm' �iae� z� �;sS;'� u. . . " " .; ,,.„s., ; . .�. .. -.: �, � " __ " . ,�: .. ,,:x.. ., � .,.x�,. � �... , � ,.., � �� :;,`�., . .. . .,.. � Buildinq Damaqe � � � � �� HAZUS estimates that about 10,921 buildings will be at least moderately damaged.This is over 18.00%of the total number �, of buildings in the region.There are an estimated 366 buildings that will be damaged beyond repair.The definition of the 'damage states'is provided in Volume 1:Chapter 5 of the HAZUS technical manual.Table 4 below summaries the expected �rr damage by general occupancy for the buildings in the region.Table 5 summaries the expected damage by general building type. � � � Table 4:Expected Building Damage by Occupancy � �, None ? Slight ` Moderate i Extensive 1 Complete _ . _.. �.�. ,_..__ �__._��. �_:� ..._.. _._� _... � . � __ �_ c 3 � _. vr�r Count� (%)� Count (%)� Count ° � o ' o � � 3 (�01E Count (��)' Count (/o +� _ . , . .. _ ...... , ._ E _ _ � 9 , _ 006 12 p . v _ . _. , ,._. _. ._ A riculture � 18 ' .06� �� 0.11 E 4 0.29; 1 j 0.40 _,_ . _ . _ _. _, ._ _� _. �. _ _.�__. ,. �vlMr __. . _�.. ___n. ... _. . __..... Commercial 524 ` 1.77, 334 ; 1.68� 394 4.37; 185 12.03 58 � 15.93 _. ._ _� � � �- v __, �_ _ _ .x , _�_. __. _. ..,. .�. "� Education � 15 ` 0.05 10 0.05 11 � p.�2' 5, 0.35 2 , 0.47 . . e � � _ _ 0 16 y _. , 7 0.42` .2 0.45 � Government 20 � 0.07� 13 0.07 14 ' ' _._. _.__. _ .... � _ . 0.49 85 0.43 � 103 � , Industriai 144 � ( " � �� lrv" d , �_ __._,„ �w�. . . ° 1y14 46. 2.98. 13 � 3.54 _ _ _, _. , _ � __�_.�_ _� _� Other Residential � 1,496 5.06� 1,339 ' 6.74` 1,469 � �g.28� 732! 47.72� 148 � 40.40 'W�+r` _m_ _ ._ _._ _ _ _ _... . _. __ _._ . . _ . . .. . . . Religion ; _ 28 0:09.s _ .._._.�9. 0.09 i. . �8.€_. _0.20� _ 9 i 0.57; 3 y 0.71 _ __ .� , _ _ _ _ 35.64_ _._ �., __�. a ._. � Single Family 27,334 ; 92.41 , 18 043 gp.gg 7,002 77 62� 547 40 ; 38.10 _. �_t. ,_,..,_. . __ _ . . ___.�a . _..�.��_ __.._ �� _ �_.,_ A_ _.. __.._. ., ""�" Total 29,580 � � 19,854 ' � 9,021 �� ° 1,535� 366 ; � � i � Table 5:Expected Building Damage by Building Type(All Design Levels) �r► ' ; ; � , None ' Slight � Moderate a Extensive ! Complete E_ „._._ -r� -- , , _,. ; '�wr � _ __.. � COUnt� (%)r COUnti (%} COUnt'- (%)� COUnt (%)s COUnt! (%) _. ..� _... __� �.. ..___ � ..r.,_, , � .. .. � Wood 27,832 � 94 09� 18508 4 93 22�� 7 051 � ��78 16� 497 32.35 E Y 142 � 38 69�� _. _. ; � � , ._.... __ . _. . ��- . � , � - �. . � .m.. .�_, �+► 3teel 189 � 0 6a� 129 0 65! 185 � 2 05� 81 ; 5.31 � 20 � 5.49 . __ _ .,� . _ � m ,_ _ .__ ;__ �_�,._� ri __ _,.... ___. � �w�_ _ ..____ . .�._ 132 � 146,_... 66 ` . 430f... . ., 14� _38_ �r Concrete 160 ; 0 54 j 122 � 0 61; 3 _ . . ..,. �. . ._..__ �.._. e. :.. _..,...._. ._ H _,.,,... ._�_ ;� Precast ' 154 , 0 52 87 � 0.44; 119 i 1.32; 62 : 4.03,, 18 " 4.89 ___. _ � . _ ,.__ � n_ � _ r_._ ,.,_ _..__ 4 c _.... ., , ,..__.. .,__.., _ , _..., _. . , �._._ �� RM ' 792 , 2 68' 317 � 1.59' 364 � 4 03; 149 � 9.69' 19 { 5.10 �r _.._,_ _ �_ __, __. ; _._. � �,. - � � ;_ , __. __ ._ __ ;_m _... _,.. M __ . �_. _ _ _� _.�._. URM 29 '� 0 10� 34 ; 0 17! 53 ; 0.59; 42 , 2.76 s 33 � 8.94 �crv �_ _ _ ,. � . __ , �.. _ ._. MH ; 424 , 1 43� 658 : 3 31` 1,117 ' 12 39 638 �41 56 121 33.06 _. , . . ,_. e _�_.. . � .. y�. , _ � _ , _ �. __ ,. � ,. �� .. . _ ; . ._ . . Total 29,580 s 19,854; 9,021�� 1,535; 366� �rr ,�„ "Note: RM Reinforced Masonry � URM Unreinforced Masonry MH Manufactured Housing � �r+` •�rn °�rr � +�W� iilr Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 8 of 20 � � � Essential Facilitv Damaqe � Before the earthquake,the region had 204 hospital beds available for use. On the day of the earthquake,the model � estimates that only 109 hospital beds(54.00%)are available for use by patients already in the hospital and those injured by the earthquake. After one week,85.00%of the beds will be back in service. By 30 days,99.00%will be operational. ''�` � '� Table 6:Expected Damage to Essential Facilities '� � #Facilities y�; Classification Total ' At Least Moderate Complete With Functionality �° ` ' Damage>50% f Damage>50%: >50%on day 1 ,� _ . ... ___ ._ _ Hospitals j 1 '�� 0 4 0 ' 1 °Y Schools ; gp f 0 9 0 ; 5� �' . .. .. ......... __. _.... _ _.. . _ .. _._ . _, _. . _ _.._._.,..__ EOCs 0 0 ' 0 0 � ... _. _ ,__ _ ......... .._ _ _._ . __ '�y PoliceStations 5 " 0 �' 0 2 , _ _ . _._ .... ..�,..__., �` FireStations 2 ; 0 , 0 2 "�r , _.._ ._.. ._._.. _. S � � � "� � � � �c � '�r` � � y�"'r � � '� � � � �' � � '� � '��' Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 9 of 20 '�, � �.►. v�r � `� Transportation and Utilitv Lifeline Damaqe +�rr o�r Table 7 provides damage estimates for the transportation system. � `Wr� Table 7:Expected Damage to the Transportation Systems '� ' � ' Number of Locations System ' Component < < , ' �rr� r � Locationsl; With at Leas� With Complet�„__ _W�th Functionality>50% _..._. �._ . �___.�� Segmentsi Mod Damaga Damage� qfter Da 1, �r _e_..._ _.., _��_e � _._.r ___. __ .� _�_,. .. _._,.� .�.___- _,._._. Y After Day 7 � �.._ ..____. ..,_.... .�. E _..._.... , _w.<,�..._ ,.._._... �wr Highway Segments ; 40 . 0 ; 0 � 40 40 , � � LL.. . __ . , .._ _ _. .,�. a�...F ._.__� ,.� _ _ . __ _ "� Bridges � 121 25 , 0 ` 96 117 ( __ _ � _. _-� ___... . �� _. ...__ �.��. a.. _...e,. � . __..� _. :_ s___ a_ __ __ � � Tunnels � 1 � 0 , 0 � 1� � � 1 _., . ...��_,._� „,:.. �_. �_ . � _. �:� _ ___,:: .._.x._ _ . .. ,_. __�.. . ._ .___...,. _ _ �� .___..., � .__. __ _ ._. ..,�. �� ._. � Railways Segments � 29 a p i p ; 2� 29 ,._ ____, : , ,__ m...,�_ .__�_._. . � _ .,_ �_ __�___� .� .._ . _ . -- "'�'"` Bridges , 1 1 0 0 I 1� � j. _�. _�! ��e� !_ _�_,_ . �... .�._ r. ...�. .__ ..a . _ _ �vrr � , __ ;_ _ ; Tunnels i 0 � 0 ; p � � p , � _.._._ ___� .. .�W_.� � , �_ < _. _ .. .�._ .. . _.. .. __._.� _.....__. _.... � ; Facilities � 3 ( 0 � 0 � � 3 .. _____., �M_ _ __ . _ E ,�,�,.; w__ __ . _ �.: �._�.m.___. _ _ �� _ � y __., . � _.__.. . ,__ _. � ...._. __,.� ._��__., _ _ ..._ € .:LL� �_. _ __... _, +�+ Light Rail Se ments ` 0 �� 0 9 � � 0 ; 0� 0 , �___ �� __. .. ..__ _._, ,.__... A_ __ __ _._ . "'�'' i Bridges ; 0 ( 0 � 0 j � p ; _ . ,_ _. � � ��,..__ �...__ ____ .__ _ . �� _ _� _. �r�► , , , __ _ ..,._ f Tunnels E 0 � 0 ; 0 ¢ p 0 �_ __ _ � ._ ...�__ _._ �__ �...�__ ..__�..� _. _,e_�.. .. � ; _........ _. ;. . __._,. ,. j Facilities �; 0 I 0 ` p I p � , � � 1 ��n► _ , _._, u �� _.. -, . _ _ �..�,... _ �� _ _...._� .... . . .,. . �__...� � .. . ._ _. ,...__ :_ .--.� � _ . ,...,. .,. __.� _..p:�.�..__. _ _ , � __ �_a �rr Bus 1 Facilities ; � � ` � � � � i � 0 _� .�� _ � � �_ _._ _ _� . . _F_�,_ _ ::. � �irr ___ . . .... ..__-�_� ' . � .._ ..._.. _ _,__� ._,.r�_ _.,__._ _....._,_ .. ._ . .. ._. ; E �' Ferry � Facilities � 0 � 0 + 0 � Q p _.. �..�,_ _ ;:u _:��.;��. ��_� n _, _ ... _._ . � _.. �a _,.._ _ �.__, __�...._ _ ...:_. , m � , ...._ ._. .....__ . �_ � _ � ,� � _ � . . �. +�rr ; ' r ? Port � Facilities � 1 , 0 � 0 � 1 1 ; � +rrr -, ,: u_, .__. �. _. . __ - _.� _., . � _,_.._ ..e .,._ �_. ._. �� `�:. _ - __.... � _ __ ...:�_ _. _. � t. _.._. . .�..�, _. _� .. ... _s_ . _ _ m_ . i ` '�' Airport ! Facilities ` 1 � 0 ; 0 � 1 1 � � � ; _.M� _. ��A _. . . _._ ,w_� __�......_... . .. __ _ __ �_.... . ._._ _, . _..._ _ _ _ _,. � � Runways f 2 �� 0 � 0 � 2 2 � P .�_� ��J_��_ � ' � _� __ _�___ _ __...__. _ _.,� _ .__ �_._. . ___. . �._.__.. _w. .._. .. _. "� Note:Roadway segments,railroad tracks and light rail tracks are assumed to be damaged by ground failure only. If ground �, failure maps are not provided,damage estimates to these components will not be computed. '�" Tables 8-10 provide information on the damage to the utility lifeline systems. Table 8 provides damage to the utility system ,� facilities. Table 9 provides estimates on the number of leaks and breaks by the pipelines of the utility systems. For electric power and potable water, HAZUS performs a simplified system performance analysis. Table 10 provides a summary of the ,� system performance information. � �Y +Irr � Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 10 of 20 � � � Table 8:Expected Utility System Facility Damage � �y' #of Locations -._ __ _. System Total# With at Least With Complete With Functionality>50% �° Moderate Damage' Damage ` After Day 1 ' After Day 7 � _.:..... .._,._.., _ __ _ , __. _. . _ 3 3 � Potable Water 3�� . �� _�._ _ _ � Waste Water 3��' 1 ; 0( 0 3 __. _.... ___ _ :__ _._ ___. � Natural Gas 1 ��" 0� p� 0 f 1 �,� __..___.__ �..__... .. _ .__ Oil Systems 0 ' 0' �C � � �I►' �_ __�._ , _. �.___ . . n �..�. �Electrical Power�� 4; 1 �� 0�� 1 '' 4 '�►' _ __ �_ . . _ , . _.. _ _.._ ... , Communication 8 6; 0� 8 ; $ � > _ __. � _.._ _. �...__.__.. �_w��... �, ___,. _.. _ ___ _ _ _W. r �.. ._ �, � � Table 9:Expected Utility System Pipeline Damage(Site Specific) � System Total Pipelines' Number of'; Number of �engtn(kms)� Leaks i Breaks � _ __ _ ,._ _ ; _. Potable Water 1,627 5 474, 118 �` _ _ __ � __� . _� ; ___ _.. � _ Y ..__ Waste Water 976; 375 ': 94 � _ _ , . __ .. _.. __._ �,.. _�_ �. � Natural Gas 651 400` 100 � .__ ___ . .. __ . _. _ Oil ; 0; 0 i 0 `�'� _ .., __., _.. _ ..__.. __ __ ; � wrlr' � � � Table 10:Expected Potable Water and Electric Power System Performance � Total#of � Number of Households without Service � , � _ , . _ _ __ .�_. . R y Y �-__.__, _y 30� At Day 90 � _ At Da 3 i At Da 7� At Da �._ _ _. _r�._.._ � __.__._.. Potable Water 20,160'� �� __ �;. _ At Day + Househo s 3 4,715� 0 i 0� 0 '+� 78,482 � � $._ � __ . _ ; .._.. _.._ _.._ _. ....__...._ Electric Power ' 0; 0 3 0; 0 i 0 '� � �, �� v�jl► � � � � Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 11 of 20 � �> � � �` r� s �`"��.��'"Y"4 � �� c�`r'� '�� a��"'"a� a � s�r`aa � p��a�'0 �'�r �- :� �"�a u� . �� '' � �t ��. � �s' _ � „� ;�"�-4 �� ,� � - ��°,�" � : , �4��s�ra..� �„�.�� 4 x 4 ,q � r : �a.�°�.:�'��s�,�,. ,e .,�:.: 3 ��.�€�,y,� .�., :�}r"Sr.�`�� ; t t'`� "�,,?�'�'{a�t��'lz ,'��S��SS��''�'a��,�;^rt . ,.i._<, . >„�,�. � ....m.'.� � ,.�.�..s.� . . �;�; �;. �.^.rr., . ., � �' f� a,r��,� �r Fire Followinq Earthquake �, Fires often occur after an earthquake. Because of the number of fires and the lack of water to fight the fires,they can often burn out of control. HAZUS uses a Monte Carlo simulation model to estimate the number of ignitions and the amount of �rr burnt area. For this scenario,the model estimates that there will be 10 ignitions that will burn about 0.11 sq.mi 0.10%of the region's total area.) The model also estimates that the fires will displace about 249 people and burn about 18(millions � of doilars)of building value. �' ryrr � Debris Generation +�r HAZUS estimates the amount of debris that will be generated by the earthquake. The model breaks the debris into two general categories:a)Brick/Wood and b)Reinforced Concrete/Steel. This distinction is made because of the different types �+' of material handling equipment required to handle the debris. � The model estimates that a total of 0.00 million tons of debris will be generated. Of the total amount,Brick/Wood comprises �;, 0.00%of the total,with the remainder being Reinforced Concrete/Steel. if the debris tonnage is converted to an estimated number of truckloads, it will require 0 truckloads(@25 tons/truck)to remove the debris generated by the earthquake. � wr� � �rr � �rr �r' �rr+ �wr► w� � �rr° � � �wr � � � wr�� +Ywr � vrr �rr �rr► � � +�rr Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 12 of 20 � � � n � � , � � �s � �� ➢ �5`� -�%��*°i7 '*� '��s.� �� k�'�v��"��5,�� A��,� � �� P� �s-fi: � uy x� ��'�p��t aw' . � ' ,��' �e , '�-� a"S�'t ,� ��„��s q t �- �. ��, � .�x�:,� � i s�°�.., � �"' �a w .:+. r � i �;� �b c �`��uv � ��»%�2p �8e��w� �r am� „ °'� `�`��",°?�k�, �`�Y,' , ��' . . .� � , � �,> � ,�� . a��3. �s;��., .,_._ . _ , .� ,v _ „_ � . ., Shelter Requirement � HAZUS estimates the number of households that are expected to be displaced from their homes due to the earthquake and � the number of displaced people that wili require accommodations in temporary public shelters. The model estimates 1,656 households to be displaced due to the earthquake.Of these, 374 people(out of a total population of 199,627)will seek `��° temporary shelter in public shelters. � � Casualties � HAZUS estimates the number of people that will be injured and killed by the earthquake. The casualties are broken down � into four(4)severity levels that describe the extent of the injuries. The levels are described as follows; � •Severity Level 1: Injuries will require medical attention but hospitalization is not needed. •Severity Level 2: Injuries will require hospitalization but are not considered life-threatening � •Severity Level 3: Injuries will require hospitalization and can become life threatening if not ,� promptly treated. �Severity Level 4: Victims are killed by the earthquake. '� The casualty estimates are provided for three(3)times of day:2:00 AM,2:00 PM and 5:00 PM. These times represent the ''�` periods of the day that different sectors of the community are at their peak occupancy loads. The 2:00 AM estimate considers that the residential occupancy load is maximum,the 2:00 PM estimate considers that the educational,commercial '� and industrial sector loads are maximum and 5:00 PM represents peak commute time. �r Table 11 provides a summary of the casualties estimated for this earthquake ''�' � � '� � � � � � � � � � � � � '�, � � 'i1�Il' °1�1� � � � Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 13 of 20 � � �r � � Table 11:Casualty Estimates � Level 1 ' Level 2 Levei 3 Level 4 � 2 AM i Commercial 9 2 • 0 - 1 �' _ _ _ _ ;�, Commuting ' 0 ' 0 ; 0 0 � i Educational 0 ; 0 : 0 0 '� I Hotels � 5 ' 1 ; 0 : 0 ___._ . _._ _� , � , �. _ ..... _ "� 'Industrial $ ' 2 ; p ; � �_ . � ..n _. _ . ..._ . . � .....�_ . w.__._.. .. . . '_.. _ � ?Other-Residential 123 � 26 ; 3 � 6 �, � __ __. _...___ �___�_, w_.a�. .__ ___.___ . .. � �__ . ._._�_.._ . _. _�-.. _ �,_.�_., _ � �Smgle Family 118 � 15 � 1 ` 1 �, t __ ._._.. ,. .__.. . � 3 ' _._ . ...,�_ ..._� _.. _._ __a. _ ..__�_ . ._ _. . _..__ ___.. .._ ; .�, aa� x � . �" f _ ,� ��`��`�,�� '� � 263 ; 47 1 5 ,. 9. i ' ° � , ; 2 PM Commercial 531 ; 137 r 21 ! 42 : �, ..�. _ _._..- �_�._ __..__. .�_. � _...��.._.. __ ,_ _ __.._.__ . � ?Commuting 0 � 0 1 ' o � � ; � .�. __ _�_._� �... � � , _____.� .. _�_ ,,,�,,. �Educational 97 25 � 4 ; 7 , , : _ ._ _ �... .. �_. .��_ _�___. , _e_�_ � , _..�_. _._._. t.. , �... �rr,r i Hotels � 1 `, 0 ' 0 ; 0 �. . __, _�_ �.�_.�,. .____ , � M..w_... . . .__. ,.,._ . ., _....._ , "�" �Industrial ; 62 � 15 2 , 4 _._, __,_M . __, _ r.. _u. _,.._.. .�. �._.. �_ _�,.._ __.._._. ,_.. �r* ' - _ !Other-Residential � 23 � 5 ; 1 s 1 �,. , , ,w. _ _ ,_ _.n_�..... _ _ ._�.��,. __._�... . . � a.��a.. .. �._. _�,. t f �Singfe Family � 21 ', 3 + o i 0 �,, j- - _� __.....__. _.._�. �..._._ . �_�._._ _ �`��'� �� ,. �� ' 735 � _186 � �.�_._w ��. ____. ,�_ 55_ ��m_.A� � �.,.. . . _„��- 3 � i � + ! � 5 PM !Commercial , 382 , 99 i 15 � 30 _�_ H . �__. . .,.._ . _ ._ _�, _�.__.�... � , _ , ..._ __.__ .__ � _a.�_ � .. . _. �wr { � ��_�ti,._ ,.._ ;Commuting � 22 ; 27 { 48 ; 9 „__ .._.� .._,_.._._ . .... _� �Irr , �._.�_� _...�..�. �__��____.. �___..._ .�., _. �._.�.� l____� -�_.��w_ _ � � �Educational � 13 3 , 1 ` 1 +�r+ �_ __.__� __.,.�.___ _ ,.._�.� ,.�__.m_. .me .,.___,�_ _r._._ ., .._.�_�� _.��... _ ;_ _. �,,, 'Hotels � 1 2 0 i --- o., _._. o:, � �.__a . . .__._ � e_. , �._ _. ._,...,_ _..__, _.___. _,_,.__. _�_.___� _..�__.� _ � _ _a�... +rr '. Industrial � 39 F 9 ; 1 i 3 ; , ___ _... ._ .__..q �._ __, t._. __,e ..,.r _. ... .... �"' ;Other-Residential ; 46 ,'> 10 1 � 2 � � _..._t:.. .. � � �.._, 7,_v �Single Family , 45 � 6 � � 0 � 1 �r , � r - �, _ _ __ �__ ..�,... _. ___.1. _ �.. _� _... ��...._�_ _�. .., r r � �. ��,., i i , �� '�� 548 F 155 � 66 � 45 � � � � � � wrr �rr �Irr Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 14 of 20 �rw � � �� .Q ^ � �«� ��" ' � � � � �� ,�c�� -��.� Yr� �� r� • ��i � � ;. � x � a z5 p .xa�t a a.'�,�`� �a �m�� , k,��,�u d . .y ' p1 K,�si�� t��'; �w �S� i �.`�"'�., 7 `� e z i,� .�� '�� m o� ��t`�..,,, . ... ��4 a..,5 � ;�e„. ��3ta .., ��Y�'��k,..� ... , . . �� ,�„e.,eu.e s�'.�,;�xa+� � a . . .,_ ,. ,....�, ,_ .....�.,r„� ..,,, .. � - � The total economic loss estimated for the earthquake is 1,785.78(millions of dollars),which includes building and lifeline related losses based on the region's available inventory.The following three sections provide more detailed information '+� about these losses. � Buildinq-Related Losses w�fr � The building losses are broken into two categories:direct building losses and business interruption losses. The direct building losses are the estimated costs to repair or replace the damage caused to the building and its contents. The +� business interruption losses are the losses associated with inability to operate a business because of the damage sustained during the earthquake. Business interruption losses also include the temporary living expenses for those people displaced `�' from their homes because of the earthquake. � � The total building-related losses were 1,414.90(millions of dollars); 15%of the estimated losses were related to the business interruption of the region. By far,the largest loss was sustained by the residential occupancies which made up over � 54%of the total loss. Table 12 below provides a summary of the losses associated with the building damage. � � Table 12:Building-Related Economic Loss Estimates (Millions of dollars) � � � Category �Area � Single , Other j Commerc�ai�; Industrial �G Others Total j Family, Residential ? � : `� .�... __ „_._ _ __ __ . _ Income Loses � �_ __� _ ..�__,._. �r _.,_. Y . � __ ,_ _ __ .__. __,__ .. _.._ �N/a9e 0.00 576 66.28 � 3.07 � 2.78 77 88 ,._..__,... _..�.,,,.. . . _ .. '� �Capital Related 0.00 2.44 � 58 30 1 83 0 87 = 63 24 � _,_._ _..�_..� .� ��.. _. � _. _�_� _ . ' � 10.70 20.41 35 56 ; 1 20 1 22 69 09 � Rental �.�_.... ,�.�_... : _ .. _. _., � 1.23 ` 0.52 2 11 , 0 10 ' 0 38 4 35 �_.__..a __ _ _ _ _ _�. __ _ a._ _ _ __ �. ._. ... .. _.,_ . ..,..._._. � �RelocaUon��f 11.94 ; 29.13 ; 162.24 ' 6 20 " 5.05 214.56 Capital Stock Loses � � � � �' �.... �.._ w � �..,. _ .. Structural 65.83 � 26.98 , 79.88 11 13 , 4 85 188 67 �...e .,.. .. _...� _. _ _ � , ___ _._ �..� _ � _ � �Non_Structural 330.04 141.78 � 180.63 a 34 19 ; 13 56 3 700 20 ___._,�.� .__.. �_ ..__ _ - , _. _ '�y ;Content : 118.14 , 36.37 � 99 98 32 51 ; 13 48 y 300 47 � .. _..._.. _ , _ ,. _ -- . _, . _.. �Inventory 0.00 , 0.00 ' 3 90 � 6 91 ; 0 19 � 11 00 �._ _.____ �� _. __ _ . _ .._..e .._, _.. _ . . _. ., .. ..._. ,�. , �_.._ � ._�_,� �" ��` � 514.01 ; 205.12 G 364.39 , 84.74 � 32 08 ; 1,200.34 � � ��,,�� y 525.95 " 234.25 ; 526.63 ; 90.94 ; 37.13 � 1,414.90 ,�, �11' 11�► � � � � � � � �' �' � � � Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 15 of 20 � � � � +r�r �r Transportation and Utilitv Lifeline Losses � For the transportation and utility lifeline systems,HAZUS computes the direct repair cost for each component only. There are no losses computed by HAZUS for business interruption due to lifeline outages.Tables 13&14 provide a detailed �Ir+" breakdown in the expected lifeline losses. � HAZUS estimates the long-term economic impacts to the region for 15 years after the earthquake. The model quantifies this �wrr information in terms of income and employment changes within the region. Table 15 presents the results of the region for the given earthquake. � �Mr � Table 13:Transportation System Economic Losses �r (Millions of dollars) i "�' System p Component Inventory Value � Economic Loss k Loss Ratio(%) ..._ _.,„,.. . ___.. .. F _.._. . .___ ...,_ .!.. .. ...„_. ._., ,__. ..._._. _. ___ _...�,._..__�,_._._.a_. .,_ __.,._.. „ _....�_� . _. � , .....,_ ,. .._....,.v...,...._.... � Highway � Segments ; 774.90 ' � ,._,«_.. .___� _�_ _ $0.00 0.00 .� _._. __,__ _.�,__ _ _ ...._._ __....� � _ ____ _ _..., �w_�._. _ u._,_.__..� � Brid es ' 2,930.79 $254.67 �, ,.___ 9_�._,.r_... �� 8.69 , _�. _�_ _.r�_._. ._.. � __.__ �_w�_ �..._u,,�_� ..__. �. �. ... � Tunnels '; $0 03 � 2,91 � 0 89 .. _.,.W...�. ___ ___,..w__. �__._. ___ � ,�a,��t_ .��..� �,�..;�� . .�..._. 3706.60 254.70 � _ _ .._. ,.___._.. _. , -__,, .... . .,_......., _ _._.. , . __ �rr+ ' � Railways � Segments ; 52.84 $0.00 ' � .�., ._ _-__ . . . f.��.,_ . . .�. _w _ . � .. __, _,v_._u.�M ___._�. 0.00 __ . . _._. , �,� � ��_ _...w� � Bridges 0.09 ° $0.00 � . � �. ;_. ,_.. s�._. 128 _..,_._ _ __. ,.. : _ . __ _. . _�._,_. ""�'� Tunnels ; 0.00 ! $0.00 ; 0.00 .� .._. �.�__.. .__..�. � � �. _._.. _.w.�.. ""� Facihties 7.19 � $1.61 � 22.35 _._...__ _�__..._ __ ____ ____.,. .., __. _._._..�._. _ _ ___. ,._ ..,......�_� ,W_. _....__. _._ __ , ��'"`� �rr i ..�>m;:. • �� 60.90 ; 1 60 , �.. .�,__.. __ ._.. _...__._.� ,_.. .�_. : _. _._m._� v,y� Light Rail f Segments ` 0.00 i $0.00 ; e,_ � 0.00 �..._.._.._ . _ _._. _..w.�__.,__ � � Bridges �� 0 00 " $0.00 � 0.00 . �... . . ..,_.._. ,..�._ __�_. __�_, �_.._,... ._ _.,_. ..w._ �. _�,__ _ _..� .._.. _.. ,�.�..._.._.. � � Tunnels , 0.00 ' $0.00 ; 0.00 , _...__, � _.._w �.� ., ___.,�.�.. . �.._._..__,.., .,.� , _ _.._ _�„_ .,�... _.... ...�_..ry _.�_M� .. _._ __. � Facilities ; 0 00 i $0 00 0.00 _ _. __.. __��_.��_ , .__.._.. ,�� _�� .____� ._. . ��.�_�.�...�__� _��____.�_ _._. _._.__.. w. �r � ._. ,�_�___ . ,� � �� 0.00 � 0.00 ; w,_._.._. _.,._,�._ _...__ __�_.___ . .�.__ _ ,_..� _,.,. _. __.. � ___�.,.___. � Bus Facilities � 0 00 � $0.00 i � � � __._ .�_ , _�.�..� �� :_ _.... 0 00 ��' " ^ �00 � �.. . _.._ �,,. _ _..,..__. ,. _ �. , . i 0 00 . ... .._ ._� _�_._m.... ___ .._ � � __..�. _ . __ _ ._.._..__ _, , .. _,..� , q ....> ,4___ _._ � Ferry FaCditles � 0 00 ; $0 00 ' 0.00 ._ ___ _ _. a._ . __ ,� _ .... � � �� 0 00 i _, � ___ � < �� 0 00 ..,.._ _. _._�. . � ,.�. , _ ..._. ,.�_ __ _ _ _ ; _ : �n .... .� ��,_ . � _�� _ y Po� Facilities ° 2.25 ; ` +�r,► --- _.__.. , $0 62 27.70 _._ _ F� ��= e� _. .�,_ . _ �� , �,,, _ ...... . ... _ ��:��„��. >� 2 20 ; _ ....0 60 a � ., . � .._. _...... _ .. _ .r. . . _ _...._ � _ .� . „ , , , __ Airport ? Facifities ' 6.00 ; $1.59 ; �, _ .... ._. . .., .;,. 26.58 _�A. . � . . . ... , �,,_,. _._. _�. , _ �. __._ . w_� ��.._ ; Runways f 68.38 � $0 00 ; 0.00 ,,,,� �._ ___ _ _._v_ � m�_.�_.. _ _ _. .� �._� _�___ . ____ _.__.. ..� ., .� . .__�. ._�_,.__ 74 40 ` 1 60 ' �„ __ .._.. . __ w _ . _a._ ._. > ,: _�,_ _ �,a, �_ _ _.. _�,_ � F��° „� � " 3843.30 � 258 50 = �rwr �ilri►' °IIMI� � '�I�i1' � Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 16 of 20 �r✓ � +r�► Table 14:Utility System Economic Losses v�v (Millions of dollars) �; System Component Inventory Value! Economic Loss` Loss Ratio(%) � _ '. _ _ _ _ '� Potable water ' Pipelines 0.00 ' $0.00 ' 0.00 _ _.. _ _ _. '�' Facilities 109.90 ' $13.15 ' 11.97 _ ___ _ ' .. ., . w._,..._ `�► Distribution Lines 32.50 : $2 13 � 6.55 � _ ._._ _,._._ . _.._ ,.. ._w.w.a '�il� �� ":3�� .,; 142.44 ; $15.28 ' �' Waste Water Pipelines .. . 0.00 $0.00 � 0.00 '�'' _ ____ _._. ... ., _..�...... Facilities 219.80 . $32.79 : 14.92 �` � _ _ _ . _.. ..._... .. __.�_ Distribution Lines 19.50 $1 69 ' 8.63 � , __ ,_ . � _ _ .._. ,� ' ��;� 239.31 � $34.48 ' � �� . _. _ _ __ _ .. ;.. __ __.. `� ._. , Natural Gas i Pipelines 0.00 ' $0.00 � 0.00 � t Facilities . 1.20 � �$017 14.16 ._�l__.__._., _�__._ '�` Distribution Lines , 13.00 $1.80 i 13.84 � __ _ _ _. � _. ___�_ � � 14 22 $1 97 kµ �.. ,��> "�' _. _..... _ � . ; _ . Oil Systems � � Pipelines 0 00 t $0 00 � 0.00 �` . _ __ _ .. . _.._.__ _._.,._...... Facilities 0.00 , $0.00 ; 0.00 � , _ ,.. _. . �._. ,.�, __. ,� �� 0.00 50.00 � , _ - � __....�._... . __..._ ..._ ___�. _. .. _. , ___. .... __w,_.; ._ . . . .,.. Electrical Power i �Facilities ; 484.00 f $60.45 � 12.49 � , , _ . __.. _�._ . �__ _.. _ _ __ _ . . __.._ � '=�� 484.00 � $60.45 � � � _ ,_.. . ., __. _ __ __ . __. . .._._.. .,,..._.._._., Communication ; Facilities 0.90 •; $0.18 G 20.05 � _ . � . __ _�_ �_ �_._. _�$018 ��,.�w ._._ _,.t_.._ ,,�p, ��_. �' � , 0.88 i � , �: ; � a � � 880.84 ' $112.36 � �� .� �, �� ` � � � � � � � � � `� Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 17 of 20 � � +�rr w�rw � Table 15.Indirect Economic Impact with outside aid +�r' (Employment as#of people and Income in millions of$) � LOSS Total % � First Year ''�"' Employment Impact _ 516 _ 0.51 ,�, Income Impact (9) -0.17 Second Year �, ... _ _ _ . __ �. _ �rr _ _ , _ . __,_ _ ._. Employment Impact 189 0.19 �'' Income Impact (32) -0.60 � Third Year w _ ... _,...,. . _ . ._. _. _ __. _. ....._. ;� Employment impact 5 0.00 Income Impact (42) -0.79 � Fourth Year . ___. __.__ _.w._. . , _ __ .,.�. �_. .._._ . _._ _,_.....� . _. . � Employment Impact � 0.00 �, Income Impact (42) -0.80 Fifth Year _._ . ..___ . _.. . �._ . �_ �,.. '�► _._.._, . . _,.,..� .. __ . _...,.._ .__...... . . �.. .... _.. Employment Impact � 0.00 "�' Income Impact (42) -0.80 � Years 6 to 15 _� �_._.___ _. , _._._ _. _._. .,_.,_ ,�, Employment Impact 0 0.00 income Impact (42) -0.80 �rw' � �rrr � � � +� �r � +�.r � �r+� �rr- � � �' +�Ilr+ � � � � � � Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 18 of 20 vr�r � � Appendix A: Countv Listinq for the Reqion "�" King,WA � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � `� � `� � �' � � � � � � � � � � � � "+�'. Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 19 of 20 � awr � �"'` Aapendix B: Reqional Population and Buildinq Value Data � � �r' Building Value(millions of dollars) State County Name Population . . '�' : Residential; Non-Residential : Total Washinqton � King 199,627 ; 12,567; 3,685 16,252 'w�++ Tota1 State � 199,627 : 12,567 j 3,685 � 16,252 „�„ Total Region ° 199,627 � 12,567� 3,685= 16,252 �rr � �' � +y�` � �' '�111►' � � � � +�r �1►' � � � � � � � � +Ir/ v� �Y� � � � � � °�„ � Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 20 of 20 � �rr � � � HAZUS-MH: Flood Event Report � � � Region Name: Renton FLD Cedar � � Flood Scenario: Cedar River � °� Print Date: Friday, April 03, Zoos � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Disc/aimer: � Totals only reflect data for those census tracts/blocks included in the user's study region. �rr The estimates of social and economic impacts contained in this report were produced using HAZUS/oss estimation methodology software �` which is based on current scientific and engineering knowledge. There are uncertainties inherent in any loss estimation technique. �, Therefore,there may be significant differences between the modeled results contained in this report and the actual social and economic losses following a specific Flood. These results can Be improved by using enhanced inventory data and flood hazard information. � � � � � �rr � �' � �r +�► �r�r► _. _. _.. +�i�' Table of Contents � S . . ,_ . ....N^`+'.3�w u e, _ , n�,.... �f+W a u.k ., � � Section Paae# � General Description of the Region 3 � Building Inventory 4 � � General Building Stock � Essential Facility Inventory � Flood Scenario Parameters 5 � Building Damage 6 � General Building Stock � Essential Facilities Damage � Induced Flood Damage 8 ,,�„ Debris Generation � Social Impact $ `�` Shelter Requirements `� Economic Loss 9 � Building-Related Losses � ��ri► 10 � Appendix A: County Listing for the Region � Appendix B: Regional Population and Building Value Data 11 � � � � � � � +�r � � � � � � � � �rr � Flood Event Summary Report Page 2 of 11 � � � � 4 ��,� " �e��s x,� .�*�,j�'� �� aew ��,x *u � � �es`� 3�y . � w� �� '� �'+� ��}.�� i��a �� g ��"��`�„��r��a y. � �^`�� , s'x�b`'`%�� + . . '� � � `" ,�m`;��'r'�-�.�,� .,��< .,�.��i,1° � -^a�.'��,�'' �'"`Y'�.� :�;�'�,t �� 'v� �� '� +�a�.ab� �, "�� p�'a''�s�r�' „ � �, . ' . -, ; .: N ., P. _ , -. _. . .; ��_.,.. � ._.. ,, � � HAZUS is a regional multi-hazard loss estimation model that was developed by the Federal Emergency �r Management Agency (FEMA) and the National Institute of Building Sciences(NIBS). The primary purpose of HAZUS is to provide a methodology and software application to develop multi-hazard losses at a regional '""' scale. These loss estimates would be used primarily by local, state and regional officials to plan and ,,,�,,, stimulate efforts to reduce risks from multi-hazards and to prepare for emergency response and recovery. � The flood loss estimates provided in this report were based on a region that included 1 county(ies) from the ;�,, following state(s): � - Washington �rr �rr Note: "'�" Appendix A contains a complete listing of the counties contained in the region. ��r+ The geographical size of the region is 114 square miles and contains 2,698 census blocks. There are over 86 �" thousand households in the region and has a total population of 222,338 people(2000 Census Bureau data). The ;�, distribution of population by State and County for the study region is provided in Appendix B. �„r There are an estimated 74,785 buildings in the region with a total building replacement value (exciuding contents) of 17,915 million dollars (2006 dollars). Approximately 91.79°/o of the buildings (and 78.76% of the building � value) are associated with residential housing. � � � �rr � �' � � � � � �r° � �p►` �rr+ � � �rri ��r+ �' � � il�+' Flood Event Summary Report Page 3 of 11 � � � � '� �t�� x"�R ' �'�; � � �� r F��, a«ra^ s�,� �'`� x€'�'`�u� � � �� g �` � ^� � � � � ' — ,�� , . � � <�,. ... ,�� '��,�.�. �r� ��.��,., ._.. �� ,�.� . ��rM . .. _ ��'�tt��. .,�., .,. . ��.. �,,,,.� e .. . . „� ,. . h . �' � General Buildinq Stock � HAZUS estimates that there are 74,785 buildings in the region which have an aggregate total replacement � value of 17,915 million (2006 dollars). Table 1 and Table 2 present the relative distribution of the value with respect to the general occupancies by Study Region and Study Case respectively. Appendix B provides a `�' general distribution of the building value by State and County. � Table 1 � Building Exposure by Occupancy Type for the Study Region `� Occupancy Exposure($1000) Percent of Total � Residential 14,109,886 _ _ 78.8% � Commercial 2,923,593 _ 16.3% � Industrial _677,070 3•$% �rr+ Agricultural _ __ 20.003 0.1% Religion _ 100 346 0.6% � Government _ 12,771_ _ 0.1% "�' Education 71,442 0.4% �,; Total 17,915,111 100.00% � � � Table 2 ,� Building Exposure by Occupancy Type for the Study Case � Occupancy Exposure($1000) Percent of Total ,� Residential 331,870 _ 84.5% � Commercial 52,422 13.3% Industrial _ -_3,659 -- — - 0.9% _ � AQricultural _ __ 329 _ _ _ 0.1% "'� Reli ion _ __ 2,844 0.7% �, Government 0 _ 0.0% Education 1,777 0.5% � Total 392,901 100.00% `� � � � � Essential Facilitv Inventorv �rw For essential facilities, there are 1 hospitals in the region with a total bed capacity of 204 beds. There are 83 schools, 2 fire stations, 5 police stations and no emergency operation centers. �` � � � � � w�► Flood Event Summary Report Page 4 of 11 � � .:.W �r � � ��'d�� w' �s�t��3 a �e��'•��+��.:Sv �4��'.�a �,.� �^�� ,�c . �R� �c��,��-,�� >��,�'.; ��'q'�� ` ��,� 4� � �� "� +� �� " ^ �� a ,�� u;�� 3��r r�� '�' .,��,.�"'�3.....- . ., �,�w,.��.�,`�,�" � t t,.,� �.,`� � � E:�y�`:��; ; ��"�'�� '��'"�e� � p�; �, �, � . ,,,�s ,,,,,� . . .�`:..�a ,_ ,a, F^;'�fwe��`a v�s9�.xx . . .. . �;'':?:rc � � ..., ye��3� � HAZUS used the following set of information to define the flood parameters for the flood loss estimate provided in "'� this report. � .rr Study Region Name: Renton FLD Cedar �+.r Scenario Name: Cedar River �rr Return Period Analyzed: 100 � Analysis Options Analyzed: 0 *�rr� � � � wir � � +�rr� � � � �► '�IiI � �` � � � `y�„ � '1r1' � � � � � �� "r��y+ � � Flood Event Summary Report Page 5 of 11 �,�r► � � s -�r ��,�` r�'��',� �'`� :�� a �� " m '�e � � ��g5�. 3� �.� � ,.� ,� ;'�� +� � '� ar � ��"r �;��„��$��w�'��;�v,�,� �`'��-,,;� :�. . �,�+ �. ��i�ffi� � � .. ��:�7 t ... .� ' 3w`"�. �:°' „4xa��,� k �''� 1� .t�t ``:��,�t"`��R�G£��w'x,.�Z�.a> x�nz � �n, .,.e..�`ti_�� `�,»��0.�SS+,Z a,3�t.r3 , .�`�.,w.,.. .Y.w2 ,. >uK.S ... ,., ,...,k...''q, .,,.,v+.�.,, ,x>...i�_ _ . ,.v.�.....,5,, , s .�_. . .. . .�. '� � General Buildinq Stock Damaqe � HAZUS estimates that about 121 buildings will be at least moderately damaged. This is over 41% of the total � number of buildings in the study case. There are an estimated 8 buildings that will be completely destroyed. The definition of the`damage states' is provided in Volume 1: Chapter 5 of the HAZUS Flood technical manual. "�" Table 3 below summarizes the expected damage by general occupancy for the buildings in the region. Table 4 ,,,�, summarizes the expected damage by general building type. � � Table 3: Expected Building Damage by Occupancy � 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 Substantially i� Occupancy Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) � Agriculture 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 i� Commercial 0 0.00 2100.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 � Education 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Government 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 `'�' Industrial 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 � Religion 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Residential 0 0.00 14 11.76 69 57.98 12 10.08 16 13.45 8 6.72 � Total 0 16 69 12 16 8 � � � Table 4: Expected Building Damage by Building Type � Building 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 Substantially � Type Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) '�' Concrete 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 � Manufl-lousing 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 8 100.00 "'�' Masonry 0 0.00 1100.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 � Steel 0 0.00 1100.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Wood 0 0.00 14 12.61 69 62.16 12 10.81 16 14.41 0 0.00 "� � � � � � � � � `1�► � � � � Flood Event Summary Report Page 6 of 11 � � �rr �wr �Y ��r�,� � sr.r+hg,�.�',, t�� f �p�� ., ;k�.� gh�„�*x��.r f�; � �"✓�'�2 �2�+ � a �+ �a��« �.u._�� '� '��'� �k y"��Y�ffi ,} � � '� ��r"� �` � , t"., � ��,t "` t+�'�' Y�' _ �'��g �-�`�'a �" ��z� .,�. � °,m�'�,�`�' ' � � �v�i; " cMs �....> �. �� a �� '�ro� , .., ,� . , . ..� ,.> .'-v?o ��,��t"�' < _. ,. . ,�nr.�.a��'us"� `r ro��- ,.�,"�m� �'Y�', � `�^�"�t �^ : s&�a . �,,.��9 7,s� n.,,� � - .. . . ... .... .. Before the flood analyzed in this study case, the region had 0 hospitai beds available for use. On the day of the '"'�' study case flood event, the model estimates that 0 hospital beds are available in the region. � +�r► ,,�, Table 5: Expected Damage to Essential Facilities wrr �rrr # Facilities � At Least At Least Classification Total Moderate Substantial Loss of Use � Fire_Stations 2 0 0 _,._�, . .. ..�e_ p ___ .. , � _ .� _ � _.. _.. .._ _. __ ._ _ _ v�r Hospitals ___ 1 0 0 �� _ _ _ _. , ... .. . . _._.. 0 _.. _.... _ _ ..� ..,.. ... Pofice Stations 5 �___.w ___. _ � _...__..._ _ .__.a e.�.. .. �r+ __�_0._ ._ . �....._ t .. � 0 _. .. ._�,.._. . ,. . . _. . .... Schools 83 p p � ��rr � If this report displays all zeros or is blank,two possibilities can explain this. (1) None of your facilities were flooded.This can be checked by mapping the inventory data on the depth grid. ""�'" (2) The analysis was not run. This can be tested by checking the run box on the Analysis Menu and seeing if a message box asks you to replace the existing results. �rr �r vr+ �r virr► � wYrr � � v�r° +�rr � �yr► � '� � � � � � � � '�r' � � Flood Event Summary Report Page 7 of 11 � � � �� a 4 a e � a x �I.�, g T��"fi � �. $� ":�'a`" ��`�` �� '4� � : �k r '�x�w3„w�� "' r � a �.� �, �.�, � . � � #��, r�' r �� `� �� t �� `�� " � � �s � � �� ,� ,� ��5 �r7 f�� . �; . �-� a � y s;$�� ';.��4. �.q:,- s v �'�u C� ��, av. . .,. �.°�� ,'�'�.q'°�,�..� �. , _.._i�� * .�. ;�rc� � -• ., �� ,..�-, �,.„ .� �,�,.`c�s. _ _ � . .: .a a.. .�,,.., . -' „. ,�,. ,. , �� ._. °r,t3 ,. .�. . ... ..._ a_,,.. .. . . �� Debris Generation � HAZUS estimates the amount of debris that will be generated by the flood. The model breaks debris into three � general categories: 1) Finishes (dry wall, insulation, etc.), 2) Structural (wood, brick, etc.) and 3) Foundations � (concrete slab, concrete block, rebar, etc.). This distinction is made because of the different types of material handling equipment required to handle the debris. +�w The model estimates that a total of 2,261 tons of debris will be generated. Of the total amount, Finishes � comprises 76% of the total, Structure comprises 10% of the total. If the debris tonnage is converted into an � estimated number of truckloads, it will require 90 truckloads (@25 tons/truck) to remove the debris generated by the flood. ''�" � � � � �� r � p �� -��•�,� � +�.��"`y�,�r�t � r�,�t '�a ,x� �`,. �• _e^r �E�A � _ ;� :: � ��e s��`a � �.c# rat� r � � v ��i� ��k� �* � ��\ 4"^�• � �`�.�',.> ,` ��,�,'�`;� � '��+w.a�: ��.,. .._, . . ,�`N�:. -',.'�4,�:..a . . .�� , � :�. ."��"w;��>,. . , , .. '. ._. .� .. ,'+�,.. , .,. � Shelter Requirements � HAZUS estimates the number of households that are expected to be displaced from their homes due to the i'�" flood and the associated potential evacuation. HAZUS also estimates those displaced people that will require �,,�,, accommodations in temporary public shelters. The model estimates 228 households will be displaced due to the flood. Displacement includes households evacuated from within or very near to the inundated area. Of '�" these, 473 people (out of a total population of 222,338)will seek temporary shelter in public shelters. „�, � � � ��r+ � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Flood Event Summary Report Page 8 of 11 � �.. �rr � �rr #� q,,� �� "rz�'��`) �`�.�� .�Z k�°��w 7'M�`.a+ � � �.*l t ` '`��?r��'� ` Ya,�` ��„�'i �� ' ��,� .xyP� '�"" :�� :�' at 3 a'�s�;'r, "" �,s* d �+- '' 't� s".�,"4 �`��;^ � � � n a�". �.., *�. , ° „} � r��r �� ya��'��,�i � � �' raa��+a�� ,,�� _ a � _. :: r �, f��. . ,.,, . , �� . ,..,. ,,�� ; °� �,"�„� � � � � �c � „ ,, «°� ,., >. �< . �,.� � ;,�,, The total economic loss estimated for the flood is 24.39 million dollars, which represents 6.21 % of the total replacement value of the study case buildings. � � Buildinq-Related Losses � The building losses are broken into two categories: direct building losses and business interruption losses. The `'�"" direct building losses are the estimated costs to repair or replace the damage caused to the building and its �,,. contents. The business interruption losses are the losses associated with inability to operate a business because of the damage sustained during the flood. Business interruption losses also include the temporary 'r+'" living expenses for those people displaced from their homes because of the flood. � ''� The total building-related losses were 24.24 million dollars. 1% of the estimated losses were related to the �,�,,, business interruption of the region. The residential occupancies made up 69.85% of the total loss. Table 6 below provides a summary of the losses associated with the building damage. � � °�► Table 6: Building-Related Economic Loss Estimates wrr (Millions of dollars) �` Category Area Residential Commercial Industrial Others Total �`" Building Loss +y�„+ Building 10.17 1.33 0.18 0.05 11.72 Content 6.83 4.55 0.26 0.75 12.38 �rr Inventory 0.00 0.08 0.05 0.01 0.14 ��t ~� �"�`�� 16.99 5.95 0.48 0.81 24.24 � BUSIfI@SS Iflt@ffUQtlOfl "�"' Income 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.04 Relocation 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.04 �` Rentallncome 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 ,�, Wage 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.06 +��`� � �� x^''� 0.04 0.08 0.00 0.03 0.15 �e ,��.�'aw�a �' ALL �', ,''��'�'��"��,r�k�� 17.03 6.03 0.48 0.84 24.39 � � � �rr � � � � � �rr �rr � � � Flood Event Summary Report Pa e 9 of 11 � g � � � Aupendix A: Countv Listinq for the Reqion � Washington "�` - King � � � '� � � � � '� � � � � � '� � � � � � � � � � ``�" � � � '�y> '� � � � � � � `�l�' Flood Event Summary Report Page 10 of 11 r�rr +�r► � �` Appendix B: Reaional Population and Buildinq Value Data � � �' Building Value(thousands of dollars) '`� Population Residential Non-Residential Total � ,�,,, Washinaton � Kinq 222,338 14,109,886 3,805,225 17,915,111 �,,: Total 222,338 14,109,886 3,805,225 17,915,111 � Total Study Region 222,338 14,109,886 3,805,225 17,915,111 ar. �rr +�r � � � � � �r � +wr � � rtr' �rr �rrr � �rr �r►' +rrw `�irr Vrrr► �rr+ � � � �r .� � � Flood Event Summa Re ort �r ry p Page 11 of 11 � Z � � W W � d. V X � N � _ m p �, 0 � � o N Z a Q N � u� 0 v � a Z W a Q a °C c� z z z Q � a � � � � �► � � �► � � � � � � � � � � � � � �► �► � � � � � � � � �► � � � � � � � �► � � � � � � � Appendix 4 Contents � Planning Meeting 1 (11/6/2008) Records A4-2 � Meeting Minutes � � Planning Meeting 4 (4/2/2009) Records A4-8 �r Meeting Minutes � Public Meeting 1 (4/9/2009) Records A4-13 � Website Calendar Announcement �'' Renton Reporter Announcement "�'' Sign-in Sheet �rrr Planning Meeting 5 (5/7/09) Records A4-16 � Meeting Minutes � Sign-in Sheet `''�` � Planning Meeting 6 (6/4/09) Records A4-25 ,� Meeting Minutes � Sign-in Sheet � Planning Meeting 7 (7/2/09) Records A4-35 +�rr► Meeting Minutes rir�r Sign-in Sheet ,� Planning Meeting 8 (8/6/09) Records A4-44 �` Meeting Minutes `�` Sign-in Sheet "� � Planning Meeting 9 (2/4/10) Records A4-54 � Meeting Minutes � Public Meeting 2 (3/16/10) Records A4-59 +r�t+�° Listing for Renton Reporter Announcement r� Website Calendar Announcement � Sign-in Sheet � Planning Meeting 10(4/1/10) Records A4-62 '�' Meeting Minutes � Sign-in Sheet � � � � � A4-1 `�` � � +� �rrr �rrr rrr� � Emergency Management Group Meeting �"' Minutes from November 6, 2008 � Present: � Kelley Balcomb-Bartok,Administrative,Judicial& Legal Services/Communications Specialist � Dennis Conte,Community Services/Facilities Supervisor �'' 1eff Dosch,Valley Medical Center/Security Manager �rr Abdoul Gafour, Public Works/Water Utility Supervisor � Jim Henriksen, Public Health/Emergency Prep � Kayren Kittrick,CED/Engineering Supervisor Mindi Mattson, Fire& Emergency Services/Emergency Management Coordinator �r Norma McQuiller, Community& Economic Development/Neighborhood Program Coordinator � Rachel Myers, Fire&Emergency Services/Emergency Management Intern '�"` Deborah Needham, Fire &Emergency Services/Emergency Management Director +rrr Linda Parks, Finance & Information Services/Director �,,, Robin Robertson, Human Resources& Risk Management/Risk Manager .�; Karl Rufener, Fire& Emergency Services/Fire Battalion Chief/Safety Officer Mike Stenhouse, Public Works/Maintenance Services/Director � Clark Wilcox, Police/Patrol Services � � ;� Next Meeting: Thursday December 4,at 0900 at City Hall,7th Floor Conferencing Center. vrr� �rr � �,,, Assignments: �, All Departments—Complete Exercise Planning Team Worksheet and Return to Director Deb �rr Needham ASAP. Assign an Exercise Planning Team Member available to meet regularly. All Exercise Plannin�Team Members—Assist in selecting weekly team meeting time. � Abdul Gafour-Contact Metro Treatment and invite them to participate in Flood Exercise 2/26/09. r"'" Contact Ron Straka about the Black River Pump Station to determine what impacts we should expect � in the event of a flood. �rr Kellev Bartok Balcomb—Contact Regional PIO to address having region-wide �„ messaging/communication at the Flood Exercise. �r Deb Needham—Investigate having an EAS message go out as a part of the Flood Exercise. Contact Exercise Planning Team Members to identify regular meeting day/time. Hold a meeting to � determine how a cit -wide ICS structure will best be accom lished. Get a co Y p py of REPA's Safe Water � class PowerPoint to provide to all city employees. � � � � � '11� �1�" � � � Key Decisions/Discussions: � 1. Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan loose ends(EM Director Needham) � a. Medical Reserve Corps is not in the plan yet under ESF 8, it will be added when ,� completely set up �,, b. We will be revising the plan on a more regular, paced schedule. Next year focus will be Long Term Community Recovery,Communications&Warning, Mass Care,and Damage � Assessment. By starting on a few ESFs next year,we won't end up with the same crunch � again in four years. �' c. Still need to get agreements with other agencies listed in our plan. '+�' d. Some organizations are working on stock language for all Cities to use in their plans and, � in the future,this would allow us to use their language without the need for their � individual review. � e. The Plan is now before council—if there are any requests for more information, clarification, Director Needham will contact you. � 2. Hazard Mitigation Plan on the Radar(Needham) � a. Due simultaneously as the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan but does not `w� affect as many Departments. If you have a mitigation piece and aren't listed/included, � contact Director Needham. � b. There is funding available for Mitigation Projects i.e.Station 11 seismic upgrades. If � there are any other mitigation projects—any that the City could benefit from-please � speak to/submit these to Director Needham. 3. Valley Medical Exercise(Dosch) � a. Valley Medical Center is coordinating with 21 hospitals to do a large Pandemic Influenza "'�► exercise- November 13, 14, 15, 17,18. �" b. On the 13th will be a Communications Exercise-our EOC email will be pinged � c. On the 14th VMC will test Supply and Access for things like medicine and respirators. ;� Renton Police need to be aware of this as there will be a WA State Patrol escorted semi �r�r► truck in the area. d. On the 15`h they will be doing Ham Radio and other radio communications testing. � 4. Citywide Exercise Planning(All) '`� a. Introductions (around the room)for non-City participants �►► b. Exercise Planning Process Overview � i. Need to comply with Federal Guidelines for exercise planning—rigid structure ,� and paperwork. Needham carries the bulk of this responsibility but needs � support. ii. Need to develop exercise objectives that are written as SMART objectives: � specific, measurable, achievable, realistic,time-specific. � iii. Handout—Exercise Planning Team—Please draft for your Department what � you'd like to get out of this exercise and indicate your level of play. �rrr � � � � � �r � �trr � � iv. Need to create a planning team—want to identify this for each department and set up weekly time to meet(may not meet weekly, but want hold on calendars). � v. The next exercise will be a flood exercise that may help focus attention on the . � Green River Levees. The levee repairs that are planned as a result of the FEMA "�" decertifications aren't predicted to be complete for 10 years. Even though it is a � flood exercose we can add other aspects. ,,,�,,,, vi. Council Members will be involved in this exercise and look at policy decisions in � the recovery phase. vii. Decided on February 26th, 8 am to noon as the exercise time for field play. � viii. In March,April, and May there will be follow-up tabletop exercises for council to � participate in recovery stage decisions. � c. Exercise Series/Structure Suggestions and Discussion � i. Full Scale—all departments involved to some degree. The exercise will take ,,�,,, place over about a 4 hour period. wrr ii. Fire Station 14 is in the flood zone and will be affected. iii. Valley Medical-Communications Piece-Test influx of patients in Valley Com .r+ and how SR-167 flooding will affect how supplies get to us(95%come that way) � iv. Fire—Evacuation elements, building of ICS structure to handle team,water ""'"" rescue elements on lake Washington (pretend it is river)which will be a Zone3 �r water exercise—King County Sheriff Department wants to play along �„ v. Consider using Red Cross Mobile Feeding Unit and/or the Soup Ladies for rehab „�, or mass feeing—this is something they would want to be involved in,to train � volunteers and cycle food products. Departments should keep the Red Cross Mobile Feeding Unit in mind for any drill,exercise or emergency events you � have. �"� vi. Should Metro Treatment be involved? It would be good to see if they would like '�' to participate it could help identify needed improvements that could be grant �,r,► funded—Abdul Gafour will contact them and invite them to participate. � vii. Should we consider drinking water safety and other environmental issues in the � exercise to include—waste water;flooding of septic systems and sewage back- ups; and supporting mass care-ensuring sanitation,feeding. Primarily Health � De artment would like to la in the recove P p y ry phase.Also think about Public `�""` Information and risk communication. There is a lot of intersection in the '�"' recovery phase—tabletop exercises with council will include this. �r viii. Public Information/Messaging—consider coordinating public messaging „�, information regionally. Kelley Bartok Balcomb will investigate further by � addressing/bringing up at the next Regional PIO meeting. ix. King County Sheriff Department and departments in the City of Tukwila are � committed to participating in the exercise. ��"` x. Is it possible to issue an EAS message? If this is the month we are scheduled to ""'�"'' test,definitely. If not,we can attempt to broker a trade. Deb Needham will �r investigate further and attempt to schedule. � � wiw � � � � xi. The Community Notification System will not be ready by the time of this � exercise, but it will highlight areas of concern and demonstrate need for purchase if it has not been purchased by the time of the exercise. � xii. Satellite phones are still an issue—there are only 10 minutes out of an hour ''� where they might work but we are not able to open up our network to know � with certainty which 10 minutes will work. We do have a great amateur radio � notification system. A secure repeater will be available during the exercise. ,,� xiii. Will flood impact our communication systems/servers? With everything in the � SW under water—at 167 height and lower—only Station 14 will be affected. It is likely that comms will still be up. It will impact Valley Medical Center parking. � xiv. Black River Pump station? Abdul Gafour will check with Ron Straka to "� determine what impacts we would expect to have in the event of a flood. ''�+'' xv. Tukwila—their levee was not decertified, so flood maps don't take into account �r the potential for levee failure. Since any levee may break if subject to the „� appropriate stresses,we need a scenario for each potential levee failure and �. impacts, perhaps a simple elevation map. xvi. What about Station 11? This exercise considers Green River flooding and even � in a worst case scenario Station 11 is in the clear until/unless the Cedar River � floods. `�'` xvii. CED—Recovery phase decisions will include heavy involvement of CED � xviii. Police—will participate, but asked about grant funding. None is currently � available. ,,� xix. ICS needs to be a part of the exercise and be practiced by all of us jointly as a � City. Public Works would be the IC with the Operations Section handling life/safety issues within appropriate branches. It is far easier to have one � agency in charge and staff it in such a way that important functions get ''�' accomplished. A1LS would staff the public information function,whether in the '�r� EOC or in the field. We need to predetermine what incident command structure � will look like for a flood and who is in charge. Action Item: have a discussion to � figure out how ICS will work city-wide and predetermine an incident command � structure. xx. Supply chain will be affected, need to do continuity planning. � xxi. CERTwill have limited involvement—this is not the best exercise to include � them. Shelter Operations could be up and running instead. We are also looking � at developing a volunteer mobilization center—something that coordinates � volunteers who are showing up and want to help in event of disaster/etc(will „�;, try to have it ready in time.) ,�; xxii. Residential evacuation—focus on SW and businesses (not residential)—consider chemicals/gas petroleum in factories in flood zone. Storage tanks, pipeline— � fuel impacts/Other Hazmat Facilities. Identify sites that have these materials � and preplan what to do, including making an effort to secure in initial warnings °"�' xxiii. Washington State Department of Ecology has a role in hazmat mgmt functions. � � �r � � vr �rr� � � � xxiv. Be sure to complete Exercise Planning Team handout. This will be reviewed in the exercise planning team and allow us to focus scenarios for departments � (Tukwila,and any otherjurisdictions,will do a parallel exercise and will come to � some of the planning meetings to discuss big items.) �✓ xxv. Give thought to recovery lessons for City Council. �r. xxvi. Be thinking about Agency Department Participation „�,,, 1. What level of participation for your agency/dept? � 2. Time commitment the day of the major exercise? 3. Number of possible players from your agency/dept? � 4. Desired activities for your staff? ""� xxvii. Agency/Department Objectives "�'" 1. What measurable objectives do you want to see included? w 2. What objectives do we share for the overall exercise? ,,,�,, d. Exercise Date-Setting � i. Need to have time for'hotwashes' directly following event. Then have one � formal exercise debrief for summary of findings/lessons learned. ii. Thursday Feb 26th 0800—need to have contingency plan for possible � cancellation. "'� iii. Tabletop exercises will continue through May`09 �r e. Exercise Planning Team Meeting Schedule ,,,��, i. Who will be your planning team rep? Make sure to think about this and include ;� on your planning handout. ii. What is their availability for meeting Nov-Feb? Want recurring meeting time. �.r Wed Morn or Thurs Afternoons are the only times that are open for current '� attendees on a regular basis. Action Item:Deb Needham will ask people �`` yes/no on certain dates. '�^' iii. Flood maps are available in PDF firnat. Action Item: Deb will email to �,r,• everyone. Please use good judgment in how you speak about flood risk in ;,�, Renton so that we are not alarmist.All levees are subject to failure under some � unknown level of stress, but it is not certain that they will fail,or even highly likely.We still need to prepare,though, and that is our focus. � iv. Need to do a round of EOC training before exercise. There is a Shelter training """ this weekend. Action Item: Deb Needham will send out information on weekly �"' trainings that will not require overtime. Consider having staff attend the vrr Renton Emergency Preparedness Academy(REPA)this Winter Quarter. Classes �,,. will include:the Police Citizen's Academy, Interacting with Emergency � Responders, safe water for emergencies (this wou/d be qood to have as a PowerPoint for all city emp/oyees),Amateur Radio License Class, Introduction � to Animal Rescue and a CPR Saturday on Feb 28, 2009. �'"' f. Announcements? None. Thanks for coming! � �.* � �wr � � � wr� � �rr► Important Dates: ``�` Fire & Emergency Services FireBall—December 6, 2008, at 1830 "'�' Flood Exercise—February 26, 2009,at OS00 �' CPR Saturday—February 28, 2009. � � � � � �wrt� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � '� � � � � � � � � � � � � �rr ,� �r � � Emergency Management Group Meeting `'�" Minutes from Apri12, 2009 � � Present: � Kelley Balcomb-Bartok, Communications Specialist, AJS �„ Todd Black, Capital Projects Coordinator, Community Services Kent Curry, Commander, Police �` Suzanne Dale-Estey, Economic Development Director, Community and Economic Development �' Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services ,,,� Steve Lee, Surface Water Supervisor, Public Works �, Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency Services George McBride, Information Services Director, Finance & Information Services '" Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services �. Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services ;;�, Linda Parks, Fiscal Services Director, Finance & Information Services � � Next Meeting: �' 0900 on May 7th, 7th Floor Conferencing Center. vrr �„► Important Dates �„ Apri120,2009 - City Council Tabletop Exercise II- Green River Flooding May 12,2009- Continuity of Operations Planning Class - offered through REPA `"�"' May 18,2009-City Council Tabletop Exercise III - Green River Flooding �r June 6,2009 - ATC 20/21 Training- offered through REPA „��,, June 13-14,2009 - Shelter Operations Training- offered through REPA � �wr Assignments: `""� 1. All Departments-If you have any injects or items you want highlighted on short-term �' recovery at the next City Council Tabletop please contact M. Mattson. � 2. All Departments-Review your stockpile of supplies to use in the event of an emergency for all of the members of your department. Identify what you have and � what you need, and report tlais to D.Needham. � � Key Decisions/Discussions: � �, D. Needham chaired the meeting. "'�'` 1. Disaster Recovery Projects �r► Handouts: City of Renton Project List, Preliminary Damages Assessment Summary �,, Report. � y.r � � � � Emergency Management Group-April 2, 2009 Minutes � � These two handouts should contain the same information. If you see any discrepancies � please notify D. Needham. � We've already had a few meetings with FEMA and believe we've arrived at the final list � of applicable damages. We are claiming 4.8 million in damages and are eligible for ,� receiving 75% back, or 3.75 million, making it worth the effort. � We reviewed the Project List one project at a time. Project managers gave a summary of �r' their project(s) and filled in the grey areas or identified a contact who could. Project 6, ;,�; from the Airport, is a big project but no Letter of Intent for a mitigation project was submitted. Project 11 and 13 are also big projects. In regards to project 11, the next '� flood could have a large impact. Project 13 is a project to repair a spawning channel that � was decimated by the flood and overtopped the permeable levee built in 2001. It is no � longer a channel anymore and no spawning occurs. This may impact our dredging rights � and increase flood risks. Projects 14-16 are in regards to the Cedar River Trail. If any projects are complete we can collect funds once this paperwork is submitted. ''�'` � 2. Mitigation Project Proposals Discussion and Recommendations ,�, We've been working on collecting the data necessary for our existing Hazard Mitigation Plan. Letters of Intent for mitigation projects are due to the state no later than May 1, 5 "'�"" pm. The basic process for this is: a mitigation grant is proposed, then letters of intent are v�r► sent, the state then reviews all the submittals and then determines the level of support. �„ Once this determination has been made, the full applications are prepared and are due in September. Limits are 1.5 million per project. Each City can have up to two projects. `� There is a matching requirement of 25%, which can include a soft match. We need to "'�'" ensure we have the matching funds to complete the project and maintain funding. r� We currently have two proposals for mitigation projects. The first one is T. Black's � project for Community Services with a projected cost of$3 million. We expect the total �"' to go down as we know more and have more exact information. This is a project to v� improve the Cedar River Trail's gabions (wire baskets with rocks in them). The damage � they sustained in recent floods reduced their effectiveness for erosion control and river bank protection. Part of this project is going to be completed by the Army Corps of "�" Engineers, for the lower portion of the trail. We should take this part out of the proposal �' before going to FEMA. This project will replace the gabions, at a minimum, with the ,� same thing or a new thing. We are currently evaluating what to use, including logs or core logs (fabric encased materials where things can grow inside). More study is needed � to determine the best course of action. `� � The other project is S. Lee's Public Works/Water project currently projected to cost an � estimated $1.5 million. The Elliot Levee was originally designed for 3000 CFS, but we have had events each year that overtop this amount. So, even if we build it back to �' current specs it will continue to be damaged. We are currently doing a study to '�r determine the best course of action, including looking at setting back the levee to the golf ,,� course fence. This would mean we wouldn't have to maintain the channel but would still get the benefits of the habitat. This would also protect the golf course from damage that � � Page 2 of 5 � � � � �r � Emergency Management Group—April 2, 2009 Minutes � � is ineligible for FEMA reimbursement. The match required for this project would be �"' $375,000. We do have a means to get this through the King County Flood Control '�` District. It would come in small increments and would achieve the matching amount in � approximately three to four years. � We have three weeks to refine and pin this down. Please ensure you have support from �"" your department in regards to the match and the City's level of support. � �" 3. Hazard Mitigation Plan and Grant Eligibility Updates ,�,,. We have to have a current hazard mitigation plan in place to be eligible for Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funding. The plan is currently being revised by a consultant � the Community Services department retained. This year's plan won't be the most "�'`" complete plan but will improve upon last year's plan and will increase the level of detail. � The guidelines, for the plan and grant, include a requirement for public outreach. We are �rr meeting these outreach requirements with a public meeting scheduled for Apri19. We are posting a notice about this meeting in the paper, and have done a press release. The """� purpose of the meeting is to gather input on what is a value to the community. We will �r explain the hazards to them, using a hazard map on display, and then we will garner their ,�,, priorities. Names of possible department representatives were provided to attend the meeting and provide information to the public. �r `°�" For the meeting agenda, we are thinking about doing a quick introduction and then allow �,,, for questions. Do any attendees with more experience with public meetings have any suggestions? S. Dale-Estey suggested having a sidebar on this or contacting others in her � department who could assist. �rrrr ""� 4. Council Tabletop Exercise Review � We recently had our first of three table top exercises, using the Howard Hanson Dam ,�„ scenario, with city council. No other cities have engaged their councils in this way but have asked for copies of our tabletop exercise. The handout Executive Roles in Disaster � Response and Recovery was given to Council as reference in the tabletop exercise. It �" specifies their roles and responsibilities. The tabletop exercise gives them an environment � where they can explore these issues and learn before they need to make decisions in a real � emergency. Each council member had subject matter experts to refer to when they needed to. All Administrators had advance review of the exercise and injects at mayor's staff. �"""' Each Administrator ensured the injects and department specific information was accurate. �rr Throughout the exercise, we ensured the mayor's authority was clear in the event of an ,;�,, emergency. Council respected this, allowing us to move swiftly when necessary. "'� The first tabletop focused on response issues. The short-term recovery table top is �' scheduled for Apri120 (to begin not later than 6pm). We'd like to get S. Dale Estey's �,,,, expertise for the short-term recovery table top exercise. Following this one will be the long-term recovery table top. Chip Vincent and Norma McQuiller would be good � resources for this exercise. � �..► �"' Page 3 of 5 '+rr � � � Emergency Management Group-Apri12, 2009 Minutes � � During the first exercise the City council asked for an update on the stockpiling of supplies for our employees. Remember, this is the responsibility of each department to � manage. We may ask you to update us on this project so that we can give them an "�'` accurate representation of where the City is at in acquiring the necessary supplies. � During the exercise we also looked at shelter operations and considered what it would be like to provide a shelter for our neighbors. Council responded well to this idea and � discussed providing shelter and determining how we would pay for this. We also '�"` discussed flood fighting and the different costs of infrastructure and the costs to save it. � The final thing covered in the exercise was, what will the City do if there are no funds ,�;, and we can't cover the costs of things like payroll? Council began to look at this, which included discussion of a rainy day fund. This work will be a good starting point for the � next exercise. Overall the first exercise was a success. Council members are still talking � about it very positively. v� Please feel free to provide any input/injects for Council that you'd like them to wrestle � with. It is important to remember to keep this at the policy level. Even if you don't have "� the wording for the inject and/or only have a concept for what you'd like them to look at, � please contact M. Mattson so that it can be worked in. �, 5. Howard Hanson Dam Information Updates � We recently attended the large overall planning meeting regarding the Howard Hanson "w+" Dam concerns. Seattle is participating in planning although they will be minimally ,,�;,, impacted by the flood. D. Needham is leading the Notification and Warning Unit and developing the Standard Operation Guidelines and Information Resource for that group. `� �rr A coordinated NOAA weather radio campaign is planned. We are also proposing an `opt � in/opt out' for the new community notification system we are getting. We would like to ,�, allow businesses, via the web, to update us on what phone lines to use in the event of emergency. This is not only important for the businesses, but is important for the City of `"� Renton because we have a limited number of free calls on the notification system. In the � event of an emergency the remainder of the cost for the calls is partly reimbursable by ,,� FEMA, but we need to be aware that there is a cost. � The planning group is trying to identify locations for mega-shelters for displaced Kent "�' and Auburn residents. Rachel Myers is working on contacting hotels to learn their �► occupancy levels so that we can project evacuation plans. S. Dale-Estey pointed out that there could be some issues with this because it is protected corporate information, and � suggested talking later about this. M. Mattson is working on the evacuation plan. ''�` � The good news is that the Army Corps of Engineers are comfortable raising the Dam's �, pool level slightly, allowing us to increase the storage capacity. The bad news is that a second depression has been identified. They still think the dam will hold and projections �` are better than they were. CED is doing an informational mailing to businesses and � property owners and are working on developing a business mailing list. Since we are � spending hours working on developing this list it would be great to have a GIS system ,� available to help, but we're not there yet. � Page 4 of 5 '� v� � � �rr Emergency Management Group-April 2, 2009 Minutes � � ��rr +�r► v� 6. Project Accounting ,,�,, Justifying expenses for the EMPG grant can be difficult for our department because we have the smallest emergency management staff in the region. In addition, we don't have �"`` a blanket cost share that other emergency management departments have that allows for °�` billing and recapturing costs for computers, facilities, printing, etc. Since we can't bill ,,,� for this, we've billed for employee's time spent working on emergency managemendhazard mitigation planning, meetings, etc (not for disaster events). Most � people included in this have been figured for 1 or 2 hours a week for a year or 5% of their "�' time, while some like Terry Vickers, Cyndie Parks, and Gary Harsh have been figured at � '/z of their time due to their line of work that fits emergency management definitions. G. �, McBride stated that he can provide a breakout of emergency management's costs for IS for the 2010 grant application. � �r► Last year we got $85,000 and are hoping to get approximately$110,000 this year. Since �,,, we started getting this grant, we've nearly tripled what we've gotten previously. The grant essentially pays for M. Mattson's position. When funding arrives it can be used for "�'` anything that supports emergency management, such as funding for police overtime for � emergency management exercises and training. Be thinking about what you could use �, for your staff or the City as a whole. � Since there is staff inember time attributed to emergency management and this grant we �"' need to start tracking this time using project accounting. We have 22 people city-wide � who need to start accounting for this time if they have not been doing it already. A �r project number is being created and when it is available it will be sent out to the applicable people. Please start tracking your time as soon as your receive this "'�"'' information. � ,,,,� 7. Announcements/Good of the Order The REPA class schedule for Spring 09 has been published. Several classes have already � proved to be very popular. Please take a look at the classes and spread the word. � +wr � Minutes taken and submitted by: Kelly Carey, Admin Sec I, Fire &Emergency Services � � �wr � � �rr � �w �"" Page 5 of 5 �r � City of Renton Home page Page 1 of 1 �` � � .a�---�— ... �_ . '�Ir ��+� ( tty'[�t i � ��"" � � : .� "�' h �� r� A'+ �.�...�..� , l` �;�' �'l ['; �`l , �� ,,.+. '+.�'�•.++�r:�ti.R\:�E`�.,a `.,� `� � You are here:Cafendar �Print Frier�dlv Version `� � C��'llf��11' ---------------._....--------.......---------------- � < Aprif 2011 View Upcoming: ee � onth �.y� ,�„ » su rto Yu we Ti� Fr sa Date Event Locat[on � > 27 28 29 3a 3� �, � 4/9 Hazard Mitigatton Pfan Citizen Ynput Meeting Renton City Hal1,7th Floar > 3 4 5 � 7 g � b;0(I Ph4 The public meeting on April 9th,6:00-8:00 pm in Council Chambers � > �Q ]� 12 � 14 15 16 to Council Chambers on the 7th fioor of Renton City vi�r 8:00 PM Half,ia55 S.Grady Way,Renton.The current Hazard > 17 18 19 20 �], ?3 23 Mitigation Plan and lo�al maps will be available for � > 2� �5 2� � 28 2� 30 review.The plan identifies hazards that could affect � > 1 2 �. 4 5 6 7 residents,businesses,visitors,and infrastructure .__ --_---------------------- � within the City of Renton and Iden�ifies potentiat mitigation projecks that could help proEect the City v�r Filter Resuits from future dtsasters. Public input Is sought For the By Date Range:(mm/dd/yyy}+) revision of this plan.For more informatlon,please � --... . ._.. 2!9/2009 I contact Deborah Needham,Emergency anagemen � Director at 425-430-7Q27. From: 8 �'' _......_- -- __ 4l9/2009 � To: 8 � By Category ancJ/or Keyword: � Afl Categories i� � - � _� � �: Submit:; "� � � � � � � � � � � � � � v�+ � � htt„•//rPntnnwa anv/calPnr�ar_a�nx 5/25/2011 _, ; "r� 'i� '� �'� �9� " �a� �g� �� '� '''� �� t� � � � � � � � � � � � � � �, � v � � � � � � $ . � � � �° � : _ � _ .�� :< : „ � : : � _ ; ; � _. , �, ,� . � ; �,,....,., . � � � � ir f MONDAY,05l23/2011 � � ` - _ - . �1 . . . .. . . . - . -. . .. .- . -.. . . . -•� . � � � �i't'��i � .l,�i�M�s BiA�iON �.� ,� .�� ' � d� EtiOS ,-� +�l��,�101, �.a;�',�. , �'"'� ''"'' o�r..e�a. � � � ��A+y :,��aii" i r � � � `.,t,�0 COMMENTS [�lMAIL u Ll7TlR �PRINT �FOLLOW �SHAR! _ __ - , . City to hold public meeting on � Renton Reporter on Facebook Hazard Mitigation Plan • --. ��ke Yo��ke - ReportE . . Apr 02 2009 . � � `� . . Confirm Page•Ir You like � • The City of Renton will host a public meeting on p��„� Page•ir ' ' • Thursday,April 9,so that citizens can review the �� "� ,� ��ti'� 382 people like Rer�ton Reporter.381 � current Hazard Miti ation Plan and local ma s. ^�� 3 g p i�f�Ei �� - � � .,,,� people like Renton Reporter. ■Y i7 ,,, IN�i,�►'�i. ,, , �., ` „� .- The meeting is 6-8 p.m. in the City Council � � chambers on the seventh floor of Renton City Hall, �� ,� �" � � ��a� r 1055 S. Grady Way. ��_:: � � �� ' � S � „mr-a�m�"s''t,. %1� . ._ ....... ...... Th..;....... I��+n.inn.. .... The plan identifies hazards that could affect �c �Facebook social plugin residents, businesses,visitors and infrastructure . . " ' �`' ----� -.�--- - -�--.--�-��-----�- _ within the City of Renton and identifies potential �= �� mitigation projects that could help protect the city � � � from future disasters. rtewTeo sroR�es � � �� Renton Reporter � HEtNEN&CQMPANY Public input is sought for the revision of this plan. For further � p blic heaanalnW dne davion Suns'et � information,contact Deborah Needham, Emergency Management redevelooment �_ _ Cltek�iN for a�or9�wlorm#11oa! � . _.�,. .. _._�_ �_�__. ..�.__. �..___...�. Director at 425-430-7027. . Renton CiN Council to hoid oubiic I hearina on Gomcastfranchise Mondav ' South King County �°a � v= �� , �r:s �� ' • �itv of Covinaton plans oublic meetina �` �" for comorehensive nlan amendments . YarrowBay,and Covinqton reach �eement on traffic mitipation and Maole Hilis deveiooment to cloae out Z414 . Panel to hold forum_on flood mitiaation for area rivers . �puos urflpd to come toaether.careful4v mitiaate river svstem�Hildreth . Citv to hold 2 flood oreoaredneas tIISgSILIff� i i ATTENDANCE — PLEASE S[GN IN !f you would like to speak, please indicate as such next to your name with an "X",you will be cailed on in turn and given 5 minutes to speak. Meeting: _ Hazard Miti�ation Plan Public Meetin� Date(s): April 9, 2009 �imes: 6:00 pm—5:00 pm Location: Renton Citv Hall Counci[ Chambers Print Narr►e I would like to Spea�C(X) Email address ifvou would like us to respond to vour inquiry � ��c�i'.�r /vP�.2G�'�Y�t �..''r�ivl �2�I, ��V' L��'l/�!/l.GI � i C=�"a /.` �S ��e n q ., �, �a � ��>' . . , � s ��,� . ; � � � , n � � Gt ��lN � l � '_"' -^ � , i t �� , �(��cl �}�-R � L�t�a � � �� ""` ..�j2L �L'�/�/� 1 \ r:1 ��;: f I`�"a�F'Q-- r�r�� ,,� �. � / �,! � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � '� � �; � � � '� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �rr � +�1r✓ � ;�„ Emergency Management Group Meeting � Minutes from May 7, 2009 � � Present: �rr Kelley Balcomb-Bartok, Communications Specialist, Administrative,Judicial & Legal Services ,,,� Mark Baldridge, Facilities Technician, Community Services/Facilities Jeff Dosch, Security/Emergency Management, Valley Medical Center �"` Floyd Eldridge, Commander, Police '�' Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services ,,,�,� Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Fire & Emergency Services Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency Services � George McBride, Information Services Director, Finance & Information Services `�"" Joan Montegary, Assistant to the Chief, Fire & Emergency Services � Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services �, Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services Preeti Shridhar, Communications Director, Administrative,Judicial & Legal Services �"" Marty Wine, Assistant Chief Administrative Officer, Administrative,Judicial & Legal Services .r� �r ,,�,,, Next Meeting: wr 0900 on June 4th, 7th Floor Conferencing Center. � Important Dates �"` May 12, 2009 - Continuity of Operations Workshop - EOC �rr May 18, 2009-Next City Council Tabletop Exercise �;, June 6, 2009 - ATC 20/21 Training- offered through REPA June 13-14, 2009 - Shelter Operations Training- offered through REPA � � `�'" Assignments: � 1. All Departments- Please assess your disaster preparedness supplies for all members �,, of your department and report your findings to D. Needham by May 15. 2. All Departments - If you ha ve any injects or items you want highlighted on long-term `� recovery at the next City Council Tabletop please contact M. Maltson prior to May 15. "�` 3. Police- Is there a member ofyour department willing to assrst the multiagency �, Howard Hanson Dam plannrng by serving as a Deputy, a back-up role, on the Evacuation Branch? Ifso,please speak to D. Needham. � 4. All Departments- Ifyou'd like to have Fire&Emergency Services order pandemic ""�' f1'u or disaster supplies in bulk for your department, speak to R. Myers. � 5. All Departments- Ifyov have any emergencymanagement related events that a �, member ofyour department needs funding to attend, speak to D. Needham. '� D. Needham chaired the meeting. � v� � � � � Emergency Management Group-May 7, 2009 Minutes � '� � Key Decisions/Discussions: � 1. "Business Not As Usual" -Video presentation on preparing for a pandemic flu "'�" � The video we watched is available online at: � http'//www kin c�ountv.�ov/healthServices/health/preparedness/pandemicflu/video.aspx � Discussion occurred following the video. J. Dosch from Valley Medical mentioned that � he is living it right now with the H1N1 "swine flu" virus. They are already seeing lower ,�y; levels of service and supply delivery. D. Needham noted that we already had continuity planning on the work plan for this year. There is a plan in place for the Fire & � Emergency Services Department, but we do not have one for the entire City. `'�' � 2. Continuity Planning Overview- R. Robertson There will be a workshop on May 12th to discuss and begin our business continuity � planning. R. Robertson has had experience with this and is here to share her expertise. `�'` She has written business continuity plans before and has been a consultant. She's here to �rr provide information on what has worked for her previously and how to make this type of ,�; planning easier. � This can be a simple process. It may seem like it is overwhelming and difficult, but it can �r be accomplished with teams. It is an ongoing process. � Definitions of business continuity planning or a business continuity plan are as follows: � processes and procedures an organization puts in place to ensure that essential functions `'�'' can continue during and after a disaster; set of documents, instructions, and procedures � which enable a business to respond to accidents, disasters, emergencies and/or threats � without impacting key parts of business; and/or the logistical part of a disaster recovery plan. The purpose of the plan is to answer the questions of how you are going to get to `"�` the point that you are up and running in the immediate, and how you get to a full � recovery point. � A good way to start the planning process is to perform a Risk Assessment/Analysis. R. � Robertson likes to start this at the smallest level - at your desk- and then meet as a group �" to look at the departmental level and then the organizational level. The focus of the � assessmentlanalysis is the key functions and priorities of your business. You can combine the individual and departmental plans to create the organizational plan. The � goal is to minimize chaos and focus on the steps necessary to achieve recovery. �"` � A business continuity plan is a living document that will need to be changed and � improved regularly. The continuity section of the plan addresses the: who, what, where, when, why and how of a disaster process. The recovery section involves an analysis of � business processes and continuity needs. Disaster recovery describes how the '�' organization will recover from the effects of a disaster. � � Page 2 of 7 �' � � ' � +rr Emergency Management Group-May 7, 2009 Minutes � � It is important to have members of your department walk around and do an asset � inventory. A major inventory to include key information on each item inventoried �' including the vendor contact information. Major inventory, meaning the items that are �,r expensive to replace, take a long time to replace or you cannot run your day to day � business without them. The handout marked "#1" and titled Asset Recovery is an example of an inventory form. D. Needham wondered if there is a way to tie into IS's """' inventory system and have them give each department a list or report on their items, so � we aren't redoing their work. � Next you need to identify the top critical functions you want to maintain. Critical � functions are those functions that must be recovered before any others. You'll need to � make up a list and share the information with stakeholders. The list can be changed as ;�„f, needed. Once you have defined your critical business function you will need to complete a disaster business functions action plan. An example of this type of plan is provided in � the handout marked `Form#2'. This piece makes up the bulk of your plan as it details "�'" every step necessary to recover each of the critical business functions step by step. For �r each business function you will need to identify a primary contact, support contact, ,�, immediate actions, mitigation actions and recovery actions. It should serve as a guide for the team after a disaster has occurred. Begin with the 10-15 critical functions you �'" identified and then build on the plan as you become more comfortable with the process. +�rr The steps should be written so that a volunteer could follow them. �rr You must have a recovery plan for every continuity plan. You will need to create a � process restoration priority, and identify the restoration priorities for every business � function identified. Manual workaround processes also need to be documented step by � step. � Once you've completed all these pieces you're ready to combine them and write your �"'' plan. When your plan is completed you need to test it and evaluate it. This should be � done at least annually. Procedures used to test the plan should be documented. � We are having a business continuity planning workshop on May 12 at the EOC. If you're �" attending and have laptops, please bring them. We'll start looking at our own files and �r begin to work on things. This workshop will be a kick-start to the planning process. � There will be forms available that we can be used city-wide. � If you need more information, examples of forms, etc, please feel free to speak to R. '�' Robertson. � � Please remember that this process can be overwhelming but it is doable and achievable. Creating this plan is a high priority and we need to achieve completion as soon as `�"" possible � � �.r � �"" Page 3 of 7 +.r �r � � Emergency Management Group—May 7, 2009 Minutes � � 3. Disaster Updates a. Flu � There are currently 23-29 confirmed cases — and the number is growing. 99% of � the cases identified as probable H 1 N 1 are being confirmed as H 1 N 1. There could ,,,� be additional cases because they are not testing or tracking people until their symptoms warrant it. There could be several people with minor symptoms who � may have H1N1. While Public Health is doing updates three times a week, they `'�" are currently ramping down now that the information is out to the public. They �rrr are stepping back and will monitor the situation. This disease is still considered a �; pandemic because it will be global, but at this time we don't know what level of impact it will have. � � Personal Protective Equipment and Supplies—R. Myers � Members of the Fire & Emergency Services Department recently met and discussed what personal protective equipment the department should be providing � for members. When Swine Flu was announced this group began thinking about ''�' other departments and discussed how to support them. One way could be � assisting with bulk supply purchases. Fire & Emergency Services can order � masks, gloves, etc, and bill your budget. They can also assist with rotating items that you may not use often so that they don't expire prior to being used. If you're '"�'� interested in ordering supplies they just need a contact from your department to �rr work with. � The decision for the type and amount of supplies is done at the department level, `"'�`` with each department making decisions for their members. This allows you to � determine the level of need based upon what services you provide, level of �; contact with the public, number of inembers, etc. � The Fire & Emergency Services Department hasn't started a discussion on �' food/water supplies, but R. Meyers is willing to look into this further as well as � provide information on what they currently have and use. �„ The next tabletop for council on May 18 is regarding our current level of �` preparedness. We need to know where your department is in regards to food, tirr water and emergency supplies for each member. Please email D. Needham by ,,,�, May 15 to let her know what you have and what you need. Administrators are responsible for ensuring that all employees have supplies, even if they are � directed to bring them themselves. � � There should be some actions to follow up with Administrators to ensure they are �, aware that they need to assess their food/water supplies and address pandemic flu supplies immediately. Maybe the Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator "'� can do this at the next Mayor's staff ineeting. � � � � Page 4 of 7 � � � �. �r � Emergency Management Group—May 7, 2009 Minutes � � b. Howard Hanson Dam- P. Shridhar � We recently did a mailing to all the businesses in the valley to alert them of the `""''" Howard Hanson Dam concerns and the different scenarios that could occur. We �r,► informed them of the current multiagency work happening, and the different +�r. resources available to them. Kudos to L. Garvich for her assistance with the mailing. � � The collaborative website kingcounty.gov/flood plans includes a calendar of ,,,�,,; events and additional information. Each City has information on their site. On May 11 there will be a public meeting regarding the Dam on the Kent campus. � We are trying to ensure there is consistency in our messaging and information. �" We hope to have sufficient time between now and the next major weather event to � allow for planning and response preparation. � The US Army Corps of Engineers' Seattle Branch received funding from the ""'' stimulus package for the Howard Hanson Dam repairs. They received a total of � $26 million, but we are unsure how much of this is for the Dam's right abutment. �rr The multiagency planning groups are looking for a member of one of the Police '""' Departments to be a deputy in the evacuation branch, a back-up role. We have � people from the City of Renton in various places, but they could use one of our �,, Police Commanders or the like to step-up. It would not be a heavy role, with a lot � of ineetings, etc. Please contact D. Needham if someone is willing to assist. "'�'` c. Flood and Snowstorm Recovery �,,,,. If you have any projects that aren't being approved, speak to D. Needham. She is willing to work with you to fight for the project. Our projects with FEMA are � currently being adjusted. We will be getting less than expected, but will still be """" getting $3 million. If the money from FEMA is returned within the same year, �r the money goes back to the department rather than the general fund. � d. Project Accounting '""' We need to begin tracking and accounting any time that is for disaster work and w� recovery. Handouts detailing the different project codes that should be used were �,, passed out. Anytime disaster work is being done, please use the project codes for your time even if an event you're working on hasn't been `declared' a disaster � yet. This will help us put a placeholder on these funds and attribute it to the �'' appropriate disaster after the fact. After the disaster is declared we may assign a ,�,,, specific code or provide additional levels to differentiate between design, supplies � and labor. We will keep you posted as these codes are defined. �"" All work for the flu has a disaster project code. Even though it hasn't been «„�„� identified as a disaster, we need to track these funds in the event that it is declared �,, and we would be eligible for retroactive pay. It can be difficult to do the project accounting, but will help us get funds. � � �"` Page 5 of 7 .r wi.r � � Emergency Management Group-May 7, 2009 Minutes � � EMPG personnel are people who have 5% or more of their time attributed to Emergency Management. A handout with a list of the EMPG personnel was �" provided. These people need to use project accounting to track the amount of '� their salary that is related to emergency management. For example, Terry Vickers � and Cindie Parks' time are both at a 50% due to their job descriptions and duties. Gary Harsh's time is also at 50% because of his HazMat work. L. Garvich is at � 30%, P. Shridhar is at 10% and K. Carey is at 5%. Please start tracking your time �"` now. If it isn't feasible to track your time on an hourly basis, consider doing a set � amount of hours each pay period to z09200, f247. If it isn't possible for you to ,,�,, track your time, please notify us. If you're unsure which code to use, please code emergency management work using the general code/other project code. �' � If everyone tracks their time and enters their hours under the project codes we will ,,�,,;, be able to respond to an auditor's request for proof of hours worked. This will also help us track the cost of emergency management for the City overall. We � might even be able to utilize this information to argue for an increase on '"�"` individual budgets for emergency management time/work. Building a history � now, will help us make a case for more support later. � e. Related Mitigation Projects �` We had two projects related to the recent floods. One of these projects, the one v�rw from Community Services, seems like it will be turned down. The project from �,�,, Public Works seems like it will be approved. � 4. Current Projects �" a. Hazard Mitigation Plan Status �► We recently learned that we don't have to have the Hazard Mitigation Plan completed by May l, because FEMA changed when the plan had to be complete. � The consultant we hired has prepared a plan and D. Needham is currently '"�'' reviewing it with other members of Fire & Emergency Services Department. The �rr consultant will be doing some additional work and the plan will be completed in- ,�„ time for the new FEMA deadline. � b. Council Tabletop Exercise Review �' The council members are really enjoying participating in the table top exercises �, and are learning what their roles and responsibilities are during a disaster and the recovery phases. The next table top will be May 18. One question was posed at � that should be brought up at the next table top —given the flood concerns should "'�" we pose a moratorium on building in the valley? � c. EOC Computer Upgrade � The old laptops in the EOC have been replaced with new desktop computers. �` There is still some work for IS to do, like update the profiles and favorites on each �r computer so that they are all the same. ,,� � � Page6of7 � � � � vrr �r Emergency Management Group-May 7, 2009 Minutes +�wr �rr� d. Renton Emergency Preparedness Academy � Renton Technical College's Community Education Budget has been cut "'�"' drastically. This is the part of the college that we've been partnering with to put �► on the academy. We have had some exciting classes including water safety and ,�; self defense that have received a great response. If Renton Technical College can no longer host the academy we will find somewhere else, because is a great `°�"' program that needs to be maintained. Fellow cities have even expressed an �r+ interest in doing something similar in their communities. w�► 5. Announcements/Good of the Order �rr """�` J. Dosch - There will be a Bomb Threat exercise at Valley Medical at approximately 9 iwr a.m. on June 23. It will only be a 4 hour exercise, but it might be good for members � of the Fire & Emergency Services Department or Police to be present and observe. He will add a representative from these two groups to his email list. The next '�'' planning meeting is May 27 where they will confirm the time-line, and define when �r would be a good time for people to come and observe. Tim Troxel was ,�,; recommended as a good person to add to the list. `�` D. Needham - Great news! We were approved for all the funds we requested in the '�' EMPG grant. We were able to defend our proposal based on the level of work � members of the City are doing. We are even getting more than Bellevue. Due to this influx of funding, it is possible that when there are things like the Valley Medical � Bomb Threat Drill the cost for staff to attend could possibly be billed to her budget. "�'' She'll need specific quantifiable amounts to do the billing, but if it is a learning � experience related to Emergency Management in some way, and she has the funds, ;�, she wants to support it. If there is something like this coming up for your department please speak to D. Needham to discuss possible funding. � � Next meeting is June but may be a workingmeeting. � � � Minutes taken and submitted by: Kelly Carey, Admin Sec I, Fire & Emergency Services � �rr � +�rr � � � �rr � � "`�'° Page 7 of 7 � � ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGN ('N Meeting: €�� ---� Qate(s):_ ��71��3�'�„ Times: _��1 c.� �- / G�� C� Location: � � ��.- �.ca(r��'-� c,......,..�.. �-,r— - Print Name __ _ Department Position Ext / e p� ° : /J�".`�rr"�t..� f �jG2.f�'�'� �� :.� �'�-'�k��`. �`��,y,�,� ��.�,��•�.��.,"7C`.., rr/(ii< '� �^^"�. � e �° O,�+ ��„-..:�..�-5..,�� '.e��..�.��'��''� ^'��.��'�,le�3t�-. �� , ��`��'-�. �.�� C � , ��G � f .-�-�. ��.��'--�:�:�'�.�� . ,. �-� Gt-�� 5��. {r��`'��"1 ��L't�'1 ��- "�--- . � °��',, '��._f , �� _ _.._. � ._.(.� I�'� ( � ' �.!'ft "� ��"` �� —�1.:��"� t�,.��,,�.�`;��11��:� � �e: �` \ � '� � � � � � � � � � � � � � �, � � � � � � �: � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ,.; .., .,,... _��. ,..._ n ...,.m,.�,,,_....._„-m....,..,..��.m... ..„,_._.�<.�..�.._m_�.__..,_...._��_..�_,m.._..,..�._,..,_..._.._:_�..._._.._.,�..�..__.._,.��........___.... w._____..._..__. _ __.. .__._ � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �. � � ATTENDAN�E - PLEASE SIGN IN Meeting: t=''� � �`"`° `";� Date(s): 5�� `Z-� �''J Times: c��C�G� /�� Location: �,� �� (_ � �'7�%� t '� --T -T-- Print Name Department Position Ext. '�`', F �� ''`�� "... —!�j 1. 4 « c�-3 � .�%�.� � M` `�� ';�5 A � �/ k � � � �� _ � �, ..�..,1�' -�,� � � �_ . �,.� �.��i-~ � � ��_'� �� ,�.�„� ' ��..�... �`�,�. t�..��..1.'-� G� �� j' � �,�.,�. �� - �� .� /�. ��'1 �� `� � � �� . � � r , t i'�}`'�.., 'f��C.:��-'v`t(�� ta �_�� a:F�,_~_ (t � � � � Emergency Management Group Meeting ,�,, Minutes from June 4, 2009 � � Present: '��° Mark Baldridge, Facilities Technician, Community Services/Facilities �r Jan Conklin, Development Services Representative, Community & Economic Development „�,, Kent Curry, Commander, Police I. David Daniels, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator, Fire & Emergency Services `�'` Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services � Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Fire & Emergency Services „� George McBride, Information Services Director, Finance & Information Services Norma McQuiller, Neighborhood Coordinator, Community & Economic Development � Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services '"�'` Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services � David Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services ,�, Mark Peterson, Deputy Fire Chief, Fire & Emergency Services Mary Roy, Administrative Secretary, Finance & Information Services '"�` Ray Sled, Water Manager, Public Works � Preeti Shridhar, Communications Director, Administrative,Judicial & Legal Services „� � Next Meeting: � 0900 on July 2na� �cn Floor Conferencing Center. "'� � Important Dates �rr June 6, 2009 - ATC 20/21 Training- offered through REPA � June 13-14, 2009 - Shelter Operations Training- offered through REPA June 15, 2009 - FEMA Disaster Costs Submittals DUE �" June 18, 2009 -Hazard Mitigation Plan Review in Writing DUE '� June 20, 2009 - Bomb Drill-Valley Medical Center � July 1, 2009 - Continuity Planning Forms DUE � � Assignments: ""� 1. All Departments - Please review the Hazard Mitigation Plan and put your additions or � corrections in writing byJune 18, 2009 and provide to D. Needham. Please pay close ,,� attention to tables, highlighted areas, and pages described on page 7-8 of these minutes. Files are located at Q:I Emergency Managementl PLANS AND � PROCEDURESI Hazard Mitigation Plan I DRAFT REVISION '� Z. All Departments - If you have any remaining disaster costs for FEMA,please submit � to D. Needham prior to June 15, 2009 3. All Departments- Please nominate at least two appropriate members in your � department to serve on the City's Incident Management Team. "'�" � � � � �r �w Emergency Management Group—May 7, 2009 Minutes �r �rr 4. All Departments - Complefe initial Continuity of Operations Planning(COOP) � worksheets byJuly 1, 2009. Worksheets for each department are located at �"' Q:I Emergency Managementl PLANS AND PROCEDURESI RENTON COOPI Draft „�, 5. All Departments - Ifyou have any emergencymanagementrelated training that a �, member ofyour department needs funding to attend, speak to D. Needham. �'""` D. Needham chaired the meeting. �rrr �,,, Key Decisions/Discussions: � � 1. Howard Hanson Dam/Flooding Planning Update (D. Needham) "�"' They have filled the depressions in the dam and are in the process of slowly raising the � pool level to determine the full extent of the dam's capabilities. The good news is that we gained a little flood buffering capability. The bad news is that the cause for the � depressions is still unknown and could be a result of a structural problem in the right ''"`` abutment. So, an increased flood risk is still present for the next 2 to 6 years. � � We have updated flood maps for Renton. Different versions show what would happen at different flood levels. In several versions, Renton will be adversely affected with at least '�" a foot of water over I-405. 13,900 cubic foot per second would result in minimal effects; �° but it is a very unlikely scenario, unless we have a really dry flood season. The flood �,,, scenarios that demonstrate 17,600 or 19,500 cubic feet per second (cfs)or less of water are most likely. At the low end, these scenarios proj ect that the valley area of Renton will `"�' have one foot of water in parts, and at the high end (19,500) some areas will have 3-4 feet '�"` of water or more. This won't affect roads that much, and Fire Station 14 is okay for these �„r two scenarios. At the 25,000 cfs flow, however, most of the valley is under a significant �r amount of water. �"' Chief Daniels asked how quickly the water would come and how much warning would be •.• possible. Auburn is very close, so depending on the intensity of the rain and the release, ,�, we could have water on our hands in a very short period of time, as in a matter of a few hours. What is more likely is that the water will come at a slower pace and take days to �` reach full levels. � �,,. We are working on developing our notification and warning systems to ensure there is as much lead time as possible. The US Army Corps of Engineers, National Weather � Service, and King County Flood Warning Center are all currently working on their i'�' prediction technology. � �, 2. Incident Management Team (DC Peterson) "�`" When we were aware of the impending storm in December 2008, we prepared for the �rr event by putting together an incident command post. We had different departments, like �,,, Public Works, Fire & Emergency Services, Police, etc. sit down together to develop an � incident action plan for the next operational period (12 hours). This worked out well as `� Page 2 of 8 �► � � � Emergency Management Group-May 7, 2009 Minutes � � we ensured we weren't duplicating efforts and improved our efficiencies. Using this successful experience as a model, we'd like to establish an Incident Management Team '� so that if there is another event, we can have a team ready to meet, develop a plan, and '�► run an incident. We would use an Incident Management Team for all types of major „i,� events from a water main break or an earthquake. We could also do this for public events like Renton River Days and the 4t" of July. The person/department in charge during any � incident would depend on the type of event. When a person is the incident commander ''�' they need to be able to delegate and stay abreast of the situation. The ICS command and � general staff positions need people who are ready, experienced and trained, so that we are ,�, able to support an incident over time and multiple operational periods. � Initially we need two members from each department who would be willing to be a part �` of the Incident Management Team. They need to be available to take the training ;,,,� necessary, as well as be ready to work on the team when an incident occurs. If we have people designated for the necessary roles we will be better prepared to respond. The � Incident Command department will be in charge of the Incident Management Team and "'� focus their staff in Operations and others will take on support (primarily � planning/logistics/finance/PIO) roles. � Time commitment would be attending an in-depth ICS training that would ideally be a ""'�'` week long to cover Command and General staff training, and eventually for the specific � position being trained for (Planning Section Chief, for instance). After that, the time ,,�, commitment would be minimal. There would be exercises/practice, but they would be scheduled based on people's availability. Whoever is identified for these roles would � need to be able to be available during an event. Since it is a week of training we will �` have people specialize in different chief sections/roles. If we could accomplish the „� training prior to flood season (November) we'll be in a good place. We will balance people's skills and interests with the City's needs. We are looking at eventually training � 40 to 50 people city wide across the departments. The majority of these people will be "� from the Fire & Emergency Services, Public Works, Police, and Community Services �rr departments. Representatives from the Finance department would probably be sent for �, training offsite, instead of bringing an instructor here. We would like to accomplish this by October before flood season begins in November. `�` � Discussion: Time commitment is an issue, how do we balance this training with all the � different efforts we are working on for emergency management? It might help to consider this as an investment in the City's future, rather than a time commitment. We � could consider doing the training in pieces and have a one or two day training prior to the '�'' flood season-what you absolutely need to know - and then build on it later. If we are � bringing the instructor in, we can tailor the training to Renton's needs. ,� v�rr 3. Regional Shelter Task Force � Dennis Conte and Sonja Mejlaender were unable to come today, so we will discuss what '�' we can without them. Recreation has taken the lead on providing this for the City of ,,� � Page 3 of 8 �` � � �: � wrr Emergency Management Group—May 7, 2009 Minutes vrr+r r�rr► Renton. Facilities are going to provide back-up support (open doors, provide tables and +,rf chairs, etc). �r �,,, The King County Region 6 Shelter Table handout provides information on what the � region has planned for sheltering. We are currently looking at combining efforts with neighboring cities depending on sheltering needs, to ensure we have enough staffing and """ Red Cross volunteers. At this point in time, we currently do not have enough people to � run one largeshelter at the staffing levels recommended by Red Cross for one entire 24 ,�,, hour period. We are building up what we can do, but the region-wide plan may be a good solution. According to the Red Cross 32, staff are needed to run a shelter based on the "'� different duties and tasks involved. � �,,, We only have a few mega shelter sites in the region and none are located in Renton. There is a zone dormitory shelter in south King county, if we only have a few people in � need of shelter. If we have as many as 90 citizens in need of a shelter, we would "'�'" probably set up a dormitory shelter here in Renton. When thinking about an incident, we � need to think about the homeless and provide shelters or alternate locations if they aren't �, able to go to existing shelters. We also need to be aware of citizens who require a medical needs shelter. Public health will provide that type of shelter, but we need to triage shelter ""r"' clients and direct the medical needs elsewhere. We should also be sure to evaluate the �r situation and determine what level of sheltering is needed. What if food is all that � citizens need? We can offer a location to get free meals and have people return home afterwards. This would be easier to do, and require less staff. The sheltering and mass '� care decision tree handout helps with decision making. What do we do if we have a �` small amount of people? Should we provide a shelter or give out hotel certificates? It �,,, also addresses what to do with animals and could be very helpful. � We need to have a representative from Renton on the regional task force looking at """"` sheltering for the region. Please contact D. Needham if you or someone from your � department is interested. � 4. H1N1 Flu Update (D. Needham) ""'" The H 1 N 1 flu is definitely out there and there are more cases than you realize. It is �r extremely prevalent. If staff are symptomatic they should be sent home. We need to ,�,,, prevent the spread of this highly infectious disease. There have been some people who have died due to this flu, but they had pre-existing conditions. What we are concerned �" about is the potential for this flu to mutate later in the actual flu season and become more �' dangerous. � Tamiflu, an anti-viral, does not cure it, but stops the virus from replicating so the flu '� doesn't get much worse than it already is. If someone has a mild H1N1 and they aren't """` susceptible to developing a bad case, they aren't given Tamiflu. If they have strong �,r symptoms, or they are vulnerable, they are given Tamiflu. They are trying to conserve � the Tamiflu to ensure we have enough of it and that it doesn't become ineffective. � +�r �"` Page 4 of 8 � � � � Emergency Management Group-May 7, 2009 Minutes � � If you need a poster/sign to encourage hand washing ask D. Needham. Remember to cough or sneeze into your elbow or into a tissue, and then throw the tissue away. � � 5. Continuity Planning Check-In (All) �r We had the continuity planning training last month where each department was tasked � with completing the worksheets for their workgroup by July 1. The forms are located on ''�'` the "Q" drive. D. Needham will send out a link to the group today, and then a deadline �r reminder before they are due. A check-in with each department was done to determine ,�, where people were at in the process: � Fire & Emergency Services-Haven't done much since the workshop, but will. �` AJS - Communications may need to do special planning beyond their department's � borders. Legal - New department, but working on it. � Finance -They are currently working on it and the meeting rep will remind those '`+�'" working on the project of the July 1 deadline. �r IS - G. McBride is certain that Young Yoon has finished this task. � Public Works -They have started working on this. They had a staff ineeting regarding the forms and each manager is working on their own section. "�' Community Services - Representative is not sure where they are at. � Police- Floyd Eldridge attended the training and K. Curry hasn't had the chance to „�, connect with him, but will attempt to do so within the next few days. CED - Has started the forms, most of the work done so far was done at the training, but � they are still working on it. "� � 6. CodeRED Service (D. Needham) ;�, The necessary paperwork is in process. Legal noted that the service has an automatic renewal clause we will need to keep abreast of, because we will need to go through the �" council approval process for the renewal as the price will go up to $25,000 in the next �r► year. Once the paperwork is done, we will have little to do on our end, as far as setting ,,�, up the system is concerned. We have arranged to get the E911 King County database for free. We will most likely have a temporary employee come in for a short time to clean '�` up this list for our use. This money was already budgeted. We can use the published '��` phone number database legally for non-emergency messages -think about this option for � your departments if you may find a good use for it and can pay for the minutes used. � CodeRED is a hosted website service. We will provide a link from our home page. `'�' Legally, we will only be able to use the King County E911 database for a true w� emergency. CodeRED will have an opt-in and opt-out option. People will be able to go ,�r, to our website and add their cell phones and/or identify that their phone is TTY. If someone opts in, they will be added to both databases. Business or other systems with "�`` PBX lines can opt out to ensure we don't overload their systems or aren't calling phones � that shouldn't be called. Ensuring we aren't making unnecessary calls is fiscally ,�, important, because while we are allotted a certain amount of minutes we have to pay for any additional minutes over our limit. � � Page 5 of 8 � � � � �w Emergency Management Group—May 7, 2009 Minutes � � � The question was raised regarding letting people who do not live in the City opt-in. �"' There are some issues with this, including concerns about the costs to call everyone. The .,�,► City of Auburn is limiting who can be on their list— if they don't live in the city, they � will be put on the list only if it is a life safety issue, like a family member they care for lives in the city. Since there are other public notification means that people outside of the ""�'� City will have access to, including the media and the Emergency Alert System, not �r» everyone with an interest needs to be on the list. CodeREDwill not be a method that is �,,, used often and/or used alone. It will be, however, an excellent system for notifying neighborhoods/areas if there is a police lock down or a hazmat. Either way, it will be a �' difficult balancing act to determine who should be on the list. Cell phones are replacing �' landlines more and more and used more often. � D. Needham will be working on a written procedure for emergency notification. Once � CodeRED contract is signed we are approximately 30 days from putting the code on the "�" website. The CodeRED plan comes with five username/passwords. The cost is �r $150/each for additional username/passwords. We need to discuss and determine who � needs to have access. ""`" The question was raised whether Valley Comm will administer a shared notification +� system for the region. It would be great if Valley Comm would do this like Norcomm � and Clark County does, but Valley Comm has no interest in doing this and have not responded positively to requests in the past. Each city in the area has had to get their own '""`� system, but fortunately most are choosing the same one. This will allow us to tie our '°� databases together for incidents that cross lines/boundaries. � w� 7. Communications Sta�ing Update (P. Shridhar) �'" P. Shridhar was able to get a grant for a new VISTA/Americorps volunteer in her section. � She had to leave the meeting early, so she will talk about this next month. � 8. EM/Disaster Cost Recovery Efforts (D. Needham) �r � The deadline for wrapping up the costs, bids and paperwork for FEMA is June 15, 2009. „�,,. They are being very particular about submittals right now and very good documentation is needed to ensure funding. Community Services has had to work hard to get their � claims approved and FEMA is questioning some costs. Paperwork needs to be put in � AND points have to be argued with FEMA before June 15 or it could result in �„ reimbursement delays. �r. Please be sure to do project accounting if applicable. We need to support our increase in '`�'" funding by documenting the work we are doing. Remember that EMPG funding is +� available for emergency management related training. For example, there is a bomb ,��,, exercise at Valley Medical on June 20, 2009. If there are employees who'd like to participate and need to be funded, speak to D. Needham. She will not be able to pay for `"' this event outright, but could pay the department back when the funds become available. � �"' Page 6 of 8 � � � � Emergency Management Group-May 7, 2009 Minutes � � 9. Hazard Mitigation Plan Draft Overview (All) � � (The documents can be found at Q:\Emergency Management\PLANS AND �,;; PROCEDURES�Hazard Mitigation Plan\DRAFT REVISION) ,,� A consultant hired by Community Services has been working on updating the Hazard '''� Mitigation Plan. D. Needham and R. Meyers have gone through the draft and made v�r changes/additions. At this point we need representatives from each department to review �, the draft, paying close attention to the highlighted sections, and notify D. Needham of their edits/answers. Both the new plan and the old plan are being provided because there "�`` are points where you need to reference the old plan. Please let us know if you see errors '� as you go through this. The entire plan needs to be completed by the end of the month, � so we need feedback in writing within the next two weeks. A review of highlighted sections during the meeting identified: � � Page 2-1: Map needs to be changed -need to secure map from GIS �r Pages 2-4, 2-5, 2-6: Need more information from CED ;� Chapter 3: This chapter is currently filler, D. Needham needs to write it, so it can be skipped when reviewing for now. `� Page 4-3: Need everyone to look at the goals and answer the question - Do we want � to commit to these? �, Pages 4-4, 4-5: Look at the information and make sure it is accurate- Public Works/Facilities need to look especially hard at this section. Need to be able � to discuss these by the next meeting. '�' Page 6-1: Need brief descriptions/narrative for Community Services and � Transportation should include discussion of road/damages on 169. Page 6-3: We may not be able to provide the flood inundation map due to legal issues. � Page 6-7: Could really use Public Works help with a list that includes all areas of "r' concern to include: street flooding, localized flooding, wetlands that spill +�rr over, etc. � Page 6-8: We need Ron Straka to provide some data here on flood plain inventory, critical facilities and transportation. We also need data on insurance coverage �` in the city, D. Needham will check with Ron Straka on this. '�` Page 6-9: Ron Straka needs to look at this and add his input. � Page 6-12: Need ALL Departments to look at the table and make sure that everyone is okay with what is listed. We need to be very careful to look at what we are � committing to and ensuring we can provide it. "'� Page 7-3: We need more information regarding responses to storm water flooding from � Ron Straka and R. Sled. ,�; Page 7-8: We need to review and revise the table and prioritize it for the City of Renton. Public Works, Community Services and CED have pieces. `�' Chapter 8: This chapter is on earthquakes. D. Needham searched through four or more � binders that were at least four inches thick on the Nisqually earthquake. After � looking through these we still cannot locate a synopsis of the damage to the City of Renton from the Nisqually or earlier earthquakes. Does anyone know � � Page 7 of 8 � �r► � � � Emergency Management Group-May 7, 2009 Minutes �r � where we can find this information? One suggestion was the Renton � Reporter. Another was to use the county-wide data we do have and ""` extrapolate the City's costs. R. Sled stated that he had a book with some of � this information for the State of Washington, and will get it to D. Needham. � Page 5-13: Evaluating short term solutions like strapping computer monitors or desktops down and better fastening of servers. Facilities isn't equipped to handle this � task. It makes sense that IS would do this for computers/etc. It is a huge cost � savings if we protect our expensive equipment. Facilities will need to work � on ensuring large pieces of furniture are secured so that they will not fall over. We need to check with IS to determine what timeline is feasible for strapping � down computer equipment and how much of their budget is available for this ''�"` project. We may have some funding from EMPG for this, but really hope we � can count on departments to cover these costs. Page 9-2: Need to correct graphic. � Page 9-5: Should take out consultant's notes. Map may need further review. '�'" Page 12-5: Need to speak to DC Flora to cite the fire code for hazardous materials. �r Page 12-7: Change wording regarding cause of pipeline break to "a common cause" �, rather than "the most common cause". Chapter 13: Need to hear overall feedback from IS and Police on this chapter. '"""`` Page 13-5: Need more action items. � ,,,,,�, Everyone should look at every table to determine your department s commitments �"' Feedback in written form is needed within 2 weeks -June 18th. Need to do final �'` review at July meeting. � �„r � Minutes taken and submitted by: Kelly Carey, Admin Sec I, Fire & Emergency Services � �r � � vrr �rrr � wr � � � � +�r � "" Page 8 of 8 �. � ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGN IN .� Meeting: �� 1 f''c�'�-� Date(s):�,__G� Q Times 4�iD d — l tl3� Location: c_..�'t� �� '� ��. � Print Name Department Position Exfi. t V v�, � � � S �� c�...�� •c�G- ��-.C-,. �.c, t E.�..Nl +��D"`? f L,,.��A ��U �c. � �- �S ��(�V��u.� �� r��t,.� 'S d� �� q ,� �.�M �°' e� � � 4 �»��. " �` :;�� i ��- r � �� ; s'9.s, �'l ,� � �ej �. �'�-�- s �� c.�,.�� 7a z � ,�, r ,�J�✓t 1-� ��,�`'� 1� � � 'it=UM N�'"��►4►"�'L_ U�"1. � � ' � �� /Yl � �a' �,� ✓a� ��„��,��, �� ,„t��j�4� � �" �/�'z�` /�- �'G'� ;� >. ,i' � �-.��. # �f� l c�c;r�► �'-2'�- I��,�;-�. . _......_ G�' � � � . ��. � `�.� � ,��. ,� �� .�...� �„�.��..�.��.�-LL �`�� t � � � � � � � � � � � � � �: � � � � � � � � t � � � 1� � � � � � � � � . ......_..__ ....,....... . ..._......... ......,.... ..___..........._.. �.._....»».. ._...�.....�_.... ..........,.,,,,..w....,.aww...rc... ��.....�.w.,...,:+�........m.;�u.rur»...L��«w»:».«a.w�wv�.�.....r:m«� -a..wu„wx....�rt+.vww.w...:..,w«�.n»w�wwtw"�auamrca:awYvwwuiwaucw�wu�lx � � " � .w\'WY'mn'suW.wwLil.wa�tiu1N.�xrey�KN�un..r.NwiWw�iwF1'A+xdt"'"sw6W�i � � � � � �. � �. � �. � �. . � � � �. � �. � � � � � � � � � � � �au.r�oJ..a��wc�r.urn4dwwu�w��..eWh.�m.xeu..i....w� � � .. aa.x T � � ATTENDANCE - PLEASE S{GN (N � Meeting: Date(s): Times: Locatian: Rrint Name Qe artment Position Ext. 'I �.�..'�'`�I ' ��-I ��-C�� :�1 � t�,t. �`e�►��•.►� ►'� ��' �` �'C��.r� G�/ �i�T�i� �1�(�fY �" . ,�^,r 1 � � .4�C,+G:C�.�' � f 1 � � � � Emergency Management Group Meeting � Minutes from July 2, 2009 "'�+'` � Present: `� Dennis Conte, Facilities Supervisor, Community Services/Facilities 'w�' Kent Curry, Commander, Police � I. David Daniels, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator, Fire & Emergency Services Jeff Dosch, Security/Emergency Management, Valley Medical Center � Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services �"' Abdoul Gafour, Utility Engineering Supervisor, Public Works � Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Fire & Emergency Services ,�, Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services � Ray Sled, Water Manager, Public Works � Pauletta Sulky, Risk Analyst, Human Resources & Risk Management ,,� � Next Meeting: 0900 on August 6, 2009, 7th Floor Conferencing Center. � w� Important Dates "�" July 9, 2009— Red River Flood Team Seminar, RSVP at ecc.kc@kingcounty.gov v� w�r►► � Assignments: 1. All Departments-Please review tbe Hazard Mitigation Plan and put yocrr additions or � corrections in writing byJuly 15, 2009 and provide to D. Needham. Please pay close ''�' attention to tasks and agenda items and the items noted on page 4-6 of these minutes. „� Files are located at Q:IEmergencyManagementlPLANSAND PROCEDURESIHazard Mitigation PlanIDRAFT REVISION � Z. All Departments- Ensure all Continuity of Operations Planning(CODP) worksheets � are completed, edited,printed out and ready to be compiled at the August 6 meeting. +�r Worksheets for each department are located at Q:IEmergencyManagementlPLANSAND ,�;, PROCEDURESI RENTON COOPI Draft 3. All Departments- Please review the Evacuation Plan. � 4. All Departments - Ifyou have a member ofyour department who would like to work '� on the CodeRED rollout and/or needs access to the system,please contact D. Needham. ,� 5. All Departments- Ifyou have any classes that would begood for the Renton Emergency Preparedness Academy,please contact D. Needham. � � D. Needham chaired the meeting. � � � � � � � � .�r Emergency Management Group—July 2, 2009 Minutes � wrr� �,,, Key Decisions/Discussions: +� 1. Current Threat Updates (D. Needham) "'�" a. Howard Hanson Dam "`� The US Army Corps of Engineers has issued another press release notifying the � community that issues with the right abutment remain, and they had to lower water „�„ levels at the Dam. We now have similar flood pool restrictions we had in January. The boundaries for the flood plain remains unchanged, but the statistical likelihood of � flooding is higher than when flood pool restrictions are not in place. There is a �' briefing scheduled for next week between the US Army Corps and community � leaders to include Chief Daniels and D. Needham. � Green River Flood Response —When planning for this we need to talk about ,,�,, communications. Valley Comm no longer has a VHF license, so they can't patch anymore. We will need to figure out how to do the patching ourselves and other �"' forms of communications. We will discuss this at the August meeting. � b. H1N1 � The virus is still out there and people are still getting sick. We have had one death �"" related to the disease in King County. It is being rated a phase 6 pandemic, the � highest rating possible. Our concern is for the fall, and any issues we will face if it � mutates to become more deadly. Flu season generally begins in October/November. In late September/October we should get the message out to our employees that the � disease is still out there and remind departments of sick employee policies to ensure �' that people don't come in if they are a risk for spreading the disease. Given the � timing for other things and events, it might be best to start looking at this issue in � August. Right now healthcare professionals are gearing up to ensure we have the appropriate medications and are ready for the high number of cases expected. � � 2. Renton Emergency Preparedness Academy (REPA) changes (D. Needham) We had a change in the location for the Academy because Renton Technical College had � to drop their community education programs. We are working with Community Services '""' to host REPA classes and are currently working on class descriptions. Ifyou have a � class related to emergencies, disasters, etc, that might be good,please speak with D. ...r Needham. �,,, We have offered a lot of different classes including interacting with emergency responders and water safety. We have had great successes with these classes. R. Myers �` shared a story where the emergency responder course proved useful to a citizen who "■'' attended. It would be great to have a discussion/class on utility emergencies and/or what �,,, to do if there is an interesting incident a citizen wants to watch. It would be good to put some of the class information on Channe121. We are considering taping some REPA � classes and develo in informational videos from them for the website and channe121, P� g � �" helping us really reach out to the Public. � � 3. Communications Staffing Update � � Page 2 of 7 � � '�' � Emergency Management Group—July 2, 2009 Minutes � � Postponed - Preeti Shridhar was not available to attend the meeting. � 4. September Outreach Efforts (D. Needham) ;,� a. Ready in Renton w�w This is Renton's version of National Preparedness Month. This year we will be .� focusing on communications. We will be encouraging citizens to have an out of area � contact or some communication plan in place. � b. CodeRED rollout to public � We are currently working on getting CodeRED set up now. We have determined that the Police Command Duty Officers, the Fire & Emergency Services Duty Chief, the � Emergency Management Duty Officer, the Mayor's Office and the Public Works �" Managers all need to have access to this system. If there is anyone else who needs � access,please speak with D. Needham. „�;, We will be able to use the published numbers for sending out messages, but there is a �, cost for making phone calls in excess of the allotted 75,000 minutes/year. The system can be useful, but we need to be mindful of the costs. The good news is that in the � event of the emergency and disaster declaration, we can be refunded the cost of the `'�' minutes, at 75% of cost. � We will be doing a press release and public roll-out of CodeRED once it is ready. � When this occurs we will have talking points for staff. The opt-in program will be � available on the web in September. We want businesses to opt-out the majority of their phone numbers and identify only a few key numbers. This will ensure we don't � tie up ours lines or theirs. `�` For cost division, triggers for use, non-emergency announcements, etc. we will need �'' to develop SOPs and will borrow from other cities to create these. Ifyou have �r anyone you would like to help participate in this or would be interested,please � speak to D. Needham. � � c. NICHE rollout �rr We are currently working out the details and locations for this program. We have �r CERT members signed up with the City of Renton ready to assist and help. They, along with other community members, are working on identifying good locations in � their neighborhoods for a NICHE — centralized location in neighborhoods where `� emergency information will be posted. CERTs will receive the information and post � it at these locations during an emergency. We are working on mapping all the people ;,�,�, with amateur radio licenses, so that we can effectively work with them to do low tech communications. � � d. Business outreach � We are considering having a luncheon with businesses to get information regarding flood risks out to the business community. Suzanne Dale-Estey pointed out that most �° of the businesses in the valley are not Chamber members, so we are considering �► � Page 3 of 7 � � � � wrr � Emergency Management Group-July 2, 2009 Minutes � �rrr � doing a lunch at City Hall or another location. This project is in the works for September. � 5. Evacuation Template (D. Needham) �rr This handout is our recently completed evacuation plan on the preferred template for � King County. It was completed by Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management `�' Coordinator, and your input is needed. We would like to add Community Services as a �. support agency— Community Services accepted this role. w Page 9: Who has the authority to order an evacuation? We do not currently have an ;,,�, ordinance that defines this in Renton. One suggestion would be to have the people authorized to activate the EOC able to activate an evacuation. °�r +�rr If an ordinance is drafted to address this, it will need to clearly define the difference between an evacuation and a temporary move. For instance on page 8, the ordinance "'�"" should define what level of evacuation is covered. We will also need to work on defining � a procedure for activating an evacuation and put a structure in place for each of the types ,� of evacuations. The ordinance would be for large scale evacuations only. There is a tabletop exercise scheduled for the Green River Valley cities on Sept. 9, 2009. +„�► Please take a look at the draft and let D. Needham know ofany comments, etc. The � plan is also available on the Q drive. Ifyou make changes to the document,please use `"''' track changes. `"� 6. Hazard Mitigation Plan Draft Overview (ALL) � (These documents can be found at Q:\Emergency Management\PLANS AND '�' PROCEDURES�-Iazard Mitigation Plan\DRAFT REVISION) '�`" D. Needham received comments from most departments. She has yet to hear back from � Community and Economic Development (CElyj, and since they do not have a ,�, representative at the meeting, D. Needham will follow up with them. �,,,. Public Works added all facilities and open spaces in table 4-1 and they added damages � from the 2000 flood on page 1 of chapter 6. �, At this point, we still need a brief synopsis of the damage, including cost, to the golf course. Can Public Works contact transportation and get more information on the ""`� damage to the highway? D. Conte offered to add the description in. The one he just got � addresses the road slightly. The original estimate was a few million but the actual cost �,,,, was way less. D. Needham will chase down the frnal costs for the damage. D. Conte � will continue to go through the rest of the chapters. �,,, Page 6-7: Storm water—We need to identify the roads and other areas that flood, that aren't mapped in the flood plain. D. Needham imagines that Public Works and Facilities `�" would have good idea of these areas. If these areas are listed in the plan we can put in for �r funding to improve them. A. Gafour agreed to contact Ron Straka about this. � This document is supposed to be updated every 5 years at the least. We are currently �,,,. overdue for an update, but we will have it ready in time for upcoming grants. D. �, Needham recommended that we schedule review/updating of the plan on a four year � '`"'' Page 4 of 7 � � � � Emergency Management Group—July 2, 2009 Minutes � � schedule so that we have two years between each type of plan revisions. This year we had to do 2 plan revisions at once and it was a lot of work. � � We have Steve Lee's proposal for hazard mitigation coming up. We need to have it finalized, and through FEMA and the state before September. Given FEMA and state "'� time frames, and having to go through council to get this approved, we need to have an � updated plan submitted to Council for adoption as soon as possible. ,� Page 6-8: We need someone who is an expert in flood issues to fill in the shaded areas. �► A. Gafour will contact Ron Straka about this one as well. ,;� Page 6-9: D. Needham hasn't heard back from Ron Straka on this one. � For all departments-please look at all the chapters and make sure you're okay with „� the designated tasks. �' Page 7-3: We need to put the input on flood areas here as well. „�, Page 7-8: Project List-We need to have a discussion about what the priorities are, make � sure they are accurate and put them in the proper order. D. Needham will work with CED to ensure we have their input here. � � Page 8-6: Landslides - Emergency Management received conflicting information that that the slide in the Jones Rd area was due to heavy rains and not the Nisqually. The �" earthquake was confirmed as the cause. All that needs to be added to this section are the � damage frgures. Chief Flora reported that a home was destroyed. �, Non structural seismic fastenings: Facilities is not able to do this project. It would be � best if Information Services can build this into their budget and do it as part of the costs ,� of doing business. � D. Conte mentioned that he has a table of seismic information that identifies what year buildings were built and to what version of the code. He agreed to look at chapter 8 and � determine where it should be included. '`�` Page 8-10: Need anecdotal information on the damages from the Nisqually `� earthquake. Please insert what you know, and D. Needham will clean it up before the � draft is final. For example we've heard that 1 in 10 chimneys were damaged and two ,� reservoirs were damaged. For buildings like Carco, City Hall, etc., give a full sentence on what was damaged. � Page 9-2: Consultant will fix the numbers on this page. � � Page 9-3: Need definitions ofhigh ormoderate areas on the map. CED probably has all of that information. � Page 9-8: Need CED to look at this, as it talks about limiting development. � � Page 11-2: GIS piece � Page 12-5: Do we have a frre code reference we can quote that specifies what applies to � hazardous materials? ChiefFlora willlookinto this. vr� Page 12-7: We might want to ask Carolyn Boatsman, to make sure we are saying it right. � � Page 5 of 7 �` � � �wr• � Emergency Management Group—July 2, 2009 Minutes �rw � Page 13-5: These are our action items. We are considering adding two or three more � items, but are concerned about the availability of funding. � We recently had an offer from David Holcomb from the Department of Homeland '"�"` Security to evaluate our facilities and areas, and provide information on our �+ security/terrorism risks for free. Are we interested in having this done? Given that there �,,, was interest, D. Needham agreed to set up a meeting with D. Holcomb, and a � representative from Facilities and Police. We need to have one more public meeting to get required citizen input on the � process/plan. D. Needham will set a date and send it out. � D. Needham is also working on developing an introduction to the plan- a one page '`�'`' essay summarizing threats and events citizens might face. � ALL DEPARTMENTS-Please get edits to D. Needham within 10 days � � 7. Continuity Planning progress-ALL (20 min) ,�, (worksheet folders found at Q:\Emergency Management\PLANS AND PROCEDURES\RENTON COOP\Draft) �rw How is everyone doing on the continuity plan worksheets? At some point a � representative from each department will need to tie everything together in a summary �"'' overview that includes identifying how much square feet is needed for everyone to do � their mission critical functions. �' Legal - Done "�"` Communications - Still working on these. This is a fairly new group, but �r working on the plans has really opened people's eyes. +�r Police - Not sure. Commander Curry will check with Floyd Eldridge who was �,,, assigned to the task and ask him to touch base with D. Needham. �rrr Facilities/Community Services -Will check on progress and report back. '�r Public Works- Some pieces are complete like utility billing, but other parts are �,,w still in progress. � HR/RM -Working on it, nearly done. �+r Fire & Emergency Services - Majority of forms are complete. Need to compile, „�„ edit and consolidate. �,,,,. The worksheet deadline was yesterday. When we come together next month we need to � finish and polish the plan. �,, We will take an hour at the next meeting to discuss the information and how to make it useable and useful. Please print your own copy for reference at the next meeting. Police � suggested inviting F. Eldridge to the next meeting. The compiling work is huge, so we � may need to hire a consultant to help pull this all together. �"" 8. Announcements/Good of the Order � � "�"` Page 6 of 7 � � � � Emergency Management Group-July 2, 2009 Minutes � � • There is a Red River flooding team training on July 9. The training might be of interest to HR, Fire & Emergency Services, and Public Works. If you are interested � be aware that an RSVP is required. Talk to D. Needham ifyou need more ""�'` information. � • If you would like assistance with purchasing preparedness supplies, and flu '�►'' preparedness supplies, let R. Myers know about it and she can pick out and order ,,,� supplies at a cost saving. � • Based on our experience with two recent fires, it might be prudent to change water � hydrant coloring to differentiate high vs. low pressure water. � • The Valley Medical Bomb Threat Drill was cancelled due to H1N1 issues. � � � Minutes taken and submitted by: Kelly Carey, Admin Sec I, Fire & Emergency Services � � � � � � � �rr � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Page 7 of 7 �` � � ��. � � � � � � � � t � t � t � � � � � � � � � � � t � � � � � +� � � � � � � � t � � � � ATTENDANCE — PLEASE SIGN IN Meeting: """""� fi . > �� ,�� „� � Date(s}:—.�.,.,�—` Times: ��C�`�f�..�"� Location: ,�„ �.r��-�� . � Print Name De artment Position Ext. z � � , ,� � , � � :_ � � � � e �-^"��'�^?• �t�!�s a�:°;�'�'. /�� e,� �'�f..s"'�?�ru C� � �„� t ,,.� L ' ,� ��`�� /.� � � �''� `r`' ��'�� c;�.,�� 1 J t?��,�i"' ��[A'1 L �'e.?C:ca�'`�.� !�L�/V'1 �'"Z.�."Z-�-��'rtC'r K::S"~�,( ^ ��' � ,, � , � � �� "�°� , � „ �� ,��r�� 7'" �'�/��'��' �� ` � � �.�- �� .,�� . c��,, . � _ ' ,� .N� �; " �.�,.��. � � �Q�� .,,�' � � � ( � � , S �h, I ATTENDANGE - PLEASE SIGN iN Meeting: �� r��,� Date s • '��.., z�._r Times ��iG�� `" ��-� a` � � � � ,�-� � )• �,�_� • Location: �� a��,�-- !� .. ..5�� Print Name Department Pasition Ext. , /,� � _ U � °� , � I c" � �� G��7��i ��, c�if'd�t��, � �' �� F l.u+' !� A..� S... ��°�.�nd'^++J't� �� M�..-" �•:� _f4 p� 1 .n ,..� �`....^"'"�,.,,m �,(�� .�,.f � r,.,...—,.,: .--- , t'I..�"7.. u(✓� t C2�-� � '�� N+t vv i�C Z�r�2.�V 2.. �t C.'�S'_.� N.�; ��V ��,;... t � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ��..�,:�„�.,; _,.r;��r��:.,.v aa ��3m..: .,^r��mn,m�^.m��rr�er�s�v,mr�»rrenrona��r;*�m��vr,-^r�mz�.,v^,��,:,�r�..,� „ aze�,�vr�rxs^av�,r,.:7, .^r,M��. .^....�^,...;��-wr�a,,^;^^�^: . ,.�.�,r. . ,�..�. _._ . ..........�....A._..... . _ _ , .�__ . _ , ...... � . ._ ....�_ �..._.._ +rr � � � � Emergency Management Group Meeting �"" Minutes from August 06, 2009 � � Present: � Dennis Conte, Facilities Supervisor, Community Services/Facilities �. Kent Curry, Commander, Police �, Suzanne Dale-Estey, Economic Development Director, Community& Economic Development I. David Daniels, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator, Fire & Emergency Services � Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services "�"'' Abdoul Gafour, Utility Engineering Supervisor, Public Works � Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Executive Department �,,,,. Peter Hahn, Deputy Administrator, Public Works � Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency Services George McBride, Information Services Director, Finance & Information Services ""�"""` Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services '�►` Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services �,,. Linda Parks, Fiscat Services Director, Finance & Information Services �, David Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Tim Troxel, Deputy Chief, Police � Ray Sled, Water Manager, Public Works �"'"` Pauletta Sulky, Risk Analyst, Human Resources & Risk Management � Clark Wi�cox, Commander, Police ,�, Greg Zimmerman, Administrator, Public Works �wr � Next Meeting: 0900 on September 3, 2009, 7th Floor Conferencing Center. �w �"' Important Dates � August 21, 2009 -Continuity of Operations Planning FINAL DUE DATE ,,,, September 1, 2009 -CodeRED Rollout r..� September 9, 2009 - Evacuation Annex Table Top October 5, 2009 -Committee of the Whole Presentation � � � Assignments: � 1. All Departments—Ensure all Continuity of Operations Planning(COOP)worksheets are �,,, completed and ready to be compiled by August 21. Worksheets for each department are located at Q:�Emergency Management�PLANS wrr AND PROCEDURES�RENTON COOP�Draft """' 2. All Departments—NIMS training needs to be completed by September 30. �w 3. AII Departments—Please read and become familiar with the Evacuation P/an. � � � � � � Emergency Management Group-August 6,2009 Minutes � � 4. All Departments—If you have a member of your department who would►ike to work ,�, on the CodeRED policies,please contact D. Needham. 5. SIDEBAR—D. Needham,S. Dale-Estey, L. Garvich - Determine what type of business �` community outreach we would like to do in response to the Green River flood threat, "�" to include discussion of joining ShoWare event. � 6. SIDEBAR—Chief Daniels, D. Needham, P. Sulky—Further discuss possibility of HR/Risk ,�;. Management developing City-wide policies and procedures that deal with the � potential of a pandemic to include health screenings and exclusion policies. � D. Needham chaired the meeting. `'�'' Key Decisions/Discussions: � � 1. Green River Flood Risk Update and Issues—(D. Needham &G. Zimmerman) � There is currently a lot of outreach and events going on in different cities in regards to ,� potential Green River flooding, with the main push being in September. Preeti Shridhar is coordinating with them and will keep us informed. A major concern in the event of a flood � event is the potential for sewage back-up in Renton. The sewer system could become ""�"�` surcharged or overloaded, causing sewer manholes to pop off and release sewage into the � valley. Residents wouldn't be able to use their toilets. This should only happen in a worst � case scenario flooding event. ,� Public Works will be having a large internal meeting to brainstorm regarding this issue and „�, generate a task force. We are going to look at the different flood scenarios the Army Corps � of Engineers have provided, including the worst one with 5 or 6 feet of water at our feet, and evaluate city vulnerabilities including: lifeline roads; protection of key properties; � operations of utilities including sewers; waterlines, we have no pumping systems in the �' valley and will need to consider contamination; acquisition of resources and the level of �r assistance we will provide to private companies. We will need to develop a good blend of „�; service to private and public entities. We will also look at potential road closures, barricades and investigate any mutual aid agreements we should create with neighboring � cities that won't be under water. If we have a huge flood we would probably have to shut "�'" down the sewage plant meaning part of South Seattle will not have sewage service either. +� What do we do if sewage is released? What will be our policy for providing assistance to � other cities in trouble? What facilities do we need to protect? Bob Hansen is on our ,�, engineering staff and has been through similar flooding in Snohomish valley. We are encouraging private businesses to have their own engineers come take a look and advise � them on what to do. Following this first internal meeting Public Works will be looking to the '"�` other departments for more information and to exchange ideas. We will need to make a � presentation on our plan to the Committee of the Whole on October 5. ,� Since Public Works is talking to businesses, it is important that we think about all of the � types of business outreach the City's doing. With all of the stuff going on in the community, ,�; we want ours to be a coordinated message. We need to be talking now about what we will do in September. L. Garvich addressed the possibility doing a hosted lunch at Renton � � Page 2 of 8 � � � � wr+ +�rr Emergency Management Group-August 6,2009 Minutes � +�rr� �r Technical College with a small reservation fee, offer it as an opportunity for businesses and residents to come and get information. S. Dale-Estey suggested that we have a sidebar to '""" talk about all the different options. We should consider joining the event at the ShoWare "�' Center and make it a regional event. The ShoWare Center may attract interest in and of �,., itself, and joining the event shows the solidarity of the different cities working together to ;�,, address the flood risk. ,,�„ In regards to sheltering, our region has decided to use a regional sheltering model. This is �, the best method to ensure we have sufficient staffing—most cities don't have enough for one shelter. They are currently determining the best location for a Regional Medical Needs "`� Shelter. The one they thought they had identified has fallen through. They asked if the �"° region could use our community center(RCC), but since it is on the Cedar River it may not +�.r be a good location. If we do offer RCC it will potentially decrease City revenues for rentals. ,,,� The good news is that under the terms of the Regional Disaster Plan we can charge a rental �.► fee for the facility that other cities will have to pay. The other cities can get reimbursed or King County can get reimbursed for the rental fee(s). In the end,there would be no loss of ""' income for the City and we might even earn a small amount of revenue. We do have two �' other neighborhood facilities in the highlands, but they are not big enough for a shelter of � this type. King County Public Health defined RCC as suitable—and is in fact the only facility �,, identified as suitable in our City. They are also looking elsewhere to avoid the sewer impact area. We should be able to bill the requesting agency/jurisdiction for all related costs �" (including staff OT) and then they can get reimbursed by FEMA at 75%. ��r► We are currently looking at different ways to protect Station 14 with water barriers and/or � covering openings and relying on the walls to hold back flood waters. An evaluation of the •" construction of the building and the different costs associated with protecting the building �,.r• will be done by Facilities. Barriers would cost between 45 and 75K. �` The Army Corps of Engineers are spending 8.8 million to slow the seepage, but they will not ,,,,,,, be able to test the flood pool over the winter. Any water coming in will go out. The dam is � currently only at 1/3 capacity. This year is going to be a tenuous year. They will test the Dam next summer, which means we will probably be better protected for the following � flood season. To fully fix the dam will take years and hundreds of millions dollars, and will ""�" require assistance from the federal government. In addition to spending 8.8 million on �..• seepage they are doing repairs on five different levees. There was a rumor that Kent was �,,,, raising levees and how that might cause water to go to other cities, but they are trying to � improve it and at this point aren't expecting to displace water. ;�r,, 2. CodeRED Policies and Procedures Development (D. Needham) � The official rollout date is September 1, but we are up and running now. We had a training ,�, on how to use the program yesterday. A handout that specifies who is authorized to use the program was passed out. We need to add D. Pargas to the list under Emergency '� Management. CodeRED can be used even if online access isn't available. It will most likely � be used in conjunction with other warnings rather than alone. We need to develop policies � and procedures that define the triggers for when and how we will use it. � '�` Page 3 of 8 w.� � � � Emergency Management Group-August 6,2009 Minutes � � What are the situations or triggers for CodeRED use in emergency situations? Discussion � included the following: � • Water Main Breaks—is that a life safety issue? ,� • Road Closures/Snow—depends on how widespread. • Sinkhole- may want to notify the neighborhood. � • A non-emergency use could be notification of land action use in areas- allowing `� us to use less paper, and be more efficient—we will need to clarify if v�r applicable/appropriate. +�rr • Levy failure, pre-identify the group using GIS, and be ready in the event that it �; breaks. Have a pending alert, all have to do is send it. Probably use this and a media release. This will help ensure that we contact as many people as possible. � • Another non emergency use would be Water Shut-offs; we might even charge "�"` the expense of the notification to the person. 'fw�" • Police lockdowns or evacuations would be good use for system. � • Missing person announcements—children/elderly—still believed to be in the ,�; neighborhood. • Notify public of con artist collecting utility bills? One factor to consider is how � widespread the issue is, if it is widespread, we would probably use different "�" forms of notification like a media release. '� CodeRED has reports we can access that identify who was actually contacted, if it was an '"� answering machine, etc. The system can work with cell phones as well. We can even use a �rrr comma delimited list and import it directly into the system without data entry. One of the ,,,�,� challenges will be getting the addresses with these reports. We currently cannot access � this, but are looking into why we cannot and how to gain access. � It is important for us to define how we are going to use the system and that what is listed � on the website is how the system will be used. � Since CodeRED has a limited number of minutes, we will need to evaluate how to pay the costs for going beyond the limit. If we expand to non-emergency use, departments will � have to budget for it. We can include the cost of minutes in the cost of projects/events '� where notification is needed. ''� We need to recognize that it is unusual to get 100%connect rates leaving us to pick up the "'� odds and ends. We may have issues with notifying apartment complexes. Will never get �r everybody, but will help contact those gaps. System has a slight issue with providing ,;�; messages in multiple languages: we can use another language but need a translator, etc and ;�, may not have time in emergency event. � Who should have the authority to issue a CodeRED announcement? D. Needham � recommends tying the authority to those who have authority to activate the EOC. Do we need the Mayor's blessing, a department head's blessing or what? When we need it, it will � be a time-sensitive issue. Who should have the authority? Can we get in trouble? If we use �' the e911 list when it isn't an emergency we could be fined/penalized, but otherwise no � trouble, except for the cost. ,� Page 4 of 8 � � � � � +rr Emergency Management Group-August 6,2009 Minutes w � � The group suggested it should be Administrators and up. Each department would set the policy for who they want to empower to be a delegate, so authorized parties would be an '�"` administrator or designee. There will still need to be a formal City Policy. �rr What about notification—are we telling the Mayor or City Council or Emergency �'" Management when this is done? Administrators could tell them? There is an all-call +�` feature where we can identify people to be called every time a message is sent out. For � example, Emergency Management is already set to receive a notice every time so they will ,�, know what is going out. The City policy we develop needs to govern the finance end of things as well. We have 75,000 minutes total. If we go over 75,000, we can only purchase � minutes in 10,000 increments. We could start with 25,000 per department and then ""'�"" reconcile at the end of the year or divide the 75,000 for emergency use only between those �r groups that send emergent messages like Police, Fire & Emergency Services, Emergency �,,, Management and Public Works. We could require all departments sending out non- � emergency messages to budget/pay for them. They will need to build in their use, but if at the end of the year we don't have any cost, i.e., we don't go over the minutes, we'll work it '°`� out between departments. The 'year'for the 75,000 minutes is June to June. By March we *� need to determine if we want to continue with the contract and at what level, it is currently � set up to auto renew. � We can do free text messages and email notifications to your own staff using the system. ,,,r,,, Don't rely on it for emergency communications, because it could be backlogged and/or �r people may not get them, but there are pertinent uses. Individual department users can work on setting up groups for their staff. �r �r When thinking about the different types of inessages you'll send out, there is an advantage to doing shorter messages. The shortest a message can be is 30 seconds. � � 3. Personnel Policies in a Pandemic—(P. Sulky& D. Needham) ,,,�,,,Y Given the impending swine flu pandemic we need to consider different pandemic related � policies for the City. The CDC recommends having policies that address health screening of employees, restricted travel, evacuating employees, employee exclusion and sick policies �"" among other things. HR/Risk Management has reviewed this and is unsure that this is a � policy development or revision issue. There is concern that required health screening might ,,,,,,. violate HIPPA laws. Chief Daniels noted that doing a health screening is legal and we have � EMTs who could do this. A shift/crew could be assigned to perform this duty. Is there an issue with sending someone home? If it becomes necessary we should have a check in � process for when people come into the building. If other jurisdictions do this and we don't, "�' it would be a problem. When we do, we will have to tie it to a pandemic event and a � mayor's proclamation. �►° Chief Daniels and D. Needham stressed that this is an HR policy issue. We need policies that ,�. define what we would do if there were a pandemic event. For example, what exactly ;,�, switches on extra precautions, and what are the precautions we'll be taking? Does the CDC have a template for these policies and procedures? Since everyone is going to be doing the � same thing is a policy needed? HR/Risk Management, again, is not sure this is a policy � ``"` Page 5 of 8 � �.. `,�' � Emergency Management Group-August 6,2009 Minutes � � development or revision. They aren't comfortable dictating what is going to happen. There � would need to be guidelines after it has happened but it isn't a policy HR/Risk Management would do in advance. � Chief Daniels and D. Needham disagreed, stating that we need to know what the policy will � be in advance. If we are sent home, when and how will we be allowed to return? Are we `� going to remove doctor note requirements, especially if they can't get one in a pandemic? � Right now it is not a deadly strain so we do not need tents and screening now, but the � potential is there. What is the threshold? We will need to tie into public health standards ,�; for the threshold. What about sick leave? An exclusion policy comes into play. � HR/Risk Management feels there will be guidelines developed by outside agencies but that a City Policy isn't needed. Others feel like we are putting our head in the sand if we don't � develop something to deal with this and leave it up to individual departments. We can �"'�' remind supervisors to monitor employees now, but this doesn't help if we need to exclude `�`' people. On a philosophical level are we going to do something? Flu season is coming soon. � We need to start talking about it now so that any new policies are in place in time. It was ,�, recommended that Fire&Emergency Services and HR/Risk Management have a sidebar on this issue. This work will need to be done along with Unions. P. Sulky will pull related � policies and provide them to Fire & Emergency Services. They will then meet with Robin ''� Robertson in HR/Risk Management. If we don't do anything internal we won't be able to do � anything external. If other people do it and we don't, we will be in trouble. Need to have � these policies in place, even if we don't use them. It would be good to have these policies � tied to an emergency proclamation from the Mayor. We may want to get Legal involved when creating these policies. � � 4. Incident Management Team/NIMS Training—(D. Needham) � We held a meeting a week and a half ago on Incident Management Team development. We are putting together a team and will have an intense NIMS training for these members. We � have some opportunities for upcoming NIMS 300 or 400 trainings. If you have not signed `� up there is one for 400 the dates left at this time are August 31/Sept 1St. There are more '�" date openings for NIMS 300. D. Needham will send out reminders about the trainings, � particularly those that can be taken online. Please let D. Needham know if there is anyone ,�, who can't take it online. Last call for NIMS compliance is September 30. If anyone is going to act as an Incident Commander they need NIMS 400. If they are going to be Command & � General Staff they need NIMS 300. All people taking the week-long intensive trainings in '�'` Planning or Logistics need to have taken everything including NIMS 300 and 400. �r Supervisors need to have NIMS 100, 700 and 200 if they will have a field emergency � response role. All emergency responders need NIMS 100 and 700. NIMS 800 is really only needed by those who will deal with the Feds directly, but will confirm. � � 5. Communications update—(L. Garvich) � As of July 15Y, AJLS became the Executive Department and has a newly formed ;� Communications division with 7 people. The hope for this change is to streamline and increase the efficiency of communications for the City. By bringing graphic design and � � Page 6 of 8 � � � � � � Emergency Management Group-August 6,2009 Minutes � � � community outreach together we should be able to provide a greater resource to the City. The division will be providing support for Ready in Renton in September and the Howard '�"' Hanson Dam issue. They will also play a key role in the EOC when it is activated. �r 6. Evacuation Annex Finalization—(M. Mattson) �r+� M. Mattson has completed the Evacuation Annex based on all comments. By the end of � Friday it will be final. If you have any edits, let her know ASAP. Last month we talked about "`'�" adding Community Services as a support agency,this was confirmed at the meeting. The � great news is that we now have a plan in place. King County provided an evacuation ,,,,,,, template with questions leading us through the process. It has been vetted throughout the � City and is a good plan. The last thing to do is add the appendixes. King County is going to be putting on a table top exercise to explore the plan. We will have our own table top � exercise,to explore our plan and see if it works, in the morning of September 9. Everyone "■'' participating should familiarize themselves with their plan, show up and be ready to play. �,r Please send good representation to the tabletop so they can help identify how we want �, things to be done and highlight any issues. �rr Currently Fire & Emergency Services and Police are listed jointly for evacuation. We would �, like to make Police primary, and Fire & Emergency Services a support, because the Police handle the actual movement of people. Public Works will help support them with the � movement, and Community Services will support them by designating where people will go. �"`" The recommendation is that Fire & Emergency Services or Public Works can designate the �rr need for an evacuation and Police will be the incident commander for the actual ,,,,�, evacuation. Is this okay with Police? Whoever designates this will need to provide them � with comprehensive information so that they can lead the evacuation properly. Need to know soon, because the plan is due now. �. �wr 7. Hazard Mitigation Plan Finalization - (D. Needham) �„ (Documents found at Q:\Emergency Management\PLANS AND PROCEDURES\Hazard �v Mitigation Plan\DRAFT REVISION) � This is the last call for any changes to the Hazard Mitigation Plan. D. Needham will have to chase CED down for a couple things. Please look at the Action Plan handout. If there is a � project that you would like to get extra funding for through Hazard Mitigation, you should �'"' add it to this list ASAP. Changes can be made to the draft directly. The 'Drop Dead Date' � for the plan is next Wednesday,August 12. �' 8. Continuity Planning Next Steps—(D. Needham) �"` (Worksheet folders found at Q:\Emergency Management\PLANS AND "�'" PROCEDURES\RENTON COOP\Draft) "�'` D. Needham has reviewed the work that has been done. Police didn't have as much as we "�` thought, Public Works had more than we thought but needs to consolidate, Executive/AJLS ..,�„ needs more, Fire & Emergency Services needs to consolidate some, Finance/IS still has ;,�, sections to complete, HR/Risk Management did a good job, CED has a lot to do and Legal is �r done. D. Needham will be contacting individual departments and let them know what ""`' Page 7 of 8 � �..� wr� �r Emergency Management Group-August 6,2009 Minutes � � needs to be done. Some have a little polish work and others have a bit more to do. Each Department should go back to their folders and ensure that it is done, particularly in the � event of a pandemic. We need to identify how much space is needed for mission critical �" functions. Don't worry about identifying alternate locations. Facilities will look at the `� square footage needs and determine what should be done. Everyone needs to complete � the facilities worksheet. Be creative about what your mission critical functions are and how „�;, you will meet them. Alter regular plans like work schedules of 8/5 working from home, � calling in, etc. � The plan needs to be complete enough to make sense to someone outside of your Department. At that point a consultant may be our best choice to help us tie it together � and compile what all the departments will be doing. `'"�` Our deadline has already passed. We need to complete this ASAP. It should be in place � before pandemic or flooding occurs, with enough time for a consultant to pull it together '"�" into a final format. Please make sure your plans are ready for an outside look, and are the �rr final draft, by August 21. � � Minutes taken and submitted by: Kelly Carey,Admin Sec I, Fire& Emergency Services ,�,; � � � � � � � � � �ww� � � � � � � � � � � � Page 8 of 8 � � � � ___. ..._... ---__ __... � ___� �_ � � � � � � �. � ._.� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGN IN w�� w.�, Meeting: ,� �,�� ;,��;t.y.:a '�' ,. �° .� �'�- _ . .. • . Date(s)• ��;;� d ��"� T�mes: �� r.� ... s ��; �'� Location: _ ��,��:��:�,��f,��.��.�, . ; � � � ^��,..J Print Name De artment Positian Ext. , �, ' w .. .. , ry ..�_ �... q+�.. � � t3 '� °� " c" � '�'�/ •� ;,, ��,�ac��...��.,�.�.:�'. �''� �� '��' � �_� � � �� _ �,�,. ;a, �_� w �'�,,s � ' �" '°�'�:�7 �dr.� � ,/"� ...�� ,� J �„�" �, ."',�, �,�,;,"�.'7-- .� � �,;w� , s C_..,�,.� �;- �.s� ,� � ,.5�'c��. `�'..� � �� `� G'��' �"rc� c��.��=� �'��' � � .� �.,. �� f` .�• � � � � °� ' ,;�'�'� �,,� ; �� G�r��',�✓� �Ll�<v�i��" G�� L i'^` / �•I.a.,. / �.+'fr�J L.—� / �.. GY /"w^ '� ! "�'- ��/ ` ��'1 . . � . , � . �. H "1 .�� Z , b � � , � �� 'l�°�� z� �: ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGN IN � Meeting: �.;^�'�w�-�..�, �...� :'�°"1e�.-� �z�,�..�...,.,�,,,„,,.�- �+.a�;�=..�, - � r. Date(s): �'' � rvfi ,��. .r.;��-�� Times: � ��r>e:� � I �"� ��s Location: ,�.,,c�?��a..�}�t� ,��.a�� K c�'��, �rz...,�.., Print Name De artment Position Ext. �- �, � �, �� ,,�� ? �� '�� ' � y� �-:.`� .�� :� �� t�..��,`� `��d�� ( � c � L. �...,� � -��' F.�.��.. r ,�. �� - � �� R �� ,� ��J �� • ��..c.��. �a r�1�:.� � i � IY. .s, t��c�r-- �� ' _..l. • � 4 � 5 C t_►+��6. �l�.��. 4�1tr'M�'t l�t , �0�� ' �1 f l�/� "`C`�� L,..- ��t..l c � �j�� fi� �� `7 S� ( � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � vrr � � wr' �„ Emergency Management Group Meeting � Minutes from February 4, 2010 � � Present: Kelly Carey,Administrative Secretary, Fire& Emergency Services "�'' Dennis Conte, Facilities Supervisor, Community Services �r Kent Curry, Commander, Police �, Suzanne Dale-Estey, Economic Development Director,Community& Economic Development Sonja Mejlaender, Community Relations Specialist, Community Services '"'�' Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services vr Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services ,� David Pargas,Assistant Fire Marshal, Fire& Emergency Services Colleen Shannon,System Technician, Human Resources& Risk Management � Ray Sled, Water Manager, Public Works � � Important Dates: �r 0900 on March 4,2010,Next EM Group Meeting, 7th Floor Conferencing Center :� 0800 on April 6-7,2010,Partners in Preparedness Conference,GTCTC �rr° �,,. Assignments: '"�"' All Departments: �' a. Please take a final/ook at the Hazard Mitigation Plan and notify K. � Carey of the coordinating organizations in the Action /tems. � b. Please notify K. Carey who will be the representative at the public «.. meeting for the Hazard Mitigation Plon. � c. Please review indirect costs requests for grants (section 5 of the � minutesJ and provide to Director Needham ASAP. �„ d. Please update the disaster assignments list for your department �,,, and provide to Director Needham ASAP. ,,�,, e. Please review the Gets Card list and notify Director Needham of ,�, critical positions that need the card(ond those that don'tJ. � f. Please review the 2010 work p/an and notify Director Needham to � add or remove any projects. � g. Update EOC callout- determine one or two contact numbers that are a/ways answered. Provide to Director Needham ASAP. � h. Please be sure to track any time working on Emergency '� Management using EM coding in /TS or Telestaff. � i. Notify Director Needham if inembers are interested in attending the �"' Partners in Preparedness Conference for free. � � � � � � Emergency Management Group-February 4,2010 Minutes � � Director Needham chaired the meeting. � Key Decisions/Discussions �" 1. Green River Update—S. Dale-Estey '"�'' � • Community and Economic Development has been working with the Communications Division to create a mass communication plan in regards to Green River Flooding. � o We were getting inundated with calls and experienced issues with �` misinformation and/or how facts were presented, so we have tried to get ''�' organized internally. �rr o We were meeting every two weeks to touch base and share information. � Coordinating City interfaces with businesses allowed us to act quickly and effectively when any red flags came up. � ■ Vivienne Lietz at extension 6582 was/is the funnel for business contacts `'� and is maintaining a list of contacts to review at the meetings. �r o We offered a forum for brokers in the community to hear our perspective on the ,,�, facts. o We have been using an email list and have created a lot of redundant systems to � communicate with businesses in the valley as well as the property owners. ""�` o It is an ongoing challenge. Please continue to share information! `�rr • Fundraising—is now job #1—so we can arrange permanent fixes to the Dam and ,� levy system that meet FEMA standards. Improving our currently poor floodplain ,,� rating will increase interest in coming to Renton. o We are coordinating with neighboring cities to determine what needs to happen �` to fix this issue. The current quote for a permanent fix is 540 million. '"�' o If every city submits the same request it should help us get what is needed. wr o S. Dale-Estey and the Mayor are going to Washington D.C. to discuss this issue. „� • The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers design process is usually six years long. This wil) � not work for both dam and levies. They are attempting to expedite the design process as well as evaluate alternative analyses. �` • This year's remaining flood threat is low, but next year will be a big concern. '�'' � 2. 2010 Work Plan Finalization � • The 2010 Work Plan handout summarizes the results of last month's meeting—The v�trF names listed are the leads for the projects. � • Please skim through and see where your department falls. If there is anything we need to take off the table or add,please let Director Needham know. � • Disasterassignments—We've received HR/RM, Community Services and Police's � assignments. We still need them from the other departments. '��' o K. Carey will send out a template to help with the disaster assignments listing. If � you need individual assistance with this, please contact Director Needham. �, � 2 ,� � � 'rrlt � � � *�r Emergency Management Group-February 4,2010 Minutes � ,�, o The positions identified on this should only be those who do not have a critical position during a disaster job (not response-level positions). � Notice the Community Risk Reduction Community listed at the end of the plan. . � o This is a Fire & Emergency Services committee that works on reducing risks � through prevention (think Renton Heart Month) but there is no public input. ,�,,,. o Since all of the departments perform prevention work, this committee could be +w developed further to include all Departments and public input. The vision would be for this group to be like the EM group but with the public perspective on how � to reduce risks in the community. `�" • ESF 14—CED is the lead, but we need to identify a representative. If this isn't the �r year to do it, let us know. � 3. School Emergency Planning—R. Myers � �r • The Emergency Management Institute offers a course on Multi-Hazard Planning for ,,�,, schools. o We'd like teams from each school in the Renton School District to attend during � June,July or August. ``�""` o We'd like to get internal commitments and identify back-ups before approaching �rr the schools. We need reps from Fire, Police & Emergency Management. �,,,,, o R. Myers has a form she can send out to those people who should attend. � o Costs—(In addition to week of time from employees attending) ■ Travel is reimbursed but departments would have to front the money. � ■ Departments would have to pay for the meal ticket-$91/week. ''�+►° o Relationship with schools is improving—they have agreed to support the NICHE �„r program—but the emergency planning relationship is very weak. „�, ■ Issue is not necessarily that they aren't doing planning, but that they aren't coordinating with City to ensure good response. � ■ We need to gather copies of the emergency plans for our schools—so that '"'' we know what they expect from us and what we can expect from them. �r o Private school (Renton Christian, St. Anthony's) connections are good. Similarly �,, preschool training and communication is good. 'i""' 4. Hazard Mitigation Plan � �rr • Trying to put a wrap on this plan, but we need ALL departments to review the action items and update with coordinating organizations. How much time is �""` needed to address the action items?The group agreed to two weeks—Feb 18, 2010. �"�'` • We also need everyone to take a final look at the plan to address the consultant's �rr notes and ensure everything is the way it should be. ,�„ o We need CED to look at inserts and update with requested information. � o Want everyone to think about projects that should be included—be creative - we can put things in the plan that we may never accomplish, but we might be �.r► �,,. 3 �rr � � � � � Emergency Management Group-February 4,2010 Minutes � � able to do in the future. The projects would improve the plans' approval rating �, as well as the likelihood of getting those projects accomplished. • Please mark the hard copy,send to K. Carey and we'll compile. � • We also need one more public meeting prior to completing the plan and sending it �` to the state. `�' o Please provide K. Carey with names of the representative(s)from each �,�,;, department who will come to public meeting to answer questions. ,� o The meeting would most like start with an open house from 6:00-6:30 p.m. and then 6:30 p.m. to 8 p.m. for questions. � o P. Shridhar wondered if this could be combined with a City Council Meeting. '"'� Director Needham is going to investigate this idea further. vi�rr • Peter Renner is applying for a grant and the plan has to be in the place in order to �; receive the grant. (Good motivation to get it done quickly). � 5. Grant Update and Information Needs � • We've received a slight 'blow' in regards to EMPG eligibility guidelines. � o Previously we could count any salary time spent on Emergency Management as �` long as the annual amount was 5%or more. "'�'' o The state has changed the requirement so that we can only count those people � who are within Director Needham's chain of command. ;,� o To make up the 'difference' we need to determine all of Emergency Management's indirect costs including: � ■ Facility costs—annual cost per person in Emergency Management '"�` ■ IS costs—computer, phones, pagers, support, etc. �rr ■ Finance/ HR/RM —cost to support Emergency Management Employees ,� ■ Please contact Director Needham with these costs as well as any others she �Irr� could include. vir► 6. Disaster Reimbursements—K. Carey � • K. Carey has been working on Disaster Reimbursements from FEMA. � • Since October she has processed over$250,000 in funds for the City. • If you are working on one of the FEMA projects and/or have questions about "� Disaster Reimbursements, please speak to her. ""�" � 7. Target Capability List Priorities � • Passed out a list distributed yesterday by Homeland Security. Please look at the �` green highlighted items and help us identify which,from our local perspective, are '� our highest priorities: (in no particular order) � o Discussion identified the following priorities � ■ 25—City Evacuation &Shelter in Place � ■ 33—Mass Care � 4 � � � � ti�..rr +rrr �r � Emergency Management Group-February 4,2010 Minutes �rr ,�,, ■ 37—Economic & Community Recovery ■ 36—Restoration of Lifelines � ■ 17—Volunteer Management and Donations '"""' ■ 2—Communications � ■ 10—Critical Infrastructure Protection �,,,: o We may be able to create a project that addresses one of these priorities if � someone is willing to pilot it and it has regional effect. Please consider this, and the list, and contact Director Needham if you have a project orsuggestions. � �,,. 8. Gets Card � • The list of current Gets Card holders was passed out. Please read the fact sheet. • We need to review the list and identify who should and shouldn't have a card. � o Who is critica!? Please review and get back to Director Needham. �r �,,.: 9. Announcements/Good of the Order �r • Partners in Preparedness Conference—let Director Needham know who attended last year so we can bill and pay for it. � o If inembers of your department want to attend this year's conference, �"' Emergency Management should be able to cover the cost—please let Director � Needham know who would like to attend. � � � �r �ir � � �rr � +rr +rrr' � iirr �+irr �r � wrrr► � ��rr � 5 �rr � �r � � � � For publication in the Renton Reporter not later than 3/12/2010 � CITY OF RENTON �" CITIZEN INPUT MEETING v� � HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN The city administration will be hosting a public meeting on March 16`h, 6:00-8:00 pm in the 7th Floor "� Conferencing Center, Room #726 on the 7'h floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 S.Grady Way, Renton.The �, city has been working on a revision of the Hazard Mitigation Plan over the past year.The plan and local maps will be available for review.The plan identifies hazards that could affect residents, businesses, � visitors, and infrastructure within the City of Renton and identifies potential mitigation projects that '� could help protect the City from future disasters. Public input is sought for the finalization of this plan. ,,,�,� For further information, please contact Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director at 425- � 430-7027 or view the plan at rentonwa.gov. � � � � � � � �rrw► � � � � +�w � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �r � �. ��., � City of Renton Home page Page 1 of 1 �r `�' ____ ,�; • r t i!�:�t:� �: . � � �� -�-._._._.�... r�,��'l C��}�,�1 ,�,,, � You are here:Calea�dar � �Prfnk Frieticfla Version �11r � C�lendar �'" < April 2011 View Upcoming: Week� M nt �.y�r �, » su n+o Tu we Y�a Fr sa Date Event Location �, > 27 28 24 �Q 31 1 � 3/I6 Nazard Mitigatton Plan Renton Ciry Half,7t1�Fioor > 3 4 � 6 7 � � 6:00 Pt�3 to Additional input is sought as the City of Renton Conferencing Center "�"' 8:00 PM finalizes its Hazard Mitigation Pian.The Hazard > 10 1�, �7 � 14 15 �6 � > 17 1$ �9 20 21 � � Mitigation Pfan identifies hazards and risks present within a community and suitable measures to �r > �4 25 26 27 2� �9 30 address the risks oF dfsaster to(essen the potentia) �„ > 1 2 � 4 5 6 � For Injuries or damage.Read more... �rrr Filter Resuits �+rrr By Date Range:(mm/dd/yyyy) � 211/2090 � � From: 8 �r►" 3/16/2010 � �'` To: 8 �, [�r Category and/or Keyword: . �r AI!Categories;:► _....___.........._.....,.__� . � r . -: � � . , s�b�;,t � +w� � +�rr � � �rr � � �rr .rr � � +y�„ � � � � *�rv littr�•//rPnMnc�ra anvin��Pnr�ar acnX 5/25/2Q1 1 �t✓ ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGN IN , ,/� Meeting: ; t/1il.t'tt� ft��'�'� �l c�v� ITI.t 1��i „ 7L` �'1� Date(s): ��{Q ��2�� o Times: 1��,2CZ -- ?_�Y_�CJ Location: y��O��-,� � l�/ � •T• '��a� � Print Na 'e De artmer►t Position Ext. ti CtJt.�Z-� � ,-- C�c��'��C�� —? SSS �U�l1 ��`"4,�4� 1 �I`t � c�JQ'-'PCsL �� ✓�a s v�.r J 1$o r �Z-�S , , � 2� S � t�C C S �PrLr��Z.�' ' �il 0� � �r2r�� -� �� w �� .��wT ,,� �-,�� yo 0 J��'� � �� —r'c- �..�� s��a2�) ��e �u A �.c �o'�� o C-�� t. ,�� '�-�.�- � �-�-� �l C90 �' � i ^ ,^-� .�- � � �7�r� 7 a 2� �� , 1 C�� i�'ccr o� 5� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �: � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �. � � � � +�.r +�rr �' �„ Emergency Management Group Meeting �► Minutes from Apri11, 2010 � � Present: Craig Burnell, Plan Review, Community& Economic Development ��"` Kelly Carey, Administrative Secretary, Fire & Emergency Services �'` Suzanne Dale-Estey, Economic Development Director, Community& Economic Development �rr Bill Flora, Deputy Chief, Fire & Emergency Services �,; Abdoul Gafour, Water Utility Supervisor, Public Works Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Executive � Gina Jarvis, Fisca) Services Director, Finance & Information Services ""�"" Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency Services +�r►� Sonja Mejlaender, Community Relations Specialist, Community Services � Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services � Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services Ann Nielsen, Assistant City Attorney, City Attorney � Preeti Shridhar, Communications Director, Executive �'' Ray Sled, Water Manager, Public Works �rr Tim Troxel, Deputy Chief, Police � � Important Dates: � � 0800 on Apri16-7,2010,Partners in Preparedness Conference,GTCTC 0900 on May 6,2010,Next EM Group Meeting, 7th Floor Conferencing Center � �; 0800 on October 6-7,2010,SOUNDSHAKE 2010-SAVE THE DATE! � Assignments: � � All Departments: � a. The Continuity of Operations Plan is due May 12, 2010 � a. Please submit updates to the following items for your Department � ASAP to K. Carey: i. Disaster assignments, N/MS training, GETS Card list and the � EOC callout list `"� b. Please begin gathering expense data for Green River f/ood p/anning "`�'� and protection measures. `"'` c. Please determine which staff will participate in SoundShake at the �"' EOC and save the dates—October 6 and 7. If you have injects for � SoundShake contact M. Mattson. � � � � � � � Emergency Management Group-April 1,2010 Minutes � � CED, CS, HR & Fire: �r • Please coordinate to determine the primary department for ESF 23. ,�, PW & Parks: � • Please identify who can work on the Debris Management plan and �,,; notify Director Needham. � � Director Needham chaired the meeting. � Key Decisions/Discussions �` 1. Green River Update "'�` • US Army Corps of Engineers are starting to refill the reservoir and test capacity. ,,,� • This year will be a "neutral" winter historically known for greater flooding. ,�, o The grout curtain has been installed and there are plans to expand the curtain, which will take approx. 1 yr. The permanent repair work will take 5 years. � o Flood risk will decrease back to previous levels when project is complete. "� • Levees are still a concern. ''�' a. Restricted Access Authorization Pass � • Local emergency managers have created a draft and are meeting with the State � next week to present it to them. • The pass will be in color, difficult to forge and will have an expiration date. '�'' • A safety caution/disclaimer will be included. '"'�` • Emergency managers will provide passes only to critical infrastructure providers �r or others with a public safety mission in the area. ;,� o The committee recommended that a specific person be named on the pass and that passes be limited. � o Some companies with Hazardous Materials may need emergency mitigation `�'` assistance. "'�` • Once public safety hazards are mitigated, access will be allowed for all impacted � businesses/residents. They will not need a special pass. They will only need their � ID and proof that they have legitimate business in the blocked off area. b. Debris Management Planning Status Check � • Parks accepted responsibility for doing the Debris Management Plan but has not "�` had time to work on it. '� • In the absence of another plan, Public Works had begun developing their own. �, • We had a consultant offer to assist Parks with this for free, but the offer ended � April 1- did Community Services or Public Works connect and/or contact the consultant for assistance? No. � • We need Public Works and Community Services to work together on this. Please � let Director Needham know who are the best people to assign. � • There is a very easy-to-use regional template available for this plan so that we � just have to fill in the narrative blanks. � 2 �r � � � � �r � � Emergency Management Group-April 1,2010 Minutes � „�, 2. Blue Cascades Exercise �r • Flu/Flood Tabletop Exercise that included businesses, local, state and federal government, King County Public Health, Dept of Homeland Security, DSHS, etc. �" • It was useful for businesses that hadn't done the flu/flood planning in advance. �"' • Pointed out that there is not enough bandwidth for everyone, especially when you �r count children, to telecommute. � � 3. Regional Catastrophic Planning a. Regional Long Term Care Mutual Aid Plan �'�"' • Tabletop Exercise for long term care facilities. The point was to encourage them �" to develop mutual aid plans in the event of an emergency. Liability issues, � transportation issues, appropriate resources, etc were discussed. �.. • Care providers were encouraged to be creative and develop solutions if/when current plans aren't available. � • Renton's long term care facilities were not present. King County Public Health is � going to follow up with them, we will assist as needed. `� b. Regional Volunteer Management Issues �r • Workshop reviewed the current volunteer management plans local jurisdictions �, have and determined that most don't have them. �r • Renton, however, is prepared to register emergency workers for our own use. • Workshop also addressed how to connect resources—connect people with ``�"` needs with those who are willing to help without liability concerns. We don't � have the staff to create a volunteer reception center and do the connections. � • They are currently looking for a private partner to assist with this need. If ,�,, anyone has an idea or suggestion please notify M. Mattson. � 4. Hazard Mitigation Plan Finalized '`�"` • Special thanks to Kelly Carey for doing the wrap-up and pulling the plan together. ''�' • It will be sent to the State of Washington Emergency Management Division and �,r FEMA for review. It will also be sent to the City Council via memo. Council approval ,�;, will be sought after the State and FEMA review. • If you have edits send them in TODAY. We must send in as soon as possible to � ensure hazard mitigation grant eligibility. �rrw +r�r � � � � � �r �, 3 � � tirr � � Emergency Management Group-Apri11,2010 Minutes � � 5. Seismic Building Codes/Lessons from Chile ,,�; • Discussed an OpEd Article in the NY Times regarding seismic building codes in Chile. • Chile had 9.5M earthquake recently. Since they are in a subduction zone like us, we � have the potential for the same size quake here. �" • If we were struck with a quake of this magnitude we would be greatly impacted. �w' • Generally our codes are strict, but we have a lower seismic code than California. � • Is frequency the best way to determine seismic codes? Of course, we need to � balance this with costs for development with stronger codes. wr� • Building codes here could be strengthened, but aren't for this group to discuss. • Are there some talking points we could prepare for calls of this nature? �" • Director Needham will meet with C. Burnell and Neil Watts to create talking points, '"'�" and defer calls to them when expert information is needed. '� � 6. SoundShake Workshop Discussion ;,,� a. Building Officials Workshop Tying into Renton Damage Assessment Planning • Larger jurisdictions like Seattle and King County have developed lists of people � qualified to provide rapid building assessments for a fee. � o We need a roster like this for our jurisdiction. vr�► • ATC 20 is a course that trains people to perform this assessment. City employees ,,,�,, from Facilities, Fire Inspection and Building have taken this. � o We should compile a list of who has taken the training to determine if more trained City staff inembers are needed. � • An emergency proclamation is needed prior to doing assessments to ensure the `'�" people doing the work are indemnified. � • There are several businesses that cannot open until they have been assessed. ,,,� We need to make sure we have sufficient support to help these reopen. � • We also need to set up mutual aid relationships with other jurisdictions, like Eastern Washington, in the event that we have a huge disaster. � • Non-emergency services agencies are not as tied into mutual aid arrangement "'�"' like emergency services agencies. '� o Renton is signatory to the Regional Disaster Plan that includes a legal ,�,, payment agreement between King County agencies, but if it was a county- wide disaster, we would need larger agreements to reach outside of the � area. � • Currently we have three departments listed as joint primaries: CED, Community "�' Services and Fire. We need one clear lead to take on primary responsibility for � this ESF to organize planning meetings. Consider Risk Management as the ,,�, organizer and have the other three as supporters actually doing the work? � • Need to develop a way for people to report in from the field, to include P/W and CS, and we could have massive information if they provide the input. �' • Using Engines and Aid Cars to do damage assessment is not the best use of our `� materials and resources. '+� 4 �r � � � � � � +r Emergency Management Group-April 1,2010 Minutes � �,,, o We have a large number of people assigned to do Damage Assessment, but there are concerns about using personal vehicles, personal versus city � insurance, traffic congestion, identification - more brainstorming is needed. "'�`` o Public Works trucks all have radios and they will assess bridges immediately, � in addition to documenting fires and other damage. They could send all ,,,,,,, information to City Shops and that information could be relayed to the EOC. � o King County Office of Emergency Management is currently working on an internet application that would allow people to click on general categories to '� indicate the type of damage and then GPS tag it. Our IS department is °'�' currently working with them. � • Revisit next month. Really need to tackle this now in preparation for the 2012 �, review of the entire plan. � b. Long-Term Housing Workshop Tying into Renton ESF 6/Mass Care Planning • Plan to limit shelter use to two weeks, if need extends beyond that, we will need � to look at providing temporary housing. �' • Currently need to identify shelters and temporary housing in Renton, even with +r�r planning there will definitely be gaps- especially with a big disaster. ... 7. Exercise Participation Decisions � a. Dam Sector Exercise `"�"` • There will be a Green River tabletop exercise around the same time as � . SoundShake. Due to the timing, we are unsure if we will be able to participate. � b. Green River Integrated Emergency Management Course (IEMC) vrr • Planned for 2011. Similar to Emmetsburg, being brought to us. c. SoundShake 2010 � • Kin Count is uttin this to ether and is currentl g Y� p g g y putting on workshops. They `"�'` provided little notice, but we are participating as best we can. �' • Two day exercise with an EOC focus, Oct. 6 and 7, running 12 hours each day. �, o Main focus will be EOC operations, to include shift changes. The handout w� includes King County objectives for the exercise—we can add to them o Let M. Mattson know if you have things you'd like to add. �" • More EOC training will be scheduled prior to the exercise. We currently only °`�" have enough people to fully staff one operational period. � • Need to identify additional staff to get the training and able to rotate through. � • We are still trying to set up a Logistics Chief training this year—is there a time ±rr° that is best for people? We are not having much luck finding a free trainer. • Please review your lists and identify if there are any others you can add to the � EOC list and who could participate October 6 and 7—hold these dates. �r► �wr 8. Community Risk Reduction Committee Reorganization ,,,,.� • Postponed until next month. �r ,,,� 5 �.. � � � � Emergency Management Group-Apri11,2010 Minutes � � 9. Assignments Check-in � • Continuity of Operations Plan is due May 12tn • Still have not received disaster assignments, GETS Card, EOC Contact updates from � several Departments—please send them in. We will send out a specific list shortly. "'�'� �r 10. RCPT Grant � • We can provide a match for this regional grant by looking at Green River planning ;,� work that has crossover applications to the RCPT project list. Please review the list �r�r► and document any hours and expenses. � 11.Announcements/Good of the Order `'�'' • None. � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 6 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGN IN Meeting: � �.''� I I . � / Date(s):�✓ , { � ,I„�,_Times: � � j�,i '�7d Location: �G� �� ( Print Name Department Position Ext. ` � r r� �'7�� G � ��5 ' r� �Y � ' !�. : �F 1 r �C..- I � Y V� w � ��.�� i " ;�5 �' �� a 2�(� .��`f ,, ` ��.i � l'` .� 4��1� ��M �It ,� �;U'l il � r r� Ct�� 7 � � , . . �,,- . • .�f��- �'��, �c j/z-.� ,�/� ��G� . t `�;��'�r �=�``� �,1/:.�� ' ��';f,�� '��,,�� j��! • - c �' - �,' t � � ,�. ' -,n ` G � C�� 5^l� ' � � �' , 't� ��4 �r'' �/`�� i;� ��` f(� t E ' �'I t � l ��''�,'� / � y� � / ` 5 � � % `��ULW Vv�'+L`�M/ ��1 iFJ�l\l. •v �`�� r ' • l_�� Gr/ . � t�✓--" 1��,� l�,�� 7 �� . I � � ' �- � � . �i�.��' �K �C - ��.'� ��e�� 6S� ' , � , .��^�� r- G� � �i r �� • � . d � , �' � v� Y" � v� � :..� '7 2.�� . ` I J�, r ?C� ��-�� J7�J`c`'� Gr�, �._ �--� .. ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGN IN Meeting: Date(s): Times: Location: Print Name Department Position Ext. 1 � � 1 U�1 V'i 1��1 ��to��5�'1 �t��i �f�l �.�r `� �b`� � � � _ _...- , � �i �.+ tr- `_� j--�t�C141"�, SCC ` �" � '; ��a .,r � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �: � � � �: � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � J a > 0 � °C a � a - a � J Z � m W V � a Z o. � a O V >- H- V �► � � ► � �► � � #� �► � � � � :l � � � � � � � � � � � � � 1 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �' �' . '�Ir � CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON wr► RESOLUTION NO. 3 6 S 0 `"� � A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTQN, � ADOPTING THE HAZARD MITIGATIUN PLAN. '�`" �� w�r WHEREAS, Section 322, Nfitigation Planning, of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief � and Emergency Assistance Act, enacted by Section 104 of the Disaster Mitigaiion Act of 20Q0 '""'� � (DMA)(P.L. 106-390}provides new and revitalized approaches ta mitigation plaruiing;a� ,,,� WHEREAS, the Disaster Mitigation Act e.stablishes the requirement for state and local �" � governtnent mitigation planning as a condition of disaster assistance;and � � WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Council recognize that mitigation plauming, alang with � other emergency preparedness actions, provides a significant apportunity to reduce the Crty's � � disaster losses;and ,,,�, WHEREAS, the City has developed the City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan and is � � committed to fi�lfilling the mitigation goals and abjectives outlined in the Plan; r,� NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, � v� WASHINGTON, DO RESOLVE AS F4LLOWS: '�' � SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects. � SECTION II. The City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan is adopted by the City "�"'` � and all responsble departments are authorized to execute their responsi`bilities in implementing ,,,�,; � this Plan. v� � � � � � � � � � April 2, 2012 �,r° Renton City Council Minutes � Page 101 The Committee further recommended that the Mavor and Citv Clerk be authorized to sign the lease addendum. MOVED BY CORMAN,SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Utilities Committee Utilities Committee Chair Taylor presented a report recommending CAG:08-202,Solid Waste concurrence with the staff recommendation to approve Amendment#1 to the Services,Waste Management Solid Waste Contract(CAG-08-202)with Waste Management, Inc.to revise Section 3.3, Compensation Adjustment,to use the Consumer Price Index for annual contractor compensation changes and provide a one-time lump sum payment, based upon the actual dollar increase incurred by the contract for June 2010 through December 2011,currently estimated to be$36,000 for changes to the State's Business and Occupation tax rate. The Committee further recommended that the Mavor and Citv Clerk be authorized to sign the contract amendment. MOVED BY TAYLOR,SECONDED BY CORMAN,COUNCIL CON'CUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. RESOLUTIONS AND The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption: ORDINANCES RESOLUTION#4136 A resolution was read adopting the City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan. Fire: Renton Hazard Mitigation MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY ZWICKER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION Plan p � .�o(de� AS READ. CARRIED. The following ordinance was presented for reading and referred to the 4/9/2012 Council meeting for second and final reading: Budget: 2012 Carry-Forward An ordinance was read amending the City of Renton Fiscal Years 2011/2012 Ordinance Biennial Budget as adopted by Ordinance No. 5583, and thereafter amended by Ordinance Nos.5595, 5616, and 5638, in the amount of$37,139,384. MOVED BY BRIERE,SECONDED BY PERSSON,COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 4/9/2012. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS MOVED BY PERSSON,SECONDED BY ZWICKER, COUNCIL REFER A BRIEFING ON Public Safety: New Downtown THE NEW DOWNTOWN CAMERA INSTALLATION (PROIECT)TO THE PUBLIC Camera Installation (Project) SAFETY COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Community Event:Women's Councilmember Palmer remarked that on Saturday, March 24,the airport held Fly It Forward Event another Women's Fly It Forward event. She stated that pilots flew 255 participants from the airport that day. Ms. Palmer added that City staff are waiting to hear from Women's Aviation to determine if a new record was set like in December 2010 when the City received the"Most Female Friendly Airport in the U.S." award. AUDIENCE COMMENT Karen Hensley(Renton) stated that she voted to annex to KCLS and is against Citizen Comment: Hensley- moving the library to a new site. She remarked that she is appalled that the Initiative Petition Regarding initiative petition process was put down,and vowed to fight for the petition to the Downtown Library go to court if it will help the proponents. Citizen Comment:Asher- Beth Asher(Renton) remarked that it was ironic that the City would celebrate Initiative Petition Regarding April as Volunteer Month and then invalidate the petition brought forth by a the Downtown Library group of volunteers. She stated that even though Council had 20 days to deliberate they decided now and crossed a boundary by invalidating the petition, making the issue a civil rights issue, and denying the people's voice in the legislative process. � April 2, 2012 +r,r,r► Renton City Council Minutes `� Page 99 Councilmember Persson called for the question. ROLL CALL: FOUR AYES: ZWICKER, BRIERE, PRINCE, PERSSON;THREE NOES: PALMER,CORMAN,TAYLOR. *MOTION CARRIED. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Council President Rich Zwicker presented a Committee of the Whole report Committee of the Whole recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to adupt an CED:School District Impact ordinance to approve impact fee collection changes and Capital Facilities Plans Fees for three school districts within the City of Renton as follows: • Collect the requested impact fee of$3,568,a decrease of$240,for each new single-family home on behalf of the Issaquah School District; and • Continue to collect an impact fee of$5,486 for each new single-family home and$3,378 for each new multi-family unit on behalf of the Kent School District; and • Collect the requested impact fee of$6,392, an increase of$82,for each new single-family home and $1,274, an increase of$16,for each new multi- family unit on behalf of the Renton School District. The Committee further recommended that the ordinance regarding this matter be prepared and presented for first reading. MOVED BY ZWICKER, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Briere recommended approval of Claim Vouchers Finance:Vouchers 310844-311140,six wire transfers, and one payroll run with benefit withholding payments totaling$4,606,409.61,and payroll vouchers including 752 direct deposits and 64 payroll checks totaling$1,574,538.59. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Finance: Fee Waiver Request, Finance Committee Chair Briere presented a report recommending Summer Teen Musical concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve a fee waiver request in the net amount of$4,850 for the use of Carco Theater and associated staff costs for the production of the 2012 Summer Teen Musical. MOVED BY BRIERE, . SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Finance: Fee Waiver Request, Finance Committee Chair Briere presented a report recommending CROPWALK concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the fee waiver request in the amount of$280 for use of the Liberty Park and Riverview Park picnic shelters on 5/6/2012, during the 2012 CROP Hunger Walk fundraising event sponsored by the Renton Ecumenical Association of Churches (REACH). MOVED BY BRIERE,SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Public Safetv Committee Public Safety Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending Fire: Renton Hazard Mitigation concurrence in the staff recommendation to adopt the new City of Renton Plan Hazard Mitigation Plan,which is a complete revision of the plan adopted in ,\ �(,�O`�� l December 2003. All City departments participated in developing the revised �� '� plan. ' April 2,2012 � Renton City Council Minutes � Page 100 The plan categorizes the hazards that may impact Renton,assesses Renton's vulnerability to those hazards and identifies actions to take to reduce risk. A full review of the Hazard Mitigation Plan will be conducted every five years. The Committee further recommended that the resolution regarding this matter be adopted. MOVED BY PERSSON,SECONDED BY PALMER,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 101 for resolution.) Communitv Services Community Services Committee Chair Palmer presented a report Committee recommending concurrence in Mayor Law's appointment to the Planning Appointment: Planning Commission of Mr. David Fleetwood for an unexpired term expiring on Commission 6/30/2013 (position previously held by Mr. Ed Prince.) MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY PRINCE,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Mr. Fleetwood thanked Council for the opportunity to serve on the commission. • Appointment:City Center Community Services Committee Chair Palmer presented a report Community Plan Advisory recommending concurrence in Mayor Law's appointments of the following Board individuals to the City Center Community Plan Advisory Board: For terms expirin�on 4/30/2013: Mr.Chris Aird; Mr. Doug Baugh; Ms.Angelina Benedetti; Mr. Michael Bowman; Ms. Dana Rochex; Mr. Rodney Swift; Mr. Brian Van Houten; and For terms expirin�on 4/30/2015: Mr. George Daniels; Mr.Jerry Kavesh; Ms.Shasta McKinley; Mr.James Stanek; Ms. Sybil Turner; Ms.Suzanne Thompson; and For terms expirin�on 4/30/2017: Mr. Ray Giometti; Ms. Nancy Eklund; Mr. Mike 0'Donin; Ms. Francine Siverts; and Ms. Kim Sweet. MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY PRINCE,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. James Stanek remarked that he has lived in downtown Renton for 16 years,and thanked Council for the opportunity to serve on the board. He noted that many of tonight's speakers are passionate about the downtown library, and requested that they do not lose that passion based on the decisions made tonight. Francine Siverts thanked Council for the opportunity to serve on the advisory board. She stated that she has worked on the Library Steering Committee and is excited about the City's plans for Renton's future. Mayor Law thanked both appointees for volunteering to serve the community. Transnortation (Aviation) Transportation (Aviation)Committee Chair Corman presented a report Committee recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve an Lease:Time Extension, Rainier addendum to the 2011 lease with Rainier Flight Services for the second floor of Flight Services, LAG- the 790 Building and ground lease tie-down area,to extend the term for one- year(to 3/31/2013) and increase the rate by$459.49 annually. '�rr`�' � PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE '�� °� , `�i� �C�'UNGI� COMMITTEE REPORT _ April 2,2012' �:�t� �-�-av<2 " . City of Renton Haaard Mitigation Ptan (Referred March 12; 20T2) The Public Safety Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to adopt the new City 'of Renton Hazard\ Mitigation Plan; .which is a complete revision of the Plan � _ adopted in December 2003. All'city deparEments participated in developing the revised plan. , - The plan categorizes the hazards that may impact Renton, assesses Renton's vulnerabiJity to those hazards and identifies actions to take:to reduce risk: A full review of the Hazard Mitigation Plan will be conducted every five years. ' The Committee further recommends that the Reso(ution regarding this m.atter be adopted. ---,`----o. '��f �f�� .- ;- , V ;�'' ��- -��-�-�� -_..�.._ - _ Don Persson, Chair �_��.� ��'��.- - Marcie Palmer, Vice Chair Terri Briere; Member , - Cc: - Deborah Needham,Emecgency Management Director ' . , "�' °Yir✓ RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting April 2,2012 Council Chambers Monday,7 p.m. M I N U T E S Renton City Hall CALL TO ORDER Mayor Law called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. ROLL CALL OF RICH ZWICKER, Council President;TERRI BRIERE; ED PRINCE; DON PERSSON; COUNCILMEMBERS MARCIE PALMER; RANDY CORMAN;GREG TAYLOR. CITY STAFF IN ATTENDANCE DENIS LAW, Mayor;JAY COVINGTON,Chief Administrative Officer; LAWRENCE J.WARREN,City Attorney; BONNIE WALTON, City Clerk;GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Public Works Administrator; KELLY BEYMER, Parks&Golf Course Director; SUZANNE DALE ESTEY, Economic Development Director; BONNIE RERECICH, Neighborhoods, Resources,and Events Manager; FIRE& EMERGENCY SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR MARK PETERSON, DEPUTY CHIEF ERIK WALLGREN AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COORDINATOR MINDI MATTSON, Fire & Emergency Services Department; CHIEF KEVIN MILOSEVICH, DEPUTY CHIEF TIM TROXEL,COMMANDER CLARK WILCOX AND COMMANDER KEITH VANVALEY, Police Department. PROCLAMATION A proclamation by Mayor Law was read declaring April 2012 to be "Volunteer Volunteer Month-April 2012 Month" in the City of Renton and encouraging all members of the community to commit a portion of their time to volunteer service to perpetuate the spirit and vitality of the city. MOVED BY ZWICKER,SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE PROCLAMATION. CARRIED. Neighborhoods, Resources, and Events Manager Bonnie Rerecich accepted the proclamation. She remarked that 4,611 volunteers donated 62,800 service hours to the community in 2011. She stated that the lobby volunteers contribute over 2,200 service hours to City Hall, and 174 volunteers provide over 13,300 service hours at the Senior Activity Center annually. She announced that banners recognizing all of the City's volunteers have been hung throughout the community, and encouraged anyone considering volunteering to contact the Community Services Department. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in Fire: Renton Hazard Mitigation accordance with local and State laws, Mayor Law opened the public hearing to Plan consider adopting the City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan. `�e( Emergency Management Coordinator Mindi Mattson reported that a new l �p Hazard Mitigation Plan is required because the City's 2003 plan lapsed in 2009. Q�� She remarked that the the plan was updated for many reasons including best � practices, new Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) guidelines,and grant eligibility requirements. She explained that the plan was allowed to lapse in 2009 because of funding issues. Ms. Mattson stated that the City hired a consultant to begin the process of creating the new Hazard Mitigation Plan in 2009,and public input was sought at two meetings that occurred in April 2009 and March 2010. She added that considerable input from State and Federal agencies has been included in the plan since that time. , Ap�il 2,2012 `''r✓" Renton City Council Minutes '°or✓ Page 90 Ms. Mattson stated that the document is a tool to be used for mitigating hazards before they occur,and is not a response plan. She explained that the document contains chapters on specific hazards, how those hazards are prioritized for emergency response,and how they will be mitigated. She also explained that a cost/benefit analysis was conducted for each type of hazard to help determine whether or not the cost to mitigate the problem outweighs the benefit. Concluding, Ms. Mattson noted that the Fire and Emergency Services Department has had the plan posted to the City web site to solicit public input, and invited residents to pre-register by April 18 for a public workshop on April 26. She requested that Council approve the plan. There being no public comment, it was MOVED BY ZWICKER,SECONDED BY CORMAN,COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. (See page 99 for related committee report and page 101 for resolution.) AUDIENCE COMMENT Elizabeth Stevens(Renton)stated that she was one of the 6,383 registered Citizen Comment:Stevens- voters who signed the initiative petition regarding the downtown library. She Initiative Petition Regarding remarked that the ballot and voters pamphlet regarding annexation to the King the Downtown Library County Library System (KCLS) (in 2010)was not clear regarding relocation of the downtown library. She commented that revitalization is successful when driven by business owners and private investors, not City staff. Ms.Stevens remarked that contracts with KCLS can be amended, and administrative memorandums regarding costs estimates are vague. She urged Council to either adopt the initiative petition ordinance or place it on the ballot with mutually accepted language. Citizen Comment:Avery- Stuart Avery(Renton) shared his experiences volunteering in the community for Initiative Petition Regarding the past 17 years,and remarked that he is one of the registered voters who the Downtown Library signed and gathered signatures for the initiative petition. Mr. Avery commented that many people within the community feel misled about the relocation of the downtown library, and asked Council to honor the intent of the initiative by allowing constituents the opportunity to vote on where the new library will be built. He added that if the petition is ignored,the City will be setting the stage for a possible lawsuit. He asked that Council's oaths of office guide their actions. Citizen Comment: Smith- Shelby Smith (Renton)stated that she signed the petition regarding the Initiative Petition Regarding downtown library,and feels that City residents have obtained the right to a the Downtown Library City-wide vote on this issue. She remarked that all that is required of Council to justify and realign their position on this matter is to adhere to the principles of representative governance and adopt the citizens' initiative petition. She appealed to the integrity of the elected officials, and said she depends on them to be devoted to the higher principles of democracy. Ms.Smith added that many people would like to see the Big 5 site used as an arts and culture building that would fit into the desires and needs of the City. Citizen Comment: Martinez- Mark Martinez(Renton) remarked that he missed a crucial piece of information Initiative Petition Regarding when he voted to annex to KCLS and that regarded relocation of the downtown the Downtown Library library. He explained that if he had known the library would be moved, he would have voted di#ferently. He stated that he believes in the democratic process and the rule of law, and that under the Revised Code of Washington if '� Agenda Item No.: �. ' ` RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING PUBLIC HEARING/MEETING ` SPEAKER SIGN-UP SHEET (Page 1) CITIZENS MUST PROVIDE NAME AND ADDRESS IN ORDER TO BE CONTACTED OR TO BE A PARTY OF RECORD WHEN APPROPRIATE DATE: Z 0 � PLEASE PRINT 5 Minute Time Limit 1 5 Name: Name: Address: Address: City Zip Code City Zip Code Topic: Topic: 2 6 Name: Name: Address: Address: City Zi� Code City Zip Code Topic: Topic: . 3 7 Name: Name: Address: Address: City Zip Code City Zip Code Topic: Topic: 4 8 Name: Name: Address: Address: City Zip Code City Zip Code Topic: Topic: (CONTINUED ON REVERSE SIDE) C�ont� inued from Reverse Side - Page 2� . , RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING PUBLIC HEARING/MEETING SPEAKER SIGN-UP SHEET CITIZENS MUST PROVIDE NAME AND ADDRESS IN ORDER TO BE CONTACTED OR TO BE A PARTY OF RECORD WHEN APFROPRIATE PLEASE PRINT 5 Minute Time Limit 9 13 Name: Name: Address: Address: City Zip Code City Zip Code Topic: Topic: 10 14 Name: Name: Address: Address: City Zip Code City Zip Code Topic: Topic: 11 15 Name: Name: Address: Address: City Zip Code City Zip Code Topic: Topic: 12 16 Name: Name: Address: Address: City Zip Code City Zip Code Topic: Topic: . � � ' " 03/30/2012 �� . � � ;� �' �� t . � �` , . , : , .. � � : ;` °� Reason for new Hazard Mitigation Plan � Plan revision required for mitigation grants � Best practice � Hazard Mitigation Plan revision process � Consultant retained to revise structure � Department review and content provision � Public input � State and FEMA pre-approval 1 � � 03/30/2012 • ' ; ,. t :;� � : � �< <- �� "Actions taken to reduce the risk due to hazards and reduce the potential for damages, losses and casualties in future disaster events." -City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan April, �o1z � x 1 . . Hazard (frequency and severity of events) + Exposure (value/vulnerabilityof inventory) = RISK (threatto the community) 2 �r✓ `✓ ' ' 03/30/2012 i' f r' " � � '- �' � , �' � �. . .. Is level of risk acceptable? If yes, mitigation not necessary. If risk is not acceptable: � Identify mitigation alternatives � Prioritize mitigation alternatives (include benefit/cost analysis) � Obtain funding � Implement mitigation measures � Reduce risk ' :� i � �r � . • � Introductory/Background Information, Ch. 1-5 � Specific Hazards Addressed, Ch. 6-i3 � Flood Hazards � Volcanic Hazards � WinterStorms � Coal Mine Hazards � Earthquakes � Hazardous Materials � Landslides and Debris Flows � Terrorism �= Appendices 1-5 3 �1�►' "�I�' . 03/30/2012 • Y . �� . ,� �" �i , � Background information on hazard � Renton-specific risk assessment �e Proposed mitigation projects/action items � Short-term vs. long-term � Policy vs. expenditure action items � Coordination organization � Timeline � Plan goals addressed � Potential funding sources _ _ � � April z Public Hearing �j Council approval � Promulgation Questions? 4 � � Creating a Disaster Resilient Community Apri126th, 6:30 - 9:00 pm Renton City Hall, 7th Floor Council Chambers, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton Pre-re�istration Required by April 18t"! Why is it that some communities completely fall apart after a disaster, while others emerge stronger than before? To rise from the ashes of a disaster the whole community must strategically engage in advance, strengthening core elements that support a vital community. Participate in this discussion-based group and share your ideas and learn from others about what makes our community strong, and what areas we can target for improvement. Light food provided. Pre-registration required. Register by calling 425-430-6700 or use the registration form on back. Questions? Contact Kelly at kcarevCc�rentonwa.gov. �� .� -a . . . . ��p r � �. ��M � � . i,� � � �� Y� .. �, ,.,.;, �. ,� 4„ s..�. K *.,"'"� . ��,V�y � _ .�'�. ��' "i tyd., �� . � # s � „ x, m � , a, , . : � — �t u :.�,. � 4��.. a � .. ;,.� `,.: «u�," .,a 6 � � �� #". � � x , � �:t$ ,�:. ...; a ..� � �� , ,�' .V C; _a� .:�. ♦ +� ,,� page 39 • , � Z � O Easy Ways ta Regis�er! Our on-line system, Cyber Sign-Up is available 24 hours a da and allows you to view courses, register, make payments, and view account in�ormation.To use Int�'rne� Cyber Sign-Up go to www.cybersignup.org or visit the Ciry's website at rentonwa. gov. You will need the following: • Participant barcode • Family PIN • Program course number � • Valid Visa or Mastercard number and expiration date ' .�, ��T Renton Community Center, 1715 SE Maple Valley Highway, Renton, WA 98057. V Y a��—�n Monday-Thursday: 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Friday: 7:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and Saturday: 8:00 a.m.to 4:30 p.m. Phone-in registration is available Monday through Friday, 10:00 a.m.to 4:00 p.m. Ph()j'��—Ij"� beginning Thursday,December 8.Please have registration information and cred- � it card ready. Call 425-430-6700. , Complete the registration form and include Visa or Mastercard number,expiration Ma�.l-In date and card holder signature, or check and mail to City of Renton Community Center, 1715 SE Maple Valley Highway, Renton,WA 98057. Please Print Please mal:e cliecks payable to City of Renton.Notification�vill be made only if classes are canceled. ParenUGuardian Information Last Name: First Name: Address: City State Zip Phone (h): (w): email : ParticipanYs Name Birthdate Sex Course# Course Name Fee If course not available, course#of alternative. 49691 Creating a $0 Disaster Re i ie t Community T��1a Being fully informed as to the risks and in consideration of my being allowed to participate in City sponsored activities and/or use of City fa- Cash cilities, I hereby assume all risk of injury,damage, and harm to myself arising from such activities or use. I also hereby individually and on # behalf of my heirs,executors,and assigns,release and hold harmless Expiration Date: the City of Renton, its officials,employees and agents, and waive any right of recovery that I might have to bring a claim or a lawsuit against Check/Money Order# them for any personal injury, death, or other consequences occurring to me arising out of my voluntary participation in this activity. I hereby Date: give permission to the City of Renton and the Recreation Division to gy. use any photos taken during this activity, which might include me or my child (children), in publications promoting programs or activities within the City. Parent or guardian must sign if participant is a minor. Signature Date: For more infornlation,ca11425-430-6700 or visit rentonwa.gov y J �� Creating a Disaster Resilient Community Apri126th, 6:3Q - 9:00 pm Renton City Hall, 7th Floor Council Chambers, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton Pre-re�istration Required by April 18tni Why is it that some communities completely fall apart after a disaster, while others emerge stronger than before? To rise from the ashes of a disaster the whole community must strategically engage in advance, strengthening core elements that support a vital community. Participate in this discussion-based group and share your ideas and learn from others about what makes our community strong, and what areas we can target for improvement. Light food provided. Pre-registration required. Registe�by calling 425-430-6700 or use the registration form on back. Questions? Contact Kelly at kcarey�a�rentonwa.gov. �, _ �,� � �'� ��i'll�"�i� ��rs . ,. -;, � � , � � - ', , � . _ . ,� � . �, � r s,,,,, .:," � C . �.: _ � , . : £. s ,- " . ... � •� � .: °"� �. II� 5d;�u' '; ' , r 4. �� i . , 5 i — �-_ ., �i '� ��'.� ,,.. I,:� . "�r�l uViy��. ��i r � �'� +� y6 i ,�„• „; �...w4i�l I� •�-'�"... ,��..,. '�^� .r��r ��f r`y.- 'i .�"* `rtPl �"�L�qr�. rv�..: ..-".'�. � . ., ��_,s'i� .. 6''�. ��,, . IF+p. �:'�" v�a ; c �.�4 �`k��t i �i .M. . , �.. . . �.. "� .�.e . � �� " a.uY W'. C.�. C . "�,.. .�,,. ..;' u.» ... a.';�. � ��r* " � u�u� � y��.� �� b i *� R � i � p �iu �. - � ^— �i�i� ,� i i� h� r h � iiii' .� � � IV II� �P i il��il' �� ilu i q °�� _ :�, ,� � ,.' F � . ' 4e,j� " .8. " y�'.w .,� ��.'� �.. : �� 'L- ` � , � �i� -.;:. ^ .-.. i.: '� �:e�:. IN �� k � .�:v, 3 � :`��(�i�y,�': ii� ,� '� . 4 ' w. -a . .� . . ��..� , v r�r �c page 39 Sz Me U ! Easy Ways to Register! Our on-line system, Cyber Sign-Up is available 24 hours a day and allows you to view courses, register, make payments, and view account information.To use Interne� Cyber Sign.Up go to www.cybersignup.org or visit the Ciry's website at rentonwa. .,,�� gov. You.will need the following: • Participant barcode • Family PIN • Program course number • Valid Visa or Mastercard number and expiration date � � Renton Community Center, 1715 SE Maple Valley Highway, Renton, WA 98057. Walk-In Monday-Thursday: 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Friday: 7:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and Saturday:8:00 a.m.to 4:30 p.m. Phone-in registration is available Monday through Friday, 10:00 a.m.to 4:00 p.m. `=x'- PhQ]'le'Ijl beginning Thursday,December 8.Please have registration information and cred- it card ready.Call 425-430-6700. . Complete the registration form and include Visa or Mastercard number,expiration Mall-I� date and card holder signature,or check and mail to City of Renton Community Center,1715 SE Maple Valley Highway,Renton,WA 98057. Please Print I'lease make checks payable to City of'Renion.:\'atiiication�vill be Ynade anly if classes are canceled. ParenUGuardian Information Last Name: First Name: Address: Ciry State Zip Phone(h): (w): email: ParticipanYs Name Birthdate Sex Course# Course Name Fee If course not available, course#of alternative. 49691 Creating a $0 Disaster Re i ie t Community Total: Being fully informed as to the risks and in consideration of my being allowed to participate in City sponsored activities and/or use of City fa- Cash cilities,I hereby assume all risk of injury,damage, and harm to myself arising from such activities or use. I also hereby individually and on # behalf of my heirs,executors,and assigns,release and hold harmless Expiration Date: the City of Renton,its officials,employees and agents,and waive any right of recovery that I might have to bring a claim or a lawsuit against Check/Money Order# them for any personal injury,death,or other consequences occurring to me arising out of my voluntary participation in this activity. I hereby Date: give permission to the City of Renton and the Recreation Division to By. use any photos taken during this activity, which might include me or my child (children), in publications promoting programs or activities within the City. Parent or guardian must sign if participant is a minor. Signature Date: For inore inforniation,ca11425-430-6700 or visit rentonwa.gov March 12, 2012 � Renton City Council Minutes �"�' Page 68 Public comment was invited. Steven Beck(Renton) expressed support for the Windstone V annexation area coming into the City with an R-4(four dwelling units per net acre)zoning designation. He explained that the area can only be zoned R-1 (one dwelling unit per net acre)or R-4, and the R-1 zone is reserved for areas containing pervasive critical or sensitive areas. Mr. Beck stated that there is an argument that because the Windstone site is within the greater May Creek Basin area, and this basin contains pervasive critical areas,then the Windstone site should be denied an R-4 zoning designation. He refuted this argument by explaining that much of the greater May Creek area is zoned at a higher density than R-4, and the small stream known as Greenes Creek is barely within the annexation area. Continuing, Mr. Beck explained that the definition of pervasive is to become spread throughout all parts thereof and pointed out that critical areas are clearly not spread throughout all parts of the May Creek Basin. He reiterated his opinion that the area deserves an R-4 zoning designation because there are no pervasive critical areas at this site. There being no further public comment, it was MOVED BY BRIERE,SECONDED BY PRINCE,COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY BRIERE,SECONDED BY PRINCE,COUNCIL ACCEPTTHE 60%DIRECT PETITION FOR THE WINDSTONE V ANNEXATION,AND AUTHORIZE FORWARDING THE NOTICE OF INTENT PACKAGE TO THE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Kimberly Danke and her daughter, Irissa, (Renton)expressed support for the Citizen Comment: Danke- renewal of Cascade Canoe& Kayak Club's lease of the Boathouse on Lake Cascade Canoe& Kayak Club Washington. Irissa Danka spoke of the impact the club has had in teaching her life-skills, including responsibility, patience,strength,and self-esteem. Ms. Danke shared her experiences growing up in Renton,and the impact the club has had on her family. She also noted that the club is a more affordable activity than gymnastics and dance classes. CONSENT AGENDA Items listed on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. � Council: Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council meeting minutes of 3/5/2012. Council concur. 3/5/2012 Appointment: City Center Mayor Law appointed the following individuals to the City Center Community Community Plan Advisory Advisory Board for terms expiring on 7/1/2015: Angelina Benedetti,George Board Daniels, Dana Rochex,James Stanek,Sybil Turner, Ray Giometti, Doug Baugh, Nancy Eklund, Michael Bowman, Rodney Swift,Jerry Kavesh,Suzanne Thompson,Chris Aird,Shasta McKinley,and Brian Van Houten;and terms expiring on 7/1/2017: Francine Siverts, Kim Sweet,and Mike O'Donin. Refer to Communitv Services Committee. Fire: Hazard Mitigation Plan Fire and Emergency Services Department recommended approval of the City of P� �O�,f�� Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan,to supersede the plan adopted December 22, �^ 2003. Refer to Public Safetv Committee; set public hearing on 4/2/2012. � � CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL `� ,C; Subject/Title: Meeting: City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan Regular Council - 12 Mar 2012 Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: Issue Paper Fire & Emergency Services City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan Draft Resolution Staff Contact: Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director Recommended Action: Refer to Public Safety Committee 4/2/2012 Set Public Hearing on 4/2/2012 Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ n/a Transfer Amendment: $ n/a Amount Budgeted: $ , n/a Revenue Generated: $ n/a Total Project Budget: $ n/a City Share Tota) Project: $ n/a SUMMARY OF ACTION: The City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan categorizes the hazards that may impact Renton from floods to earthquakes to hazardous material spills, assesses Renton's vulnerability to these hazards, and finally identifies actions to take to reduce our risk to future damages and losses. The current plan is a complete revision of the Hazard Mitigation Plan, adopted in December 22, 2003,and needs to be reviewed and adopted by Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Hold a public hearing on 4/2/12 and adopt the City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan. � � FIRE& EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT � ityof , � C��a� ��'' M E M 0 R A N D U M DATE: March 12, 2012 TO: Rich Zwicker, Council President Members of the City Council VIA: Denis Law, Mayor FROM: Mark Peterson, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator t}�K STAFF C�NTACT: Deborah Needharn, Emergency Management Director SUBJECT: City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan • lSSUE The City of Renton Nazard Mitigation PEan is a camplete revision of the Hazard Mitigation Plan adopted in December 22, 2Q03. The pEan categorizes the hazards that may impac# Renton from floods to earthquakes to hazardous material spil3s,assesses Renton's vulnerabi(ity to these hazards, and f:nally identifies actions to take to reduce our risk to future damages and fosses. This plan needs to be reviewed and adopted by Council, RECOMMENDATION The administration recammends that a Public Hearing be set far April 2,2012 to take � publsc input regarding the draft City of Rentan Hazard Mitigation Plan, and thereafter that the resolution to approve the plan be adopted. BACKGROUND . Renton's first hazard mitigatian pfan was developed as a result of the Disaster Mitigatian Act of 200�. The Office of Emergency Management with the assistance of the Emergency Management Group, made up of representatives from each department and afso known as the Nazard Mitigation S#eering Committee, revised the original p{an. Public input was gathered at two pubiic meetings and additional public corrsment will be collected at the public hearing. The Hazard Mitigation Plan details how to incvrporate mitigafiion planning and hazard mitigation projects into comprehensive City planning. A Hazard Mitigat4on Plan is required to receive federal grant funds for mitigation projects. The State of Washington Emergency Management Division and F�MA have reviewed and approved our plan. CONCLUSI�N Review and adoption of the City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan will greatty improve the City of Renton's ability to mitigate hazards. �r► �rr►' CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AD�PTING THE CITY OF RENTON HAZARD MtTIGATION PIAN. WHEREAS,the City and the surrounding areas are subject to a wide range of natural and anthropogenic hazards, including floods, winter starms, earthquakes, landslides, hazardous material spills and more; and WHEREAS, tfie impacts of potential future hazard events in Renton may be minor, or they may be major,wfth damages and economic losses reaching millions of dallars; and WHEREAS, with the implementation of a hazard mitigation plan, the City can substantially reduce the negative impads of future disasters; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE C1TY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The above�ecitals are found to be true and c�rrect in all respects. SECTION II. The City of Rentan Hazard Mitigation Plan is he�eby adopted by the City of Renton. PASSED BY THE C1TY COUNCIL this day of , 2012. Bonnie I. Waltan, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of . 2012. Denis Law, Mayor 1 � � RESOLUTION NO. Approved as to form: tawrence J. Warren,City Attorney _ RES.1544:2/20/12:scr 2 `;�,,' "�,,n,� City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan � . � .N ,�_ _ y�� , � � . ' . 5�� : � �. . N�,� ' � -�"" �� &�� z�`��. ..,w�.«--�"` d��P^�,�"�'F `� r*Me�v „" k � x�. ��&:�... �i��'^;��dua , ,x€r � ,"�Y.`,,;,'�.,,e;am +�"'-9 ';","`;'�., ��.� ,�. � . �� .,� ��% . �. , ��jt�",�� . "�,�� :��;.. Wi � �� ri�Q° �' ��„�'��'�ra#��.�,�� ii��y,li M�i�'��" rri m a,46.si a�i � �,ji��', �[fs�' �; ; n ,. i.ev. "..r,.. �i,��'I�iiil� .. .�;.�_....� �;.;. �. , � '- April 2010 ----� ' �t ��'''�i` . . � � � �� -: f � � �s!i, �� ; r>\�`,i � � � Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction 1-1 Chapter 2: Community Profile 2-1 Chapter 3: Public Input 3-1 Chapter 4: Mission Statement, Goals, Objectives and Action Items 4-1 Chapter 5: Plan Adoption, Maintenance and Implementation 5-1 Chapter 6: Flood Hazards 6-1 Chapter 7: Winter Storms 7-1 Chapter 8: Earthquakes 8-1 Chapter 9: Landslides and Debris Flows 9-1 Chapter 10: Volcanic Hazards 10-1 Chapter 11: Coal Mine Hazards 11-1 Chapter 12: Hazardous Materials 12-1 Chapter 13: Terrorism 13-1 Appendix 1: Synopsis of FEMA Grant Programs A1-1 Appendix 2: Principles of Benefit Cost Analysis A2-1 Appendix 3: Hazus Reports A3-1 Appendix 4: Planning and Public Meeting Records A4-1 Appendix 5: City Council Approval A5-1 City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan i. April 2010 � � 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 What is a Mitigation Plan? The City of Renton and the surrounding areas are subject to a wide range of natural and anthropogenic hazards, including:floods, winter storms, earthquakes, landslides, hazardous material spills and more.The impacts of potential future hazard events on Renton may be minor, like a few inches of water in a street, or they may be major,with damages and economic losses reaching millions of dollars. The impacts of major disasters on communities can be devastating.The total damages, economic losses, casualties, disruption, hardships and suffering are often far greater than the physical damages alone. Furthermore, recovery from major disasters often takes many years and some heavily impacted communities may never fully recover. Completely eliminating the risk of future disasters in Renton is neither technologically possible nor economically feasible. However, substantially reducing the negative impacts of future disasters is achievable with the implementation of a pragmatic hazard mitigation plan. Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan addresses each of the natural hazards that pose a significant risk to Renton, along with the major anthropogenic hazards.The mitigation plan addresses hazards such as severe weather events or localized storm water drainage flooding that may happen in some locations almost every year.The plan also addresses larger hazard events that will affect much or all of the Renton community, albeit with lower probabilities of occurrence in a given year. Infrequent hazard events, such as a major earthquake, which may occur only every few decades or every few hundred years, still pose a substantial threat to Renton because the consequences, when they do occur, may be extremely high. Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan has several key elements. 1. Each hazard that may impact Renton significantly is reviewed to determine the probability(frequency)and severity of likely hazard events. 2. The vulnerability of Renton to each hazard is evaluated to estimate the likely extent of physical damages, casualties and economic impacts. 3. A range of mitigation alternatives are evaluated to identify those with the greatest potential to reduce future damages and losses in Renton, and to protect facilities deemed critical to the community's well-being that are desirable from the community's political and economic perspectives. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-1 December 2011 � � The purpose of Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan is to address only the mitigation of hazards that originate within the City of Renton and those that have an effect in Renton. Response to disasters and emergencies are covered in detail in Renton's Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan. Furthermore,this plan addresses only the mitigation efforts the City can and will take in accordance with the legal limits of its authority. Although some of the recommendations within the plan are made for infrastructure providers that are not part of City of Renton government, individuals, businesses and other government agencies are responsible for protecting their own property from hazards and disasters. Private and public entities alike are encouraged to review this plan and consider making mitigation efforts as appropriate.Additional mitigation information resources for Renton residents and businesses are available by contacting the Emergency Management Office located at Renton City Hall. 1.2 Why is Mitigation Planning Important for Renton? Mitigation simply means actions that reduce the potential for negative impacts from future disasters including:future damages, losses and casualties. Effective mitigation planning will help the residents of Renton deal with natural and manmade hazards realistically and rationally. It will help identify specific locations in Renton where the level of risk from one or more hazards may be unacceptably high and then find cost effective ways to reduce such risk. Mitigation planning strikes a pragmatic middle ground between unwisely ignoring the potential for major hazard events on one hand and unnecessarily overreacting to the potential for disasters on the other hand. Furthermore,the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) now requires each local government entity to adopt a multi-hazard mitigation plan and to update that plan every five years to remain eligible for future pre- or post-disaster FEMA mitigation funding. An significant objective in updating Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan is to maintain eligibility for FEMA funding and enhance Renton's ability to attract future FEMA mitigation funding. This Plan is specifically designed to help Renton gather the data necessary to compete successfully for future FEMA funding of mitigation projects. FEMA requires that all FEMA-funded hazard mitigation projects must be "cost-effective" (i.e.,the benefits of a project must exceed the costs). Benefit-cost analysis is an important component of mitigation planning, not only to meet FEMA requirements, but also to help evaluate and prioritize potential hazard mitigation projects in Renton, regardless of whether funding is from FEMA, state or local government, or from private sources. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-2 December 2011 � �. 1.3 Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan This Plan is built upon quantitative assessments, to the extent that data allows, of each of the major hazards that may impact Renton including their frequency, severity and areas of the City likely to be affected.The hazards addressed are: floods, severe winter storms, earthquakes, landslides,volcanic events, coal mine hazards, hazardous materials incidents and terrorism/civil disturbance. Other hazards, including extreme temperatures, drought and wildland/urban interface fires are briefly addressed, but are not considered in detail, because they pose less significant risks to Renton. Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan also includes a qualitative or quantitative assessment on the vulnerability of buildings, infrastructure and people possibly impacted by each of these hazards,to evaluate the likely magnitude of future disasters on Renton. The review of hazards and the vulnerability of Renton to hazards is the foundation of the mitigation plan. From these assessments, specific locations where buildings, infrastructure and/or people may be at high risk are identified.These high risk situations then become priorities for future mitigation actions to reduce the negative impacts of future disasters on Renton. Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan deals with hazards realistically and rationally and strikes a balance between suggested physical mitigation measures and planning measures.The overall goal is to reduce the negative impacts of future disasters and better prepare the community to respond and recover from disasters. 1.4 Key Concepts and Definitions The central concept of mitigation planning is that mitigation reduces risk. Risk is defined as the threat to people and the built environment posed by the hazards being considered.That is, risk is the potential for damages, losses and casualties arising from the impact of hazards on the built environment.The essence of mitigation planning is to identify high risk locations/situations in Renton and to evaluate ways to mitigate (reduce)the impacts of future disasters on these high risk locations/situations. The level of risk at a given location, building or facility depends on the combination of hazard and exposure as shown in Figure 1.1 below. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-3 December 2011 � � Figure 1.1 Hazard and Exposure Combine to Produce Risk HAZARD EXPOSURE R1SK Frequency Value and Threaf to the and Severity ♦ Vulnerability of - � Community: , of Hazard Events Inventory Peo�le,Buildings . and[n#rastructure " Risk is generally expressed in dollars(estimates of potential damages and other economic losses) and in terms of casualties (numbers of deaths and injuries). There are four key concepts that govern hazard mitigation planning: hazard, exposure, risk and mitigation. Each of these key concepts is addressed in turn. HAZARD refers to natural or manmade events that may cause damages, losses or casualties (e.g.,floods,winter storms, landslides, earthquakes, hazardous material spills, etc.). Hazards are characterized by their frequency, severity and the geographic area affected. Each hazard is characterized differently, with appropriate parameters for the specific hazard. For example,floods may be characterized by the frequency of flooding, along with flood depth and flood velocity. Winter storms may be characterized by the amount of rainfall in a 24- hour period, by the wind speed or by the amount of snow or ice associated with a storm. Earthquakes may be characterized by the severity and duration of ground motions and so on. A hazard event, by itself, may not result in any negative impacts on a community. For example, a flood-prone five-acre parcel may typically experience several shallow floods per year, with several feet of water expected in a 50-year flood event. However, if the parcel is wetlands, with no structures or infrastructure, then there is no risk.That is,there is no threat to people or the built environment and the frequent flooding of this parcel does not have any negative impacts on the community. Indeed, in this case, the very frequent flooding (i.e., the high hazard) may be beneficial environmentally by providing wildlife habitat and recreational opportunities. The main point here is that hazards do not produce risk to people and property unless there is vulnerable inventory exposed to the hazard. Risk to people, buildings and/or infrastructure results only when hazards are combined with exposure. EXPOSURE is the quantity, value and vulnerability of the built environment (inventory of people, buildings and infrastructure) in a particular location subject to one or more hazards. Inventory is described by the number, size,type, use and City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-4 December 2011 � � occupancy of buildings and by the infrastructure present. Infrastructure includes roads and other transportation systems, utilities (potable water, wastewater, natural gas, and electric power), telecommunications systems and so on. Inventory varies markedly in its importance to a community and thus varies markedly in its significance for hazard mitigation planning. Some types of facilities are identified as"critical facilities" due to their import to the community, particularly during disaster situations. Examples of critical facilities include police and fire stations, hospitals, schools, emergency shelters, 911 centers and other vital buildings. Critical facilities may also include infrastructure elements that are essential links or nodes in providing service to large numbers of people such as a potable water source, an electric power substation and so on. "Links" are elements such as water pipes, electric power lines and telephone cables that connect portions of a utility or transportation system. "Nodes"are locations with crucial functions, such as pumping plants, substations or switching offices. For hazard mitigation planning, inventory must be characterized not only by the quantity and value of buildings or infrastructure present but also by its vulnerability to each hazard under evaluation. For example, a given facility may or may not be particularly vulnerable to flood damages or earthquake damages, depending on the details of its design and construction. Depending on the hazard, different measures of the vulnerability of buildings and infrastructure are often used. RISK is the threat to people and the built environment-the potential for damages, losses and casualties arising from hazards. Risk, which results only from the combination of Hazard and Exposure as discussed above, is illustrated schematically in Figure 1.2 below. Figure 1.2 Risk Results from the Combination of Hazard and Exposure R.��7� . ' �`'��°" �� ., . ,�_ °� � � ,�:; �.,�.�;-� �, �� ., ., �, : � � l �� w o `� ; :. o �.�. ��-��'� o �r '� o � �c,�� ^ � � ��. a ��•� � �- � .� _._ ��; s�.A _ -�`}` Hazard , �:.� �� . � �� .... �.� '+,� � ��,� �`��, �: . �ti:z� Exposure .�- City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-5 December 2011 �` � A disaster event happens when a hazard event is combined with vulnerable inventory.The highest risk in a community occurs in high hazard areas (frequent and/or severe hazard events)with large inventories of vulnerable buildings or infrastructure. However, high risk can also occur with only moderately high hazard, if there is a large inventory of highly vulnerable inventory exposed to the hazard. For example, seismic hazard is lower in Washington than in the seismically active areas of California. For some buildings the seismic risk in Washington may be comparable to or even higher than the seismic risk in California, because some of the building inventory in Washington is much more vulnerable to earthquake damages. Conversely, a high hazard area can have relatively low risk if the inventory is resistant to damages (e.g., elevated to protect against flooding or strengthened to minimize earthquake damages). MITIGATION means actions to reduce the risk due to hazards and reduce the potential for damages, losses and casualties in future disaster events. Repair of buildings or infrastructure damaged in a disaster is not mitigation because repair simply restores a facility to its pre-disaster condition and does not reduce the potential for future damages, losses or casualties. Hazard mitigation projects may be initiated before a disaster, or after a disaster has already occurred. In either case,the objective of mitigation is always to reduce future damages, losses or casualties. A few of the most common types of mitigation projects are shown below in Table 1.1. Table 1.1 Common Mitigation Projects Hazard Miti ation Pro'ect Flood Build or improve levees or flood walls Improve channels for flood control Improve drainage systems and culvert capacities Create detention ponds for storage Relocate, elevate or floodproof flood-prone structures Acquire and demolish highly flood-prone structures Winter Storms Add emergency generators for critical facilities Improve redundancy of utility systems Trim trees to reduce failures of utility lines Earthquakes Upgrade seismic performance of buildings Upgrade seismic performance of infrastructure Landslides Remediate slide conditions Relocate utility lines or structures Wildland/Urban InterFace Fires Increase fire safe construction practices Vegetation(fuel load)control General Enhance emergency planning and mutual aid Ex and ublic education ro rams City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-6 December 2011 � � The mitigation project list above is not comprehensive and mitigation projects can encompass a broad range of other actions to reduce future damages, losses and casualties. 1.5 The Mitigation Process The essential aspect of all hazard mitigation projects is that they reduce risk.The benefits of a mitigation project are the reductions in risk, or the difference in expected damages, losses and casualties before mitigation versus after mitigation. These important concepts are illustrated below in Figure 1-3. Figure 1.3 Mitigation Projects Reduce Risk R1SK. BEF�RE MITIGATION BENEFITS OF MITIGATION REDUCTION RISK IN RISK AFTER MITIGATION Quantifying the benefits of a proposed mitigation project is an essential step in hazard mitigation planning and implementation. Only by quantifying benefits is it possible to compare the benefits and costs of mitigation to determine whether or not a particular project is worth doing or economically feasible. Real world mitigation planning almost always involves choosing between a range of possible alternatives,often with varying costs and varying effectiveness in reducing risk. Quantitative risk assessment is central to hazard mitigation planning. When the level of risk is high,the expected levels of damages and losses are likely to be unacceptable and mitigation actions have a high priority.Thus,the greater the risk the greater the urgency of undertaking mitigation. Conversely, when risk is moderate both the urgency and the benefits of undertaking mitigation are reduced. It is neither technologically possible nor economically feasible to eliminate risk completely.Therefore, when levels of risk are low and/or the cost of mitigation is high relative to the level of risk,the risk may be deemed acceptable (or at least tolerable). Proposed mitigation projects City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-7 December 2011 � � that address low levels of risk, or where the cost of the mitigation project is large relative to the level of risk, are generally poor candidates for implementation. The overall mitigation planning process is outlined in Figure 1.4 below. Figure 1.4 The Mitigation Planning Process Mitigation Planning Flowchart Risk Assessment Quantify the Threat to the Built Environment Is Level of Risk Acceptable? Risk Acceptable? Risk Not Acceptable? Mitigation Not Necessary Mitigation Desired Identify Mitigation Alternatives Find Solutions to Risk Prioritize Mitigation Alternatives Benefit-Cost Analysis and related tools Obtain Funding Implement Mitigation Measures Reduce Risk The first step is a quantitative evaluation of the hazards(frequency and severity) impacting Renton and of the inventory(people, buildings and infrastructure) exposed to these hazards.Together the hazard and exposure data determine the level of risk for specific locations, buildings or facilities in Renton. The next step is to determine whether or not the level of risk posed by each of the hazards impacting Renton is acceptable or tolerable. Only the residents of Renton City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-8 December 2011 � �z can make this determination. If the level of risk is deemed acceptable or at least tolerable,then mitigation actions are not necessary or at least not a high priority. On the other hand, if the level of risk is deemed not acceptable or intolerable, then mitigation actions are desired. In this case, the mitigation planning process moves on to a more detailed evaluation of specific mitigation alternatives, prioritization,funding and implementation of mitigation measures.As with the determination of whether or not the level of risk posed by each hazard is acceptable or not, decisions about which mitigation projects to undertake can only be made by the residents of Renton. 1.6 The Role of Benefit-Cost Analysis in Mitigation Planning Communities, like Renton,that are considering whether or not to undertake mitigation projects must answer questions that do not always have obvious answers, such as: What is the nature of the hazard problem? How frequent and how severe are hazard events? Do we want to undertake mitigation measures? What mitigation measures are feasible,appropriate and affordable? How do we prioritize between competing mitigation projects? Are our mitigation projects likely to be eligible for FEMA funding? Benefit-cost analysis is a powerful tool that can help communities provide solid, defensible answers to these difficult questions. Benefit-cost analysis is required for all FEMA-funded mitigation projects, under both pre-disaster and post-disaster mitigation programs. However, regardless of whether or not FEMA funding is involved, benefit-cost analysis provides a sound basis for evaluating and prioritizing possible mitigation projects for any natural hazard. Benefit-cost analysis software,technical manuals and a wide range of guidance documents are available from FEMA at no cost to communities. A Benefit-Cost Analysis Toolkit CD which contains all of the FEMA benefit-cost materials is available from FEMA.The publication What is a Benefit? Guidance for Benefit- CostAnalysis is particularly recommended as a general reference.This publication includes categories of benefits to count for mitigation projects for various types of buildings, critical facilities and infrastructure and has simple, standard methods to quantify the full range of benefits for most types of mitigation projects. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-9 December 2011 � � 1.7 Hazard Synopsis To set the overall context of hazard mitigation planning,we briefly review the major hazards that impact Renton. Some hazards affect the entire city, while some hazards have more localized impacts. Renton has several areas of flood plains mapped by FEMA.These include areas along the Cedar River, Green River, Springbrook Creek, May Creek and their tributaries. Other portions of Renton, outside of the mapped floodplains, are subject to flooding from Iocal storm water drainage. The entire City of Renton is subject to the effects of winter storms, including wind, rain, snow and ice, as well as secondary effects such as power outages. The entire City of Renton is subject to the impacts of earthquakes on the Cascadia Subduction Zone off the Washington coast, on the Seattle Fault and other faults within Washington. Portions of the hilly areas of Renton are subject to landslides or mudslides, which may affect buildings, roads and utilities. Historically, several areas of Renton had active coal mines. Although none of these mines are currently active, the old mine sites pose risks from possible collapses and the release of underground water. The entire City of Renton is subject to volcanic hazards from eruptions in the Cascades, although the impacts are likely to be very minor ash falls. Hazardous material releases are possible nearby or downwind from fixed site concentrations (e.g., industriat sites)as well as along transportation corridors from truck or rail accidents. Terrorist incidents or other deliberate malevolent actions by vandals, disturbed individuals, or employees or members of organized groups could affect Renton. There are several other hazards, including extreme temperatures, drought and wildland/urban interface fires,which pose only minor threats to Renton. Renton's moderate climate indicates that extremes of temperature (either hot or cold) sufficient to have major impacts are very unlikely.Similarly, the high average rainfall indicates that potential droughts are not a major concern. Renton and the surrounding communities are largely built out,with very limited areas of high fuel load vegetation, making the potential for major wildland/urban interface fires is low.These hazards pose only minor threats to Renton and are not considered further in this mitigation plan. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-10 December 2011 �rr `+r` The approximate level of risk posed to Renton by each of the hazards covered in this mitigation plan is summarized below in Table 1.2.This ranking is based on quantitative/qualitative judgment about the likely long-term average annual damages and losses from each hazard,taking into account the probability of hazard events and the severity of damages and losses when such events occur. Table 1.2 Relative Risk to Renton from Hazards Hazard Relative Risk to Renton Earth uakes Hi h Floods Hi h Winter Storms Moderate Landslides Moderate Coal Mine Hazards Moderate Hazmat Incidents Moderate Terrorism Low Volcanic Events Low Extreme Tem eratures Ve Low Wildland/Urban Interface Fires Ve Low Drou ht Ve Low The remaining chapters of the Renton Mitigation Plan include the following: • Chapter 2 provides a brief community profile for the City of Renton. • Chapter 3 documents the community involvement and public process involved in developing this mitigation plan. • Chapter 4 outlines the mitigation plan goals, mitigation strategies and action items. • Chapter 5 documents the formal process of plan adoption, implementation and maintenance. • Chapters 6 through 13 cover each of the major hazards addressed in this mitigation plan, including: floods, winter storms, earthquakes, landslides,volcanic hazards, coal mine hazards, hazmat incidents and terrorism. The Appendices include synopses of FEMA mitigation grant programs and benefit- cost analysis. . City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-11 December 2011 � � 2.0 COMMUNITY PROFILE: RENTON 2.1 Population,Geography, Hazards and Climate The City of Renton is located at the southern end of Lake Washington in King County, about 10 miles southeast of downtown Seattle. Renton,which was founded in the 1850s and incorporated in 1901, occupies an area of 23.79 square miles. n..� -�+70wrY � � Gr,o'Jb1.,; O ... ��. ��21re1�:�dfIGfiUVB��> � ' ' ��V a�,m_G��.OAttr�*ifa6-�....�..._...�._............,_ Edlr.'�H9fi0 .-� :� �im� '. � �, �Spokane � ' - ; Seakfle a ' a < a hir�Gun w txcnw � � 3s. ...__ �, � � , Portland,;�„ 4F�� ` "saema� ',�.�� _ ' ' o�x��.- � " � OGo 31LS� `;,� �' , �� #+K�wrII •,.: .a a.+.cr++r' �.,� . �^��Easro.a Evg�e � . ,_ �,k.,, � ..� b 2xm6 Fiei4i(nW ISaiO , �R HmW : . G^`�^�Y naidw+CaY mlls. . _... I hmanon�l n.po �O y:.bn NlwCiStk , . �. ,COTICRN - 1` fiib� � . �..��.� ��Kmn'Rak ASu;r.t �Eei �l ,.`^�' . -_ \J ,Rp�lon � � ' • ',:�. MuneM� � Loax�t.� . �., rn ' � � � 59B ..-SliJk�S .... ....�~� " R� eastP.an•m R enon 'uku�l� 158 ... HWhaMs B:r.en �'n� �. .�urok,ma�� Giw .. ....Seatlk�7acom� sta �F '�"�°'NM4 t6 Intems4one�� Fm�wpe: Naple_ a�� .m��Famwcc�=hlMsls Nortrvaf�Y � � �dWt " � '�2 . .��. M; .... .�;.��. . . . The 2010 population in Renton was recorded as 90,927 by the US Census Bureau. Renton is the 4th largest city in King County and the 8th largest city in Washington. Renton has experienced rapid population growth in recent years with the 1990 population of 39,340 more than doubling by 2008. Renton's dominant natural landscape features are Lake Washington and the Cedar and Green Rivers.The Howard Hanson Dam provides flood protection for the Green River, but recent needed repairs to the dam highlighted the vulnerabilities of the dam/levee system.The topography of Renton varies,with generally flat areas near Lake Washington and hilly areas in eastern and southeastern Renton. Elevations in Renton range from about 45 feet at Lake Washington to about 400 feet in the hills. Earthquakes and floods pose the greatest risk for Renton.The entire city is subject to the effects of winter storms and to volcanic hazards. Portions of Renton are subject to landslide hazards, coal mine hazards, and wildland-urban interface fire City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-1 December 2011 "wr/ "✓ hazards as well.The city is also exposed to risks from human-caused hazards, including hazardous materials or terrorism incidents. The climate for Renton is moderate. Mean daily temperatures range from highs of about 77 degrees and lows of about 55 degrees in July and August to highs of about 47 degrees and lows of about 35 degrees in December and lanuary.The average annual rainfall is about 38 inches.Average monthly precipitation varies from nearly 6 inches in November through January to about 0.75 inches in July. Average annual snowfall is about 12 inches. 2.2 Demographics Demographic data for Renton from the US Census Bureau is shown below in Table 2.1.The age and ethnicity categories in Table 2.1 intentionally include overlapping subsets for planning purposes. Table 2.1 Population Demographics (2010 US Census Bureau) Qernagraphic Data Age LJnder 5 years 7,8% iJncfer 18 years 23.2% 18 years a�d over 76.8°fo 18 years to 65 years 66.4°l0 65 years and over 10.1% Raee and Ethnicity of Hauseholds VVhite 49% African Arnerican 14%a Asian/Pacific Islander 22% Hispanic/Latino 13% Two ar mare races 5% American Indian/Alaska Native 3.% For emergency planning purposes, children, elderly adults,the disabled, people whose primary language is not English and low income residents are considered special needs populations. Based on census data, Renton has a substantial population of children and elderly adults.As shown in Table 2.1 above, about 23% of the population are children less than 18 years old, while about 10%are adults over 65 years old.About 14%of the population 5 years or older is classified as disabled, per the census data. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-2 December 2011 � � Renton has large populations of Asian/Pacific Islander(22%) and Hispanic/Latino (13%) households. Overall, about 25%of Renton's residents were born outside the United States;for most of these residents, English is a second language. Nearly 33%of the residents 5 years or older speak a language other than English at home. According to 2005-2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, about 7% of families and 11%of individuals residing in Renton are below the poverty line. � The US Census website (www.census.�ov) has a vast amount of demographic data for Renton and for King County. See the website for additional demographic data, including school enrollment, educational levels, disability status and other categories of demographic data useful for planning purposes. 2.3 Transportation, Employment, Economics and Housing Renton is situated at the center of a regional and international transportation network, surrounded by freeways and in close proximity to air, sea and rail transportation hubs. Renton is at the center of the regional highway transportation network with three interstate highways and four major state highways in or near Renton. Seattle-Tacoma International Airport is located only six miles from Renton. In addition, Renton maintains its own airport, Renton Municipal Airport-Clayton Scott Field which has a runway just over one mile in length capable of serving most types of aircraft from general aviation to corporate jets and turboprops. The airport is also home to the Will Rogers and Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base on Lake Washington.The seaplane base provides land access for amphibian aircraft of all types, and a few businesses at the airport provide floatplane launch/retrieval services. Renton Municipal Airport is also home to The Boeing Company's 737 with more than 5,000 deliveries and 7,000 orders.All new 737 aircraft produced in the factory depart on their maiden voyage from the Renton airport. Renton has a broad, diversified employment base with over 2,700 employers and nearly 45,000 employees in the city.The Boeing Company is the largest employer in Renton, providing approximately 30%of the jobs in the City. Renton has been the home of Boeing for over 65 years. In addition to The Boeing Company, Renton's leading aerospace companies include AIM Aviation,Aero-Plastics, Harper Engineering, Renton Coil Spring, Honeywell, Worldwind Helicopters and the regional headquarters of the Federal Aviation Administration. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-3 December 2011 � � Other major private sector employers in Renton include: PACCAR Inc., Wizards of the Coast,Seattle Seahawks,TOPICS Entertainment, Providence Health &Services, ER Solutions, IKEA, Wal-Mart,Young's-Columbia of Washington, Kaye-Smith Business Graphics, Fry's Electronics and Sam's Cfub. Major public sector employers include:Valley Medical Center, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (Seattle Branch), Federal Aviation Administration, Renton School District, City of Renton and Renton Technical College. Overall, Renton's economic condition is robust,with median household income, average household income and per capita income all above the national averages. Summary US Census Data for Renton's housing stock is given below in Table 2.2. Table 2.2 Renton Housing Data (2005-2007 American Community Survey Estimates,US Census Bureau) Housing Data Occupied Housin Units(25,524 Sin le Famil , Detached 48.0% Sin le Famil ,Attached 6.0% Apartments(2 to 9 units 17.7% A artments 10 or more units) 25.8% Mobile Home or Other 2.6% Year Structure Built 2000 or later 16.4% 1990s 17.5% 1980s 15.9% 1960s o�1970S 30.1% 1940s or 1950s 17.1% Before 1940 3.1% The census website (www.census.�ov) has a vast amount of other economic data for Renton.See the census website for additional economic data. 2.4 Land and Development The City of Renton is located at the south end of Lake Washington, between Seattle,Tacoma and Bellevue. Renton covers 23.79 square miles and is bordered by King County, Kent,Tukwila, Newcastle, and Bellevue, with downtown Seattle 20 miles to the north.Two major freeways bisect the City- Interstate 405 and Highway 167. The overall pattern of land use and development in Renton is shown in Figure 2.1 on following page,the Renton zoning map. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-4 December 2011 � � Figure 2.1 Renton Zoning Map(9/19/2011� �:::_::�*MM:.,,,,.. �-w�..,�.�r..s, ��r.�...�,..� �;.�� r� A-.,,.,.�..�,-�. ��. �`�" �� V�}O� ..3° .,..rwww.e ..� s+,wra..�.w.r..hua..a�nx..�croa�.��.w+►arr..mwo � y � �.,�. �� . ��.��. " . �. i .�, fna�wi...ius,+oc m,ewu-r»ur.,:.�e.�w.�� ,- ,.ewraKuww.m.�� ni n� ��:�_�� .�u��.�: ��,�.�k �,��..,.,�,._ ��,�.,.�....� ; .�� ._�... � �,.��..,a..,�.,,��..� s��.�.,R�..� _.._ —,, y _` . ,_ i E �' i � { u� x;.�,;-._ �� • � . s - � � •� ��-�-- � _�� .�1 � _ _ � i �f G 1b1 s��y" 1 , � . yt .. ...�_ . ,,:__ ;_. , ,. � �. � i� .... , . ... ...._..... � . ; X�. .. . '..�' . ... f} E y,� 1 7C �� t��f �. �� "�v P ..-. _ "�. .�., .. .,. " _ � V . _.;� �M ��F . . . ' �� .:. r,s . . aa j j � , �.. }� "'. .� � µ � M � , �s � ,�,*l�� RI�,� �y�_ IGt �_�V�.� ., . . ' �'3; � : " `Rt � o M ��..� 1� �`L M� � u. � G:"a .. •# ��4 �� '� '-�.:� �i � M R!�.V�> .�-t:` � � , ��'� � �;t'. �^ ��. q . �' �� LnY.��i., � K! . 'M � . � �tC#T A.�„�? _ � . .. s.�i "i"`.§y,f � v . . �G� ��m.� R�7 �.R� k �.� � ,-t`� . � .__ . t F,�z� e �y E'^=x M ��¢&.':. >Rs �. 1F1 . ��..., YC�M Y �y,� � '� ' . � � < L „fl ` � � � � U � : . k '.� i . . �„+'. �� . • � 1.� ` ,.IS _ .� ' � � --� �� k,� F1 . ��,�� `.,� � u a �t. s � `e� ', ( "4 tf INO � e � _ I Rt 5• 's � . A.� ��aei'e� io! .a UJ Rf� M .. � �.�,q� �. „ .M,� {� . � �..WI � �..,....�..�. � �� `xi��'�"� 4 `��a.,'�w� 3 ' � �a�"E� k"� � : �.� � . � �� -_. � ,�;� "��;y�f^€%.a�' �'� � } ,g--- ,_. +w*a' � �� ti � °. - w ..,N d . '4.a'�r,��", ; z � �.� _—,D,,,I^^R �`�R = .� � - �� '� '��-l� � y �T . Z � � �� M �'� � .� � ,��v.. q'�y� _ . - `�`r a��:. � . r.� . • . , � • . �t, ' � `�r �a �,r,f^� .w's,� �e,., � . ,' M� ..�..� h�'~\\F5� ��f . t M R A\ � f --.9_ +,^^."' JN� IWV ' ��L f A �� : p' s. . � �.V Rf, � � µ j.: � : r ' . ._ . � . _ � , �� ...�� ... �.[-. x... �, � _ . _.__ .ti: .k� '.�-� ...... . .. --.a�. p <:t� Ai ::� �� : _. .... , a ..�..�. ..:�. 7, �, h :�: �.,,. 7 sct . '"_E . �.. _ � �, � ,_�PY Ps �. Lf � [ � . <,� _ �'' — . � m .2 i l ' 4 v :�" � �a , �_r � 3 . S ,.R.1<Y' � ` u .:�� 1��'. YE' � � t MD,� -� . . t +� 1�,E, ww.•s?,xx�::4 zi,�s �-- y..` � ;. � '°w�� ,�� . S . <«.__-_.... �� ,� tt a . .., � � . T.��,»ww � -�� 2 � N' � . � �� 3 � :1��t� aa �y � { .. ___ ' �, . ' � - , _'" _ :c " .' . � �� . - .., , ,_ . ,� � ��'� M �. F� ':�} . .. �$�'�+'^� « .M� �p� ,ro 1M �.� . �,_.. � .. . ' ., i:,.�..'`�„m'�°'*..� ..ii.u.. .�„«. .,._....«._. ..�� . ..; "�� .. UWatetl W 0�6nancc.°.- � °' � ... �� Y 5Gi5.#5[26 xntl 1l;,+S�7 � ~� ,µ� ;� . . 0M cfie7ne as d , y,��d� ,__- . . . Ssp2em�ert9,20tt � �. � . �; ... .., , _.. _ o,: `b _ � �}I�E ;. ___'. 4 -, � . � ..�.- . .-� , ; . f�16.00a �- . . tnmmunity&Economic Development �� :,. � . JF.a Drctub.L7mi�tmm . . . Pd!�ni Av'amx+eR�IMNfqg TCeMaeih tl -� ' _...._' ��... ..�.. ,��. . . ��._ _ 3*.��_�r f.i. �: ' . _. ,.:.�...«: .. , _ - _ City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-5 December 2011 � � Renton has a mix of land uses throughout the City.The land uses within the City include industrial and commercial uses located primarily in the downtown areas of Renton. Boeing and the Renton Airport are located on the southern end of Lake Washington in northwestern Renton, at the mouth of the Cedar River and the site of past severe flooding.Also downtown are mixed use residential and commercial land uses, with a mix of single and multi-family homes. Single family residences dominate the eastern and southeastern portions of the City. In addition, in those areas there are pockets of mixed-use commercial centers aimed at providing services for residents living along the eastern edges of the City. Southwest Renton, west of Highway 167, is a mix of commercial office space, light and heavy industrial and resource conservation lands.To the east of Highway 167, in southern Renton, is a mix of low-density single family, multi-family infill lands, single family homes and commercial office space. The Comprehensive Plan provides a vision of Renton development 20 years into the future.The vision includes infill into existing neighborhoods on vacant lots with an increase in multi-family housing in the downtown areas, again with the emphasis on infill rather than on urban sprawl. Resource conservation lands are located along major rivers and creeks in areas associated with critical areas (wetlands, aquifer protection areas,fish and wildlife habitat,frequently flooded and geologically hazardous areas as defined by the Growth Management Act and RMC 4-3-050, Critical Area Regulations)and in the Valley(south of SW 16th Street and west of Highway 167) where significant wetlands exist. . Some existing development occurred in hazard areas prior to the adoption of current zoning and development standards regulating development in sensitive areas. According to the City of Renton Zoning Map (October 30, 2009), much of the hazardous and sensitive areas are zoned to allow only very low-density residential uses.The exception is building within the areas where soil conditions and the potential for liquefaction or lateral spreading increase seismic hazards, since seismic hazard areas encompass much of downtown and southwest Renton. Multi-family infill development has increased over the past ten years to accommodate the growth expected within the City. Much of the downtown increased seismic hazard area is designated as a mixed-use downtown center. While this accommodates the growth expected for the region it may also increase both the day and nighttime populations of downtown Renton. Single-family residential growth is occurring in eastern Renton, largely outside of hazard zones. The City currently controls development of lands that are identified hazard areas in several ways.The Critical Areas Regulations, adopted into zoning in 1999, protect lands with identified aquifers, flood hazards, steep slopes,geologic hazards, and wetlands. Lands that are mapped in these designations, and lands City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-6 December 2011 �'' '�+' that are identified as"critical areas" based upon adopted criteria upon site- specific review, are subject to restrictive standards and additional environmental analysis. Development regulations require that critical areas be deducted from the buildable area of the land in question for regulated hazards. For lands with characteristics below regulated thresholds, additional technical analysis—such as geotechnical reports or wetlands analysis—is required to ensure that development adequately addresses hazardous conditions. Analyzing Development Trends The Puget Sound Regional Council's population and employment forecasts project growth for the City. Over the twenty-one-year interval from 2001 to 2022 they estimate an increase of 9,723 households and 33,600 jobs. Growth targets adopted by the Growth Management Planning Counci) anticipate 6,198 households and 27,597 jobs. Both forecast growth and targets are well within the City's estimated land capacity of 11,261 units and 32,240 jobs established through the Buildable Lands requirements of the Growth Management Act(GMA). Renton is planning for its regional share of forecast growth over the next 20 years at the high end of the range, and the adopted target at the low end of the range. In the first nine years of growth management actual growth in Renton exceeded targets, but was within the range predicted by the forecast growth assumptions.With external factors, including the regional economy, state/federal transportation funding and the GMA regulatory environment remaining constant or improving, Renton's growth is anticipated to continue. Table 2.3 summarizes Renton's forecast growth, targets and land-use capacity. Table 2.3 Renton's Forecast Growth Adjusted Target/Capacity Reflecting Incorporated Renton 2001-2011 Growth/Annexation/Land Use Changes in 2001 and 2002 9,723 Units Forecast 33,600 Jobs None Growth 22,266 Population 6,198 Units Growth 27,597 Jobs 4,253 Units Targets 14,194 Population 26,736 Jobs City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-7 December 2011 � � 2.5 Parks and Recreation Renton has an extensive park, open space and urban trails system.The City's park system includes: • 28 developed public parks • 12.5 miles of trails (including a 4.5-mile paved trail along the Cedar River) • 732 acres of open space for hiking, wildlife viewing and enjoying nature • Maplewood Golf Course, an 18-hole, 190-acre, public golf course • 45-acre Ron Regis Park includes a lighted regulation sized baseball/softball field and all-weather soccer field, lighted basketball court and opportunities for future baseball/softball and soccer field expansion. • Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park, a beautiful 55-acre park with nearly 1.5 miles of Lake Washington waterfront and a public boat launch, is the most popular city park with 1.5 million visitors each year.Additional amenities include two restaurants, 1.5 miles of shoreline and over-water walking paths, picnic facilities and a large children's play area. . The public has additional water access at the mouth of the Cedar River on Lake Washington where the Cascade Canoe and Kayak Center offers canoe and kayak rentals. In addition,the City has a unique combination of recreational and cultural opportunities and facilities that make Renton a quality community where people choose to live,work and play, including: . The Henry Moses Aquatic Center which features two separate pools, a 9,000- square-foot leisure pool and a 3,300-square-foot, six-lane lap pool. The leisure . pool includes popular features such as a zero-depth entry, wave machine, water spray play area, lazy river, island lagoon, water slide,toddler water area, large sun and shade spaces, a bathhouse and a concession area. • A skate park, community center, two neighborhood centers, senior center, two King County library branches and a history museum. • The City's historic walk-- "History lives Here" a self-guided tour of 22 markers highlighting historically significant places, people and events in Renton. Brochures along with a brief summary, historical photographs and pictures of related memorabilia are available at the King County Library located in downtown Renton as well as at City of Renton buildings. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-8 December 2011 �" � 3.0 PLANNING PROCESS 3.1 HistoricalOverview Renton has always considered hazards as part of the community planning process. Hazard maps are maintained at Renton City Hall in a common area for public review. Formal consideration of flood hazards is an integral part of Renton's participation in the National Flood Insurance Program; with about 951 flood insurance policies currently in pface in Renton. Renton's first hazard mitigation plan was developed as a result of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and was authorized by City Council Ordinance No. 3680 adopted on December 22, 2003. The first hazard mitigation plan was developed prior to the creation of The Office of Emergency Management.The Office of Emergency Management was created as a part of the Renton Fire & Emergency Services Department in 2007 when Renton's first Emergency Management Director was hired. In 2008,the Office of Emergency Management was expanded to include an Emergency Management Coordinator and AmeriCorps VISTA volunteer. In 2009, the most recent addition was an Administrative Secretary I, shared with the Community Risk Reduction Section of the Department. Prior to 2007 emergency management work was completed by staff with other duties.The creation of the Office of Emergency Management has allowed for dedicated personnel assigned to emergency management work. Since the development of the office, hazard mitigation planning has been conceptually incorporated into Renton's Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP),the latest revision of which was authorized by City Council Ordinance No. 3988 adopted on December 8, 2008.The Basic Plan portion of the CEMP provides a listing of the major hazards posing threats to the City of Renton. Each Emergency Support Function includes a supportive statement and encouragement to apply mitigation measures appropriately. As the Office of Emergency Management has expanded and become a fixture of the City of Renton more work is being done to further incorporate hazard mitigation planning in all city plans. 3.2 Planning Process The development of the new City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan was coordinated by the Office of Emergency Management and the Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee, with the assistance of consultant Ken Goettel.The work began in late 2008, with ten steering committee meetings from November 2008 to April, 2010. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-1 December 2011 � � The City of Renton's Emergency Management Group functions as the Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee in Renton.The Emergency Management Group meets monthly and carries out the full spectrum of emergency management coordination topics including mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. Although the composition of the group is primarily City staff, the local hospital and college have been included in the membership. All members of the Office of Emergency Management participate in this committee. The first hazard mitigation plan was used as a guide in the drafting of this plan. Historical information and mitigation actions listed in the original plan were considered in the rewrite. Mitigations actions not completed were evaluated and included in the new plan if deemed valid by the affected department and/or the Emergency Management Group. In nearly all cases lack of funds were responsible for mitigation actions identified in the initial plan not being completed. Through the Emergency Management Group each department was asked to participate and, based on their expertise and knowledge, add details into the new plan. Internal and external studies as well as historical information were included in the chapters related to the hazard addressed.The initial drafts of the new plan were created by the consultant. Reviews and changes were completed by the Emergency Management Group during planning meetings and in contact with Emergency Management staff. Final wrap-up of the plan was completed by the Office of Emergency Management based on input from the Emergency Management Group,the public and Washington State Emergency Management. The inclusion of public input and the planning meetings held are detailed below. During the current revision of the Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan,two public workshops were held at Renton City Hall.The first public workshop, held April 9, 2009, presented the expired Hazard Mitigation Plan to the public and initiated dialogue for suggestions on improvements to the plan.After extensive coordination within the Emergency Management Group and with other City staff to develop revision recommendations, a second public workshop, held on March 16, 2010, provided an opportunity to review and comment on the first draft of the plan.Additionally, the plans were posted on the City of Renton website for public review and electronic comment. These public workshops in Renton gave both public-sector and private-sector stakeholders in Renton opportunities to contribute the City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan.These public workshops were advertised on the rentonwa.gov website and in the local Renton newspaper. City staff with subject-matter expertise were in attendance at the two workshops with maps and other visual displays to explain the hazards, answer questions and engage in dialogue with members of the public. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-2 December 2011 � � As a result of the Hazard Mitigation Plan development process, and the desire to further involve the public in planning,the Emergency Management Group has recommended the formation of a separate group, the "Community Risk Reduction Committee".This committee will meet at least twice yearly to gain more external and public participation, on an ongoing basis, for prevention and mitigation activities citywide to better inform the Emergency Management Group on mitigation issues and progress. Hazard mitigation planning and public meetings conducted during the development of the Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan are summarized below. Meeting attendees are listed in Section 3.3 at the end of this chapter. Scanned copies of the meeting minutes, sign-in sheets, and advertisement for public meetings, where available, are included in Appendix 4. Following the completion of the final draft, the plan was submitted to the State of Washington Emergency Management Division (EMD)for review as to FEMA requirements for Hazard Mitigation Plans. Recommendations made by the WA State EMD were incorporated into the plan by the Office of Emergency Management.The plan was then submitted to FEMA for final review and approval. Recommendations made by FEMA were incorporated into the plan by the Office of Emergency Management prior to submittal to City Council for adoption. Planning Meeting#1 (November 6, 2008) The Emergency Management Group was introduced to the Hazard Mitigation Plan revision needs on November 6, 2008 at Renton City Hall.A brief discussion emphasized the importance of hazard mitigation planning and garnered participation from the key contributors to the plan revision. Planning Meeting#2 (March 3,2009) The Community Services Department set up a meeting with consultant Ken Goettel for advice on Hazard Mitigation Grant Program applications. Additionally,the smaller meeting group entertained a verbal proposal to have him compile and put narrative to the hazard mitigation planning efforts of the City's Emergency Management Group. Planning Meeting#3 (March 5,2009) The third planning meeting was held on March 5, 2009 to identify the hazards most significant for Renton and to begin the process of identifying mitigation goals, objectives and action items. Consensus opinions and suggestions from this meeting included: City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-3 December 2011 �iww✓ �.r�' • The greatest losses to the City would be caused by earthquakes and floods. • Power outage is a potential in all disasters and can also be the primary disaster in and of itself.The December 2006 windstorm highlighted the need for backup power for City facilities to protect critical services. • Public input in this plan is important and a meeting for input should be held soon. Planning Meeting#4(April 2,2009) Considerable internal coordination and information sharing with the consultant occurred between the third and fourth planning meeting.The fourth planning meeting was held on April 2, 2009 at Renton City Hall.This meeting followed up on action items proposed in Meeting#2. Participants also reviewed and discussed the relative merits of two grant project proposals being considered for submission under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. City staff were confirmed for their roles in the scheduled April 9, 2009 public meeting to present the expired mitigation plan to the public and solicit input and concerns to guide plan development. Public Meeting#1 (April 9, 2009) The first public meeting with representatives of the planning team was held on April 9, 2009 at Renton City Hall. Major topics addressed included: • Purpose of a Hazard Mitigation Plan. • Identification of the major hazards within the City of Renton:floods, winter storms, earthquakes, landslides and debris ffows, abandoned coal mines, hazmat incidents,volcanic eruptions and terrorism. • Explanation of mitigation measures and solicitation of input into plan revision. Planning Meeting#5(May 7, 2009) The fifth planning meeting was held on May 7, 2009 at Renton City Hall. Only a portion of the Emergency Management Group meeting was devoted to the Hazard Mitigation Plan and focused on general updates on the status of the consul.tant's work and outstanding information needs to be satisfied by planning team members. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-4 December 2011 � � Planning Meeting#6 (June 4,2009) The sixth planning meeting was held on June 4, 2009 at Renton City Hall.The first draft of the Hazard Mitigation Plan from the consultant was available for review. Emergency Management Group members went through a page by page review of the plan and identified missing information and discussed action items. Planning Meeting#7(July 2,2009) The seventh planning meeting was held on July 2, 2009 at Renton City Hall. Between the sixth and seventh planning meetings, Emergency Management Group members worked on their narrative assignments and provided them to the Emergency Management Director for compilation in advance.The second draft of the Hazard Mitigation Plan was presented to the group members for another detailed review. Additional clarification was made through discussion on various topics as they were systematically reviewed. Follow up assignments were given to specific team members. Planning Meeting#8(August 6,2009) The eighth planning meeting was held on August 6, 2009 at Renton City Hall. Only a portion of the Emergency Management Group meeting was devoted to the Hazard Mitigation Plan and focused on final edits needed to the plan. Planning Meeting#9 (February 4, 2010) The ninth planning meeting was held on February 4, 2010 at Renton City Hall. Only a portion of the Emergency Management Group meeting was devoted to the Hazard Mitigation Plan and consisted of a last call for final edits needed to the plan before presentation at the March 16, 2010, public meeting. Public Meeting#2: Presentation and discussion of Public Review Draft Hazard Mitigation Plan (March 16,2010) The Public Review Draft of the Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan was presented and discussed March 16, 2010, at a specially scheduled public meeting at Renton City Hall.The context and purposes of the plan were discussed, along with goals, objectives and action items. Additional public comment was encouraged. Planning Meeting#10(April 1,2010) The tenth and final planning meeting was held on April 1, 2010 at Renton City Hall.The group reviewed and considered public comments received during the open comment period and incorporated them appropriately into the plan before submission. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-S December 2011 � �. 3.3 Pianning Participants City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Planning Team Kelley Balcomb-Bartock, Executive, City of Renton Kelly Carey, Fire& Emergency Services, City of Renton Kent Curry, Police, City of Renton Dennis Conte, Community Services, City of Renton Suzanne Dale-Estey, Community& Economic Development, City of Renton leff Dosch, Security& Emergency Management, Valley Medical Center William Flora, Fire& Emergency Services, City of Renton Abdoul Gafour, Public Works, City of Renton Lisa Garvich, Executive, City of Renton Gregory Hartman, Fire & Emergency Services, City of Renton Gina Jarvis, Finance & Information Services, City of Renton Adriana Johnson, Community& Economic Development, City of Renton Kayren Kittrick, Community& Economic Development, City of Renton Bob Mac Onie, Public Works, City of Renton Mindi Mattson, Fire & Emergency Services, City of Renton George McBride, Finance & Information Services, City of Renton Elman McClain, Emergency Management, Renton Technical College Norma McQuiller, Community& Economic Development, City of Renton Sonja Mejlaender, Community Services, City of Renton Rachel Myers, Fire & Emergency Services, City of Renton Deborah Needham, Fire& Emergency Services, City of Renton David Pargas, Fire & Emergency Services, City of Renton Robert Robertson, Human Resources& Risk Management, City of Renton Tracy Schuld, Finance & Information Services, City of Renton Colleen Shannon, Human Resources& Risk Management, City of Renton Preeti Shridhar, Executive, City of Renton Raymond Sled, Public Works, City ofRenton Michael Stenhouse, Public Works, City of Renton Ron Straka, Public Works, City of Renton Rocale Timmons, Community& Economic Development, City of Renton Timothy Troxel, Police, City of Renton Chip Vincent, Community& Economic Development, City of Renton Donnaann Visneski, Finance & Information Services, City of Renton Neil Watts, Community& Economic Development, City of Renton Marty Wine, Executive, City of Renton Cindy Zinck, Finance& Information Services, City of Renton Distribution List for Notices and Planning Materials Renton Hazard Mitigation Planning Team members listed above Renton Reporter City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-6 December 2011 � � 300 Emergency Worker Volunteers 350 Neighborhood Leaders http://www.rentonwa.gov Planning Meeting#1 (November 6, 2008) Kelley Balcomb-Bartok, Communications Specialist, Executive Dennis Conte, Facilities Supervisor, Community Services Jeff Dosch, Security& Emergency Management,Valley Medical Center Abdoul Gafour, Water Utility Supervisor, Public Works Jim Henriksen, Emergency Prep, Public Health Kayren Kittrick, Engineering Supervisor, CED Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency Services Norma McQuiller, Neighborhood Program Coordinator, Community& Economic Development Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services Linda Parks, Director, Finance& Information Services Robin Robertson, Risk Manager, Human Resources & Risk Management Karl Rufener, Fire Battalion Chief/Safety Officer, Fire & Emergency Services Mike Stenhouse, Director, Public Works Clark Wilcox, Sergeant, Police Planning Meeting#2 (March 3,2009) Leslie Betlach, Parks Director, Community Services Todd Black, Capital Project Coordinator, Community Services Kelly Beymer, Golf Course Manager, Community Services Ken Goettel, Consultant Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services Peter Renner, Facilities Director, Community Services Planning Meeting#3 (March 5,2009) Daniel Carey, Surface Water Engineer, Public Works Kent Curry, Commander, Police/Patrol Services Dennis Conte, Facilities Maintenance Supervisor, Community Services I. David Daniels, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator, Fire & Emergency Services Jeff Dosch, Security& Emergency Management,Valley Medical Center Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-7 December 2011 � � Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire& Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services � Robin Robertson, Risk Manager, Human Resources&Risk Management Mary Roy,Admin Sec I, Finance & Information Services Ray Sled,Water Maintenance Manager, Public Works Preeti Shridhar, Communications Director Administrative,Judicial and Legal Services Ron Straka, Surface Water Engineer, Public Works Planning Meeting#4(April 2,2009) Kelley Balcomb-Bartok, Communications Specialist, Executive Todd Black, Capital Projects Coordinator, Community Services Kent Curry, Commander, Police Suzanne Dale-Estey, Economic Development Director, Community& Economic Development Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Steve Lee, Surface Water Supervisor, Public Works Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency Services George McBride, Information Services Director, Finance & Information Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services Linda Parks, Fiscal Services Director, Finance & Information Services Public Meeting#1(April 9, 2009) I. David Daniels, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator, Fire& Emergency Services Victor Eskenazi Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Jennifer Henning Katie McClincy, Commander, Police Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Inter, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services Gary Palmer King Parker, Renton City Council Member Don Perkins Peter Renner, Facilities Director, Community Services Daflin Slaugh City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-8 December 2011 � � Ron Straka, Utility Engineering Supervisor, Community Services Planning Meeting#5 (May 7,2009) Kelley Balcomb-Bartok, Communications Specialist, Executive Mark Baldridge, Facilities Technician, Community Services/Facilities Jeff Dosch, Security& Emergency Management,Valley Medical Center Floyd Eldridge, Commander, Police Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Fire & Emergency Services Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency Services � George McBride, Information Services Director, Finance & Information Services Joan Montegary, Assistant to the Chief, Fire & Emergency Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services Preeti Shridhar, Communications Director, Executive Marty Wine,Assistant Chief Administrative Officer, Executive Planning Meeting#6 (lune 4,2009) Mark Baldridge, Facilities Technician, Community Services Jan Conklin, Development Services Representative, Community& Economic Development Kent Curry, Commander, Police I. David Daniels, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator, Fire& Emergency Services Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Fire & Emergency Services George McBride, Information Services Director, Finance & Information Services Norma McQuiller, Neighborhood Coordinator, Community& Economic Development Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services David Pargas,Assistant Fire Marshal, Fire &Emergency Services Mark Peterson, Deputy Fire Chief, Fire & Emergency Services Mary Roy, Administrative Secretary, Finance & Information Services Ray Sled, Water Manager, Public Works Preeti Shridhar, Communications Director, Executive Planning Meeting#7 (July 2,2009) Dennis Conte, Facilities Supervisor, Community Services Kent Curry, Commander, Police City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-9 December 2011 � � I. David Daniels, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator, Fire & Emergency Services Jeff Dosch, Security& Emergency Management,Valley Medical Center Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services ' Abdoul Gafour, Utility Engineering Supervisor, Public Works Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Fire & Emergency Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services Ray Sled, Water Manager, Public Works Pauletta Sulky, Risk Analyst, Human Resources& Risk Management Planning Meeting#8(August 4,2009) Dennis Conte, Facilities Supervisor, Community Services Kent Curry, Commander, Police Suzanne Dale-Estey, Economic Development Director, Community& Economic Development I. David Daniels, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator, Fire & Emergency Services Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshat, Fire & Emergency Services Abdoul Gafour, Utility Engineering Supervisor, Public Works Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Executive Department Peter Hahn, Deputy Administrator, Public Works Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency Services George McBride, Information Services Director, Finance & Information Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire& Emergency Services Linda Parks, Fiscal Services Director, Finance & Information Services David Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Tim Troxel, Deputy Chief, Police Ray Sled,Water Manager, Public Works Pauletta Sulky, Risk Analyst, Human Resources& Risk Management Clark Wilcox, Commander, Police Greg Zimmerman,Administrator, Public Works Planning Meeting#9 (February 4, 2010) Kelly Carey, Administrative Secretary, Fire & Emergency Services Dennis Conte, Facilities Supervisor, Community Services Kent Curry, Commander, Police Suzanne Dale-Estey, Economic Development Director, Community& Economic Development City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-10 December 2011 � � Sonja Mejlaender, Community Relations Specialist, Community Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services David Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Colleen Shannon, System Technician, Human Resources& Risk Management Ray Sled,Water Manager, Public Works Public Meeting#2: Presentation and discussion of Public Review Draft Hazard Mitigation Plan. (March 16,2010) Dennis Conte, Facilities Supervisor, Community Services Kent Curry, Commander, Police Roy Gunsolus, Fire Battalion Chief/Safety Officer, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services Ray Sled, Water Maintenance Manager, Public Works Ron Straka, Engineering Supervisor, Public Works Chip Vincent, Director, Community & Economic Development Dennis Wood Planning Meeting#10(April 1, 2010) Craig Burnell, Plan Reviewer, Community& Economic Development Kelly Carey, Administrative Secretary, Fire & Emergency Services Suzanne Dale-Estey, Economic Development Director, Community& Economic Development Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Abdoul Gafour, Utility Engineering Supervisor, Public Works Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Executive Department Gina Jarvis, Fiscal Services Director, Finance& Information Services Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency Services Sonja Mejlaender, Community Relations Specialist, Community Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services Ann Nielsen, Assistant City Attorney, City Attorney Preeti Shridhar, Communications Director, Executive Ray Sled,Water Manager, Public Works Tim Troxel, Deputy Chief, Police City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-il December 2011 "�r►� � 4.0 MISSION STATEMENT, GOALS, OBJECTIVES and ACTION ITEMS 4.1 Overview The overall purpose of Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan is to reduce the impacts of future natural or human-caused disasters on Renton. By reducing the vulnerability to disasters and enhancing the capability of the City and its citizens to respond effectively to, and recover quickly from,future disasters Renton will become more disaster resistant and disaster resilient, Completely eliminating the risk of future disasters in Renton is neither technologically possible nor economically feasible. However, substantially reducing the negative impacts of future disasters is achievable with the adoption of this Plan and ongoing implementation of risk reducing Action Items. Incorporating risk reduction strategies and Action Items into Renton's existing programs and decision making processes will facilitate moving Renton toward a safer and more disaster resistant future.This Plan provides the framework and guidance for both short and long-term proactive steps that can be taken to: • protect life safety, • reduce property damage, • minimize economic losses and disruption and • shorten the recovery period from future disasters. In addition, Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan is intended to meet FEMA's (Federal Emergency Management Agency) mitigation planning requirements so that Renton remains eligible for pre and post-disaster mitigation funding from FEMA. This Plan is based on a four-step framework that is designed to help focus attention and action on successful mitigation strategies: Mission Statement, Goals, Objectives and Action Items. • Mission Statement.The Mission Statement defines the purpose and primary function of the Plan.The Mission Statement is an action-oriented summary that answers the question "Why develop a hazard mitigation plan?" • Goals. Goals identify priorities and specify how Renton intends to work toward reducing the risks from natural and human-caused hazards.The Goals represent the guiding principles toward which the community's efforts are directed. Goals provide focus for the more specific issues, recommendations and actions addressed in Objectives and Action Items. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-1 December 2011 � � • Objectives. Each Goal has Objectives which specify the directions, methods, processes or steps necessary to accomplish the Plan's Goals. Objectives lead directly to specific Action Items. • Action Items.Action Items are specific well-defined activities or projects that work to reduce risk.The Action Items represent the steps necessary to achieve the Mission Statement,Goals and Objectives. 4.2 Mission Statement The mission of Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan is to: Proactively facilitate and support community-wide policies, practices and programs that make Renton more disaster resistant and disaster resilient. This Plan documents Renton's commitment to promote sound public policies designed to protect citizens, critical facilities, infrastructure, private property and the environment from natural hazards by increasing public awareness, identifying resources for risk assessment, risk reduction, and loss reduction and identifying specific activities to help make Renton more disaster resistant and disaster resilient. 4.3 Mitigation Plan Goals and Objectives Mitigation plan goals and objectives guide the direction of future policies and activities aimed at reducing risk and preventing loss from disaster events.The goals and objectives listed here serve as guideposts and checklists as the City, other agencies, businesses and individuals begin implementing mitigation Action Items within Renton. Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan goals and objectives are based broadly on and are consistent with the goals established by the State of Washington's Hazard Mitigation Plan. However,the specific priorities, emphasis and language are Renton's.These goals were developed with extensive input and priority setting by Renton's Mitigation Plan Steering Committee (the Emergency Management Group) and the other stakeholders and citizens of Renton. Goal 1: Reduce the Threat to Life Safety Objectives: A. Enhance life safety by minimizing the potential for deaths and injuries in future disaster events. B. Enhance life safety by improving public awareness of earthquakes and other natural hazards posing life safety risk to the Renton community. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-2 December 2011 � � Goal 2: Reduce the Threats to Renton Buildings, Facilities and Infrastructure Objectives: A. Identify buildings and infrastructure at high risk from one or more hazards. B. Conduct risk assessments for critical buildings,facilities and infrastructure at high risk to determine cost effective mitigation actions to eliminate or reduce risk. C. Implement mitigation measures for buildings, facilities and infrastructure which pose an unacceptable level of risk. D. Ensure that new buildings and infrastructure in Renton are adequately designed and located to minimize damages in future disaster events. Goal 3: Enhance Emergency Response Capability, Emergency Planning and Post- Disaster Recovery Objectives: A. Ensure that critical facilities and critical infrastructure are capable of withstanding disaster events with minimal damages and loss of function. B. Enhance emergency planning to facilitate effective response and recovery from future disaster events. C. Increase collaboration and coordination between Renton, nearby communities, utilities, businesses and citizens to ensure the availability of adequate emergency and essential services for the Renton community during and after disaster events. Goal 4: Vigorously Seek Funding Sources for Mitigation Actions Objectives: A. Prioritize and fund Action Items with the specific objective of maximizing mitigation, response and recovery resources. B. Explore both public(local, state and federal)funding and private sources for mitigation actions. Goal 5: Increase Public Awareness of Natural Hazards and Enhance Education and Outreach Efforts Objectives: A. Develop and implement education and outreach programs to increase public awareness of the risks from natural hazards B. Provide information on resources,tools, partnership opportunities and funding resource sources to assist the community in implementing mitigation activities. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-3 December 2011 � � C. Strengthen communication and coordinate {iarticipation among and within public agencies, non-profit organizations, business, industry and the public to encourage and facilitate mitigation actions. Goal 6: Incorporate Mitigation Planning into Natural Resource Management and Land Use Planning Objectives: A. Protect the aquifer supplying Renton's potable water and environmentally sensitive areas within Renton. B. Balance natural resource management, land use planning and natural hazard mitigation to protect life, property and the environment. C. Preserve, rehabilitate and enhance natural systems to both improve habitats and serve natural hazard mitigation functions. 4.4 Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Items The Mission Statement, Goals and Objectives for Renton are achieved via implementation of specific mitigation Action Items. Action Items may include refinement of policies, data collection to better characterize hazards or risks, education, outreach or partnership-building activities, as well as specific engineering or construction measures to reduce risk from one or more hazards to specific buildings, facilities or infrastructure within the Renton community. Many of the high priority Action Items focus on facilities which are critical or essential for Renton. Critical facilities are facilities necessary for emergency response and recovery activities, especially public safety facilities and hospitals. Essential utility ' services such as electric power, water and wastewater are also extremely important to �communities, especially after a disaster.Such utilities are often characterized as "lifeline" utilities because they are so important to a community for life safety(e.g., services to hospitals) and for the economic recovery after a disaster. Although not included, additional infrastructure important to the City, region and nation are also present in Renton, including the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. Critical facilities identified by Renton are shown below in Table 4.1 Action items identified and prioritized during the development of the Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan are summarized in Table 4.2. Individual action items may address a single hazard (such as floods, or earthquakes) or they may address two or more hazards concurrently.The first group of action items is for multi-hazard items that address more than one hazard,followed by groups of action items for each of the hazards considered in this plan, as addressed in more detail in Chapters 6 to 13. Prioritization,funding and inclusion of action items in City planning ar.e addressed in Chapter 5. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-4 D'ecember 2011 ir�� Table 4.1 Critical Buiidings and Infrastructure for Renton Infrastructure and Capital Source/Type of Facility Facilities City of Renton Water System . 10 Wells • 1 Spring • 12 Booster Pump Stations • 9 Reservoirs • 9 Metered Connections to Outside Sources • 2 Water Treatment Facilities • 290 Miles of Water Main City of Renton Wastewater . 23 Lift Stations System . 4,219 Manholes • 180 Miles of Sewer Main City of Renton Surface Water • 2 Pump Stations Utility . 225 Miles of Storm Sewer Main • 83 Water Quality and Detention Facilities • 1.25 Miles of levees and Floodwalls Seattle Public Utilities • 5 Water Transmission Mains King County Wastewater . 7 Sewer Interceptors(trunk lines) Treatment • 1 Treatment Plant Public Safety • 1 Police Facility,including jail services and facilities Fire Facilities • Station 11-211 Mill Ave.S.98057 • Station 12-1209 Kirkland Ave.NE 98056 • Station 13-18002 108th Ave.SE 98055 • Station 14-1900 Lind Ave.SW 98057 • Station 16-12923 156`h Ave.SE 98059 • Station 17-14810 SE Petrovitsky Rd.98058 • Fire District 25—King County Station,serving the east portion of the City City of Renton Facilities FACILITIES • Renton City Hall: 1055 S.Grady Way-262,884sq.ft. • Old City Hall:200 Mill Ave.S-51,OOOsq.ft. • Renton Community Center:1715 Maple Valley Hwy. (Potential Shelter)36,OOOsq.ft. • Renton Senior Activity Center:211 Burnett Ave. N., (Potential Shelter)22,150sq.ft. • Carco Theatre: 1717 Maple Valley Hwy.,(Potential Shelter) 11,090sq.ft. • Highlands Neighborhood Center:800 Edmonds Ave. NE, (Potential Shelter)11,960sq.ft. • North Highlands Neighborhood Center:3000 NE 16`h St. (Potential Shelter)4,430sq.ft. • Tiffany Park Neighborhood Center: 1902 Lake Youngs Way SE,(Potential Shelter) 1600sq.ft. • Spirit of Washington Events Center:233 Burnett Ave.S. (Potential Shelter)11,780sq.ft. • Main Library:100 Mill Ave.S.-22,400sq.ft. • Highlands Library:2902 NE 12th St.-6,580sq.ft. • Facilities Shop:107 Williams Ave. N.-3,850sq.ft. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-5 December 2011 � � • Park Maintenance Shops: 100 Bronson Way N.-3,850sq.ft., and 105 Williams Ave. N.-7,500sq.ft. • PubliC WOrkS City ShOps Bldg.A,B,C,D,&F:3555 NE 2"d St.- 52,400sq.ft. • Boathouse:1060 N.Riverside Dr.-8,900sq.ft. • City Center Parking Garage:655 S.2°d St.-179,243sq.ft. • Renton Historical Museum:235 Mill Ave.S-5,300sq.ft. • Maplewood Golf Course/Clubhouse/Driving Range:4040 Maple Valley Hwy.,(Potential for Shelter with open Spaces)27,OOOsq.ft. PARKS/OPEN SPACES WITH RESTROOM FACILITY • Cedar River Park: 1703 Maple Valley Hwy.—450sq.ft. • Cedar River Trail/Park:Riverside Drive&6`h St. • Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park: 1201 Lake Washington Blvd. N.,(Open Spaces and Picnic Structures) • Henry Moses Aquatic Center: 1719 Maple Valley Hwy.- 6,320sq.ft. • Cedar River Park:1703 Maple Valley Hwy. • Jones Park:Welis Avenue S.&the Cedar River • Kennydale Beach Park: Lake Washington Bivd.and N.36`n St. • Kennydale Lions Park:2428 Aberdeen Ave. NE • Kiwanis Park:815 Union Ave. NE • Liberty Park: 1101 Bronson Way N. • Maplewood Park:3400 SE 6`h St. • Heritage Park:233 Union Ave. NE • Philip Arnold Park:7201ones Ave.S • Riverview Park:2901 Maple Valley Hwy. • Talbot Hill Reservoir Park:701 S.19`h St. • Thomas Teasdale Park:601 S.23rd St. • Windsor Hills Park:432 Windsor Way NE • NARCO Property:1500 S.Houser Way(18 acres, undeveloped) • Edlund Property: 17611 103�d Ave.SE(15 acres, undeveloped) Utilities:Electricity • Bonneville Power Administration 0 5 Transmission Circuits • Puget Power o Talbot Hill Station, High Capacity Lines Utilities:Natural Gas • Puget Sound Energy o SWARR Station&Gate Station o Network of high pressure mains and distribution lines Utilities Fuel Product • Olympic Pipeline Pipelines o Central monitoring station at 2319 Lind Ave.SW o Petroleum enters and leaves Renton via 2 pipelines Hospitals • Valley Medical Center(169 beds),includes an emergency room Schools • 36 schools and related facilities Airport • Renton Municipal Airport City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-6 December 2011 � r M � f0 E a � fC p, 0 d W y Z , , a o� Multi•Haiard Mitigation Action Items Establish a formal role for the Renton All Hazard ', Short-Term Mitigation Planning Committee(Emergency Hatard Mitigation Planning LOC81 I #1 Management Group�to develop a sustainable Committee•Emergency Ongoing X X x Funds process to encourage,implement,monitor,and Management�EM)Group evaluate citywide mitigation actions. Short-Term Identify and pursue funding opportunities to LOCeI City staff Ongoing X #2 implement mitigation actions. Funtls Short-Term Develop public and private sector partnerships to Hazard Mitigation Planning On oin X X Local #3 foster hazard mitigation activities, Committee•EM Group g g Funds � Local Short-Term Develop detailed inventories of at•risk buildings and Haiard Mitigation Planning 1-2 Years X X Funds, N4 infrastructure and prioritize mitigation actions. Committee-EM Group Grant Funds Local Funds, long-Term Develop education programs aimed at mitigating the Haiard Mitigation Planning On oin X X x Grant #1 risk posed by hazards, Committee•EM Group g g f unds (EMPG, HMGP) Long-Term Integrate the Mitigation Plan findings into planning Hazard Mitigation Planning On oin X X LOCeI k2 and regulatory documents and programs, Committee•EM Group g g Funds � Locai Integrate hazard,vulnerability and risk Mitigation FutltlS, L�ng-Term plan findings into enhanced Emergency Operations EM Group Ongoing X Grant �3 planning. (EMPG, HMGP) City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-1 December 2011 a o a W v Z a � Flood Mitigation Action Items; Within FEMA-Mapped Floodplains Complete an inventory of structures,critical facilities Short-Term and important transportation or utility system Community Services(for City 1-2 Years K X LOCeI #1 components within mapped floodplains,including facilities), Public Works Funds elevation data and structure�facility information. Local Identify and implement cost-effective mitigation FUI1dS, Long-Term measures for high risk structures,with the highest Community SeNices(for City On oin X X C8p1t21 #1 priority for critical facilities,transportation and utility facilities�, Public Works g g Funtls, components, Grant � Funds Identify and implement measures and policies to Long-Term increase Renton's Community Rating System score to Community and Economic Ongoing X X X LOC81 #2 reduce flood insurance rates. Development,Public Works Fuf1tlS Continue to be a member of the National Flood Insurance Program to enable property owners in long-Term Renton to parchase flood insurance from FEMA and Public Works Ongoing X X X LOC81 �3 allow the Ciry to receive flood disaster funding to Fu►1dS repair damages due to flooding following a federally declared disaster. Continue to require new construction of structures in the floodplain to be constructed in accordance with � Long•Term FEMA standards and the National Flood Insurance Community and Economic On oin X X X X LOC81 �4 Program requirements,including requiring Development,Public Works g g Funtls compensatory floodplain storage for filling of the floodplain. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-8 December 2011 ' a ' a " "' � Z Implement the Reasonable and Prudent Measures Long•Term identified in the NOAA Fisheries Biological Opinion Community and Ewnomic On oin X X X X LOCaI H5 regarding FEMA's National Flood Insurance Program Development,Public Works g g FUI1dS j as required by FEMA. I Continue to enforce,maintain and update the li long-Term Communityand Economic LOCeI Renton Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Ongoing X X X #6 Master Program requirements. Development,Public Works Funds Continue to perform maintenance dredging, LOC81 Long-Term maintenance of floodwalls and levees associatetl Community and Economic #7 with the Army Corps of Engineers Cedar River Development,Public Works Ongoing X X z Funds, Section 205 Flood Hazard Reduction Project. USA�E � Continue to implement the Surface Water Utility programs related to flood hazard management, Long-Term which include the Capital Improvement Program, Community and Economic On oin X X X LOCeI #8 engineering program,maintenance and operations Development,Public Works g g Funds program,public education and customer service programs, Adopt storm water design standards equivalent to the Ecology 2005 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington to better control the long-Term quantity and quality of storm water runoff from new Community and Economic On oin X X X X LOC81 #9 construction and redevelopment projects and meet Development,Public Works g g Funds the requirement of the Phase II Nationa)Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)permit requirements. � Integrate flood hazard reduction with other objectives related to water quality protection, Long-Term habitat protection and habitat restoration efforts Community and Economic On oin X X Local #10 including complying with the Clean Water Act NPDES Development,Public Works g g Funds Phase II permit,the Endangered Species Act and the regional salmon recovery efforts. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-9 December 2011 a o a w �i Z a � Long-Term Continue to be consistent with the King County Flood Community and Economic LOC81 Ongoing X X X X X X #11 Hazard Reduction Plan. Development,Public Works Funds Continue to participate in the King County Flood - long-Term Warning System and the King County Flood Control Community and Economic Ongoing X X X X X X LOC81 #12 Zone District. Development,Public Works Funds Continue to be a member of the FEMA Community long-Term Rating System that enables property owners to Community and Economic Ongoing X X X LOC81 #13 obtain flood insurance at a reduced rate. Development,Public Works Funds Long-Term Re-evaluate future land use and zoning designations Community and Economic On oin X X X Local #14 in FEMA mapped 100-year floodplain areas, Development,Public Works g g Funds . � Flood Mitigation Action Items: Outside of FEMA-Mapped Floodplains Complete an inventory of structures,critical facilities Short-Term and important transportation or utility system Community Seruices(for City 1-2 Vears X Local #1 components in locations with a history of severe or facilities�, Public Works Funds repetitive flooding, Short-Term Evaluate and improve notification,evacuation and Fire&Emergency Services,Police, LOC81 #Z response planning for areas within the potential public Works 1-Year X X X X X X Funds inundation area for failure of the Hanson Dam, For locations with repetitive flooding and significant � Long-Term damages or road closures,determine and implement Public Works,Community Services Ongoing X X X X Local H1 mitigation measures such as upsiiing culverts or Funds storm water drainage capacity. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-10 December 2011 Dam Safety Mitigation Action Items Maintain copies of high resolution maps of dam Short-Term failure inundation areas and update emergency Fire&Emergency Services,Police, LOC81 Ongoing X X X #1 response plan,inclutling public notification and Public Works Funds evacuation routes. Resear�h seismic vulnerability assessments for Short•Term Howard Hanson Dam and Chester Morse Dam and fire&Emergency Services Ongoing X X X LOC81 #2 lobby dam owners to make seismic improvements as FUIIdS neces5ary, Plan Goals Addressed H � ` � � � C �, d �j � � 0 � � Haiard Action Item Coordinating Organiiations Timeline o � a N r 9 �� c Funding � , 3 � � � � c � � � Source Q "' � � _v w J u � « C � 1L v:0 � '0 � a � a W � �"o t0 a � � Z Winter Storms Mitigation Action Items Short-Term Enhance tree trimming efforts especially for PSE,Community Services On oin X X x PSE,LOCaI #1 transmission lines and trunk distribution lines, (secondary support) g g Funds Short-Term Encourage property owners to trim trees near PSE,Community Seruices On oin X X X X PSE,LOC81 �2 service drops to individual customers. (secondary support) g g Funds Ensure that all critical City facilities in Renton have PSE,LOCaI Long-Term sufficient backup power and emergency operations Community Services 5 Years X X X �1 plans to deal with power outages. FUI1dS Consider upgrading lines and poles to improve � wind�ice loading,undergrounding critical lines,and Long-Term PSE,CommunityServices PSE,LOCaI #Z adding interconnect switches to allow alternative (secondary support� 5 YearS X X x Funds feed paths and disconnect switches to minimite outage areas, long-Term Encourage new development5 to include Communiry and Economic on oin X X X X LOC81 �3 underground power lines. Development g g Funds City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-11 December 2011 Earthquake Mitigatiun Action Items Evaluate the seismic vulnerability of critical city- LOCaI owned buildings,utilities and infrastructure and Funds, Short-Term establish priorities to retrofit or replace vulnerable Community Services 1-2 Years X X z Granr #1 facilities to ensure adequate seismic performance of FUf1dS critical facilities. (EMPG, HMGP) Conduct a sidewalk survey of residential,commercial LOCaI and industrial buildings in Renton using FEMA's f unds, Short-Term Rapitl Visual Screening to identify especially Community and Economic 1-2 Years X X x Grant #2 vulnerable buildings,raise awareness and encourage Development Fullds mitigation actions. (EMPG, HMGP � Disseminate FEMA pamphlets to educate Short-Term homeowners about structural and non-structural Community and Economic LOC81 #3 retrofitting of vuinerable homes and encourage Development 1-2 Years X X X X Funds retrofit, Local Funds, Ensure that all critical City facilities in Renton have Grant �ong-Term Funds #1 sufficient backup power and emergenry operations Community Services 5 years X X x (EMPG, plans to deal with power outages. HMGP, SHSP, UASI _ Local long•Term Obtain funding and retrofit important public facilities Funds, � �2 with significant seismic vulnerabilities. Community Services 10 years X X X X Grant Funds �(HMGP) City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-12 December 2011 a ` " '" a Z ' a � Landslide Mitigation Action Items Short•Term Complete the inventory of locations where buildings Community and Economic 1-2 Vears X X LoC81 �I #1 or infrastructure are subject to landslides. Development,Public Works Funds long-Term Consider landslide mitigation actions for slides public Works 5 Years X X X LOC81 #1 seriously threatening buildings or infrastructure. FUI1dS Long-Term Limit future development in high landslide potential Community and Economic On oin X X X X �OC81 #2 areas. Development g g Funds Plan Goals Addressed � � � :� ,�o '� a a�, v d � �, ? � v > 3 v � � a � ,a � ;,� � � Funtling ' Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline ,� � r �— � v Q �, aN L � � � � � Source � � J � J u w C LL y 0 i 9 7 C 7 O C a W w f�p � ' a , a � z Volcanic Ha:ards Mitigation Action Items Short-Term Update public emergency notification procedures for fire&Emergency Services 1-2 Years X X X X LOCeI #1 ash fall events. Funds Community Services,Fire& ShoR-Term Update emergency response planning for ash fall Emergency Services,Police,Public 1-2 Years X X X LOC81 H2 events, Works FultdS � Evaluate capability of water treatment plant to deal Short-Term with high turbidity from ash falls and upgrade public Works,METRO 1-2 Years X X X X METRO #3 treatment facilities and emergency response plans to deal with ash falls. City of Renton Haiard Mitigation Plan 4-13 December 2011 a � � W a Z � � a Coal Mine Hazard Mitigation Action Items Require geological or geotechnical engineering Long-Term studies before permitting new construction i� Community and Economic Ongoing X X X X LoCal �1 identified coal mine hazard areas. Development Funds Plan Goals Addressed � �o " v �, � � y > � v � > > � v v � a � ;, m 'o'� Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline ro � a � r �— u � v '� - �3 � a N ` � � � � � $OUfC2 � � , � � a c c LL °1 n ,� � � 3 � , a o a W v f0 � ' a oc Z Hazmat Incident Mitigation Action Items Short-Term Ensure that first responders have readily available LOC81 #1 site-specific knowledge of hazardous chemical Fire&Emergency Services 1 year X X z Funds inventories in Renton, Local Enhance emergency planning,emergency response Fu11dS, Short-Term training and equipment to address hazardous Fire&Emergency Services,Police, Ongoing X X x Grant #� materials incidents, Publie Works Funds (SHSP, UASI) � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4•14 December 2011 . . . .. . LL L � W W Z. . a � Terrorism Mitigation Action Items Local Enhance emergency planning,emergency response FUI1dS, Short-Term training and equipment to address potential Fire&Emergency Services,Police Ongoing X X X X z Grant #1 Funds incidents of terrorism. � (SHSP, UASI) Local Upgrade physical security detection and response f UI1dS, Long-Term capability for critical facilities,including water Community Seruices,Police Ongoing X X X X Grant �1 Funds system, (SHSP, UASI) Long-Term E�aluate and implement hardening measures for 5-10 LOC21 #2 highly vulnerable critical facilities. Police,Community Services Years X X X X FUI1dS Local Funds, Long-Term Identify and establish secure surveillance cameras Police,Community Services,Public 5 Years X X X Grant #3 and monitoring at all critical infrastructure, Works FuntlS (SHSP, UASI) Local � Chemical,Biological,Radiological,Nuclear and Funds, Long-Term Ezplosives�CBRNE)Detection and securitY Grant #4 devices/elements integrated at critical city Police,Community Services 5 Years X X X Funds infrastructure, ($HSP, UASI) City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-15 December 2011 � � 5.0 PLAN ADOPTION, MAINTENANCE and IMPLEMENTATION 5.1 Overview For a hazard mitigation plan to be effective, it has to be implemented gradually over time as resources become available, continually evaluated and periodically updated. Only through developing a system which routinely incorporates logical thinking about hazards and cost-effective mitigation into ongoing public and private-sector decision making will the mitigation action items in this document be accomplished effectively.The following sections depict how Renton has adopted and will implement and maintain the vitality of Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan. 5.2 Plan Adoption Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan was adopted by Renton's City Council on ....TBD.....'., making this the effective date of the plan. A copy of the resolution is attached in Appendix 4. After adoption by City Council, FEMA approval will be sought. FEMA approval means that Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan meets national standards and that the City will continue to be eligible for hazard mitigation funding from FEMA's mitigation grant programs. Renton has the necessary human resources to ensure this Plan continues to be an active planning document. City staff have been active in the preparation of the plan, and have gained an understanding of the process and the desire to integrate the plan into Renton's Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan.Through this linkage,the plan will be kept active and be an ongoing working document. Recent major high-profile disasters and the growing understanding of the threats posed to Renton from various national and anthropogenic hazards, have kept the interest in hazard mitigation planning and implementation alive at the City Council and city staff levels, among private sector entities and among the citizens of Renton. 5.3 Implementation Coordinating Body The Renton Emergency Management Group, led by the Emergency Management Director, will coordinate the implementation of the plan and be responsible for periodically monitoring, eva,luating and updating the plan.The City will continue to provide staffing to accomplish this. Consistent staffing allows for well-organized meetings and will ensure that the right people are involved.The existing active interest in mitigation and emergency planning that exists within Renton will help to ensure the successful implementation of the plan. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-1 December 2011 �� Integration of the Hazard Mitigation Plan into Ongoing Programs, Policies and Practices The mission statement, objectives,goals and action items outlined in this Plan provide a strong framework and guidance for the identified mitigation priorities for Renton. However,the Plan is a guidance document, not a regulatory document. Implementation of the objectives,goals and action items can only be accomplished by fully integrating this guidance into ongoing city-wide programs, policies and practices. The City of Renton relies on comprehensive land use planning, capital improvements planning, and building codes to guide and control development in the City. After the City officially adopts the Hazard Mitigation Plan, these existing mechanisms will, as appropriate, include and integrate mitigation strategies identified in the Plan. After adoption of the Plan, the City will address hazards in the comprehensive plans and land use regulations. Specifically, one of the goals in this Plan is to protect life and property from natural disasters and human-caused hazards.The Community and Economic Development Department will review the City's comprehensive plans and land use policies, analyze any plan amendments, and provide technical assistance in implementing these requirements. The capital improvement planning that occurs in the future will also contribute to the goals in Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan. When projects are being planned mitigation measures will be considered and prioritized as part of the project based on the cost benefit analysis and available funding.The Community and Economic Development Department will work with capital improvement planners to secure high-hazard areas for low risk uses. Within six months of the effective date of the Mitigation Plan, the mitigation activities listed in Chapter 4 will be incorporated into the process of existing planning mechanisms. Incorporation of hazard mitigation actions has been addressed with and agreed to by the administrators of each department. In addition,the Emergency Management Director is the Fire & Emergency Services representative at all City planning meetings.The Emergency Management Group will be the mechanism for communication between individual departments and Emergency Management and have the responsibility to include hazard mitigation actions in planning and budgeting for their departments. When hazard mitigation grant opportunities become available they will be brought to the Emergency Management Group so that the hazard mitigation actions remaining can be evaluated and prioritized.The Emergency Management Group has identified standing criteria to rank the mitigation activities including: City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-2 December 2011 � � life safety, likelihood of occurrence, benefit/cost analysis, regional impact, public vs. private property, duration, achievability,cumulative risk and size of impact. These criteria will be used to rank and prioritize all hazard mitigation actions that have not been funded.These priorities will be brought back to the department by group members to continue to bring their importance to the forefront. Cost Effectiveness of Mitigation Projects As Renton and other entities, public or private, within the City consider whether or not to undertake specific mitigation projects or evaluate how to decide between competing mitigation projects,they must answer questions that don't always have obvious answers, such as: What is the nature of the hazard problem? How frequent and how severe are hazard events? Do we want to undertake mitigation measures? What mitigation measures are feasible, appropriate and affordable? How do we prioritize between competing mitigation projects? Are our mitigation projects likely to be eligible for FEMA funding? Renton recognizes that benefit-cost analysis is a powerful tool that can help communities provide solid, defensible answers to these difficult questions. Benefit-cost analysis is required for all FEMA-funded mitigation projects, under both pre-disaster and post-disaster mitigation programs. Benefit-cost analysis provides a sound basis for evaluating and prioritizing possible mitigation projects for any natural hazard. Renton will use benefit-cost analysis and related economic tools, such as cost-effectiveness evaluation,to the extent practicable in prioritizing and implementing mitigation actions. See Appendix 2 at the end of this Plan for details on the benefit-cost analysis process. STAPLE/E Approach Renton will also use the STAPLE/E to help evaluate potential mitigation actions. Using STAPLE/E criteria, mitigation activities can be evaluated quickly in a systematic fashion based on Social,Technical,Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic and Environmental (STAPLE/E) considerations.The STAPLE/E approach is helpful for doing a quick analysis of mitigation projects. Most projects that seek federal funding and others often require more detailed benefit/cost anatyses. The following are suggestions for how to examine each aspect of the STAPLE/E Approach. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-3 December 2011 � � Social: Community and Economic Development and Community Services staff, local non-profit organizations or local planning groups can help answer these questions. • Is the proposed action socially acceptable to the community? • Are there equity issues involved that would mean that one segment of the community is treated unfairly? (Or one segment more favorably?) • Will the action cause social disruption? Technical: Public Works, Community Services, and Community and Economic Development Staff, Police, and Fire & Emergency Services staff can help answer these questions. • Will the proposed action work? • Will it create more problems than it solves? • Does it solve a problem or only a symptom? • Is it the most useful action in light of other goals? Administrative: Elected officials can help answer these questions. • Is the action implementable? • Is there someone to coordinate and lead the effort? • Is there sufficient funding, staff and technical support available? • Are there ongoing administrative requirements that need to be met? Political: City Council members and planning officials can help answer these questions. • Is the action politically acceptable? • Is there public support both to implement and to maintain the project? Legal: Include legal counsel, land use planners and risk managers in this discussion. • Who is authorized to implement the proposed action? • Is there a clear legal basis or precedent for this activity? • Are there legal side effects? Could the activity be construed as a taking? • Is the proposed action allowed by the comprehensive plan, or must the comprehensive plan be amended to allow the proposed action? • Will the City be liable for action or lack of action? • Will the activity be challenged? Economic: Community and Economic Development and Finance and Information Services Department staff, civil engineers, building officials, and the County Assessment and Taxation office can help answer these questions. • What are the costs and benefits of this action? • Do the benefits exceed the costs? • Are initial, maintenance and administrative costs taken into account? • Has funding been secured for the proposed action? If not,what are the potential funding sources (public, non-profit, and private)? City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-4 December 2011 � � • How will this action affect the fiscal capability of the City? • What burden will this action place on the tax base or economy? • What are the budget and revenue effects of this activity? • Does the action contribute to other goals, such as capital improvements or economic development? • What benefits will the action provide? (This can include dollar amount of damages prevented, number of homes protected, credit under the CRS, potential for funding under the HMGP or the FMA program, etc.) Environmental: Public Works and Community and Economic Development staff, environmental groups, land use planners, engineering, and natural resource managers can help answer these questions. • How will the action impact the environment? • Will the action need environmental regulatory approvals? • Will it meet local and state regulatory requirements? • Are endangered or threatened species likely to be affected? 5.4 Plan Maintenance Periodic Monitoring, Evaluation and Updating The City of Renton has developed a process for regularly reviewing and updating the Hazard Mitigation Plan.The Emergency Management Group will serve as the Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering Committee and members will be responsible for overseeing the progress of the mitigation actions in the Plan.The Emergency Management Group is led by the Emergency Management Director and composed of representatives from all City Departments and two external agencies. The Emergency Management Group will review and evaluate the plan for progress each year. During the annual review the Emergency Management Group will update information in the Plan, remove outdated items and completed actions, as well as recognize the success of the community in implementation of action items. Annual revisions of the Plan will be summarized for the Public Safety Committee of the City Council for formal acknowledgement as part of the Plan's maintenance and implementation program. A full review of Renton's Hazard Mitigation Plan will be conducted every five years. The Emergency Management Group will have lead responsibility for the formal updates of the plan. Renton chose this cycle and process in order to provide a sufficient time horizon for mitigation actions to take effect and show results. During the full review every five years the Emergency Management Group will determine if: City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-5 December 2011 � � • The goals and objectives address current and expected conditions. • The nature or magnitude of risks has changed. • The current resources are appropriate for implementing the plan. • There are implementation problems, such as technical, political, legal or coordination issues with other agencies. • The outcomes have occurred as expected. • The agencies and other partners have participated as proposed. The Emergency Management Group will then review the results of the Plan assessment, identify corrective actions, and recommend to the Emergency Management Director what actions are necessary to bring the Plan back into conformance with the stated goals and objectives. Emergency Management Group members will then update and make changes to the plan before submitting it to City Council and the State Hazard Mitigation Program Manager. As documented in Chapter 3,this plan is a complete re-write of the first hazard mitigation plan adopted in 2003. Changes to the first plan were too extensive to document analysis and alterations on a section by section basis. Any future revisions of the City of Renton Hazard Mitigation plan will include documentation and/or a matrix that identifies which portions were reviewed, analyzed and revised as a part of the of the update process.Section 5.5 details progress on goals and action items specified in the 2003 plan. Future revisions will include similar detail on the progress made on goals and action items in this plan. Continued Public Involvement and Participation Implementation of the mitigation actions identified in the Plan must engage the community.The participation that led to the Plan was the result of existing community networks, and these networks will continue to participate as the community-wide mitigation activities identified in the plan are implemented. Some projects can be done at the volunteer level while others will require technical expertise.The stakeholders in the planning process will become project partners, as needed, on specific items. The City of Renton is committed to involving the public directly in the continual reshaping and updating of the Hazard Mitigation Plan.The Emergency Management Group members are responsible for oversight of the plan. Since members of external agencies and the public are not significantly represented on the Emergency Management Group, an additional committee will be implemented in 2012, one which actively engages residents, businesses, and other stakeholders. This committee will address integrating prevention and mitigation into the City's relevant activities, and will provide ongoing advice and input to the Emergency Management Group regarding the Hazard Mitigation Plan. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-6 December 2011 � � Copies of the plan will be catalogued and kept on hand at the King County Library System .The existence and location of these copies will be publicized on the City web site. Contained in the plan is the address and phone number of City staff responsible for keeping track of public comments on the plan. In addition, copies of the plan and any proposed changes will be posted on the City website.This site will also contain an email address and phone number to which people can direct their comments or concerns.The City will further publicize the Plan availability on the City web site through various sources including:the Renton Reporter(newspaper), Channel 21(Renton cable station), neighborhood association newsletters, Renton School District, Piazza Renton (downtown business association)and Renton Chamber of Commerce. Citizen comment and interest will be solicited and directed to the Emergency � Management Group via the Emergency Management Director. At the discretion of the City, a public meeting may be held after each review of the plan by the Emergency Management Group. When the plan is revised every five years the City will hold at least two public meetings.The first meeting held when the plan is opened for revision and the last meeting will be held following the revision for final review prior to revision.These meetings will provide the public a forum for which they can express concerns, opinions or ideas about the plan.The Fire & Emergency Services Department will publicize and host this meeting, and any updates will be posted on the City web-site allowing for additional public input. 5.5 Update from 2003 Plan Considerable progress has been made in addressing the goals and action items from the 2003 Hazard Mitigation Plan. Detailed below are the goals and action items in that plan and the progress made. Goal 1—To protect aquifers used by the City and the City water supply system from contamination by hazardous materials and other hazard effects Actions: a. Continue to implement and maintain the Aquifer Protection Plan b. Continue Risk Assessment Methodology for Water Systems Process; implement measures as appropriate The Aquifer Protection P/an and the Risk Assessment Methodology for Water Systems Process have been implemented and maintained since 2003. Their � implementation and maintenance are ongoing. Goal 2—Minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-7 December 2011 � �- Actions: a. Continue to enforce, maintain and update Renton Critical Areas Regulations, development regulations, and Surface Water Management Design Standards; These regu/ations have been enforced, maintained and updated since 2003. This work is ongoing. b. Continue to perform maintenance dredging, when needed, and maintenance of the levees and floodwalls associated with the Army Corps of Engineers Cedar River Section 205 Flood Hazard Reduction project; This maintenance has been performed since 2003. This work is ongoing. c. Develop criteria for and conduct hazard-susceptibility assessments of business and public facilities (baseline and changed conditions); An assessment has been completed for the City and was utilized in the development of this p/an. Going forward these assessments will be updated when conditions change. d. Enhance and continue drainage system maintenance; Drainage system enhancement and maintenance has been performed since 2003. This work is ongoing. e. Avoid/reduce instances of non-underground extensions of utility lines which may create debris dams during floods; As much os possible instances of non-underground extensions of utility lines have been avoided and/or reduced since 2003. This work is ongoing. f. Evaluate and reconcile competing goals and practices regarding habitat protection and flood mitigation; This work is ongoing. g. Maintain and enhance the City of Renton Flood Hazard Reduction Plan; The City of Renton did not develop an independent Flood Hazard Reduction P/an. Instead the City is following the King County Flood Hazard Reduction P/an and is assisting in its maintenance. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-8 December 2011 � `"�. h. Continue to participate with King County in the King County Flood Warning System and the Green River Flood Control Zone District Administration. participation has occurred since 2003 and will continue. Significant additional coordination has occurred in 2009 and 2010 as a result of the increased risk of potential flooding on the Green River due to damage at the Howard Hanson Dam. � Goal 3—Minimize damage due to natural hazards Actions: a. Conduct hazard-susceptibility assessments of business and public facilities Assessments have been completed.Assessments will continue as facilities change or are developed. b. Identify, assess, and maintain critical transportation routes within the City; This work was completed in 2009 with the development of the Evacuation Annex to the Comprehensive Emergency Management P/an for Renton. Ongoing transportation analysis is occurring through the City's participation in the Regional Catastrophic Planning Team which is exploring transportation/lifelines in the Greater Puget Sound Area. The routes will be reassessed when the plan is updated. c. Develop objective criteria and conduct seismic preparedness and retro-fit of critical public and private facilities; Progress has been made on this since 2003. Most recently Fire Station 11 was retro fitted to Zone 4 compliance.A detail of current seismic preparedness of critical facilities is provided in Ch6pter 8—Earthquakes. d. Re-enforce utility infrastructure and connections; Progress has been made since 2003. This work is ongoing. e. Implement slope stabilization measures in steep/unstable areas; Progress has been made since 2003. This work is ongoing. f. Use HAZUS Loss Estimation tool kit to identify and assess vulnerabilities to earthquake damage. This was completed. The HAZUS report is available in Appendix 3. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-9 December 2011 � �„r� Goal 4—To minimize impacts on critical habitats and wetlands from natural or man-made disasters Actions: a. Assess vulnerability of critical habitat and wetland areas to disaster damage; b. Assess capacity for critical habitat and wetland areas to serve as mitigation buffers for floods; c. Incorporate habitat and wetland mitigation enhancements into drainage maintenance program; d. Evaluate and reconcile competing goals and practices regarding habitat protection and flood mitigation. Progress has been made on these since 2003. This work is ongoing. Goal 5—Minimize the impact of technological or man-made disasters on the City (e.g., hazardous materials incidents,terrorist attack, civil disturbance, etc.) Actions: a. Robust systems • Retro-fit critical facilities for blast-resistance and resistance to forced entry; � Protect utility lifelines (water, power, communications, etc.) by concealing, burying, or encasing; � Develop backup control center capabilities; b. Security/Safety � Incorporate vehicle barriers such as walls, fences, ponds/basins, plantings, sculptures into site planning and design; design grounds and parking facilities for natural surveillance; � Ensure adequate site lighting; • Locate critical assets(people, activities, systems) away from entrances, vehicle circulation and parking, and loading and maintenance areas; • Separate high-risk and low-risk activities; separate high-risk activities from public areas; • Install public and employee screening systems and closed-circuit television (CCN) security systems. c. System Redundancy • Implement separate emergency and normal power systems; ensure that backup power systems are periodically tested under load; • Ensure provision of primary and backup fuel supplies; provide secure storage; • Install exterior connection for emergency power; City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-10 December 2011 � � • Enhance communications and information management capabilities: o Update the telecommunications capabilities of City government offices. o Create redundant/backup capability for landline telephone system. o Develop off-site backup of information technology systems. d. Enhanced Emergency Response • Maintain access (ingress and egress)for emergency responders, including large fire apparatus, and for resident evacuation; • Develop and maintain comprehensive emergency response and recovery plans; • Conduct regular evacuation and security drills; • Regularly evaluate emergency equipment readiness/adequacy; • Develop backup control center capabilities; Progress has been made on these since 2003. This work is ongoing. Goal 6—Enhance the City's capability for gathering, organizing, and displaying spatial data regarding hazards,vulnerabilities, critical facilities, and vital statistics. Actions: a. Maintain comprehensive hazard maps; b. Create critical facilities database information for use in future mitigation strategies. c. Obtain and integrate HAZUS Loss Estimation tool and ArcView GIS with existing City GIS geospatial programs. These have all been completed. The information continues to be updated with new studies and technology. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-11 December 2011 ~� � 6.0 FLOOD HAZARDS The City of Renton is subject to flooding from several flood sources, including: 1) over bank flooding from the Cedar River, Green River, Springbrook Creek, May Creek and their tributaries, 2) local storm water drainage flooding, and 3) floods from dam failures. Major flooding events in Renton generally result from large late fall or winter storms with a combination of intense rainfall, leaves clogging inlets and exacerbated by snow- melt runoff. Larger rivers whose drainage basins include higher elevations experience flooding in late winter to spring, due to large contributions from snowmelt. Flood events often result in simultaneous flooding on all rivers and streams in an affected area. Based on previous history we can reasonably expect flooding to at least some degree every year. However, because of differences in drainage areas, slopes and other watershed characteristics,the severity of flooding in any given rainfall event often varies significantly from stream to stream and basin to basin.This chapter uses FEMA Flood Insurance Studies combined with historical data to provide estimates of flood events within as well as outside of mapped floodplains. 6.1 Historical Floods in Renton Flooding has occurred in the Renton area throughout the recorded history of the area.The FEMA Flood Insurance Study for King County, including the City of Renton, dated April 19, 2005 has a brief history of major historical floods in the area. Cedar River Flooding atong the Cedar River is of specia) concern to Renton. As noted in the Flood Insurance Study, significant flooding along the Cedar River has occurred every 5 to 10 years when the discharge exceeds about 4,000 cfs (cubic feet per second).The flood of record on the Cedar River,which was somewhat greater than a 100-year event, occurred in November 1990 with a peak discharge of 10,600 cfs. More recent major flood events on the Cedar River occurred in 1990, 1995, 1996, 2006 and 2009.The last four flood events were Presidentially-declared disaster events.The 1990 flood caused about eight million dollars in damages to the Renton Airport, Boeing facilities and Cedar River Park.The 1995 and 1996 floods also impacted the Renton Airport, the old Renton City Hall (200 Mill Ave. S), Renton Community Center, Carco Theatre, Renton Senior Activity Center, the Cedar River Trail Park and the Boeing Plant.The 2009 flood caused over four million dollars worth of damage to the Cedar River Trail system,the Elliot City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-1 December 2011 �' � Spawning Channel and associated infrastructure.The eastern half of the Maplewood Golf Course and portions of the City's Ron Regis Park are located within the FEMA designated 100-year floodplain.The typical golf course damage from flood events (both 2006 and 2009) have been caused by the Cedar overflowing the channel and depositing heavy amounts of sediment across holes number 5 and 7 necessitating golf course closure and loss of revenue.The 2009 flood event engulfed the entire four holes located on the east side of the river(#4 -#7), and a river formed through the golf course exiting onto the Cedar River Trail. This flood water caused significant washouts and buckling of the trail (approx. 150 yards) and undermined the fill material that supports Highway 169's westbound approach to the bridge over the Cedar River,causing the support panels and bridge ramp fill to slump and fail.The westbound lane crossing the bridge of Highway 169 and the Cedar River Trail was closed for approximately 9 weeks until repaired by WSDOT. Green River Historically, the lower Green River Valley from Auburn to Renton has been inundated by large floods, such as those that occurred in 1933, 1951 and 1959. However, the potential for major floods has been largely mitigated by construction of the Howard Hanson Dam on the Green River.The storage capacity of the dam allows the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers to limit flows to no more than 12,000 cubic foot per second (cfs), as measured at the Auburn gauge,to prevent flooding. Per the Flood Insurance Study,the Howard Hanson Dam provides approximately a 500-year to 600-year level of protection against overbank flooding from the Green River.There are levees located on the lower Green River within the Cities of Auburn, Kent,Tukwila and areas of unincorporated King County.These levees protect the valley floor from flooding up to Green River flows of 12,000 cfs. Other than the Tukwila levee that protects commercial and industrial areas in Tukwila on the left bank,the Green River levees are not FEMA certified.The King County Flood Control Zone District is responsible for the maintenance, repair and improvement of the Green River levee system. Renton has no Green River levees within its jurisdiction, but flooding could occur in Renton if a levee failed on the right bank(east side) of the Green River between river miles 11 and 26. Although the Howard Hanson Dam ordinarily provides a good level of flood protection, damages sustained in the flooding of January 2009 resulted in a significant reduction in the flood control capabilities of the dam. Due to the damage,the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)reduced the storage capacity in the reservoir upstream of the dam.Without a fully functional dam,the USACEmight have been forced to release water from the dam in excess of 12,000 cfs at the Auburn gauge.This could have resulted in levee overtopping, breaching and flooding in the Green River Valley including Renton. In the fall of 2011 the USACE announced that the dam had been repaired and the valley had been City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-2 December 2011 '"�✓ �r returned to its original 1 in 140 risk of flooding. Unrelated to the dam repair issue; in the unlikelyevent of a failure of the Howard Hanson Dam very severe flooding could occur along the Green River.The worst case scenario for flooding is indicated by the inundation map for failure of the Howard Hanson Dam. Other Flood Sources The FEMA-mapped floodplains for Renton include areas along Springbrook Creek and May Creek, as well as their tributaries and the tributaries of the Green and Cedar River.These areas have also experienced frequent flooding in the past. 6.2 Flood Hazards and Flood Risk:Within Mapped Floodplains 6.2.1 Overview Flood prone areas of Renton include the FEMA-mapped floodplains the Cedar River, Green River,Springbrook Creek, May Creek and their tributaries.The FEMA floodplain maps delineate the 100-year floodplain boundaries. (The 100-year flood is the flood with a 1%chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year.) Detailed floodplain boundaries are shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Figure 6.1 shows the current FEMA approved mapped floodplains developed in 1995. Renton's floodplains are currently being reconfigured by FEMA to match current floodplain information. Figure 6.2 shows the proposed FEMA floodplain map currently under review. When the floodplains are finalized these maps will be updated with the official floodplains. Figure 6.2 should not be used for flood insurance rating until it is approved. For Renton,the FEMA floodplain maps include the following types of areas: 1. AE: Areas with a 1%annual chance of flooding with detailed flood hazard data including base flood elevations (the elevation of the 100-year flood). 2. A: Unnumbered A-Zones, within 100-year flood plain, but without detailed flood hazard data (no base flood elevations). 3. X: Areas outside the 1%annual chance floodplain, areas of 1%annual chance of flooding where average depths are less than 1 foot, areas of 1%annual chance stream flooding where the contributing drainage area is less than 1 square mile, or areas protected from the 1%annual chance flood by levees. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-3 December 2011 � � Figure 6.1 Current FEMA-Mapped Floodplains in Renton t ; a�,,..-_� � �: ,,- _r - - - -_� , . _.. .. _ „-��,, �. ., , ; -; . _. t� � - �r - ��r..�� ,. "3 %� '� '��- � � __ ` ,t r' � � _ `� `,ti �` �`� �`' -;' �� ,`� '' �'�� ''i�� ,-� ) ■ �� ! . .l ! � i . '� 'X� .` �. 'I � � �. r" � 4 � - "�_s r f L,: ,,� .1� :� 1,:�;ir� � '., t �i ,,t�.. ,*�i, x ,w{;� .� 1'*� ��`�` l:: � �'- `+- r � (- ` `•� 4„� , �YJ �.�.—. '4 " "�� . e��':..4 �'Y ,�,� ,_i Y"�S��"_'� i ��'"`°'�..''`v. � �er ��' �ti ��- �:..�� "1`., � r ' � i ��l �. l �: - � ':.�' 'Y _ ... � i� v � � 3 . � n .- -� � r �, - : .� �' . � � � ; ' _ � �� .i� � _� r� `��'.� C1 ..,�l,� �.�+ '.^ � }k .�.: , �. -��... � -• : ,..� ,, .Xi �,�.w=� d�� ,;; '."1�' L _ _t i'; J "�Y` .. ;, .ro ,. :; _ . �n; i, '- .. _ . .,.-,. - : ..a , � ,� . .. ,�. ... ��., y x . ; :. . � y��,. : s .: -. W �" :i - �, � � , ._� � ' .: C -. ,� � e: - �^-. . � , .. _ _,> ' . ' � 1"� " ��. _ �;� 5� .. : �„ _ a � "' . : ; , ti:, . � �. •� r - .. ;_ , : �- � �::� � _}� _ �..= � �_ :�%....,�„-,_,�`� _ 1, �r�--- �� j. ,� �� t �:. � « ; 2 -'' _,_.. „- ::. i �� r� 4 _ �� x „e,r �-�`. � �� ' � �--1�� ll .. �`{ �... `y^""�, /� -i...j.� '� '� * ~' `� � '� �g5.� � ; � .,�j � l r�..� . EI 1 � \ � �� J� � � { �' � � � -� fd �� "'1J �� ! � .� �:' ;: � ., � � -. ., S 1 _-1 l•�1.. . ' ! , s .._;. :� ;,,.... " : .F . 1 �� .. . � �X y ... ' � . r _ t � � � � — - � , - �- � , �+ ,. > � ; � � , , _ _ � . _ 3 _ ,- `, - �t_ �'. _ t - L� ' _ � _ ,�_ F _, � ` ir S � ._ �i -- .. _ � ' � - t ��, ; (f, l °�.. ;,.�. , , � _ 7 . f� � ^---y+. �� _ l�4� � ,' - � '� '� �; '�;, , =�r ��--•---�- •- .:� 'E� � �� .t ��.t � _ _f ��'< ..� � ., , � � r ' .�-'"`£�a`�� _..� L '� .�`' i � �: �� ` . _ � � : � ��_ , _ _ �� ,. � ; �F - � � � �, �� } �''� � ' � - � . _ , _ _ _ , . _ . . FEMA Mapped Flaodp�ains in R�nton �� 0 f_i.5 1 NIIBS R��R.oMan Cdy Lm�s This map is based upon the�day16,1995 j � `__�PoteniialAnna:atinnfirea BnunCay FE0.1b FIooC Insunnce Fate Maps far Renton. -FxistingFlnpaHa�rdFrSa '�.FEMAisinlhzprpcess�oipublishingnewF!ood �,,,,�--- �Insurance Rata Maps in2GlUwhichwili chanye ; �T s �., the iniormation shr•wn un lhis map. � ?� f1�r)�I =.� S�rttaee Wali�WiliF(I�+.C.elPozarp�PtintrE on03A3.?O10 City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-4 December 2011 � � Figure 6.2 Proposed FEMA-Mapped Floodplains in Renton : r - ; r , �� . .. �. x � � ,; -= -• �, ��,� _ �` , � �� : ; . i ; , ./Fr.� � . � F ��.1 _ ��!'�� ..�, .::� ,� ._ ' �`,". t� _ 'F�,� �e�,; � � ; . J ' il- �� I ( t , �4 �� , 'fJ �j _ ...' i'.. r .. �, ` � 4_.' � � '�.,. � �t, �� • ,�+�. � ��` ti ��, �� f� `�.*�.:.-� J '�p� `) y-_�,, .. ''4.�; .�.. ' �. • � ��` , �t.e.�"�R'` ' .`r-- i.�,�.;``4~w��l-w, �� ..� _� � '. t-5 �i ?:i ��r-r,j -:i �-� . r�_ � s;y '� I ,�'-�.�,. �� = i _ a � , �' ,� �1 � �;�� `"�� ,� - � ~' �`��. �=a.:.. , - �� ,.�� ; � X ' � ,�.. f '�t /�f �� tl�5 ! �.. Z�i- "�• y..- � .�. 1. �'�. � .�:� .. i ..� y,^.- F � t'. � ��.__� - 3 t. t _ - I- - `�� 1: A � �� ' .D _ 1 " �. � .. ,. - � ` _ { �� i ^ � ; ,. �.� ` �� k ��-�" �.� ...rr '.e...`"� `..-sE � �.. �J— f -� �...� _ ��' '�- �- _t � .. �'p.!'_ ,� _ � �'7� �.. �?�� r 1� _ l l�� :`, �� ,� `� � ,+', . 1 _ �; z 'L� �-�i �, .. � - :- .- -sz, ......,t,. �� ti,. .�/ �....,.�� •� � � ` k .. � . �F �,'�a.�ls�'� ""t.. Y ,-� � �� 4 `�--. -� �s f ;.:��.,.�.: � s � � � � - +� ;��_� , _ " u_� . _ " { -_ .a-� � . c' _ - �� (�. '��.. , � �. �,� ,. - i - . � , -�h + � � i ? ' .. '_' � �� 1�. - j n,�, � ''� � t . � - v ;,�e. 'Lt. �}� ". � t � 7� 1. .. F ~ �. ._. � aY A�.�y� � �.� _ J � ;} L' A ^� � x �a��. � =`� _ � �,''-t'�`'��. � c Z `j„ 1 s , '� '._.� y ` 4 �.....�i�.�...w.,.._...::�,.: � ' �'„"� `� t ��t....� � �' _ � �� -- f � � 4,� ��'°�,J[ �_. �_ #° ��. � ^ ��. �� "' ., ;J .�t , ..��'��.'� �' �,�J��.. "� V � � � r �,� ��. � a. . 'I. � - �'�'�'"' .�. � .� � � — . :., s —, � �,{'� � ��„� � �� s s5 � 4� 64s* ��` .�� ..?.}� .. . ..' ':��• 1 �� 5�� ,�.i�, � , "C`l` ..�T ..J..� _. _ Y _ .� �'� ?�•,: �` : �'1 .� 1 r ' 1 i ��:..� �� •: ��- w � � �_� `4�1 �� ..._ �� + �� _ .. f ��.. y� � '."H+ '_ � ,,, - \ ... p � ��" ii }�. '�:_. -i .>"�'K '4 : . : � 2 � ;;�: ��... u - -� � � � .<<�� ,� _ ,,, , . , . . _ \ Rentvn �urrent Flood H�zard Map -a�� Ra n�an CiiS Lknits rF:�o��aui ure.�le rvr v��.'v�rse�.+io.ar Ru n C 7.5 1 MIleS� red..w:..e,�r..ro.r.e.�.ewreuae.e.:.r.. � `��Po!enti:lAnnasatio�A2aBaunaary �WnIMe�EMSEraP�p+lThefbWl�a��Ra��rt �FloodHazartlArea i�R~pn'�.�aryIfRMllerlle��aaM1YAp��js'bWlro k �br�eermwi4�d eryuiamena. r1�� w• -�„�,°°""..�t (1[ �;'I ,.��. " ...e...;._m�.....�K,�.,.... �,�.,,..,� .. Su�{aeeWateilltiliylG:DelRmanolP�imedsn03�f2010 r �ce�.cra•�ee.��.s.cui�.'.:n�a.+�.••�u�+aceq=F.+w•..-.=m' City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-5 December 2011 � � The FEMA Flood Insurance Study and Flood Insurance Rate Maps for Renton include a large number of acronyms. A good summary of the terms used in flood hazard mapping is available on the FEMA website at: http•//www fema gov/pdf/floodplain/nfip s� appendix d.pdf 6.2.2 Flood Hazard Data For mapped floodplain areas,the flood hazard data included in the Flood Insurance Study(FIS) allowed quantitative calculation of the frequency and severity of flooding for any property within the floodplain. Table 6.1 Flood Hazard Data Cedar River: Renton USGS Gauge Vicinity of the Bronson Way North Bridge(RM 1.6)NAVD 88 Datum Flood Frequency Discharge Elevation ears cfs feet 10 5,940 34 50 9,860 36 100 12,000 38 500 18,400 40 The stream discharge data shown above for the Cedar River is from the April 2006 Flood Insurance Mapping Study of the Cedar River(Lake Washington to Renton City Limits)for the City of Renton. Stream discharge refers to the volume of water flowing down the river and is typically measured in cfs. The flood elevation data is from the Cedar River—Main Channel Flood Profile Figure 2 of the Flood Insurance Study. Flood elevation data varies with location along the reach of the river and thus separate flood elevation data points must be read from the graph at each location along the river.The data shown above is for approximately 1.6 miles above the mouth of the Cedar River immediately downstream of the Bronson Way N Bridge over the Cedar River at USGS gauge site number 12119000. - Quantitative flood hazard data is very important for mitigation planning purposes because it allows for quantitative determination of the frequency and severity (i.e., depth) of flooding for any building or other facility(e.g., road or water treatment plant)for which elevation data exist. Such quantitative flood hazard data also facilitates detailed economic analysis(benefit-cost analysis) of mitigation projects to reduce the level of flood risk for a particular building or facility. For a given neighborhood, the level of flood risk varies dramatically with the first floor elevation of each house. If the building's first floor elevation is below the 100-year flood elevation,the building could experience flooding above the first City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-6 December 2011 � � floor more frequently. However, a building with a first floor elevation above the 100-year flood elevation has a less than 1%chance of being flooded in any given yea r. 6.2.3 Caveats for the Renton Flood Insurance Study The Flood Insurance Study(FIS) for Renton is quite recent (2006). Over time, flood hazards may change because of increasing development upstream, changes in stream channels, improvements (or degradation) of flood protection measures over time and so on.Simply because an FIS is old does not mean that it is outdated or inaccurate. However, the older a study is, the more likely it is that channel or watershed conditions have changed over time. Another caveat is that flood studies are inevitably less than perfect, due to incomplete data and modeling uncertainties.Thus, in some cases, mapped floodplain boundaries may underestimate or overestimate the actual level of flood risk at a given location. 6.2.4 Interpreting Flood Hazard Data for Mapped Floodplains The level of flood hazard, or the frequency and severity of flooding, is not determined simply by whether the footprint of a given structure is or is not within the 100-year floodplain.A common error is to assume that structures within the 100-year floodplain are at risk of flooding while structures outside of the 100-year floodplain are not.This simplistic view is simply not true. Some importance guidance for interpreting flood hazards is given below. A. Being in the 100-year floodplain does not mean that floods happen once every 100 years. A 100-year flood simply means that the probability of a flood at the 100-year level or greater has a 1%chance � of happening in any given year. B. Within or near the 100-year floodplain,the key determinant of flood hazard for a building or other facility is the relationship of the elevation of the structure or facility to the flood elevations for various flood events.Thus,for example, homes with first floor elevations below or near the 10-year flood elevation have drastically higher levels of flood hazard than other homes with first floor elevations near the 50-year, 100-year, or higher elevations. C. Flooding happens outside of the mapped 100-year floodplain. a. The 100-year flood is by no means the worst flood possible. Floods greater than the 100-year flood will affect many areas outside of the mapped 100-year floodplain. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-7 December 2011 � � b. Areas protected by levees may flood if the levees fail. c. Many flood prone areas flood because of local storm water drainage conditions (see Section 6.3 below) and have nothing to do with the 100-year floodplain boundaries. 6.3 Flood Hazards and Flood Risk: Outside of Mapped Floodplains This section applies to the portions of Renton that are outside of FEMA-mapped floodplains. Many areas of the United States outside of mapped floodplains are subject to repetitive, damaging floods from local storm water drainage. Nationwide, more than 25%of flood damage occurs outside of FEMA-mapped floodplains. In most cities, storm water drainage systems are designed to handle small to moderate size rainfall events. Older Storm water systems were designed to handle 10-year flood events, and are rarely designed to handle greater amounts of rainfall.The current design standards require storm water drainage systems to be designed for a 25-year event with consideration for how the system functions during a 100-year event, but flooding could still occur during flood events greater than a 25-year event. New development and other land use changes result in increased runoff that could cause the capacity of existing storm drainage systems to be exceeded and result in flooding. For local rainfall events that exceed the collection and conveyance capacities of the storm water drainage system, some level of flooding occurs. In many cases, local storm water drainage systems are designed to allow minor street flooding to carry off storm waters that exceed the capacity of the system. In larger rainfall events,flooding may extend beyond streets to include yards. In major rainfall events, local flooding can flood buildings. In extreme cases, local storm water drainage flooding can result in several feet of water in buildings, with correspondingly high damage levels. Other portions of Renton outside of the mapped floodplains are also at relatively high risk from over bank flooding from streams too small to be mapped by FEMA. The following is a list of some of the flooding locations due to insufficient storm drainage system conveyance capacity: • NE Fifth Place and Edmonds Avenue NE • Lake Avenue S. and Rainier Avenue S. • Oakesdale Avenue SW and SW 41�Street-Springbrook Creek Culvert • N Eighth Street and Garden Avenue N. • May Creek Culvert Removal at NE 31�Street • Hardie Avenue SW Railroad Underpass City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-8 December 2011 � � • Monroe Avenue NE and NE Fourth Street • SW 43�d Street and Lind Avenue SW • Rainier Avenue S. Railroad Underpass • East Valley Road between SW 27th Street and SW 415Y Street • NE 43�d Street and Lincoln Avenue NE 6.4 Dam Failure Flooding The Chester Morse Masonry Dam on the Cedar River could inundate residential, commercial and industrial areas of Renton should it fail. Likewise, failure of the Howard Hanson Dam on the Green River would inundate commercial, industrial and residential areas as well as roads and byways.There are almost no residential areas in the Green River Valley that would be affected by a failure of the Howard Hanson Dam. 2009 damages to Howard Hanson Dam heightened concerns regarding dam safety.Although the damages at Howard Hanson Dam have since been repaired and the dam has been returned to full operating capacity for flood control, considerable proactive measures were taken in 2009 and 2010, including: developing and improving inundations maps and evacuation routes, as well as notifying the public of the increased risk and encouraging them to secure flood insurance coverage.The City partnered with neighboring cities and the county to ensure a coordinated message and response in the event of failure.These dam mitigation action items are included in Table 6.3 Flood Mitigation Action Items at the end of this chapter. 6.5 Inventory Exposed to Flood Hazards in Renton 6.5.1 Flood Prone Inventory The total area of floodplain in Renton is approximately 1,125 acres.There is 7.5% of the City within the floodplain based upon the current effective FEMA floodplain maps.The total number of parcels in the current FEMA effective floodplain is 574 which includes 534 structures with a total assessed value of$1,274,871,700 including$728,598,400 in improvement value. FEMA is in the process of updating the floodplain maps for King County including Renton.This update will significantly increase the amount of area within the FEMA floodplain in Renton in the Green River Valley area.This is due to the fact that FEMA does not recognize the Green River levee system as providing 100-year flood level protection, since the levees are not certified levees. Figure 6.3 shows Renton's critical facilities overlaid with areas at risk for flooding. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-9 December 2011 � � Figure 6.3 Critical Facilities Overlaid with Flood Hazards ♦ _ �� i-' ,� � � �a (, �_ , !;'. � HAZARQ CQNDITION , � :�: . t. . < - �., �' ; - ��:r Flood: .. , __ , .` ; � � r" _ _ , •,... .. � -� �� ' �` i „�r �, � (; ' . r=�� r '��.�.�� '� � �� , ----�� ' � �"` '`� �' � ��-� -� ' ��'°`'T�,/�i" j' � s �� In ��; '�`��E��. � , ''• �``.�` ��" l.«'"�I /f'�;r�, . � � H _t..� r,,. ` � � YG� ��Et{,h(�' +� �t .E�, i .��,� � f�"� �"�` � '� �i� 7 � .� ;� i � �` . - ,; - � : � � �� i , ti; , �. . .. � �'�' � �..�„ � � .. '""''...�,,:::.�,.,\ ', II$ �„ P,.. ' . ""T�-r�.�r. . �V, r" __�I� `'`� /` � ... � p P. �„ ��.._'--_�. , .i_;"�I . , _� '=.�`i..� ; ��_�__� -� �. �� f; ` !� . ; _ ' .� 6 �r,��'f #� `.� ; � i I _��tr. �. �s *wy"-'�4'.�/ �� `� - _ I ;�` � �. ,y'�`f '.�. � • �,,�,�,F � �,,�,� _.... L__� y +, ;r ,,� �,< `1 . �� .�r..r °.��`.�>�`. �',� ��-� ,.��.. � � ,�.� �'r�,.��"'�i`� " ��'` •\ - �A"��,... ^�� r,f',�'��, �--�� - � �' '" ' �' I .Jr '�'' l' +"� � F �� xF �. � 1N� �- '"' �� " •��.�',1�.r��,l� � P � ',` �'L� �, �.' � i ..=� Y T� ��, ,`� . ..., +Y,.:,� f" n _ _ � r,✓ � _..r""",,_J � . ,,,• +'`�j ��:a � �,y �f � j ,— _,,�' �� . ^ • +� — -------' :' �;y � .,✓ �"-�'�' � �. z I ;� ,p� _ ! ��, 1 ��, �1`� � � ..�j�.��. F � � ��,� ' > `✓ � ";'^� �- �r �'' � � �, r` :�''' s � � i � s � t , ��....� '�; r � I �,.�: ''�'��^�; <,� .� �;�,.�' ,r,.�f �. ...:s; 4�:� � '��+'\, 4 � f✓ .. � � f;�r � / e '�, � F r{y�� l �� 9�: l ` '��✓' „' "4 � / ✓�' F ��f � '� 4 . f,`�� ` `�°1'`�: �l� ��- ; `` ;r��`rt-.E'�' .s;r� �;rj','�r i_ ..... _--- {,'+ � r f � 4 �':..J' ,�`i �� + .K.J6; i � informatian Technology-GIS ----t - �rinted an 43tQ312010 �____� ��f}+'Of��fl�OtT � po(iCe Departmeht � SGhOo(S . �afs Saurces:Cky af Renio[�,Kin�Gau:,w '7?��c,vmen[sa+arapw��represeMxlnn.eatgiiarar�eetl� � Fire 5tations �"' ��'p�ant 4^survcy ucsmavt m�.n Wisc•C on t":c beu inf�matio-n � (� y{ ��/ { YVSII�L�e'��diflEtl81Yb4:CN'fl.Th4..�O5p176S,yed�3r - xw:�we_ JealUe YY�t L�� rt�°'sqaYp:up°x'°"i. .,��,�,y. Army Reserve Centet � . Sewer �,, � Productian Welts � ��of , Olympie Pipelines _.....,. �� " � " f '> �'� ,'} � lNater tJtilityr Res$rvair � _ .�r.. .. ,��.� _r High Pressure Gas Line � Vafley Medical Cenler City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-10 December 2011 � � The critical facilities in the mapped floodplain are comprised of: • Fire Station 14, • the sewer lift station, • 4 water production wells, • 10 water monitoring wells and • 8 water utility structures. The floodplain is crossed by high pressure gas lines, sewer lines and the Olympic pipeline. Roadways in the Renton portion of the Green River Valley, including Lind Avenue SW, Oakesdale Avenue SW, SW 41�Street, SW 43�d Street and East Valley Road, would be impacted by flooding. In the event of Cedar River flooding the critical facilities impacted would be the Maplewood Golf Course and the multiple City owned trails and facilities along the river.The following bridges would be subject to damages and road blockages: Houser, Bronson, Williams, Wells and Logan Avenue. 6.5.2 Flood Insurance Data FEMA's National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) maintains a nationwide database of flood insurance policies and repetitive loss properties.The City of Renton has no properties on FEMA's national repetitive loss or severe repetitive loss lists. FEMA records indicate three paid claims in Renton since 1978,for a total of $21,175. The City of Renton has participated in FEMA's Community Rating System since 1992 and currently holds a class 6 rating.There are currently 613 flood insurance policies in Renton, 71 of which are written for properties in the current floodplain. The total premium paid in Renton is $497,927,with an average premium of$783. The average premium would be approximately$1,100 without Renton's class 6 CRS rating.The City's Class 6 rating is due to the adoption of floodplain development regulations that exceed the minimum NFIP standards, such as elevating structures to be 1-foot above the base flood elevation and requiring compensatory flood storage for filling in the floodplain.The City also gets credits for other programs that reduce flood risks and control runoff that are managed through the Surface Water Utility and other departments.The other programs include the Surface Water Utility storm system maintenance program, public education and outreach;floodplain mapping and critical area mapping; and open space acquisition of areas within the floodplain. NFIP insured properties are often given high priority for flood mitigation actions such as elevation or acquisitions (which are always voluntary and at the owner's discretion). City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-11 December 2011 � � Table 6.2 below details further NFIP information. Table 6.2 NFIP Information for Renton Regular Entry Current Map Last CAV Date Total Policies in Total Insurance in Date Date Force Force 5/5/1981 5/16/1995 4/7/2010 613 $202,060,800 6.5.3 Flood Damage Estimates � To quantify the level of flood hazard for properties in the FEMA floodplain, it is necessary to determine the elevations of these structures. Only by determining the first floor elevation of each of these flood prone structures can the level of flood hazard be calculated accurately. Acquiring such elevation data is recommended as a high priority. Similarly, acquiring elevation data for additional structures within the 500-year flood plain as well as in other flood-prone areas outside of mapped floodplains would greatly increase the accuracy of hazard, inventory and vulnerability assessments. The most accurate structure elevations (first floor elevations) are those determined accurately by surveying. Flood insurance certificates generally include survey elevation data.Absent survey data useful estimates of elevations for structures can generally be made by reference to elevations of nearby structures or public infrastructure with surveyed elevation data. In addition to elevation data, quantifying the level of risk faced by these structures requires basic data about each structure, including square footage, number of stories, with or without basement, and information on the type and function of the structure. As noted above, some areas of Renton outside of the mapped floodplains are also subject to relatively high levels of flood risk.To quantify the level of flood risk posed by these areas, historical data should be compiled to determine frequency and severity of flooding. Severity of flooding can include estimates of past damages, if available, and/or simple narratives reporting whether the flooding in a given area is limited to street flooding, and/or affects yards or buildings as well. In 1995, prior to the construction of the Lower Cedar River Section 205 Flood Hazard Reduction project that included dredging and construction of levees and floodwalls along the lower 1.25 miles of the Cedar River,the Corps of Engineers conducted a study of the public and private buildings, infrastructure and economic impacts to business that would be affected from a 100 year flood event on the Cedar River. Based upon the 1995 channel conditions and in 1995 dollars, approximately$8 million in annual damages could have resulted under the City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-12 December 2011 � � "without projecY'condition. Most of the damages would result on the Renton Municipal Airport and the Boeing 737 Renton Plant site. FEMA's HAZUS regional Ioss estimation software was used to assess the likely damages in Renton from a Cedar River 100 year flood event. Summary results from the HAZUS report are shown below in Table 6.3. Table 6.3 Scenario Flood Impacts on Renton Scenario Flood Return Period 100 Damages &Other Losses $24.39 million Sheltering 473 people Debris Generated 2,261 tons The HAZUS report is available in Appendix 3. 6.6 Common Flood Mitigation Projects Potential mitigation projects to reduce the potential for future flood losses cover a wide range of possibilities. For any of the mapped flood sources, it would be theoretically possible to reduce future flood losses by improving existing levees or flood walls and/or by adding new levees or floodwalls. Flood losses could also, in principle, be reduced by adding additional upstream storage (dams or detention basinsj. In practice, however, such projects are often very expensive and have a host of environmental and other regulatory hurdles. For areas of Renton subject to flooding from storm water drainage,various improvements to water drainage systems may be desirable.Typical improvements include upgrades to the size of drainage ditches or storm water drainage pipes as well as upgrades to pumping capacity(for pumped portions of drainage systems) or construction of local detention ponds. Making storm system improvements to reduce flooding and adopting new surface water design standards to better control the flow of runoff from new development, re-development and construction sites will help prevent existing flooding problems from getting worse, avoid new flooding and protect the water quality and habitat in the City. For critical facilities at low elevations with high flood risk, construction of berms (raised barriers) or floodwalls to protect the facilities may be desirable. For residential, commercial or public facilities at high flood risk, elevation of structures is a mitigation action. For structures at very high flood risk acquisition and demolition are potential mitigation options. Elevation and acquisition (especially) are expensive mitigation options that are generally not cost-effective unless the levels of flood hazard and flood risk are rather high.These mitigation options are most attractive for structures deep in the flood plain (i.e., with first floors below the 10-, or 20-,or 30-year flood elevations). For structures outside of mapped City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-13 December 2011 � � floodplains, elevation or acquisition would likely be cost-effective only for structures with a strong history of major, repetitive flood losses. For structures near the fringe of the 100-year flood plain, near the 100-year flood level, or with some history of repetitive flood losses, various small scale flood loss reduction measures such as elevation of furnaces and utilities may be desirable. The following table,Table 6.4 Flood Mitigation Items, includes flood mitigation action items from the Master Action Items Table in Chapter 4. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-14 December 2011 3 r ,v,, � � � Q � �`o a Q a W v Z a � Flood Mitigation Action Items: Within FEMA-Mapped Floodpiains Complete an inventory of structures,critical facilities Short-Term and important transportation or utility system Community Services(for City 1-2 Years X X LOC81 �1 components within mapped floodplains,including facilities�, Public Works FundS elevation tlata and structure/facility information, Local Identify and implement cost-effective mitigation Fut1dS, Long-Term measures for high risk structures,with the highest Communiry Services(for City On oin X X Ceplt8l #1 priorityfor critical facilities,transportation and utility facilities�, PublicWorks g g Funds, � components, Grant Funtls Identify and implement measures and policies to Long•Term increase Renton's Community Rating System score to Community and Economic Ongoing X X X LOC81 �Z retluce flood insurance rates, Development,Public Works FundS Continue to be a member of the National Flood Insurance Program to enable property owners in long-Term Renton to purchase flood insurance from FEMA and public Works Ongoing X X X LOC81 #3 ailow the City to receive flood disaster funding to Funds repair damages due to flooding following a federally declared disaster, � Continue to require new construction of structures in the floodplain to be constructed in accordance with Long•Term FEMA standards antl the National Flood Insurance Community and Economic On oin X X X X LOC81 #4 Program requirements,including requiring Development,Public Works g g Funds compensatory floodplain storage for filling of the floodplain, City of Renton Hatard Mitigation Plan 6-15 December 2011 implement the Reasonable and Prudent Measures Long-Term identified in the NOAA Fisheries Biological Opinion Community and Economic On oin X X X X LOC81 #5 regartling fEMA's National Flood Insurance Program Development,Public Works g g Funds as required by fEMA, Continue to enforce,maintain and update the long-Term Community and Economic LOC21 Renton Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Ongoing X X X �6 Master Program requirements, Development,Public Works Funds Continue to perform maintenance dredging, long-Term maintenance of floodwalls and levees associated Community and Economic LOC81 #7 with the Army Corps of Engineers Cedar River Development,Public Works Ongoing X X x Funds, Section 205 Flood Hazard Reduction Project, USACE � Coniinue to implement the Surface Water Utility � programs related to flood haiard management, Long-Term which include the Capital Improvement Program, Community and Economic On oin X X X LOC81 �8 engineering program,maintenance and operations Development,Public Works g g Funds program,public education and customer service programs, Adopt storm water design standards equivalent to the Ecology 2005 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington to better eontrol the Long-Term quantity and quality of storm water runoff from new Community and Economic On oin X X X X LOCeI #9 construction and redevelopment projects and meet Development,Public Works g g Funds the requirement of the Phase II National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)permit requirements. Integrate flood hazard reduction with other � objectives related to water quality protection, Long-Term habitat protection and habitat restoration efforts Community and Economic On oin X X Local #10 including complying with the Clean Water Act NPDES Development,Public Works g g Funds Phase II permit,the Endangered Species Act and the regional salmon recovery efforts, City of Renton Hatard Mitigation Plan 6•16 December 2011 _ .. . ... . . , . . . . . . r � L - �. ` . � a Long-Term Continue to be consistent with the King County Flood Community and Economic Ongoing X X X X X X Local #11 Hazard Reduction Plan, Development,Public Works Funds Continue to participate in the King County Flood Long-Term Warning System and the King Counry Flood Control Community and Economic Ongoing X X X X X X LOC81 #12 Zone District. Development,Public Works FU11dS Continue to be a member of the fEMA Communiry long-Term Rating System that enables property owners to Community and Economic Ongoing X X X LOC81 #13 obtain flood insurance at a reduced rate. Development,Public Works FUI1dS Long-Term Re-evaluate future land use and zoning designations Community and Economic On oin X X X LOC81 #14 in FEMA mapped 100-year floodplain areas. Development,Puhlic Works g g Funds � Flood Mitigation Action Items: Outside of FEMA-Mapped Floodplains Complete an inventory of structures,critical facilities Short-Term and important transportation or utility system Community Services(for City 1-2 Years X LOC81 #1 components in locations with a history of severe or facilities�, Public Works Funtls repetitive flooding. Evaluate and improve notification,evacuation and LOC81 Short-Term fire&Emergency Services,Police, #Z response planning for areas within the potential public Works 1-Year X X X X X X Funds inundation area for failure of the Hanson Dam, For locations with repetitive flooding and significant Long-Term damages or road closures,determine and implement Local � Public Works,Community Services Ongoing X X X X #1 mitigation measures such as upsizing culverts or Funds storm water drainage capacity. City of Renton Haiard Mitigation Plan 6-17 December 2011 a ` �. W v Z a � Dam Safety Mitigation Actian Items Maintain copies of high resolution maps of dam Short•Term failure inundation areas and update emergency Fire&Emergency Services,Police, LOC81 #1 response plan,including public notification and Public Works Ongoing X X K Funds evacuation routes, Research seismic vulnerability assessments for Short-Term Howard Hanson Dam and Chester Morse Dam and Fire&Emergency Services Ongoing X X X LOC81 #2 lobby dam owners to make seismic improvements as Funds necessary. � � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 6-18 December 2011 �,,,' r.W+" 7.0 WINTER STORMS 7.1 Overview Winter storms affecting Renton are generally characterized by a combination of heavy rains and high winds throughout the City and surrounding areas, sometimes with snowfall, especially at higher elevations. Heavy rains can result in localized or widespread flooding, debris slides and landslides. High winds commonly result in tree falls which primarily affect the electric power system, but may also affect roads, buildings and vehicles. Winter storms may also result in significant ice accumulation, which primarily affect the electric power system and transportation.This chapter deals primarily with the rain, wind, snow and ice effects of winter storms. (Larger scale flooding is addressed in Chapter 6.) The frequency, severity and impacts of other severe weather events, including severe thunderstorms, hail, lightning strikes and tornadoes are generally negligible or minor for Renton, compared to winter storm effects.Thusly,these types of events are not considered further. Winter storms can affect the area directly with damages in Renton, or indirectly through damage outside the City that affects transportation and/or utility services (especially electric power). Historically, Renton has often been subject to both direct and indirect impacts of winter storms. The winter storms that affect Renton are typically large cyclonic low pressure systems moving from the Pacific Ocean that usually affect large areas of Washington and/or the whole Pacific Northwest. They are not typically local events affecting small geographic areas in the City. The three most recent major winter storm events affecting Renton occurred in December 2008—January 2009, December 2006 and December 1996—January 1997. The 1996-1997 winter storms started with two days of heavy snow and ice, with over eight inches of snow. Large numbers of tree falls resulted in failures of power lines and widespread outrages which affected over 120,000 Puget Sound Electric customers.The second phase of the storm included heavy rain which, combined with snow melt, resulted in widespread flooding on small streams and major rivers, including the Cedar River.There were numerous landslides throughout the Puget Sound area although none occurred in Renton. The 2006 Windstorm resulted in numerous and prolonged power outages,felled trees, blocked roads, downed power lines and damaged homes, necessitating the setup of an emergency shelter for a number of Renton residents. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-1 December 2011 � � The December 2008 storm was characterized by several serial snowfall events. Very little damaged occurred but high overtime and equipment costs were incurred during snow removal. Some residents were snowbound and experienced difficulty in getting their basic needs met. 7Z Rain Hazard Data Severe winter storms in Renton often include heavy rainfall.The potential impact of heavy rainfall depends on both the total inches of rain and the intensity of rainfall (inches per hour or inches per day). In the context of potential flooding, "rainfall" also includes the rainfall equivalent from snow melt. Flash floods, which are produced by episodes of intense heavy rains(usually six hours or less), or dam breaks are rare in Renton (and western Washington) but do represent a potential meteorological hazard. Larger drainage basins like the Cedar or Green River typically have longer response times.The total rainfall amounts (plus snow melt) over several days or more are what determines the peak level of flooding along large rivers like these.Smaller rivers and larger streams may reach flooding levels in several hours or up to a day or two. Smaller, local drainage basins may reach peak flooding rainfall totals over a period of an hour to a few hours. Renton annual rainfall data are summarized in Table 7.1 below. Table 7.1 Renton Rainfall Data Average Annual Lowest Annual Highest Annual period of Location Precipitation Precipitation Precipitation Record (inches) (inches) (inches) SEA-TAC 38.09 23.78 (1952) 55.14 (1950) 1931-2006 Western Regional Climate Center website: www.wrcc.dri.edu Average annual rainfall amounts are moderately high in Renton, about 38 inches per year.As shown above,there are also substantial variations in annual rainfall from year to year. The rainfall data shown in Table 7.1 gives a general overview of the potential for winter storm flooding in Renton, but whether or not flooding occurs at specific sites depends heavily on specific local rainfall totals during individual storms and local drainage conditions. For example, 3" of rain in one area may cause no damage at all,while 3" of rain in a nearby area may cause road washouts and flooding of buildings. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-2 December 2011 ir.+' �.✓y For Renton, identification of specific sites subject to localized flooding during winter storms is based on historical occurrences of re�petitive flooding events during past winter storm events. Most of these sites affect roads rather than buildings. A list of some of the most problematic sites for localized flooding in Renton is given below: 1) 200 Mill Ave. S.: Old City Hall-51,OOOsq.ft. 2) Renton Community Center: 1715 Maple Valley Hwy. (Potential Shelter) 36,OOOsq.ft. 3j Renton Senior Activity Center: 211 Burnett Ave. N., (Potential Shelter) 22,150sq.ft. 4) Carco Theatre: 1717 Maple Valley Hwy., (Potential Shelter) 11,090sq.ft. 5) Monroe Avenue NE and NE Second Street 6) NE Fourth Street Crossings 7) Lincoln Avenue NE Culvert 8) Rainier Avenue Pump Station 9) Puget Drive SE at Rolling Hills Avenue Culverts 7.3 Snow and Ice Hazard Data for Renton Winter storms can also involve ice and snow in Renton.The most likely impact of snow and ice events in Renton are road closures limiting access/egress to/from some areas, especially higher elevations. Winter storms with heavy wet snow or high winds and ice storms may also result in power outages from downed transmission lines and/or poles. Average annual snowfalls in Renton are generally low, shown below in Table 7.2. Table 7.2 Snowfall Data for Renton(SEA-TAC Data) Average Annual Lowest Annual Highest Annual Period of Location Snowfall Snowfall (inches) Snowfal (inches) Record (inches) SEA-TAC 11.80 0.00 (man ears) 67.5 1968-1969) 1931-2006 Western Regional Climate Center website: www.wrcc.dri.edu Average snowfall in Renton is relatively Iow, only about 12 inches,with some years experiencing no snowfall. However, the maximum annual snowfall in Renton City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-3 December 2011 � � was 67.5 inches in 1968-1969. In addition, snowfall was 63.6 inches in 1949-50, with seven other years recording more than 20 inches. In addition to snow events, Renton is also subject to ice storm and freezing rain events. However, the National Climatic Data Center(NCDC) database shows only one freezing rain event for King County between 1950 and 2006. Website addresses for NCDC and the state and county storm event databases are: • www.ncdc.noaa.�ov and • http•//www4 ncdc noaa �ov/c�i-win/wwc�i.dll?wwevent"'storms. Probabilistic ice storm data showing ice thicknesses with return periods from SO years to 400 years are given in a recent American Lifelines Alliance report: Extreme Ice Thicknesses from Freezing Rain (2004). The 50-year return ice thickness map shows about 0.25 inches for Renton.The 400-year ice thicknesses for Renton are about 0.5 inches. Using ice thickness scaling relationships, ice thicknesses for 25-year and 10-year ice storms in Renton would be about 0.185 inches and about 0.125 inches, respectively. For Renton, ice thicknesses in a 50-year or more severe event are high enough to cause widespread significant damage, especially to trees and utility lines, with the possibility for widespread power outages. Smaller events would likely result in minor damages to trees and utility lines with localized power outages. 7.4 Wind Hazard Data Wind speeds associated with winter storms vary depending on meteorological conditions, but also vary spatially depending on local topography. For Renton, given the limited topographic relief,the wind hazard levels are relatively uniform across the City. The design wind speed for construction of new buildings in the greater Seattle area is based on a three second gust of 85 miles per hour, the 50-year return period wind speed.Typically,three second gusts are roughly 30%higher than the sustained wind speed. Using the scaling algorithm used for building design, probabilistic wind hazards for Renton are shown below in Figure 7.1. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-4 December 2011 `�" �w.�+° Figure 7.1 Probabilistic Wind Hazard Data for Renton 140 � 130 � ; E 12� ... 110 # t a s � 100 3 c7 90 �o � � U HO N ' � M �� 6� ! 50 '; 40 1 10 100 1000 10000 Return Period(years) 7.5 Winter Storm Risk Assessment Winter rain, snow, ice and wind storms may affect both infrastructure and buildings. Localized flooding from winter storms commonly affect the transportation system, especially roads. Severe winter storms may result in numerous road closures due either to washouts or the depth of water on road surfaces.Such localized flooding may also affect buildings in the flooded areas. The most common effect of snow and ice storms are disruption of transportation. However, more severe events may results in tree falls and damages to above ground utility lines, with the possibility of widespread power outages. Wind impacts from winter storms arise primarily from tree falls,which may affect vehicles and buildings, but whose primary impact is often on utility and power lines. Wind damages may result in widespread downing of trees or tree limbs with resulting widespread downing of utility lines. Such tree-fall induced power outages primarily affect the local electric distribution system, because transmission system cables are generally less prone to tree fall damage because of design and tree-trimming maintenance. City of Renton Nazard Mitigation Plan 7-5 December 2011 � � Table 7.3 Probable Impacts of Winter Storms on Rentonl Invento Probable Im acts Entire City may be affected by road closures or loss of electric Portion of Renton Affected power;otherwise direct damages to buildings and infrastructure are likei to be localized and relativel minor Buildings Isolated minor damage from tree falls,wind or heavy snow loads;a few buildin s ma be affected b localized flood dama e Road closures due to tree falls and flooding;limited impact because Streets of short detour routes within communities Potential closures of some roads and major highways due to snow, Roads to/from Renton localized flooding and tree falls. Road closures from landslides or debris flow also likel near Renton. Loss of electric power may be localized or widespread due to tree Electric Power falls on local distribution lines or very widespread if transmission lines fail. Other Utilities Generally minor or no impacts on other utilities from winter storms, exce t for ossible effects of loss of electric ower Potential for casualties(deaths and injuries)from tree falls or contact Casualties with downed ower lines or from traffic accidents. 1These winter storm impacts include localized flooding and the effects of wind,snow and ice. For more quantitative risk assessment of localized flooding and wind damages arising from winter storms,the best approach is to systematically gather data on sites where damages occurred repetitively due to localized flooding or wind damages. By documenting(and mapping using GIS) the sites of repetitive damage events, along with the type and cost of damages and losses,the most seriously impacted sites can be clearly identified. Repetitive loss sites with significant damages would be likely candidates for future mitigation actions. Based on the location and historical information available, Renton has the potential to experience a winter storm every year. Records of the impact and places of repetitive damage have not been kept by the City of Renton to allow for GIS mapping and further assessment.The development of the Office of Emergency Management and incorporation of hazard mitigation planning into City planning will allow for advanced recordkeeping and advanced estimates of winter storm risks in the next edition of this plan. 7.6 Mitigation of Winter Storm Impacts Potential mitigation projects for winter storms may address any of the aspects of such storms, including rain,flood, winds, snow and/or ice. For winter storm flooding,the mitigation measures discussed in Chapter 6 (Floods) for flooding due to local storm water drainage systems are exactly the mitigation measures for the flood aspects of winter storms. Common mitigation projects include: upgrading storm water drainage systems, construction of detention City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-6 December 2011 � '� basins and structure-specific mitigation measures(acquisition, elevation and flood-proofing)for flood-prone buildings. For roads subject to frequent winter storm flooding, possible mitigation actions include elevation of the road surface and improved local drainage. For utilities subject to frequent winter storm flooding, possible mitigation actions include improved local drainage and elevation or relocation of the vulnerable utility elements to non-flood prone areas nearby. For wind effects of winter storms, the most common and effective mitigation action is to increase tree trimming, because a high percentage of wind damage to utilities, buildings, vehicles and people arises from tree falls. However, economic, political and aesthetic realities place limits on tree trimming as a mitigation action. Future wind storm damage in Renton could be almost eliminated by cutting down all large trees along roads or in populated areas. Obviously, such an extreme mitigation measure is neither practical nor desirable. Effective tree trimming mitigation programs focus on limited areas where tree falls have a high potential to result in major damages and economic losses. High priority areas include: 1) Transmission lines providing electric power to the area. 2) Major trunk lines providing the backbone of the electric power distribution system within the area. 3) Distribution lines for electric power to critical facilities in the area. 4) Specific circumstances where falling of large trees poses an obvious threat to damage buildings and/or people or close major transportation arteries. Mitigation measures for snow and ice are limited, although tree trimming efforts, discussed above under wind, also reduce the impact of snow and ice on trees, roads, and utility lines. For the most part, dealing with snow and ice storms are dependent on proper planning, response and recovery actions. The following table,Table 7.4 Winter Storm Mitigation Action Items, contains winter storm mitigation action items from the Master Action Item Table in Chapter 4. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-7 December 2011 - Nian�oais Naaressea �o � �o ` v c � � � � v o ` N > > � v v � a � a a�i o � Funding Haiard Action Item Coordinating Organizations 7imeline � � a , r .- �oc v '� 3 �, o ,� �, � c . � � Source Q � � � v01 � �G '� d C � LL � O L � a «'c m o'. o a W a� Z a � Winter Storms Mitigation Action Items Short-Term Enhance tree trimming efforts especially for PSE,Community Services PSE� #1 transmission lines and trunk distribution lines. (secondary support� Ongoing X X z Local . Funds Short-Term Encourage property owners to trim trees near . PSE,Community Services PSE, � #2 service drops to individual customers. (secondary support) Ongoing X X X X LOC81 Funds Ensure that all critical Gty facilities in Renton have PSE� Long-Term sufficient backup power antl emergency operations Community Services 5 Years X X X LOC81 #1 plans to deal with power outages. Funds Consider upgrading lines and poles to improve wind�ice loading,undergrounding critical lines,and pSE Community Services PSE' Long-Term#2 adding interconnect switches to allow alternative �secondary support) 5 Years X X X LOC81 feed paths and disconnect switches to minimize Fut1dS outage areas. , long•Term Encourage new developments to include Community antl Economic on oin X X X X �OC81 #3 underground power lines. Development g g Funds � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 7-8 December 2011 � �� 8.0 EARTHQUAKES The greater Seattle area, including Renton, is one of the most seismically active areas in the United States.The area is subject to large earthquakes on the Cascadia Subduction Zone and on several nearby crustal fault systems.The greater Seattle area has experienced three significant earthquakes in the past 60 years: • 2001 Nisqually Earthquake, Magnitude 6.8, 1 death, 407 injuries, about$2 billion in damages. • 1965 South Puget Sound Earthquake, Magnitude 6.5, 6 deaths, about$100 million in damages (2006 dollars). • 1949 South Puget Sound Earthquake, Magnitude 7.1, 8 deaths, about$300 million in damages (2006 dollars). Although the above earthquakes caused significant damages, more damaging earthquakes are possible on the Cascadia Subduction Zone with magnitudes up to 9.0 as well as on the Seattle Fault which passes directly through highly developed areas. Before reviewing the levels of seismic hazard and seismic risk in Renton, we first present a brief earthquake "primer"that reviews some basic earthquake concepts and terms. 8.1 Earthquake Primer An earthquake is located by its epicenter-the location on the earth's surface directly above the point of origin of the earthquake. Ground shaking may not necessarily be stronger at the epicenter, depending on the geology of the area and the nature of the waves generated by the seismic rupture. The magnitude (M) describes the relative size of the earthquake. In the popular press, an earthquake is still sometimes described in terms of its magnitude on the Richter scale. Scientists no longer rely on that scale, which does not adequately define all aspects of earthquake magnitude, but rather quantify it using several different magnitude measures.The details of those different measures are beyond the scope of this discussion and will be referred to simply as magnitude. It is important to recognize that the magnitude scales are not linear, but rather logarithmic.A M8 earthquake is not twice as powerful as a M4, but rather thousands of times more powerful. A M7 earthquake releases about 30 times more energy that a M6, while a M8 releases about 30 times more energy than a M7 and so on.Thus, M8 earthquakes may release thousands of times more energy as do moderate earthquakes in the M5 or M6 range. The public often assumes that the larger the magnitude of an earthquake, the "worse"the earthquake. Thus, the "big one" is the M8 or M9 earthquake and City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-1 December 2011 � � smaller earthquakes(M6 or M7) are not. This is true only in very general terms. Larger magnitude earthquakes do affect larger geographic areas, with much more widespread damage than smaller magnitude earthquakes. However,for a given site,the magnitude of an earthquake is not a good measure of the severity of the earthquake at that site.The intensity of ground shaking at the site is a better measure and is dependent upon the magnitude of the earthquake,the depth of the earthquake, and geological factors at the location of the observer. Earthquakes at or below MS are not likely to cause significant widespread damage. Earthquakes between about M5 and M6 are likely to cause some damage at the point of greatest intensity, with the extent of damage typically being relatively minor. Earthquakes of about M6.5 or greater can cause major damage (e.g., Nisqually), with damage usually concentrated fairly near the epicenter. Larger earthquakes of M7+can cause damage over increasingly wider geographic areas with the potential for very high levels of damage near the epicenter. Great earthquakes with M8+can cause major damage over wide geographic areas. For example, a M8+on the Cascadia Subduction Zone could affect the entire Pacific Northwest from British Columbia, through Washington and Oregon, and as far south as Northern California. The intensity of ground shaking varies not only as a function of magnitude and distance but also is affected by soil types. Soft soils may amplify ground motions and increase the level of damage.Thus,for any given earthquake there will be contours of varying intensity of ground shaking.The intensity will generally decrease with distance from the earthquake, but often in an irregular pattern, reflecting soil conditions (amplification) and possible directionality in the dispersion of earthquake energy. There are many measures of the severity or intensity of earthquake ground motions. A very old, but still sometimes used, scale is the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale (MMI) a descriptive, qualitative scale that relates severity of ground motions to types of damage experienced. MMIs range from I to XII. More useful, modern intensity scales use terms that can be physically measured with seismometers,such as the acceleration, velocity or displacement (movement) of the ground.The most common physical measure, and the one used in the Renton Mitigation Plan, is Peak Ground Acceleration or PGA. PGA is a measure of the intensity of shaking, relative to the acceleration of gravity(g). For example, 1.0 g PGA in an earthquake (an extremely strong ground motion) means that objects accelerate sideways at the same rate as if they had been dropped from the ceiling. 10%g PGA means that the ground acceleration is 10%that of gravity and so on. Damage levels experienced in an earthquake vary with the intensity of ground shaking and with the seismic capacity of structures. Ground motions of only 1%or City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-2 December 2011 � � 2%g are widely felt by people; hanging plants and lamps swing strongly, but damage levels, if any, are minimal. Ground motions below about 10%g usually cause only slight damage. Ground motions between about 10%g and 30%g may cause minor to moderate damage in well-designed buildings, with higher levels of damage in poorly designed buildings. At this level of ground shaking only unusually poorly designed buildings would be subject to potential collapse. Ground motions above 30%g may cause significant damage in well-designed buildings and very high levels of damage (including collapse) in poorly designed buildings. Ground motions above about 50%g may cause high levels of damage in most buildings, even those designed to resist seismic forces. 8.2 Seismic Hazards for Renton Earthquakes in Washington State, and throughout the world, occur predominantly because of plate tectonics-the relative movement of plates of oceanic and continental rocks that make up the rocky surface of the earth. Earthquakes can also occur because of volcanic activity and other geologic processes. The Cascadia Subduction Zone is a geologically complex area off the Pacific Northwest coast from Northern California to British Columbia. In simple terms, several pieces of oceanic crust (the Juan de Fuca Plate, Gorda Plate and other smaller pieces) are being subducted (pushed under)the crust of North America. This subduction process is responsible for most of the earthquakes in the Pacific Northwest as well as for creating the volcanoes in the Cascades. There are three source regions for earthquakes that can affect the Renton area: 1) "interface" earthquakes on the boundary between the subducting oceanic plates and the North American plate, 2) "intraslab" or"intraplate" earthquakes within the_subducting oceanic plates, and 3) "crustal"earthquakes within the North American Plate. The "interface"earthquakes on the Cascadia Subduction Zone may have magnitudes of 8 or greater, with probable average recurrence intervals of 500 to 800 years.The last major earthquake in this source region occurred January 26, 1700, with an estimated magnitude of 9.0, based on current interpretations of Japanese tsunami records. Such earthquakes are the great Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake events that have received attention in the popular press.These earthquakes occur offshore from the Pacific Ocean coastline. Ground shaking from such earthquakes would be very strong near the coast and strong ground shaking would be felt throughout the greater Seattle area, including Renton. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-3 December 2011 � � The "intraslab" earthquakes, which are also called "intraplate" earthquakes, occur within the subducting oceanic plate. These earthquakes may have magnitudes up to about 7.5,with probable recurrence intervals of about 500 to 1000 years (recurrence intervals are poorly determined by current geologic data).These earthquakes occur quite deep in the earth, about 20 to 30 miles below the surface with epicenters that would likely range from near the Pacific Ocean coast to about 50 or 60 miles inland.The Nisqually earthquake was the most recent earthquake of this type. "Crustal" earthquakes within the North American plate are possible on faults that are mapped as active or potentially active as well as on unmapped (unknown) faults. The major crustal faults, mapped by the United States Geological Society, near Renton are shown below. Figure 8.1 Crustal Seattle Faults in the Greater Areal � z ,.,�_ � �' �-.��;.,`�- � ,. �� Yr�� y ��vv�� - ,;� r_ _•�,L �r" `^�' '� � -�� . �' ��,sp�` f d:�, " a �~' � �"� ��k,� .�9#oc -ti'-.,��,''v 3� � z �� '! � �.`a � "�: , ,� � ^•} g�' .� �t�� , � �•tlltesS Podi'U :�"�.-�'�:,.�ttle, pt �t'�"�-+.�.:...,....�Q�.��- � .r� `�� "r�~'--..,�•" � 2� ��,�� j`��'��1� £� � :� " � � t � �� +-� � ; �,:,: � � t. �� ,. :'�� .�,` ,r' � `. ti '�d � F F :}'� ��'��'�'ti`�. =� �� ^' �' �� Ti�e�� . ! }� W . � �« � ��f� � J �� : � �Y y��,,�'t'• � ��,�!,��,��'�,i� L � 1 � `�;�F � �`.t er .�„,�,' _ ��`ti `.""t""'�Y �dt{1FT1$�[S �,s ,�, i 1 Scenario for a Magnitude 6.7 Earthquake on the Seattle Fault(2005) The nearest crustal faults to Renton are the Seattle Fault Zone (SFZ) and the Tacoma Fault Zone (TFZ) shown on previous page.The SFZ, which runs from Seattle through Mercer Island to Bellevue, poses the greatest threat to Renton. The scenario earthquake study referenced above documents the expected levels of damages and casualties for a M6.7 earthquake on the Seattle Fault.The impacts for this earthquake scenario include more than 1,600 deaths, 24,000 injuries and $40 billion in damages.This earthquake would result in damages that greatly exceed that of the 2001 Nisqually earthquake. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-4 December 2011 �` � According to the peer-reviewed evidence that forms the basis of the 2008 version of the USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps used below,there is a 14%chance that in the next 50 years, the entire length of the Cascadia Subduction Zone (Cape Mendocino to Vancouver Island) will rupture in a magnitude 9 earthquake. Figures 8.2 and 8.3 show the contours of seismic ground motions (in PGA as a percentage of"g" the acceleration of gravity) with a 10%and 2%chance of being exceeded in a 50-year time period, respectively. The values shown on the map are for rock sites; ground motions for soil sites will typically be higher. Figure 8.2 USGS 2008 Seismic Hazard Data (PGA,Yg,with a 10�chance of exceedance in 50 years) � 4�- �'�.� .� � � 'f', x * ;�� `�,; "��'��-��_, � �� i ",� � ��'��.� ��- � ��,�,, �_ �3' '��! P ! rk`f ��' ` �''�.:" ,,,"~ : � �';� Figure 8.3 �- ,� �' � USGS 2008 Seismic Hazard Data � f'' (PAG,�g,with a 2%chance of exceedance in �n ��;� '� 50 years) - ,�� _ ., . � j _ • � " ---� 4�✓'t'7 ..��- ..... . .... ... . .. . . �i�,�'` �~ �" ~-- 1 �� •} Z'.`��j.'F�p f � 1 ,... ,.. ��Y C..Y�'-� �€�so� �� . � .� �� ' o-� 6�,� ,�, � v � a fl ."� "� }�_. � .. .f I City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-5 December 2011 � � Work done since 2008 suggests that instead of one magnitude 9 earthquake, somewhat shorter segments of the subduction zone could rupture in magnitude 8-8.7 earthquakes.This idea will be considered more thoroughly by the USGS in the next version of the Hazard Maps, which are updated every 6 years. For Renton,the 10%and 2%in 50 year PGA values are approximately 30%g and 60%g, respectively.These levels of ground shaking are roughly three to six times higher than those experienced during the Nisqually earthquake. At these high levels of shaking, damages in Renton would be tremendously higher than those experienced in the Nisqually earthquake. Overall, the level of seismic hazard is very high for Renton. 8.3 Other Aspects of Seismic Hazards in Renton Most of the damage in earthquakes occurs due to ground shaking affects on buildings and infrastructure. However,there are several other aspects of earthquakes that can result in high levels of damage in localized sites: liquefaction, landslides, dam failures and tsunamis. 8.3.1 Liquefaction,Settlement, Lateral Spreading,Amplification Liquefaction is a process where loose, wet sediments lose strength during an earthquake and behave similarly to a liquid. Once a soil liquefies, it will tend to settle and/or spread laterally. With even very slight slopes, liquefied soils tend to move sideways downhill (lateral spreading). Settling or lateral spreading can cause major damage to buildings and to buried infrastructure such as pipes. Figure 8.4 on the following page shows areas in Renton where soil conditions suggest high probabilities of liquefaction, settlement, lateral spreading and/or amplification of earthquake ground motions.These areas of greater earthquake risk largely follow the main river and stream drainage channels; as these are areas with loose, wet sediments. Liquefaction does not occur in all areas or in all earthquakes. However, in larger earthquakes with strong ground shaking for a long duration shaking, liquefaction is likely in these areas.Settlements of a few inches or more and lateral spreads of a few inches to several feet are possible. Even a few inches of settlement or lateral spreading is likely to cause significant to major damage to affected buildings or infrastructure. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-6 December 2011 '�wrrw° � Figure 8.4 Areas in Renton with Increased Earthquake Risk due to Soil Conditions _ _ _ t, � _ . `. �. �,� �� +�'� � k� Y i � L,��f �� -§-.. �`�; '. .� f✓" � 1 +i i '�... � . ,� �, � `I i�,�_, �� ,� " ti _ ..,� �,. �'�,j + E,; �` � � � . _ �'w^^��s �j� i e^^ --� a..ia.w.ra»e:Rm r,1 ti.`a.� • ..`-7 '� �. ( _ ..��..,..,#._.f"..,.. '�'� 1 (E .�4Y �, s�.. � :�»*"�-.._t � r' '�l +t�R�+ 'l �`+ i �+'� :I it � it,'� y ��ta j#k' �'[ ;,a.� d '� '� .�..•: w.. .E . � , � . , � 4 ` � � •• ` ' l ,y � 1 � ��. � i� �.� � r � �. _ � ��i� 5��.� ' �� -` - � i , �}� J � r � �e £ 'r !�� y'' � � ' �� r= t� �' � � '•.�._ - �! f . r,� . .�... .. , �� - ._ �I ' �: � , � .,r � - � �..� � :... ��... _ l.. � ` ,a • j �{''3 �... �•_• � i � . �r�" � �{�� , p `. . � �� .. �^i� 1 . � � .r , - ^�-- �' ,:, '� r �.- �s, �°-, s �� .- , R „ � �`"� � _��,.__ �'�- � � �:1� � � -� � �� " i � ' 1,, �v; � `iv.� �°` � +�` — �� h=- s �� 5 � # _7{ � '� �� :. � � . . � f n,� _ 'i . ��X '� �.1 f: ��Ff!f I . . I,., +sr �� f � :i + �' . �.." . .� `.4t . .� — el . 4i � �-_� ,y---?'. .{ �� •r. y . z -. ;,� s�`�_-�"'�`S� .�� 4:� F h #s ��e `f' ,' ".e. �{. ,f _ + .f w� 1 7 . 1� 4' ' '�_ *�-. �,,.. �e^`_- _ . ... . j t �'_ 1 j rl � , . .�.. � . ....� . � t � r . ... , � i - , ` - � t � r . � ' _< - � , . , �{ , , • � � ; : � ' "��- f ,;�_ � _ `�' � � � �. , -�, �, _ a ��. � ,� ., � �, ' �»��A.,,h'1Clh t' . ��,. . . # �.n S }r �' k � . te - '�' � A:I 1' .,Y , -. -E R.� ( , �'� �, s i �'.=�� 1�. . t ..�4 ,��. , z�'�� ,� a� �__s:� - � J ��; ; �., - —k �p^� �E1�M1+� H�Z�F�D A�F�EA� /(,�y{µ`�,�j,/�'}'y�y��-^,��y\y�� TarinicalSarJ�ces� . � ..___...�,Rytms �.�7 4imin77Bu�i.' Ct,Wtkf 5 kt Ame,O Wa�rcar: 1+.i,�hls�itl January°2,2.1]p City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-7 December 2011 �` `'rrM� Figure 8.5 on the following page shows areas of high liquefaction risk overlaid with critical facilities.The following critical facilities are in areas considered to have moderate to high risk for liquefaction: • Fire Stations 11 and 14 • Sartori Education Center • Renton High School • St.Anthony's School • King County Metro SewerTreatment Plant • 7 Water Utility Production Wells . 99 Water Monitoring Wells In addition to these,the following critical facilities are in areas of low to moderate risk of liquefaction: Kennydale Elementary School and one Water Utility Production Well. 8.3.2 Landslides Earthquakes can also induce landslides, especially if an earthquake occurs during the rainy season and soils are saturated with water.The areas prone to earthquake-induced landslides are largely the same as those areas prone to landslides in general.Areas of steep slopes with loose rock or soils are most prone to earthquake-induced landslides. In the Nisqually Quake in 2001, a large landslide on the lones Road area temporarily blocked the Cedar River. Because of rapid reporting by a resident volunteer and the swift action of Public Works staff, flooding was narrowly averted.This slide also destroyed one single family residence. Figure 9.5 in Chapter 9 (Landslides) shows areas of Renton subject to earthquake- induced (and other) landslides. See Chapter 9 for further discussion of landslides. 8.3.3 Dam Failures Earthquakes can also cause dam failures in several ways.The most common mode of earthquake-induced dam failure is slumping or settlement of earth-fill dams where the fill has not been properly compacted. If the slumping occurs when the dam is full,then overtopping of the dam with rapid erosion leading to dam failure is possible. Dam failure is also possible if strong ground motions heavily damage concrete dams. In a few cases, earthquake induced landslides into reservoirs have caused dam failures.The Chester Morse Masonry Dam on the Cedar River and the Howard Hanson Dam on the Green River could potentially be affected by an earthquake. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-8 December 2011 � � Figure 8.5 Liquefaction Hazards Overlaid with Critical Facilities H��p CQr,;Ip(TI{7N �!' i �y I !`�` Liquefaction Susceptibi{ity ;�'. �µ � i,� i high �, ; <' j i ; maderate to hi�h � � � � � � � � '�� i � low#c� mQderate . c:`` � �j;, „ j, I •..; ,r i ,�" ,_ � �'� � �'--�_ ----��, "`� �• � '��_,� ,�j 1 -- ' 1 ` . �. t � l (-i �: ��' � f� �.-�.. �? � ,,�.�1, � - � � � Q i�'-� � ,� `L._� �Ie ! - i � � I � � - �_3 �4 ----( � �s f ,� - . � . �, ! �`� .._.,,, � r �� '��j � � �� `'°'�. �p �- ---a--� � -��.,,,, �IE r=- .�.1 -`�,_- ..�: •,.�, -- �'--- -- i_�--i A` ' t..,,� Q : y -�__C �' . � , , �: � ! �.,�_. 1 '-� � _ _ �_r_.� � 1 --, � � � � F . . � � -- �.r. i--� f� �-- - � " P y� _' �. !i. � . ;� . _ s_..yr'�� . y�. f : : �\ .. ( -. . F . Vr� ::ti� � . 'f t�� ' Ph '1?. � A 7 �. r * V~'`-.� . ♦ � . • � � . a t,.. � � � �. �.: • ' �� f-.._.' .'� *'4' ^r-�. . � � � i r � ��~��•�� ,, �'_��'.! __ J. .._ ; � � � 1 � � � . . � -oii.. . d � ..,.� � f . � � '+�_,��. \, � i:�. . � .S� ��. . :��.i � r..�.�} ��t,.. /�t -3..` . � � �� . . r., � `��-„� �t .� .. . .. �' �`��, � . �� t ; � � , F � .�- � /R� �.--�--------�_�_.... `� �� . ��. ..�� i # �� .. lnfarmatian Techno[ogy-Gi5 -`----t � � Schaols Rrinted an 03J03t2d90 �,__,� ��y af Renton Palice De artment � a�s�.c,y or�eM�,K�y c�,�uy � 4 rJletra Plant rna:anai.�v.h�g�nprosr,�mntmm�noro�em�e� FIf2$Y3tiO�tS wsun�+ax,:n�.a.asmx�.�rnecawinmm,mwn . . ..�>-. SeattleWaferlioe� a.dYs.hk at N Ilie.6m sy ewn'hii r.•ap rt wilenesd kr ,�.� G'ytlisFyY�'Po5�3��Y . A;tt� Army Reserve Center � Sevrer ��i -, � Production UVelfs �a�ymR��P�pe�ines _._ �� *.°a C� �' �' � � (: � Water Utitity Resenroir Nigh�'ressure Gas Line ,_. �.„,�._ ��_.� _ �] Valley Medical Genter City or Kenton nazara ivuugauon rian ts-y uecemoer 2011 � �' 8.3.4 Tsunamis and Seiches Tsunamis, which are often incorrectly referred to as "tidal waves," result from earthquakes which cause a sudden rise or fall of part of the ocean floor. Such movements may produce tsunami waves, which have nothing to do with the ordinary ocean tides. In the open ocean, far from land, in deep water,tsunami waves may be only a few inches high and thus be virtually undetectable, except by special monitoring instruments.These waves travel across the ocean at speeds of several hundred miles per hour. When such waves reach shallow water near the coastline, they slow down and increase in height. Tsunamis affecting the Washington coast can be produced from very distant earthquakes off the coast of Alaska or elsewhere in the Pacific Ocean. For such tsunamis, the warning time for the Washington coast would be at least several hours. However, interface earthquakes on the Cascadia Subduction Zone can also produce tsunamis and the warning times would be very short (only a few minutes). Because of this extremely short warning time, emergency planning and public education is essential before such an event occurs. Since the City is not located on the coast it would not be affected directly by tsunamis on the Washington coast. A tsunami affecting Puget Sound would have little effect on Lake Washington through the channel connecting the sound and the lake. A more significant earthquake related phenomenon is "seiches": waves from sloshing of inland bodies of waters such as lakes, reservoirs or rivers. In some cases, seiches have caused damages to shorefront structures and to dams. Areas of Renton near Lake Washington are subject to damage from seiches in the lake. The Seattle Office of Emergency Management website notes that a seiche in Lake Washington from the 1964 Alaska earthquake damaged boats in Lake Washington and that an 1891 earthquake near Port Angeles caused an eight-foot seiche in the lake. Boats, dock facilities and near-shore structures are at some risk from seiches. 8.4 Risk Assessment for Scenario Earthquakes Earthquake damage in Renton from the three significant earthquakes in the greater Seattle area in the past 60 years has been minor.The low level of damage in Renton in these earthquakes reflects the locations and magnitudes of the earthquakes. In any future earthquakes that are larger(i.e., Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquakes) or closer to Renton (i.e., earthquakes on the Seattle Fault) will result in damages in Renton far greater than we've seen before. Renton sustained minor damages restricted to masonry structures during the Nisqually Quake including: City Hall, Carco Theatre, Fire Stations 11 and 16, Public City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-10 December 2011 �.+�' �rr� Works Shops and the Main Library experiencing damages on the exterior walkways,foundation, interior stacks and suspended ceiling. FEMA's HAZUS regional loss estimation software was used to assess the likely damages in Renton from a crustal earthquake along the Seattle Fault. Summary results from HAZUS are shown below in Table 8.1.The Hazus report is available in Appendix 3. Table 8.1 Scenario Earthquake Impacts on Renton Scenario Earthquake � Parameter Seattle Fault Ma nitude 6.7 Latitude 47.59 Lon itude 122.19 Dama es $1,414.90 million Other Losses $370.88 million In"uries 769 Deaths 45 The probable impacts of major earthquakes on Renton vary with the magnitude and location of the earthquake. However, the following paragraphs summarize the likely impacts on Renton. For any major earthquake, the levels of damage will likely be greater in the soft soil, high-hazard areas shown Figure 8.4 compared to the rest of the City. Buildings The vulnerability of buildings depends on the structural system and the extent to which seismic design was incorporated into the building. Regardless of structural type, buildings with soft first stories, building on steep slopes and/or in areas subject to soil failures or landslide generally have higher damage levels.Table 8.2 below is the seismic inventory for the City of Renton buildings. It details year of construction and code compliance. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-11 December 2011 � � Table 8.2 City of Renton Public and Operational Facilities Seismic Inventory Facility Year of Construction Code Compliance City Hall 1988 Zone 4 Compliant 1055 S.Grady Way Retrofitted in 1998 Fire Station 11 1979 Zone 4 Compliant 211 Mill Ave. S. Completed in 2010 Fire Station 12 2004 Zone 4 Compliant 1209 Kirkland Ave. NE Fire Station 13 2007 Zone 4 Compliant 18002 108th Ave.SE Fire Station 14 1996 Zone 3 Compliant 1900 Lind Ave. SW Fire Station 16 1974 NA 12923 156th Ave.SE Fire Station 17 1970 NA 14810 SE Petrovisky Rd. Historical Museum 1939 NA 235 Mill Ave. S. Renton Community Center 1989 Zone 3 Compliant 1715 Maple Valley Hwy. Highlands Neighborhood 2000 Zone 4 Compliant Center 800 Edmonds Ave. NE North Highlands 1942 NA Neighborhood Center 3000 N E 16th St. Main Library 1967 NA 100 Mill Ave.S. Highlands Library 1973 NA 2902 NE 12`h St. Old City Hall 1968 NA 200 Mill Ave.S. The Facilities Division recognizes the need to upgrade all city facilities to meet the current code requirements.The Community Services Department will attempt to complete this by contracting engineering services to do a seismic survey and recommendation on one site every three years, provided the budget has been appropriated.The department will also seek grants to meet these goals. Most wood frame buildings perform relatively well in earthquakes. Damages to wood frame buildings will be concentrated in the most vulnerable types, including older buildings with sill plates not bolted to the foundation or with cripple wall foundations. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-12 December 2011 `�w�`' �+r✓' Other building types likely to experience higher levels of damage include: • Unreinforced or lightly reinforced masonry buildings, • Older pre-cast, tilt-up and concrete frame buildings and • Concrete and steel frame buildings with unreinforced masonry infill walls. Infrastructure Utility and transportation infrastructure is also subject to major damage and loss of service in earthquakes, including: • Water and wastewater systems—damage to treatment plants and pipe breaks (especially in soft soil areas). Service outages may be widespread and occur for a long duration. � Natural gas systems—pipe breaks (especially in soft soil areas) but typically fewer than for water or wastewater systems. Service outages may be widespread and for a long duration. • Electric power—damage to substation equipment is common. Service outages may be widespread but typically for a shorter duration than other utility systems. • Bridges—damage to older bridges, especially multi-span bridges, may be - extensive with disruption of surface transportation routes. • Dams, especially older dams designed to lower seismic standards, are subject to damage or even complete failure in earthquakes.The worst case scenario includes inundation of downstream areas. 8.5 Earthquake Hazard Mitigation Projects: General Examples There are a wide variety of possible hazard mitigation projects for earthquakes. The most common projects include:structural retrofit of buildings, non-structural bracing and anchoring of equipment and contents, and strengthening of utility systems, bridges, dams and other infrastructure components. The seismic hazard (frequency and severity of earthquakes) is high in Renton. However, the risk(potential for damages and casualties) is not uniformly distributed throughout Renton. It is instead concentrated in the most vulnerable buildings and infrastructure. Structural retrofit of buildings should not focus on typical buildings but rather on buildings that are most vulnerable to seismic damage. Priorities should include buildings on soft soil sites, subject to amplification of ground motion and/or liquefaction, along with critical service facilities such as hospitals,fire and police City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-13 December 2011 � � stations, emergency shelters and schools. Non-structural bracing of equipment and contents is often the most cost-effective type of seismic mitigation project. Inexpensive bracing and anchoring may protect expensive and/or critical equipment such as medical diagnostic equipment in hospitals, computers, and communication equipment for police and fire services and so on. For utilities, bracing of control equipment, pumps, generators, battery racks and other critical components can be powerfully effective in reducing the impact of earthquakes on system performance. Such measures should almost always be undertaken before considering large-scale structural mitigation projects. � The strategy for strengthening bridges and other infrastructure follows the same principles as discussed above for buildings. The targets for mitigation should not be typical infrastructure but rather specific infrastructure elements that have been identified as being highly vulnerable and/or are critical links in the lifeline system. For example, vulnerable overpasses on major highways would have a much higher priority than overpasses on lightly traveled rural routes. Earthquake mitigation action items from the Master Mitigation Action Items Table in Chapter 4 are shown below in Table 8.2 Earthquake Mitigation Action Items. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 8-14 December 2011 � J � C C LL � O � � a o � � a �', � � a � a W � �o a ,� � Z Earthquake Mitigation Action Items Evaluate the seismic vuinerability of critical city- LOC81 owned buildings,utilities and infrastructure and f u(1tls, Short-Term establish priorities to retrofit or replace vulnerable Community Services 1-2 Years X X x Grant �1 faci�ities to ensure adequate seismic performance of (EMPG, critical facilities. HMGP) Conduct a sidewalk survey of residential,commercial LOCeI and industrial buildings in Renton using FEMA's Rapid Funds, Short-Term Visual Screening to identify especially vulnerable Community and Economic 1-2 Years X X x Grant � #� buildings,raise awareness and encourage mitigation Development Funds actions. (EMPG, HMGP) Disseminate FEMA pamphlets to educate Short-Term homeowners about structural and non-structural Community and Economic 1-2 Vears X X X X Local #3 retrofitting of vulnerable homes and encourage Development FundS retrofit. Local Funds, Ensure that all critical City facilities in Renton have Grant long-Term sufficient backup power and emergency operations Community Services 5 years X X X Funds #1 plans to deal with power outages. (EMPG, HMGP, � SHSP, UASI) Local Long-Term Obtain funding and retrofit important public facilities Funds, #2 with significant seismic vulnerabilities, Community Services 10 years X X X X Grant Funds (HMGP) City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan g-15 December 2011 � � 9.0 LANDSLIDES AND DEBRIS FLOWS 9.1 Landslide Overview and Definitions The term "landslide" refers to a variety of slope instabilities that result in the downward and outward movement of slope-forming materials, including rocks, soils and artificial fill. Four types of landslides are distinguished based on the types of materials involved and the mode of movement.These four types of landslides are detailed below and illustrated in Figures 9.1 to 9.4. Rockfalls are abrupt movements of masses of geologic materials(rocks and soils)that become detached from steep slopes or cliffs. Movement occurs by free-fall, bouncing and rolling. Falls are strongly influenced by gravity,weathering, undercutting or erosion. Rotational Slides are those in which the rupture surface is curved concavely upwards and the slide movement is rotational about an axis parallel to the slope. Rotational slides usually have a steep scarp at the upslope end and a bulging"toe" of the slide material at the bottom. Roads constructed by cut and fill along the side of a slope are prone to slumping on the fill side of the road. Rotational slides may creep slowly or move large distances suddenly. Translational Slides are those in which the moving material slides along a more or less flat surface.Translational slides occur on surfaces of weaknesses, such as faults and bedding planes or at the contact between firm rock and overlying loose soils.Translational slides may creep slowly or move large distances suddenly. Debris Flows (mudflows) are movements in which loose soils, rocks and organic matter combine with entrained water to form slurries that flow rapidly downslope. All of these types of landslides may cause road blockages by dumping debris on road surfaces or road damages if the road surface itself slides. Utility lines and pipes are prone to breakage in slide areas. Buildings impacted by slides may suffer minor damage from small settlements or be completely destroyed by large ground displacements or burial in slide debris. Landslides may result in casualties depending on the location, amount and speed of the slide. There are three main factors that determine susceptibility(potential)for landslides: slope, soil/rock characteristics and water content. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-1 December 2011 � � Figures 9.1 to 9.4 Major Types of Landslides � �� .r//f' oRisuR►�c�°"'� �vr,,J, t� 1 , sx�o � FIRM'BEQDE�ROCK ��' �\ a�,, 'Q° I Q � . /e . �� . 'y ne�av� � � � ' W ,, �„ e / {�,� . �, �s '� f�� '�iS�� \\� ```fr �a �� ' �/f a � �F�,!�, o� � ' �„� �j%�� «�,�' ,y •�r,�� ` � �� '/�� G��..�f�i�j `'� r� ,� r� � '�" � � gppT ERDDIBLE RQCK Figure 9.1 Rockfall Figure 9.2 Rotational Landslide � flHIGiNl1L ��'kSFySy.�._ ��GAQUH[l SUPFACE �"a!P ,-� . ,.}tti ii` �{ ��1� Il � ��7}.��t4. � 1 e ,_� x �l ^" ?;. —K •� �� ,�. �SURFRGE ' �� . � " ' . .�� '� �, TMNSYERSE . . \ '-S �� CAACKS � ` `. '�t � . . �r�r�� ` Figure 9.3 Translational Landslide �.�,,�� f f � 11r� f,� �+' �tt �' �ryv�`��li �� -i' �t '�c�i l or �Col l uvium � Scar (area of initial foiture)---� �-=� ' =—`' ,�,' /j � j �.1,. f; �� Tracktmoy or mayno#h�erQded) ,� ., �, � ��ne of deposi#'ro�n (fan} �.,/� ;�i � �'�o`' -t;t� ' /��?�''� �� !� Figure 9.4 Debris Flow City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-2 December 2011 � � Steeper slopes are more prone to all types of landslides. Loose, weak rock or soil is more prone to landslides than is more competent rock or dense, firm soils. Finally, water saturated soils or rock with a high water table are much more prone to landslides because the water decreases the shear strength of the soil and increases the probability of sliding. As noted above,the water content of soils/rock is a major factor in determining the likelihood of sliding. Most landslides happen during rainy months, when soils are saturated with water. However, landslides may happen at any time of the yea r. In addition to landslides triggered by a combination of slope stability and water content, landslides may also be triggered by earthquakes. Areas prone to seismically triggered landslides are the same as those prone to ordinary(i.e., non- seismic) landslides.As with ordinary landslides, seismically triggered landslides are more likely when soils are saturated with water. Human activity such as road cuts or removal of vegetation may also increase the potential for landslides at affected locations. 9.2 Landslide Hazard Assessment for Renton Specific areas with landslide risk include hill slopes along the Cedar River and Maple Valley Highway in eastern Renton; along the Benson Hills and South Puget Drive in south Renton, and along the southeastern banks of Lake Washington in Eastern Renton.There is also a small area of very high landslide risk along Rainier Drive N. in the vicinity of NW 7th Street. Most of the landslide hazard areas with the highest risk in Renton are located in undeveloped areas along the Cedar River. Slides in these areas may result in temporary dams with subsequent flooding that may affect developed areas nearby. One such slide event with subsequent flooding occurred along the Cedar River in east Renton as a results of the 2001 Nisqually Earthquake. Areas with high landslide potential within Renton are shown in Figure 9.5.The mapped landslide hazard areas include all slopes of 15°or higher. Figures 9.6 and 9.7 show critical facilities overlaid with areas at risk for landslides or erosion respectively. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-3 December 2011 � � Figure 9.5 Landslide Hazard Areas in Renton .� ., , � /// , . y ((( F � � � ' � � SF ..�"�. •: � �' ` �. .r� r i: � 6.w, %� . � z . �,... c � . . �`a . . �.s., , + ' a . ' ' , „ � . . _ " - o _ ,.� hP q�� y �: L� , �R �. N �. � � , �.• - � ,. � �' '� � ��;w �� ..o - � p F . ,� � - = �� r, ' t � Y „,,� � a � � �, , � f i 4 � � � s bi "'. e t....v { . . » . �� ; �r�lw ( :. s � ..0 �a a"" "'` � . #... .�. . � . - '+�"'+� . w.. ..,i.� ...' ._� ��`,^"...._--,..�--•. t ^.. :e�.-E � �d. w.. ¢ � .� . � ` N '� y � � � �� ti�. 9u � '�. � � � � y a � ._ - ,,... e �♦ �z � °t�'�. >:� ,�' _� � .�� `�a..� � $ s 5 . � �v +� �t: ° .. .. 7 .;�' r o.� . . . :. - . .�r*' i: ..�• . �'` .. " ,.�.b.. -'..�. 5�.1"� — � � - , ,' ' _ ` _ � '..., .Gr ' _... } M . .. . _. r„ : . �..�' �_,.-..y.✓ � _ . � ,�,,;� r � .... "^"" . .. ;r; �, � '� } _�.. '.. _i�.� _. t ,f i _ .. N- _ '. � r -e,; � � �.. . .. � .... . � . Y - .♦ ;� . �y. . e: �.-:.�. . , . � .. ... . 1-, . y ,��- ' `... � ' ''_.. �. , . " . .... � e r Y ... i. 1Q `_. . t . _ . g ;;, ' - ' .:� 1 .'_' z . � v' � ' . . -'- ' ,w. �---: � �*�w;a F, - s`., .. �� '��' _�,.a!'-r,��s i, �� ' e` a ��. �'�V- ��g's� E .. ��' " 7 t . � 1.-' �� d di r� '�'�'�.�-> t . . ��,*� + r�` � ��w,�.�' . ' '. �� ' , -_r = +�` � Y �p��' �� ._ � ,y-�� :i,� 4g'��~ 3 ,y� 4^ _o..,� �� yy ��i� .. �A » � i t- � �� . . � � ' "' ��—; ` , .� 't` t :.:;iC . � fy,.l - ,.-- .. � ��.. -�' ;-�..� �f¢ �', �� . F. 'f y,M [2': �.L+� � _ "' - - " '�_ �rti ' t : ,� x .. � �� *��'y 4 z ..� N { t � 9 � �� ; �� t � `� � �� ) �. . � :. ? $3. _ 4 � ; � � �` Y � ` g �W� tL'�1. i�.- _ -g ._p �?'f.i* �1 �� '"^ tl� '��. . r" ° .y � 1 T '_ ..�,y ;, ��. , k - `� �; - , _ _ �� s s� -� Y _� ,. � y � � : .., �� :.�< � � �� g '+� r s..� --r� �'----�R.-�-+e,_ ....��.» . • � „ ' .� ' .- ' .. �q. � L . ... _ ! '�. � � � � �... 4 I . r ...� �� . # 't. � r `�, t y —� ; . � , . g , �, � � m P.x ' z=; 3 n : � '-.�r ^%. �� ,:�.3 - i ....__e-t., �-.:., e. - � . � � • _. d _ � ... �'" z Y�-�. �` � � . s �,. � ' _ _ a . ....:...� � ` ... � � e - ,. � . .�. � „,, - . . ,� _ - - : � p e' . � .-, _ t �:t . . . .� . . y � ,�,�. �• -,�'S ... _ , ._- k � � F ..., .,..�, _- , z � � , ti�, , . €_ . , � . ° � � °f'' ' - $ � �. ,_. , , � .- . , . _. - , � :_ a :� '�_ ., g_ K a > d . '_ - , � � �f; - r r.�+ - ' _ «nx. ^ , _ .a�n�... �. � e: . . _.:.. a. "i�.. •t. 3. y � u . .... � - > .. ._ . . .r _ . ...,.. :. . . ,.«- a ._ �c . _. aa w-a j µ '_ i..� � I '� � .. � ........., atm sfM� . �vNr. ! i.n>. .,.ra . � . . . �: �.�.. .... s aA .: . : , , ::: r:u.. .. R >w • : � _ .:� �i. . ` ,l ._. o-., . . Mv . .. '....... . .. _ . - £ w 4_. '�.... _..x�� : . y ,.�.. .... .. : c- ' y .� .�ni�� _... � w n[�_.. � €__ � , y+,� .4. 4 : � � � ,� . S � A.. � # M�" � .. a?'" y i. i ^"]„r; . _ � �W.S..�� - . �. +-_.i.`i.•: � ,j } - � F. ,i ;�:�f . i l #r�tormstian'�echnology-�IS . ��ud.H.��a: Pnnted on M1harch 3.201 tt L(�� 1�V��ri�,f ��Z�I �� -�„� �$wrces-Cfly o"Rer:rn and Y-ng Coumy Gf5 ...«-.�.-.... ,�,..o . ,trt� � . F4'WEaA!_ �y��,,,�''y'� j CI:}'Ot g -_.-.._�'^'"_ �C t"a �"1 1 f' �`� � u.:i:si.ss�'Ep •y, S—� wwsa,.G•i4nrc 1__�i City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-4 December 2011 � � Figure 9.6 Areas at Risk of Landslide Overlaid with Critical Facilities ,f�- : . ,� � HAZARD CQNDITIUh1 i� �'�� .I Landslide Nazards . a g� r (r l„T _; S�vtrity j f.. . � � ; v�Rr��H � . . �J;�� .� j �NIGH � � . _ �� ,� � p� MODERATE � � � ��. E ' �r : �-; � ..��.UNC1ASSiFED. , , f.. . ,t_ .� � °�-- i = _ �r` "` -� r ! `.�� _ `�, � -�...� ----•�� ,-f"`-;�� .� _.... ,. . � . �. �1.-, �- . � � , , , � '--1 _ � ' \ , , , 1 _J .� . _._....__ � - "' r ' � ',� � �� i.—_.. � '4 11ti; 1 /��, �` � � Q ��i _ �, `L� � � � I, � j � �� i�� _ _--i �.. � �-,� ` I ....,,.� 1 '7 ��s � ``� �` !-_ � �9r. •- _.,4.,.� - R . ' . . '' �'b'��;"' _ � P pP �y ��_-. -._._�..��.�� ..� `�.� ! `•.. .,,, � � } •��.._� �,� i � � � � "� I�;��6 f i �� __. i_.i � - a;� . ., .:_, �'� P "�'%--y�}« . � . i; � ..� •,.,,,�r�° . � � i £ r� .,1�.�,� 4'� � ,�v, { _. � * � , , . • . --�. � 4:. _,_. ' , � „ � �� ->. r- �.� i., -•_` � a" .�.�^'�� -:. .., . .:. � �:. ' . s: . :r...i s . � �.��n. . � . � � � �0 � Y �i . ' .. . . . � ..��_��._..� . . _ .-"_ dl4 ^-.�, � ' � `-.� � � �!s --r,+� � �� `� � � �^ ,� �+�az,..e:., i s' �� ' S `� �' I � '�. I I ;' �'� � � •�. .. ,`` % �� ,�w• � � � , � _� ; � ;r_ �� . � � , � r` ,; _ . , ,. `�, i ti,y - ` . . i��...�«..._��.�..� �Y, l�f i:. k tn(ormationTechnoiogy-GIS -�--'? �I�Of Refl�Ofi � �olice flepartment � Schao[s Printed on D31�3.2010 l_.�_.; aa�so��s c�r�Re�+on,w�ca,�ur =;S fufatro Piant Twaowmer�tarcrsc�:crctsesa�na�ta+.nan�aremeca � -�. Fire Stations tp surveY ew+fuc.`t u+e a l�eC ur.�ne�m inlumuarou ..-....,_..:-. ar7A8tt�B�2t8f�lilB l+PII.�P�'►S ef IYW 4Se}i�x�}Th�F inaF n.mlenaSC fR' r^"'�� ... �,x�y�,�,xs,�,. :�; �4rmy Reserve Genter � 5ew� C ProducEion Wells � ; ; Olympic Ripefines -,_,�,,.,,�.�+�� _: � ` t" i { � � �� tNatei'U#ifity Reseruoir � � _,� x �.,��,� ,�_,� �High Pressure Gas Lina � 1ialley Medical Center City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-5 December 2011 "�✓° �.r�' Figure 9.7 Areas at Risk of Erosion Overlaid with Critical Facilities , r �� , y ',3 ;� � r : � �,. _ �.� , HA�AR�7 CL}N��TIOhf ' � '� �� {�; 1'� �.�i Erasion Haxaro ; , �, 1, � � � _ , � �'�, �� .w� � �. - / �� ^� � � � J� £ ' ��, 5 k4; �f � �``' �"� �,�,..«�''��P , -"-... .� T_d � . ��•, ��,,.��_� � � �; � ^t� ,„�" ' T�.. � � �� +t�� .�� 3 � � �S = _ I ��, 1� � � �»�� .. - � �—; � ,. �. � `: I _. - � � , � � -`�`�-� � .. • I �� ., ; : , .�. ._ ,� , ;� , � t f .. � � � i � ': . � � '. _ i : 1 . . . ... . . �' � t. � � ;. , 4 .._ -�� - L y A. � �'f' .�. 1 . . . -ne....� �iF - ~��..., ��. .� '+ . ��'�'" - P s� `" � •- � . "..L_ �� .s.a....,... .. � �p �' t �- ""_r� . � ) ^�� "_" t.-:� .. ti� 9� I� � rv�...�:��...� ' � i � !$ �s� - � i� � '''��.u. � � �__ ��y ' 3 'r`f� � � t �' ��'�. ��'��' } .;;�� '�,,a`� `-��'�. � 5T ~ �.... � �, i . �k., �C' �. � `� '� '�Y„`x`` ,"�. � � � # ➢ .4�.. "` _ „ ( � € .... �-�"'P"`'—S• �• ' „} ��~�y . � _ - . , : - . y , . � ,. ,` . . �. � . ''�"`_ �_ �� : . � � I � ., - :._ .,_�... _... E �r ---�-,��s;, �� . 1 �e�E"�,:� ,, =��. :-�� . � . . � �,q%., '..;y. ''�;§ � � � .� . S i� �'�. .. - � 1 f � ,.��;` �n„ ��i j; .f"':. . �. , � .. �I � � �� £ l '� �� ! � �,� �� ' ,� r�y �6F + �� ad�� a � � � �. # �, t �` - � ______.------- ',� ;; E-� ..�--.. � '�.�' lnfarmetion Technobgy-GIS -----t � Schnofs Printed on 031Q31201a �__,__; Cl�df ReR�On � police Qe artment � aala So-rces CM1y o Renton.Kinp Cou�ty . tr�ax�++ren�is��:�eo�aseny��o�,naq;ss�amxx4 �. Fire Stations �' Mefro R1ant tr sur.er+xwucr.end�s aaseu w�ms nes�mpmm4cr: owi�a�+e�s p o�e ea�e sa.v�.,:Yne m.,r+�.�•,n+�M . °e_":- 5eatt�$Water Line :�rd�aar��. ��^„ Army f2eserve Center Sewer � pp l�roducfioo We{Is , C}lympic Pipelines __,�,...�*�°' �'� �° �� '�� '_` '; Q Water Utility Reser+ro[r� �igh Rressure Gas Line [� 1lalkey Medical Center City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-6 December 2011 � � In mapping landslide hazards the following criteria were used. • Very High—Alf locations of mass wasting and landslide deposits as well as two previous landslides on public record. • High—Areas with a slope greater than 40%and areas with slopes between 15 and 40%where the surface soils are underlain by low permeability geologic units. • Moderate—Areas with slopes between 15 and 40%where the surface soils are underlain by permeable geologic units. • Unclassified—Areas that have not been surveyed. The total square mileage of all levels of landslide hazard is 3.37,which is .14%of Renton's total square mileage.There are 10 structures in very high risk areas, 1,387 structures in the high risk areas, 2,253 structures in moderate risk areas, and 319 structures in areas of unclassified risk.There are no streets in the very high risk areas, 18.05 miles of street in the high risk areas, 19.70 miles of street in the moderate risk areas, and 2.45 miles of street in areas of unclassified risk. There are no critical facilities in the very high risk areas.There are seven Renton water system facilities in the high risk areas and three in the moderate risk areas. The Seattle water line, sewer line, Olympic Pipeline and high pressure gas line all cross through the high and moderate risk areas. In mapping erosion risk the following criteria were used. • Hazard—All surface soils on slopes steeper than 15 %. There is one Renton water system facility in the erosion hazard areas.The Seattle water line, sewer line, Olympic Pipeline and high pressure gas line all cross through the erosion risk areas. 9.3 Landslide Risk Assessment for Renton Winter storms with intense rainfalls are the most common trigger for landslides in Renton. Major storms with intense rainfall can result in numerous landslides in slide-prone areas. It is difficult to make quantitative predictions of future landslides damages which depend on the: 1) extent of landslide susceptible areas, 2) inventory of buildings and infrastructure in landslide susceptible areas, 3) severity of winter storm event(inches of rainfall in 24 hours), 4) percentage of landslide susceptible areas that will move and the range of movements (displacements) likely and 5) vulnerability(amount of damage for various ranges of movement). City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-7 December 2011 � � For Renton, however,the most likely impacts of landslides are damages to buildings, roads and utilities. Severe landslides may also result in injuries or deaths. Small landslides are likely to affect one building or small number of buildings and/or a single road location. Larger landslides may affect numerous buildings and/or roads. In addition to direct landslide damages within Renton,the City is also subject to the economic impacts of road closures (e.g., Interstate 5) or utility outages from landslides outside of City limits. 9.4 Mitigation of Landslide Risk Mitigation of landslide risks is often quite expensive. Slope stability can be improved by drainage to reduce pore water pressure,construction of appropriate retaining walls or other types of geotechnical remediation. In some cases, buildings can be hardened to reduce damages. An alternative mitigation strategy for already built buildings or infrastructure with high potential for landslide losses is to relocate the facilities outside of known slide areas. Mitigation of landslide risk can also be accomplished by effective land use planning to minimize development and the location of critical utility lines in slide- prone areas. Generally, such land use planning requires rather detailed geotechnical mapping of slide potential so that high hazard areas can be demarcated without unnecessarily including other areas of low slide potential. The impacts of slide damage on road systems can also be partially addressed by identifying areas of high slide potential or of repetitive past slide damages so that alternative routes for emergency response can be pre-determined. The following table,Table 9.1 Landslide Mitigation Action Items, includes landslide mitigation action items from the Master Action Items Table in Chapter 4. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-8 December 2011 � � , � � � u C �, � 3 � � 0 j '�^ � v a�i +' a °0 a c, o � Funtling Haiard Action Item Coordinating Organizations' Timeline � � a ; r � �°C v c o � N �o � � Source Q � ` N � � v a J u � uw � " y p ` 'o � c a +� ,� a oc a Wa� Z a ,� landslide Mitigation Action Items Short-Term Complete the in�entory of locations where buildings Community and Economic 1-2 Years X X Local #1 or infrastructure are subject to landslides. Development,Public Works Fu11dS � long-Term Consider landslide mitigation actions for slides public Works 5 Years X X X LoCal #1 seriously threatening buildings or infrastructure, f unds Long-Term limit future development in high landslide potential Community and Eco�omic On oin X X X X �oCal #2 areas. Development g g Funds � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 9-9 December 2011 � � 10.0 VOLCANIC HAZARDS 10.1 Overview The Cascades,which run from British Columbia through Washington and Oregon into northern California,contain more than a dozen major volcanoes and hundreds of smaller volcanic features. In the past 200 years,seven of the Cascade volcanoes in the United States have erupted: Mt. Baker, Glacier Peak, Mt. Rainier, Mt.St. Helens, Mt. Hood, Mt.Shasta,and Mt. Lassen. During this time period,the most active volcano in the Cascades has been Mt.St. Helens with about 14 major eruptions and many smaller eruptions. Many other volcanoes are deemed active or potentially active.The Smithsonian Institution's Global Volcanism Project lists 20 active volcanoes in Oregon and 7 in Washington.The 7 active volcanoes in Washington are listed below in Table 10.1. Table 10.1 Active Volcanoes in Washington Volcano T e Last Eru tion Mt. Baker Stratovolcano 1880 Glacier Peak Stratovolcano 1700 + 100 Mt. Rainier Stratovolcano 1825 (?) Mt.Adams Stratovolcano 950 AD (?) Mount St. Helens Stratovolcano 1980- 2008 West Crater Volcanic Field 5760 BC (?) Indian Heaven Shield Volcanoes 6250+ 100 BC A great deal of general background information on volcanoes in the Cascades and on volcanoes in general, is available on several websites as detailed below in Table 10.2. Table 10.2 Volcano Websites Institution Website United States Geological Survey www.usgs.qov (USGS) - eneral site USGS Cascades Volcano http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov Observator Smithsonian Institution (Global �volcano.si.edu Volcanism Pro'ect) Washington State Department of Natural Resources (see: Geology www.dnr.wa.gov and Earth Resources Division) The numerous volcanoes of the Cascades differ markedly in their geological characteristics.The largest volcanoes are generalty what geologists call composite or stratovolcanoes.These volcanoes may be active for tens of thousands of years to hundreds of thousands of years. In some cases,these large volcanoes may have explosive eruptions such as Mt.St. Helens in 1980,or Crater Lake in Oregon about City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-1 December 2011 � � 6,850 years ago.A more common type of volcano,with more regular activity, is what geologists call mafic volcanoes.This type of volcano is typically active for much shorter time periods, up to a few hundred years, and generally forms small craters or cones. Mafic volcanoes are not subject to large explosive events. 10.2 Volcanic Hazard Types In this area,awareness of the potenfial for volcanic eruptions was greatly increased by the May 18, 1980 eruption of Mt.St. Helens. In this eruption,which killed 57 people, lateral blast effects covered 230 square miles and reached 17 miles northwest of the crater. Pyroclastic flows covered six square miles and reached five miles north of the crater while landslides covered 23 square miles.Ash accumulations were about 10 inches at 10 miles downwind, 1 inch at 60 miles downwind and% inch at 300 miles downwind. Lahars (mudflows) affected the north and south forks of the Toutle River, the Green River and ultimately the Columbia River as far as 70 miles from the volcano. Damage and reconstruction costs exceeded$1 billion. Volcanic eruptions often involve several distinct types of hazards to people and property. Major volcanic hazards include: lava flows, blast effects, pyroclastic flows, ash flows, lahars and landslides or debris flows. Some of these hazards(e.g., lava flows) only affect areas very near the volcano.Other hazards may affect areas 10 or 20 miles away from the volcano,while ash falls may affect areas several miles downwind of the eruption site. Lava flows are eruptions of molten rock. Lava flows for the major Cascades volcanoes tend to be thick and viscous,forming cones and thus typically affecting areas only very near the eruption vent. However,flows from the smaller mafic volcanoes may be less viscous flows that spread out over wider areas. Lava flows destroy everything in their path. Blast effects may occur with violent eruptions. Most volcanic blasts are largely upwards. However,the Mt.St. Helens blast was lateral,with impacts 17 miles from the volcano.Similar or larger blast zones are possible in future eruptions of any of the major Cascades volcanoes. Pyroclastic flows are high-speed avalanches of hot ash, rock fragments and gases. Pyroclastic flows can be as hot as 1500°F and move downslope at 100 to 150 miles per hour. Pyroclastic flows are extremely deadly for anyone caught in their path. Ash falls result when explosive eruptions blast rock fragments into the air. Such blasts may include tephra (solid and molten rock fragments).The largest rock fragments(sometimes called "bombs")generally fall within two miles of the eruption vent.Smaller ash fragments(less than 0.1") typically rise into the area forming a huge eruption column. In very large eruptions, ash falls may total many feet in depth near the vent and extend for hundreds or even thousands of miles downwind. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-2 December 2011 ��rr'' V Lahars or mudflows are common during eruptions of volcanoes with heavy loading of ice and snow.These flows of mud, rock and water can rush down channels at 20 to 40 miles an hour and can extend for more than 50 miles. For some volcanoes, lahars are a major hazard because highly populated areas are built on lahar flows from previous eruptions. Landslides or debris flows are the rapid downslope movement of rocky material, snow and/or ice.Volcano landslides can range from small movements of loose debris to massive collapses of the entire summit or sides of a volcano. Landslides on volcanic slopes may be triggered by eruptions or by earthquakes or simply by heavy rainfall. 10.3 Volcanic Hazards for Renton Several of the active volcanoes in Washington are located relatively near Renton, including Mt. Rainier and Mt.St. Helens.Approximate distances from Renton to four relatively nearby volcanoes are shown below in Table 10.3. Table 103 Distances from Renton Volcano Distance miles Mt. Rainier 48 Mt. St. Helens 89 Mt. Baker 93 Mt. Adams 94 Glacier Peak 68 Among these relatively nearby volcanoes, Mt.St. Helens is the most active. Mt. Rainier, Mt. Baker and Glacier Peak are definitely active and Mt.Adams is potentially active. Renton is approximately 48 miles from Mt. Rainier and about 68 to 94 miles from the other relatively nearby volcanoes. The USGS analysis of Volcano Hazards from Mt. Rainier,Washington,was published in 1998(Open-File Report 98-428). As shown in Figure 10.1,the proximal hazard area is the area subject to the most intense volcanic hazards including lava flows,tephra flows, pyroclastic flows, landslides and debris flows and lahars. Fortunately,this high risk area is predominantly within the national park boundary with very low population. Lahars are the primary volcanic hazard which extends into populated areas downslope from Mt. Rainier.The area at risk from lahars extends as least as far as Tacoma and Auburn. Renton is outside the geographic areas at high risk from lahars from Mt. Rainier. However, as shown in Figure 10.2, Renton may be at some risk from extremely large lahars in the Green River Valley. If so,the return period for such events is likely several thousand years or longer. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-3 December 2011 � � Figure 10.1 Mt.Rainier Volcanic Hazards Map 5�� '' � '�•�� ederal : uburn _ �"SNay _ ; `;. i .�: - n :.'Tacoma;: � Enumclaw ;:' Pu a11u .-� f.�rT'a�i `�}ii�� P� P�' •: ; :' Sumnet .. �, :: __ Buckiey . Mu� Greenwater �,: �n,ry •..•:` ; tXting WFlkeson :R•fr,crntarn � � D� l�f"�t` Cr�isrtrr• Carbonado Graham � � '��'6 •�, U�R��er '�o�jf� "� 9,a7�2t�'3'. ��3 �ti�2�sea1�YY.ifa�iri�bf.afr+,' . � 1Ci R L�kc �lF�. I i. f�apd�r;xirr f 1 �s:�.. j � �':�r;;�•; �3s�. �i Eatonviils `.R: IVIDUIttT '�'' ��z��„� xt RAtNlER` 1•f11if..ICri3�..11itflYV �; j� . � �.J �/Oel ��''Ij =•� � ..i��. I1am � '••t . . . .. : . Tlturstt�n t;��r:nr�� er Ashfo�d . . - � ; , , I xu'is Cssunry � ��b0 �'"'�---�'"�.��, r � _ __._ _ _ _. . ��'".`+-t",-�------�� ,�,�. ..r.; _ ,�.'�F E�PLAIVATIDN � Smalff�ers with recvrres�ce ;� � � �" intervai<100 years(Case�) "` Maderate lal�ars with recu�rence _�.� interaall{1(k500years(Case2] � Large I�ars wi[h recurrence ;_ � PBckwood interval 500-10ti0 year�(Case T) � � Area mosi likefy to he affected by �;et " lava flows and pyroclastic Haivs �� t�'�� .� e��4>l��x .�,� :;i'i� Posi-latl�sed'pnerlta�ort Randie c�' ,, �„,�� , 0 � 5 �0 MfLES h'i!leLa.lPe r1�'�� , � � ,r 0 5 1�KIL4METERS � FICL'Itf 3.—h$=d.Y��n'1:�<.�..'f3t:5tS�,:SL::11Uu:;,*,#!}c7^'y71ti.i95hG-?7_�ii�ftii:Ti Jk;C}U7%:K3:ryt.','4�-]r`,z�xfil:'$�d i�I�ir�.t"u,�7�N5'. l+��a�Ft�C��ai Su:�}��+en-F.�i�FeFr�^_�5-s<8J. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-4 December 2011 � � Figure 10-2 Mt.Rainier Lahar Map G�'" ��,� �� :�reas in��dated by � Seattle mudfl�u�s �c�re�� at '' � � � ?��+� Rent+�n .. � �` �t(c�unt Raini�r in th� Tacoma k [��t 5,6�� y��rs , � � �.: 6,�.' � Kent � � �" � � auF�urn � � � �.� -�. ; ` �`� Pacific � � � � � � Enumclaw :�:�g�t Puyallup 3'��'�� McMillan ; Y l�t�'hite Glrting Buckley l�i�e�r Electran McKenna �� Puyatlup t�;►rsqualty� Riv�er f�'iver glaci�r� � E�� Ashfard i � 15 mil�es National �� Topinka,USGSrCVO,2�0?;Modified(rom:Sisson,7995,USGS Open-File Report 9�642 City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-5 December 2011 � � For Renton,the most significant volcanic risk is ash fall. In addition to effects from Mt. Rainier, ash falls from volcanic activity at Mt.St. Helens or any of the other active volcanoes could also affect Renton. Depending on the volume of volcanic ash ejected by an eruption and on prevailing wind directions at the time of eruption,various thicknesses of ash falls may affect Renton. The impacts of ash falls on Renton include: a) Clean-up and ash removal from roofs,gutters, sidewalks, roads and vehicles. b) Clogging of filters on vehicle engines,furnaces, heat pumps,air conditioners and other engines and mechanical equipment,with possible damage to the engines or equipment. c) Possible respiratory problems for at-risk population such as elderly, young children or others with respiratory problems. d) Possible impacts on public water supplies drawn from surface waters, including degradation of water quality(high turbidity)and increased maintenance requirements at water treatment plants. e) Possible electric power outages from ash-induced short circuits in distribution lines, transmission lines and substations. f) Possible disruptions of air traffic from the Renton Airport,Sea-Tac Airport and/or other airports in the Pacific Northwest region. The extent of volcanic hazards for most of Renton appears limited to the possibility of ash from a Mt.St. Helens' eruption.Ash falls would likely be very minor with an inch or less of ash likely. In the 1980 Mt.St. Helens' eruption, Renton received less than 1" of ash. Even minor amounts of ash fall can result in the significant impacts noted above. The following maps show probabilistic data on ash fall in Washington,taking into account all of the active volcanoes(USGS Open File Report 9-437, Plate 1, 1999). Interpolating between the map contours of Figure 10.3,the annual probability of 1 centimeter(about 0.4 inch) or more of volcanic ash is about 1/2000 Renton. In other words,the return period for such ash falls in Renton is about 2,000 years. Interpolating between the map contours of Figure 10.4,the annual probability of 10 centimeters(about 4 inches)or more of volcanic ash is about 1/4500 in Renton. So,the return period for such ash falls in Renton is about 4,500 years. The low probabilities of significant ash falls (i.e., long return periods)arise because ash falls in Renton require volcanic eruptions producing ash and wind directions that deposit ash westward from the volcanoes. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-6 December 2011 � � Figure 10.3 Annual Probability of 1 Centimeter(about 0.4 inch)or More of Volcanic Ash � fr �j ��, ; �` ,�.—.____�__n_��.._._..�, } � < in?�C� �fJ�aurrt Baker � � � :��------- _ "� � 1 ` . � i,-�--- s I,r�3a'�:= ^�-,� � � `�.. _ �t _^ -'^Y'�'i'"Y�`�''i -�__.-ha..�� +� �hu„rs � �` � J _ �� w 3 � 4Ft I i�ii::�� 1_ ^��.. � l'��L � ( � �µ . �' .�Ei^�F".�. € /,� pxf .,..� .�._. ._ i ��s�i.:fi ��`� }�� t�� O��H'�Iy��.0 � � I � � l t �I' .- -i� _ ...* „i;:-_ `�� i : � i I t':�k.1,.�::�t� k ' + ; j 4. f` � � ��:--i-.. _Matuat St.Heiens� � � � � less a�an -�..�-� jlVlount Adarns �. � 'k '; '� 1 �� i�3,v��s `�� ,s� --i,: t_,�...-'�.�Y\ � � }-� ..�.; ;4\�_y�� r� ; -�- �--�!�loun}�HsYo� m b i �C � , 3 '1 ' _' � 'F,.�.._.. �/_.._.. ' �j . r ��--�a__1�""/-r'= +' " _ ' F � +: _ -L NSOunt JBifetSan - f !� Figure 10.4 Annual Probability of 10 Centimeters(about 4 inches)or More of Volcanic Ash (same scale as Figure 10.1 above) ��f,, ♦Mauni�3aker 5; �r-� �"�� ._ .�,J s '� � 5` � �..,_`-M----__.'`r�-�`::� .�GlacierP.e� t - 't._. __---= tv, � � , ,..,, tl., z �.�_,�_ -�'� � � __ '-��,.X ,-�`-, '� r � '� �yl' � �� l `^- j�r --' '� x '�--x ' -�,4 �.., ��`' Ra�nt�r � .._-�- � ��--;--' �w;,�_� � _ `_ � . �� ` �-.-ti`�1t ` . r . �; ' �_``= St H�lens; 7 � � � �--. � /�Moustt,Ada�sss �-�i' � , � �`�i �L.-.—��_—�—� � ,i � f'�/� f1 . �`.�y -�� } .��.�` { Y' ' ti�,�r i j' r( a5 � � ``:.��`�,y�Mour�C Herbd r ; i.� ` i r P � i_. l �+ �r" `i _ / � �_ `` � ,�`7 �\�� _ —�-_ '' ' "`-�` '-= ----' � �ti � ' ' e�ferso � ` � �.�_:''z'" - " --� , c , . _ , __,...` _"-1�� _>:�__�,_,--,._: '- ers � - - ,, i._ �-J--....__.-- .. . .. ^., - t �-�i � �wb�'rr�.�Yotcana ' ,�-.^ _ f !�'�------� City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-7 December 2011 � � 10.4 Mitigation of Volcanic Hazards Mitigation of volcanic hazards is predominantly in the areas of monitoring volcanic activity,warnings, evacuation and emergency response.There are few practical physical measures to mitigate the direct impacts of volcanic activity. The USGS actively monitors volcanic activity in the Cascades via networks of seismic sensors(which can detect earthquakes related to magma movements)as well as very accurate ground surface measurements.The USGS also has a volcanic warning system with several levels of alert as a potential eruption becomes more likely and more imminent. For the Cascades,the USGS volcano warning system has three levels. Level One (Volcanic Unrest) means anomalous conditions that could be indicative of an eventual volcanic eruption. Level Two(Volcanic Advisory) means that processes are underway that have a significant likelihood of culminating in hazardous volcanic activity, but the evidence does not indicate that a life-or property-threatening event is imminent. Level Three (Volcano Alert) means that monitoring or evaluation indicate that precursory events have escalated to the point where a volcanic event with attendant volcanologic or hydrologic hazards threatening to life and property appears imminent or is underway. For most of Renton,which is located well outside of any of the likely direct hazard zones for any Cascades volcanic events, mitigation for volcanic activity is a low priority. In the event of a minor ash flow, public warnings directing people (especially those with respiratory problems)to remain indoors and cleanup are likely the only responses necessary for most volcanic effects impacting Renton. In addition,water treatment plants should be evaluated to ensure that they can handle possible high turbidity events from volcanic ash falls into water supplies. The following table,Table 10.4, includes the volcanic hazards mitigation action items from the Master Action Items Table in Chapter 4. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-8 December 2011 � � , � � � a � � , a �, v � y > � v � v a�, � a � ;, a� N � Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organiiations Timeline ro � a � r .- � z v � Q �, � N � � � v oc � Source � � :� � c � LL a o � � � c a o a Wv t0 � a � Z Volcanic Hazards Mitigation Action Items Short-Term Update public emergency notification procedures for Fire&Emergency Services 1-2 Vears X X X X LOCeI �i #1 ash fall events, Funds Community Services,Fire& � Short-Term Update emergency response planning for ash fall Emergency Services,Police,Public 1-2 Years X X X LOCeI #2 events. Works Funds Evaluate capability of water treatment plant to deal Short-Term with high turbidiry from ash falls and upgrade public Works,METRO 1-2 Years X X X X METRO #3 treatment facilities and emergency response plans to deal with ash falls, � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 10-9 December 2011 � � 11.0 COAL MINE HAZARDS 11.1 Overview Coal mining was an important industry in Renton from the 1870s when Renton Coal Company was organized through the 1930s. Most of the large coal mining operations were closed in the late 1930s or soon thereafter.Small scale coal mining operations continued into the 1960s. There are no active coal mines in Renton.There are four mapped abandoned coal mines and smaller unmapped mines may also exist. Historical coal mining areas in Renton are shown in Figure 11.1. Most of the coal mining areas, and all of the high hazard areas, are located in the vicinity of South Puget Drive, Renton Hill south of Cedar River Park and east of Benson Drive.There has been significant residential development above or nearby these coal mining areas and abandoned mines. 11.2 Coal Mine Hazards When mines in or near developed areas were closed, mine openings were typically plugged with whatever materials were readily available including: mine waste, land clearing debris and car bodies. Rarely, if ever,were the coal mines properly sealed with engineered plugs prior to the 1950s. Given the timing of the closures, nearly all openings to abandoned coal mines in the Renton area should be considered improperly sealed. Abandoned underground coal mines pose four main hazards: subsidence, collapse, release of gases and release of water. • Areas above mine workings are subject to gradual subsidence (movement of surface as it shifts downward}, with potential damages to buildings, roads and utility systems. Subsidence can occur for all underground mines, whether the workings are deep (>200 feet) or shallow(<200 feet). • Sudden localized collapses can occur, especially for shallow mine workings. Collapses may result in major damages as well as injuries or deaths. • Underground coal mines often release methane and/or carbon dioxide. o Methane is a colorless, odorless and lighter than air gas that rises through the ground or through tunnels and shafts. Methane can accumulate in enclosed spaces and result in fires or explosions if ignited. o Carbon dioxide is a colorless, odorless heavier than air gas which descends downward through mines and may exit from downward sloping tunnels. Accumulation of carbon dioxide in enclosed spaces may result in asphyxiation. • For mines that have filled with ground water,failure of plugs may result in unexpected and sudden outbursts of water in unanticipated locations. Collapses or City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 11-1 December 2011 � ��+/ sudden outbursts of water pose life safety risks as well as threats to buildings and infrastructure. Failures of abandoned coal mines may occur at any time of year under any conditions. However,failures are more likely during periods of heavy rainfall as slope stability may be diminished. Mine failures may also be triggered by landslides or earthquakes. 11.3 Coal Mine Hazards: Risk Assessment Overall the risk from abandoned coal mines is fairly low.As discussed in the last section, there is potential for damages and possible life safety impacts from subsidence, collapse, releases of gases or releases of water. Any such events would most likely be localized and affect a small geographic area. Larger events affecting several or more buildings are also possible. Figure 11.1 shows the mapped coal mine hazards area in Renton. Coal mine hazards may also exist in other areas of Renton because the identification and mapping of abandoned coal mines is incomplete. The definitions of moderate and high coal mine hazard areas are as follows: � Moderate hazard.Areas where mine workings are deeper than 200 feet (steeply dipping coal seams) or deeper than 15 times the thickness of the seam or workings (gently dipping seams).These areas may be subject to subsidence. • High hazard.Areas with abandoned and improperly sealed openings and areas underlain by mine workings shallower than 200 feet (steeply dipping seams) or shallower than 15 times the thickness of the seam or workings (gently dipping seams).These areas may be subject subsidence and collapse. The total square mileage of coal mine hazards in Renton is 1.61, or.07%of the City's total square mileage.There are 175 structures in high risk areas, 1,809 structures in moderate risk areas and 161 structures in unclassified areas.There are .84 miles of street in high risk areas, 18.99 miles in moderate risk areas and 1.07 miles in areas of unclassified risk. Figure 11.2 shows an overlay of the mapped coal mine hazard areas with critical buildings and infrastructure.The mapped coal mine hazard areas include two water reservoirs as well as Nelson Middles School and Spring Glen Elementary.The hazard areas are crossed by the Olympic Pipeline,Seattle water line, and high pressure gas lines.There are no recorded coal mine failure events for Renton. 11.4 Mitigation Action Items Mitigation action items for coal mine hazards are summarized below in Table 11.1 Coal Mine Hazards Mitigation Action Items. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 11-2 December 2011 � �' Figure 11.1 Coal Mine Hazard Areas in Renton � r �, ' � *.�� `�� .=, � � � � � ` � '� , r""',��° . s� _ `^-- ;� "�+� .. ' „ +r ��" ,�+. E. � ^_'„� ., � IY � � �� . . . ��' I�� . . _.: �� a v� � . . a�f t e �y � � _ ., � � . . � i . ��.-� L: `� ' , .. p3 � J .� `��. �y�. . . ":� �, rs'�U � t+\ . F .. _ . t. y � i `�.f�.. .'.. •... F � + � { ` � �. _. . ., . s - � s.� _ � A � .:� F ...y • � ... 9 .F"' '.��`�V ` S s V. � ...v.� � �. � �, v. . . : �. � �r k, +. .. .r .. �. _.. .. . " ... � ,-� . �..,. : , � '- . �, .. . •� � +. . . a . , . �`..'.r � L'J '��' 1 � � � �.f — �. 1 �� 3,. . . k � 1 F �. $. . '� - r� � - ''.', E �4r �.. F 1 F � ', ! 4 ��f ��: � � t _«�y�� T�.. . 4„ ' ...�. .� s . : ��h _s ✓ Qi�� _ � _M$ ^ L.._ E `4'2/ � ^^�� e :i �� " .w . � :.iY .�.�i �� , sy � m�� _' L _• � :.� t« {.J . � R�'� r�� 'R ;��fi'. ,.�� t .� �: 4� 'i„—^#�}� y -,�, £ �"�„.,° `�- -- Q-ri•-r' �; � �".�,*�� '�"_" �` r-- .. � . 4,_ . , ` r. : � r• ' "' - � -' io-...� ..'. "F� a � F .... . , . . .. - .; , .- ,^,� z .., " � . d � � �:, . .��`.,�. � � ' t -a.. -,.+,.� Y` � ,.��`f*. � _ �""'+�P�,, ... , , .... : , , � � � � ��_� 3 " � m ._. . � r,, _�•�. '� � . � 1 ; (',_ � _ - � � j) � 4`,' '`� �� 1 " _e.. _ , � t . - - , s . . �. . . „< ��i= � � , � �� ; a °� � . .,. . . . >. � ,�_ , . � . � , . , -, , : : „ ; _ ,...._. . _ _. � ,_. � _ , ; � _ _ : � � , . .. : � �,� , �� r � ._ � a . a .:. >��. � � _ ,.r� < : � r. ,;._ .y-. . .�� . . � ,u . ..._ � _„ . . . i- j _ j f' . .. . . _... , = ..y�-� � _ .,. � s_r,.. , __ , . - -' � r:: �. ' .: ,, . ,.� . = . ...... ..,. � ., _ .7. ...,, _ .:. � �...-...� ... . . Informatton Technology-GIS �""` P°�°,�°�°�,a.�°,° �oa� �1l[ine Hazards �—��'° WI8$vYKEf"C�1f'�f f2P'eqn}aQl��q CAU4'1'� �SwGLLSt6R� .��.....�.�. 4_..._,.,_ . �`_'+e�..m.M,w,�. �,,,��r��_,^�'/� Ctrr��. �—', �-_�.....�.+c+.r"' ��..1��t ��3 F ....� City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 11-3 December 2011 ��r+ � Figure 11.2 Overlay of Critical Facilities with Coal Mine Hazards Areas ;.. � � ''-�;� � � � ` � HAZARCt COh�DIT10N � � t ,, ... �,, 1J�� Coai Mine Severiry , , � , r t/ `. ': � " ��+ ' �i{IGH . {��' .. ,; . : � ;Cif]DERhTE '/ ,� __ �t, i *� � u t UNCLkBSiFlEO ' � � � ,s , '1 . . . . /.� f, • , ...,. . ..... ._.... . . . � '! . . l�'�: + � �C ��j. ft-�--�,,._,.,,,y ,+' y . R. ,��"".. � L't._- „' 4. `\. � '��-.� _. -'.�1 `� r��"`�.'-^.. '��,. ' � - _ � '�-t ,"--� �"'^, ''�.� � � � �_� � 1.�.. ' n..�.� � . `� � ��-. .1.--..�� . J,� + �+-�� t�� `� eE�.. I � .L:'�( .. _ f�F..� � E{�.� . _'-— � rF� L--- � .t'� � I E_� � � I � b �------- , , " _ � t--� � '�� € �� ` �.. _� � � ' -- ` �. , �� , �..:� ;� � � . - ,"�`'� _� �"^ ...w�:.:�„�. � �� ' �"p � ` _ f' w� .,�1 �'"�.�,_- � �� p Q p � 1----- 1 ._�+ '--'- � __..s��. :� �k"' .�L__.r__� �_r'� ! � 4 t �_l.. f �._� � _1 � � � _�� ,� ' ��*..' ' _� .�._�- . _� � ` �' ^� ' L'"I "'� '� p� �_�j, t J� 6.." ".+'�1.. ,, �—� �`� `i��}' h� 4 t `� a � � , j � I � �'--.w.;„ r'-- '.�--� -� �' "`�----=—,,:: � -�'' ~; � ._ ..'�_• ' ,, ; � �� —:.r --- — , t > �.._,' �i¢ I � - �� ._ � 1 µ �� ♦ ! � � '~''� �'i« ,' 3� � C 3 !. ' � � .._ ti ,:�E. - � i:._. " 4�� G j. Q � � � .� z ,� �' �--� �, .. k �: fi� �, �`, 'ti� r ; f .___._...._..�__.�� InfarmativnTechnology-GIS -----� �' Palice depaRment � Schotils Printed on 03fU3241� �__�� tY of Renton � Metro Plant na�s��c��r a ree,nm,n�.�c«�,ry � Fire STalions "Chzuncuu.:rni��rta+�rn�r,+xs�r��nRw.crnn+�ua+rtc3«,.a� -'•a.._••°.::. �"@��4��tB1`�ll18 1a s�usv*y a:ana�riK 6 tK52a un Ine ReSf M:'nttnaG]n �; w.t��tiosdrtr�aneshm..r.Tn,srmca.u+tawcemi �.:�7t�; ./�rTTly R@S@(V8�+BfTtBf �v��vv�esa,y� Sewer 0 ProduGtian WellS Olympic Pipelines ��r�f� (Q Water Utitity Reservair _,..—.W_,_.,,"`•�'`��'� �' � ' � � " i� `� r High Pressure Gas Line _ s ..d..�� . [� Vafley MediGaC Gent�f City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan il-4 December 2011 Plan Goals Addressed � c � � v c ' �, ,�'� � �' o ` � � a, a, � n, � ;, m N � Funding Hazard Action Item Coordinating Organizations Timeline � � a � r �— „ � �, '� 3 �, o ;, ` � c � oc ; Source a a � v ,� ., u � � � � LL 01 O � '0 J � w 7 C � o � a Wa of6 d �. � Z a Coal Mine Hazard Mitigation Action Items Require geological or geotechnical engineering long-Term studies before permitting new construction in Community and Economic Ongoing X X X X LOC81 � #1 identified coal mine hazard areas. Development Funds � City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 11-5 December 2011 � � 12.0 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 12.1 Introduction For mitigation planning, hazardous materials may be defined simply as any materials that may have negative impacts on human health. Exposure to these materials may result in injury, sickness or death.The impacts of hazardous materials may be short-term with negative effects immediately, in seconds, minutes or hours or they may be long-term with negative effects starting in days, weeks, or in some cases years after exposure. Hazardous materials vary widely in their toxicity to humans. Some hazardous materials are highly toxic and even brief exposures to small amounts may be dangerous or fatal. Other hazardous materials are much less toxic and negative effects may occur only after exposure to large amounts over long time periods. The technical term "toxic,"which is widely used to describe hazardous materials is simply a synonym for the more common terms "poison" or"poisonous." Hazardous chemicals are widely used in heavy industry, manufacturing, agriculture, mining,the oil and gas industry,forestry, transportation, medical facilities, and commercial, public and residential buildings.There are literally hundreds of thousands of chemicals that may be hazardous to human health to some extent.A typical single family home may contain dozens of potentially hazardous materials including: fuels, paints, solvents, cleaning chemicals, pesticides, herbicides, medicines and others. For mitigation planning purposes, small quantities of slightly or moderately hazardous materials being used by end users are rarely the focus of interest. Rather, interest is focused primarily on larger quantities of hazardous materials in industrial use and on hazardous materials being transported, where the potential for accidental spills is high. Situations involving extremely hazardous materials or large quantities of hazardous materials in locations where accidents may result in significant public health risk are of special concern. The toxicity of particular hazardous materials is an important measure of the potential impact of hazardous materials on affected communities for mitigation planning purposes. Other characteristics of hazardous materials, especially the quantity of material and the ease of dispersal, may be as important as, or more important than, toxicity in governing the level of potential threat to a community. For example, a small quantity of a very toxic solid hazardous material in a research laboratory poses a much smaller level of risk than a large quantity of a less toxic gaseous material in an industrial site upwind from a populated area. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-1 December 2011 � � The severity of any hazardous material release incident for an affected community depends on several factors: a) the toxicity of the hazardous material, b) the quantity of the hazardous material released, c) the dispersal characteristics of the hazardous material, d) the local conditions such as wind direction and topography, and e) the efficacy of response and recovery actions. 12.2 Effects of Hazardous Materials on Humans There are three principal modes of human exposure to hazardous materials: 1. inhalation of gaseous or particulate materials via the respiratory (breathing) process, 2. ingestion of hazardous materials via contaminated food or water and 3. direct contact with skin or eyes. Exposure to hazardous materials can result in a wide range of negative health effects on humans. Hazardous materials are generally classified by their health effects.The most common classes of hazardous materials are summarized below. Flammable materials are substances where fire is the primary threat, although explosions and chemical effects listed below may also occur. Common examples include gasoline, diesel fuel, and propane. Explosives are materials where explosion is the primary threat, although fires and chemical effects listed below may also occur. Common examples include dynamite and other explosives used in construction or demolition. Irritants are substances that cause inflammation or chemical burns of the eyes, nose,throat, lungs, skin or other tissues of the body in which they come in contact. Examples of irritants are strong acids such as sulfuric or nitric acid. Asphyxiants are substances that interfere with breathing. Chemical asphyxiants are substances that prevent the body from using oxygen or otherwise interfere with the breathing process. Common examples are carbon monoxide and cyanides.Simple asphyxiants cause injury or death by displacing the oxygen necessary for life. For example, Nitrogen is a normally harmless gas that constitutes about 78%of the atmosphere. However, nitrogen release in a confined space may result in asphyxiation by displacing oxygen. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-2 December 2011 � � � Anesthetics and Narcotics are substances which act on the body by depressing the central nervous system. Symptoms include drowsiness, weakness,fatigue and loss of coordination, which may lead to unconsciousness, paralysis of the respiratory system and death. Examples include hydrocarbon and organic compounds. Hazardous materials may also have a wide variety of more specialized impacts on human health. Other types of toxic effects are briefly summarized in Table 12.1. Table 12.1 Other Types of Hazardous Materials Type of Hazardous Effects on Humans Material Hepatotoxin Liver damage Nephrotoxin Kidney damage Neurotoxin Neurological (nerve) damage Carcinogen May result in cancer Mutagen May produce changes in the genetic material of cells Teratogen May have adverse affects on sperm, ova or fetal tissue Radioactive materials May result directly in radiation sickness at high exposure levels or act as carcinogen, mutagen or teratogen Infectious substances Biological materials such as bacteria or viruses that may cause illness or death Much of the information above was summarized from Chapter Six of the Handbook of Chemical Hazard Analysis Proceduresl.The first few chapters of this handbook contain a concise summary of many of the technical aspects of hazardous materials.These chapters may be useful to readers seeking a more technical introduction to the nomenclature and science of hazardous materials. 12.3 Classification System and Emergency Response Protocols A standardized system is used to classify and identify hazardous materials.The Emergency Response Guidebook(A Guidebook for First Responders During the Initial Phase of a Dangerous Goods/Hazardous Material Incident2) is an extremely useful reference book that outlines the classification system, provides standardized first response protocols and detailed reference sheets for the most common classes of hazardous materials. Hazardous material releases are predominantly accidental results of traffic accidents, equipment failures or human errors. In rare cases, hazardous material releases may result from deliberate actions of sabotage or terrorism. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-3 December 2011 '�' '�' First responders for hazardous material incidents are generally public safety personnel (police or fire).The standard protocols for first responders are briefly summarized below, as garnered from the Emergency Response Guidebook. The primary guidance for first responders is to: a) resist rushing in, b) approach the incident site from upwind, uphill or upstream, and c) stay clear of all spills, vapors,fumes and smoke. Upon approaching the incident site, a three-step procedure is recommended: 1. Investigate—from a safe distance try to determine if there is a leak, smoke, visible fumes or vapors, which direction the wind is blowing, if there are victims or potential victims, and if those victims can be rescued without entering the atmosphere. 2. Identify the material—from a safe distance, with binoculars or by a representative, obtain the name of the material,or the four-digit ID number from a placard or orange panel. 3. Isolate—using the DOT Emergency Response Guidebook guideline for the product, create a safe zone around the incident area to keep the public, non-responders and non-equipped personnel a safe distance away from the hazard. Identification of hazardous materials can be accomplished by finding: a) the four-digit ID number on a placard or orange panel, b) the four-digit ID number on a shipping document or package, or c) the name of the material on a placard, shipping document or package. Once identified by ID number or name material specific information can be located using the ID number or name index.The procedures and precautions outlined in the guide for the identified class of material are then carefully followed. For each class of material,the guides have criticaf information on potential hazards, suggested evacuation distances for small and large spills and recommended emergency response actions to include first aid. For further technical details see the Emergency Response Guidebook. The emergency response to hazardous material incidents typically involves first responders(local fire departments)and then specialized emergency response teams if the severity of the incident warrants such a response. First responders are generally public safety staff trained in basic procedures for the initial response to hazardous materials incidents.The responsibilities of first City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-4 December 2011 � � responders include securing the incident scene and making a preliminary assessment of the potential severity of the incident and the level of threat, if any, to persons in and near the hazardous materials incident area. Emergency response teams are specialized teams, composed primarily of public safety staff, with higher-level training and more specialized equipment for dealing with hazardous materials incidents. Response planning for hazardous materials incidents is often characterized by a three level response classification.The distinction between Levels I, II, and III depends on: a) class of hazardous material, b) size of container, c) fire/explosion potential, d) leak severity and container integrity, and e) threats to life safety. Level I Responses are those incidents readily controlled or stabilized by first responders.The HazMat Emergency Response Team personnel may provide technical assistance via telephone or on-site assistance, but full response by an Emergency Response Team is not required. Level II Responses are those incidents that require response from a HazMat Emergency Response Team for control or stabilization of the spill. Depending on the event the response level may be 2-4 personnel, or even a small response team of 6-8 personnel for identification of the material and guidance on appropriate response actions. Level III Responses are those incidents that require special resources, including one or more full Emergency Response Teams and possibly other outside agencies for support. 12.4 Statutory and Regulatory Context Hazardous Materials—General Provisions are covered in Chapter 27 of the International Fire Code. Additional restrictions and requirements for particular classes of hazardous materials are referenced in additional chapters. The manufacture, storage, use,transportation, and disposal of hazardous materials are subject to a myriad of federal, state, and local regulations. In the context of mitigation planning and emergency response,we focus on reporting requirements for chemicals subject to mandatory risk management planning and extremely hazardous substances subject to additional reporting and planning requirements. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-5 December 2011 � � Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act Amendments was designed to prevent accidental releases of hazardous substances.The rule establishes a list of chemicals and threshold quantities that identify facilities subject to subsequent accident prevention regulations.The listed substances have the greatest potential to pose the greatest hazard to public health and the environment in the event of an accidental release. Hazardous materials may be released to the environment during manufacturing and other ongoing processes or accidentally. Certain types of businesses are required to report such releases annually for a specified list of chemicals.There are additional reporting and planning requirements for materials deemed to be extremely hazardous. 12.5 Fixed Site Hazardous Materials Locations in Renton There are over 15 facilities within City limits that have significant hazardous chemical quantities.These facilities store, transport or use these chemical in a variety of inethods. Any release of these products could trigger a significant response. A major release could activate the EOC,trigger evacuations and sheltering plans, and involve more than one department or jurisdiction. 12.6 Hazardous Materials Transport: Truck Shipments, Rail Shipments and Pipelines Hazardous materials may be transported once or many times during their"life cycle" of raw materials, manufacturing, incorporation in other products,wholesale and retail trade, use,waste disposal and recycling.The transport of hazardous materials may be local, across a state, across the country or internationally. Shipment of hazardous materials by truck within or near Renton includes shipments on Interstates 5 and 405, along with shipments on local streets. The main rail line between Portland and Seattle passes through Tukwila,just west of Renton. Current average daily train counts are 60 trains per day on the segment between Auburn and Seattle. Many of these trains contain shipments of hazardous materials. There are three types of major fuel pipeline systems in or near Renton. 1) The Williams high pressure natural gas transmission line which runs from British Columbia,through Washington and Oregon to California. 2) The natural gas distribution systems run by utilities in most cities. 3) The BP/Olympic liquid fuels pipeline that carries most of the gasoline and fuels used in the region, including jet fuel for Sea-Tac Airport. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-6 December 2011 � � The Williams gas transmission line runs north-south through Issaquah and Renton. The BP/Olympic liquid fuels pipeline runs directly through Renton. Renton also has a natural gas distribution system and pumping station within the City operated by Puget Sound Energy(PSE). PSE also operates a large underground 1.5 million gallon propane-only storage facility. The natural gas pipeline systems of local gas utilities, including the Renton system, almost always follow road and street patterns because of established utility rights of way and the need to connect with each building served. For areas served by natural gas, the local street network is essentially identical to the natural gas distribution pipe network. The propane storage facility lies in a valley in close proximity to apartments, homes,office buildings, major power lines and a major transportation corridor.A significant release could easily reach the I-405 area as well as the commercial district near Talbot and Grady.The release of even one 40,000 gallon tank is significant, and there are 36 in-service tanks present. A catastrophic release could liberate many tanks resulting in a huge dispersal area. Overall, the safety record of natural gas pipelines is good with relatively few significant accident's. Natural gas is not toxic (i.e., not poisonous) but it can be an asphyxiant if it displaces oxygen in an enclosed space. Natural gas burns readily when ignited, but only when gas concentrations are between 4%and 15%in air. In its pure state natural gas is both colorless and odorless.The strong odor normally associated with natural gas is an odorant called mercaptan, deliberately introduced at low concentrations to serve as a warning of the presence of natural gas. Mercaptan is generally added to natural gas at the local distribution level by local gas utilities. Fires and/or explosions from natural gas leaks in pipelines are rare. In part, the rarity of fires and/or explosions is due to the fact that natural gas is about one- third less dense than ordinary air. Leaking natural gas does not accumulate near the ground or"pond" in low-lying areas(as heavier gases such as liquefied propane gas or gasoline fumes may do). Instead, leaking natural gas rises rapidly and is dissipated by dilution in the atmosphere.The fires and/or explosions that do occur from natural gas leaks are generally in buildings where the confined space allows leaking gas to accumulate until ignited. Pipeline breaks due to natural causes may occur due to landslides or earthquakes. Earthquake induced pipe breaks for natural gas transmission lines are most likely to occur in areas of soft soils subject to liquefaction and/or lateral spreading which cause significant pipe displacements.The most likely locations for such breaks during an earthquake are on slopes of soft ground near where pipelines cross rivers or streams. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-7 December 2011 � `+� Smaller pipelines are frequently damaged by digging without calling for a locator to where the pipeline location. Most breaks of this type occur in local distribution lines. Pipeline breaks can atso be caused by deliberate acts of sabotage or terrorism.Although pipelines are not symbolic targets with political, historical and cultural significance,they are potential targets for terrorist actions. Major pipeline breaks could disrupt gas service over wide areas and result in significant economic impacts. Natural gas utilities and local emergency responders are generally well prepared to deal with natural gas breaks, because such incidents occur relatively frequently with well-standardized response procedures. Evacuations for natural gas pipeline ruptures are generally limited to the immediate area of the break. 12.7 Summary and Mitigation Strategies 12.7.1 Planning and Response Effective mitigation planning and emergency response planning can help reduce the number or frequency of hazardous materials incidents as well as reduce the severity of incidents that occur. In combination,these benefits can significantly reduce the negative impacts of hazardous materials inci�ents on affected communities.The general principles of mitigation planning, emergency response planning(and training) are well standardized and practiced by King County and the City of Renton. Perhaps the single most critical factor in enhancing both mitigation planning and emergency response planning is specific inventory awareness for major hazardous materials sites within each jurisdiction. Specific inventory awareness means detailed knowledge of the types, quantities and locations of all sites in a jurisdiction with significant quantities of hazardous materials. What constitutes a significant quantity varies depending on the toxicity of the material, the dispersal characteristics and the nature and population of nearby areas likely to be affected. The complexity and overload of information for hazardous materials is compounded by numerous labeling, placarding and classification systems, with countless cross references to guide numbers, material safety reports and so on. Because of this vast amount of complex information, effective mitigation planning and emergency response planning must occur before an incident occurs, not after. During an incident,the most effective response is impossible to achieve if emergency personnel are thumbing through databases trying to figure out what hazardous materials are at a given location and what the appropriate response precautions and protocols are for the specific materials involved. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-8 December 2011 +`rv' wrr'' Specific inventory awareness means that for every site with hazardous materials of sufficient toxicity, dispersal characteristics and quantities to pose a significant life safety risk to on-site employees and nearby residents must be identified in advance. Ideally, Renton should have specific inventory awareness of every significant fixed site in its jurisdiction.Similarly, each jurisdiction should have specific inventory awareness of the most toxic, most common, large volume shipments of hazardous materials within and throughout the jurisdiction. For eacfi hazardous material deemed to pose a significant life safety threat,the necessary chemical data, response protocols, initial isolation distances, protection distances for small and large spills, and all other data necessary for safe and effective response should be compiled and readily available before incidents occur. 12.7.2 Mitigation Measures Specific inventory awareness is one cornerstone of reducing the potential for negative impacts from hazardous materials incidents by helping to optimize emergency and response planning.The other cornerstone is pro-active mitigation actions to reduce the number and severity of hazardous materials incidents. A dedicated staff position within the Fire& Emergency Services Department is responsible for the inspection of facilities that store, handle,transport, manufacture or use hazardous materials for compliance with International Fire Code requirements, and to serve as a technical advisor at hazardous material incidents. The most common mitigation measures for reducing the potential of damaging hazardous materials incidents are briefly summarized below. 12.7.2.1 Physical Safety Measures The tanks, storage containers and transfer systems(valves, pipes etc.)for hazardous materials are frequently subject to damage in earthquakes, with a correspondingly high potential for accidental releases. Proper seismic design, bracing and anchoring of storage systems for hazardous materials can greatly reduce the potential of accidental releases during earthquakes. Bracing and anchoring measures for storage containers and transfer systems (e.g., piping) are often relatively inexpensive, with a large improvement in seismic performance. For small quantities of materials stored in bottles or jugs on shelving, bracing shelving and restraining containers so that they do not fall in earthquakes are particularly important. Over time the storage containers and other material handling elements for hazardous materials may change many times. In some cases, later modifications may not be designed to the same seismic standards as the original installation or later modifications may compromise the seismic stability of the original City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-9 December 2011 �M � installation.Therefore, periodic review and inspections of seismic design, bracing and anchoring are highly recommended for all hazardous material facilities. For facilities located in mapped flood plains or other areas subject to floodwaters there are two important physical safety measures. First, any containers subject to floating should be properly restrained. In many floods, improperly restrained tanks break free and float downstream, with high potential for negative impacts including fires and accidental releases of hazardous materials. Second, special precautions should be taken with water-reactive materials. Such materials should never be stored in low-elevation areas subject to flooding or in locations subject to water from storm water drainage or plumbing failures in a facility. 12.7.2.2 Standard Operating Procedures Standard operating procedures for storing, transporting and handling hazardous materials should be strictly enforced at all facilities. Appropriate training for all staff, with review courses and appropriate protective gear is essential for safety. Rigorous inspection and enforcement of hazardous materials regulations (federal, state and local) are an important part of the overall process of ensuring safety. 12.7.2.3 Mitigation and Emergency Response Planning Effective pre-event mitigation planning and emergency response planning can help reduce the severity of hazardous material incidents. From the mitigation planning perspective, specific inventory awareness of the types and quantities of hazardous materials present at each facility is particularly important. Local fire departments and other responders should be thoroughly familiar with the specific inventory at each facility containing hazardous materials and with the appropriate response protocols for each hazardous material. First responders and emergency response teams must both have the full range of protective gear and equipment necessary for their respective roles in responding to hazardous materials incidents. Emergency response planning should include thorough training in all aspects of hazardous materials response, including appropriate response protocols (procedures, protective gear and equipment). Frequent refresher training and frequent exercises (both tabletop and full field exercises) are essential for safe and effective emergency response.Training exercise should include both first responders and emergency response teams, to help ensure appropriate coordination of efforts during actual hazardous materials incidents. The following table,Table 12.2, contains hazardous materials mitigation action items from the Master Action Items Table in Chapter 4. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-10 December 2011 C � C � v f0 a� � y > � c� c ,� � � ,� ` o � ,� ` i � � v �, a °° °' v o � Funding HaZard Action Item Coardinating Organiiations Timeline � w a ; � �� v �o 'Q � a � �'� � � � J SOUfCe m d J Gl � G LL � � L 'G � C �' a N � 7 G - a_ W a Io a L � Z a Hazmat Incident Mitigation Action items Short-Term Ensure that first responders have readily available LOC81 �1 site-specific knowledge of hazardous chemicai fire&Emergency Services 1 year X X x Funds inventories in Renton, Local Enhance emergency planning,emergency response Funds, �, Short-Term training and equipment to address hazardous Fire&Emergency Services,Police, Ongoing X X X Grant #� materials incidents. Public works Funds (SHSP, UASI) � �, City of Renton Haiard Mitigation Plan 12-11 December 2011 � � References 1. Handbook of Chemical Analysis Procedures, Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Transportation,and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1988. 2. 2008 Emergency Response Guidebook(A Guidebook for First Responders During the Initial Phase of a Dangerous Goods/Hazardous Material Incident), developed jointly by the U.S. Department of Transportation,Transport Canada, and the Secretariat of Transport and Communications of Mexico, 2008. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 12-12 December 2011 � � 13.0 TERRORISM 13.1 Overview For mitigation planning, terrorism is broadly inclusive of a wide range of deliberate malevolent acts intended to damage buildings, infrastructure or to result in deaths and injuries.The probability of international terrorist organizations targeting Renton, is not zero, but is low. Renton is certainly subject to deliberate malevolent acts from many sources including vandals, mentally disturbed individuals, domestic terrorist groups (e.g., eco-terrorists),disgruntled residents and past or present employees. The range of possible malevolent actions includes vandalism, arson, explosions and armed attacks as well as the use of chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear materials. Chemical attacks include deliberate release of on-site chemicals as well as deliberate dispersal of transported hazardous materials. Biological attacks include deliberate dispersal of biologically active materials(e.g.,anthrax)capable of causing sickness or death. Radiological attacks include deliberate dispersal of radioactive materials, via dirty bombs (conventional explosives laced with radioactive materials)or other methods. Nuclear attacks include explosion of nuclear devices and the radioactive fallout from such explosions. The range of possible malevolent actions also includes cyber-terrorism or deliberate disruption/damage of computer systems and data. Especially for utility systems, cyber- terrorism can also result in loss of service due to disruption/damage to automated Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems widely used by utilities. 13Z Threat Spectrum For purposes of mitigation planning we will consider three sources of terrorist (malevolent)actions:outsiders, insiders and hackers. In each case we consider three levels of attack.The levels reflect the number of individuals involved,the level of technical knowledge or expertise and the level of equipment or tools available.This threat spectrum is summarized below in Table 13.1. In Table 13.1, outsiders refers to anyone who is not an employee of the facility under potential terrorist attack.Outsiders could be vandals, disturbed individuals or members of domestic or international organized groups. For Renton,the most likely terrorist or malevolent acts are minor vandalism or actions by disturbed individuals. Deliberate terrorist actions are most likely from domestic groups, including eco-terrorists and are unlikely to be from international organizations. In Table 13.1, insiders refers to anyone who is an employee of the target under potential attack.Acts of vandalism,theft and other relatively minor actions are common. Larger scale malevolent acts are less common but still occur with some frequency.Such acts include larger scale damage,arson,explosives and contamination of water supplies. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 13-1 December 2011 � � In Table 13.1, computer hackers refers to individuals or groups using remote access to explore, vandalize or destroy websites,computer databases and such. For utility systems, hackers can also impact SCADA systems and may affect system operations directly. Table 13.1 . Threat Spectrum for Terrorist Actions Adversary Number of Level of Knowledge Equipment Weapons Objectives Adversaries Tools Extensive knowledge of hand tools, handguns or automatic Extensive damage to critical security systems, Ou[sider:high level 1 to small group facilities and modes of Power tools, weapons,incendiary devices, facilities,widespread attack vehicles explosives,contaminants damage or casualties Limited knowledge of hand tools, Outsider:medium level 1 to 3 security systems, Power tools, handguns,incendiary devices, Damage or casualties facilities and modes of vehicle explosives,contaminants attack Minimal knowledge of Outsider:low level 1 or 2 security systems, hand tools None Vandalism,damage or facilities and modes of casualties attack Extensive knowledge of On site tools, securiry sys[ems, chemicals, handguns or automatic Insider:high level 1 facilities,operations, equipment, �^'eapons,incendiary devices, Damage or casualties policies and procedures vehicles explosives,con[aminants Moderate knowledge of On site tools, Insider:medium level 1 security systems, chemicals, handguns,incendiary devices, Damage or casualties facilities,operations, equipment, explosives,contaminants policies and procedures vehicles Limited knowledge of On site[ools, Insider:low level 1 securiry systems, chemicals, handgun or none Vandalism,damage or facilities,operations, equipment, casualties policies and procedures vehicles Full knowledge of IT SophisUcated Destruction of data and Hacker: high level 1 to small group infrasVucture,security hacker tools N/A systems,business systems,SCADA and methods operations s stems Moderate knowledge of Moderately IT infrastructure,security sophisticated Denial of servcie or Hacker: medium level 1 or 2 systems,SCADA hacker tools N/A disruption of some business s tems and methods services Limited knowledge of IT Hacker: low level 1 �nfrastructure,security N/A N/A Minor cyber-vandalism[o systems,SCADA non-critical business areas s tems The probable impacts of terrorist events on the City of Renton are summarized below in Table 13.2. For Renton,the most likely terrorist events are very small scale events (vandalism or minor damage events by insiders, local outsiders or computer hacking events) rather than major terrorist actions by outsiders. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 13-2 December 2011 � � Table 13.2 Probable Impacts of Terrorist Incidents on the City of Renton Invento Probable Im acts Portion of Renton affected Localized impacts for minor incidents, large portions or the entire City for extremel unlikel major incidents. Buildings Localized impacts to a single building or a few nearby buildings, except for extremel unlikel major incidents. Streets within Renton Some incidents may include temporary street closures. Roads to/from Renton Some incidents may include temporary road closures. Electric power Some incidents may include temporary loss of electric power in localized arts of Renton or for the entire Cit . Some incidents may include temporary loss of utilities in localized parts of Other Utilities Renton or for the entire City. Major damage to water or wastewater treatment plant could result in full�r partial loss of service for extended time periods. Casualties Ma'or events ma result in si nificant casualties (deaths and injuries). 13.3 Mitigation Actions Evaluation of the threat of terrorist or other malevolent actions generally includes several steps: 1) determine critical facilities and other risk targets, 2) identify the specific adverse consequences to be avoided, 3) review the likelihood of malevolent actions, 4) evaluate existing countermeasures and 5) implement a prioritized risk reduction plan. Critical facilities in Renton include key elements of the water system,electric power substations,other facilities with hazardous materials (cf.Chapter 12)and important public facilities such as police and fire stations. Important non-municipal facilities include the Boeing facilities and the major regional wastewater, natural gas and liquid fuels lines which pass through or near Renton. The most likely adverse consequences are vandalism and minor destructive actions by outsiders, insiders or hackers.The evaluation of existing countermeasures should include: 1) Physical security measures-fencing, locks and key control,structural integrity of critical assets,detection capabilities such as intrusion detection systems, alarms, operational alarms for utility systems and general security/access. 2) Cvber securitv measures-protection measures for business/operational computer systems and SCADA systems,fire walls, security policies and protocols,vendor access,system diagnostics, etc. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 13-3 December 2011 � � 3) Securitv procedures and policies- personnel security, physical security, key and badge control,system control and operational data, chemical and other vendor deliveries, and security and emergency response training, exercises and drills. For Renton,vigilance and modest upgrades to existing physical security, cyber security and security procedures and.policies are probably all that are reasonably required. The potential impacts of terrorism or other malevolent deliberate actions in Renton can also be mitigated by improving emergency planning and emergency response capabilities. For some types of events, such as fires or explosions,the emergency response actions are self-evident and emergency responders are wel)trained for dealing with such situations. Other types of actions such as release of radiological materials, bioterrorism,or contamination of water or food supplies may not be immediately recognized. For such types of actions, close cooperation with public health officials and awareness of the possibility of deliberate actions are important. Such situations also commonly require specialized expertise and equipment to detect and identify the radiological, biological or chemical materials used in an attack. Emergency response plans should be updated and expanded, as necessary,to include protocols for public notifications and information about appropriate public responses such as shelter in place or evacuation. The following table,Table 13.3 Terrorism Mitigation Action Items,contains terrorism mitigation action items from the Master Action Items Table in Chapter 4. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 13-4 December 2011 -. — u w y � � �y � C � � � +' _ y 0 � ' a � a W a "m ,� a � � Z Terrorism Mitigation Action Items Local Enhance emergency planning,emergency response Funds, Short-Term training and equipment to addres5 potential Fire&Emergency Services,Police Ongoing X X X X X Grant �'I �1 incidents of terrorism, Funds (SHSP, UASI) Local Funds, Long-Term Upgrade phy5ical security detection and response Grant � �1 capability for critical facilities,including water Community Services,Police Ongoing X X X X Funds system, (SHSP, UASI) Long-Term Evaluate and implement hardening measures for 5-10 LOCeI Police,CommunityServices X X X X #2 highly vulnerable critical facilities. Years Funds Local Funds, long-Term Identify and establish secure surveillance cameras Police,Community Services,Public 5 Years X X x Grant �3 and monitoring at all critical infrastructure, Works Funds (SHSP, UASI) � Local Chemical,Biological,Radiological,Nuclear and FlIf1dS, long-Term Explosive5(CBRNE�Detection and security police,Community Services 5 Years X X x Grant �4 tleuices�elements integrated at critical city Funds infrastructure. (SHSP, UAS1� City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan 13-5 December 2011 � � APPENDIX 1 SYNOPSIS OF FEMA GRANT PROGRAMS April 2, 2009 � � FEMA FUNDING POSSIBILITIES FOR RENTON Overview For public entities, such as the City of Renton, FEMA funding possibilities fall into two main categories: • The post-disaster Public Assistance Program which covers not less than 75%of eligible emergency response and restoration (repair) costs for public entities who suffer damages in a presidentially-declared disaster. The Public Assistance Program also may fund mitigation projects for facilities damaged in the declared event. � Mitigation grant programs (either pre-disaster or post-disaster) which typically cover up to 75%of mitigation costs. FEMA Public Assistance Program The objective of FEMA's Public Assistance (PA) Grant Program is to provide assistance to State,Tribal and local governments, and certain types of private nonprofit organizations, so that communities can quickly respond to and recover from major disasters or emergencies. Through the PA Program, FEMA provides supplemental Federal disaster grant assistance for debris removal, emergency protective measures, and the repair, replacement or restoration of disaster-damaged, publicly owned facilities and the facilities of certain private non-profit (PNP) organizations.The PA Program also encourages protection of these damaged facilities from future events by providing assistance for hazard mitigation measures during the recovery process. For Renton, PA assistance would be available only for future presidentially-declared disaster events which resulted in damage to Renton facilities. Further details of FEMA's PA programs are available at: http://www.fema.�ov/government/�rant/pa/index.shtm FEMA Mitigation Funding Sources FEMA has several mitigation grant programs which provide federal funds to supplement local funds for specified types of mitigation activities. The FEMA grant programs typically provide 75%funding with a 25%local match required. In very limited cases, FEMA grant programs may provide 90%or 100%funding. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan Al-1 April 2010 � � The five primary FEMA mitigation grant programs are summarized below: Hazard Risk Mitigation Grant Program Frequency Mitigation Assessments Projects Hazards Plannin Hazard Miti ation Grant Pro ram Post-Disaster YES YES YES ALL Pre-Disaster Miti ation Annual YES NO YES ALL Flood Miti ation Assistance Annual YES NO YES Flood Re etitive Flood Claims Pro ram Annual NO NO YES Flood Severe Re etitive Loss Pro ram Annual NO NO YES Flood These FEMA grant programs have specific eligibility requirements and application deadlines. All of these grant programs have specific requirements including definitions of ineligible projects which are excluded from the grant programs. All mitigation projects (but not planning projects or risk assessments) must be cost-effective,which means that a benefit-cost analysis using FEMA software and following FEMA guidance must demonstrate a benefit-cost ratio >1.0. These grant programs are not entitlement programs, but rather are competitive grant programs which require strict adherence to the eligibility and application requirements and robust documentation. Robust documentation is especially critical for the Pre- Disaster Mitigation grant program which is nationally competitive. The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program is initiated within a given state only after a Presidential Declaration of Disaster;thus,there is no fixed schedule. A given state may have several declarations in a given year or go several years without any declarations. Specific application deadlines are established for HMGP funds generated by each disaster declaration. The other four mitigation grant programs are annual programs with specific deadlines, which vary from year to year. For FY 2009 grants,the application deadline for all four programs was December 19, 2008. For FY 2010 and later years, deadlines are subject to change, but would likely be similar to the FY 2009 deadline. Please note that,these applications are reviewed and ranked by Washington State Emergency Management staff before they go to FEMA for review. Washington State deadlines are typically about six weeks before the FEMA deadlines. The three flood-only grant programs—Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA), Repetitive Flood Claims (RFC) and Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL)—are narrowly defined grant programs which apply only to properties insured under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Renton would be eligible for these grants only for properties with NFIP coverage. For the RFC and SRL programs Renton would be eligible only if the properties also meet repetitive loss requirements. City of Renton Mazard Mitigation Plan Al-2 April 2010 � � The most likely FEMA funding sources for seismic mitigation projects are the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program, as well as the Public Assistance Program if Renton suffers damage in a future presidentially-declared disaster event. Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) The HMGP is a post-disaster grant program. Funds are generated following a Presidential Disaster Declaration for a given state, with the amount of funding being a percentage of total FEMA spending for various other FEMA prograrns. FEMA regulations allow HMGP funds to be spent on any mitigation project in the state, for any hazard, regardless of whether or not an applicant was located in a declared county for a specific presidentially-declared disaster. Historically, Washington State Emergency Management has often given priority to the declared counties and to the hazard (e.g., winter storms)that resulted in the presidential declaration. However, mitigation projects outside of the declared counties and for other hazards have also been considered. HMGP funds are limited to a given state and are competitive only within each state. Each state manages the HMGP process, including setting state priorities and selection of projects for funding. FEMA reviews applications only to ensure that selected projects meet all of FEMA's eligibility requirements. HMGP is the most flexible grant program -grants are possible for any natural hazard and may include hazard mitigation planning and risk assessments as well as physical mitigation projects. States have wide latitude in setting priorities and may restrict grant eligibility to specific counties to which the disaster declaration applies and/or to specific hazards or types of mitigation activities. Washington State Emergency Management has great influence over HMGP grants within Washington, subject to the requirement that all grants meet FEMA's minimum eligibility requirements. The amount of HMGP funding in a given disaster can range from less than $100,000 to more than $1 billion for large disasters(e.g., Hurricane Katrina). For Washington, declared disasters are relatively common, often with one or more declarations in a given year for winter storms, floods or other disasters.The total amount of HMGP mitigation funds available for mitigation projects(absent a major hurricane or earthquake)will vary from year to year and disaster event to disaster event. HMGP mitigation grants do not have pre-set maximums on grant sizes. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan Ai-3 April 2010 � � Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program The Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM)grant program is a broad program which includes mitigation projects for any natural hazard as well as mitigation planning grants for the development of a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. PDM is a nationally- competitive annual program. The annual amount of grant funds available has ranged from approximately$50 million to$250 million. The congressional appropriation for FY 2009 is about$100 million, although congressional earmarks have pre-allocated some of the available funds. Funding levels in future years will depend on congressional appropriations. PDM grants cover 75%of the costs of mitigation projects up to a maximum federal share of$3,000,000 per project. Flood Mitigation Grant Programs The three flood-only mitigation grant programs have annual appropriations specific to each state. As noted above, these programs are applicable only to NFIP insured properties; and for the RFC and SRL programs, only to properties which also meet the repetitive flood loss criteria. Each of these programs has their specific guidance, outlined in the Hazard Mitigation Assistance unified guidance discussed below. However,the overall grant requirements are similar to those for the HMGP discussed above. The likelihood of getting a Flood Mitigation Assistance grant in Renton appears modest. There may be a few homes or other buildings at sufficient flood risk to have elevation or acquisition projects potentially eligible for FEMA grant funding. Absent any properties on FEMA's national repetitive loss list, Renton would not be eligible for either of FEMA's repetitive flood loss grant programs. Mitigation Grant Guidance and Requirements Detailed program guidance and the specific requirements for each of the five grant programs discussed above are posted on the FEMA website (www.fema.�ov). The guidance and requirements for the four annual grant programs have recently been combined into a uniform hazard mitigation guide (Hazard Mitigation Assistance Program Guidance,June 19, 2008). New uniform hazard mitigation guidance is expected in mid-2009. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan Al-4 April 2010 � � Mitigation Project Grant Applications All of FEMA's mitigation grant programs are competitive, either within a given state or nationally. Successful grant applications must be complete, robust and very well documented. The key elements for successful mitigation project grant applications include: • The benefits of the project are carefully documented using FEMA benefit- cost software, with all inputs meticulously meeting FEMA's guidance and expectations. A benefit-cost analysis that meets FEMA's requirements is often the most critical step in determining a mitigation project's eligibility and competitiveness for FEMA grants. • Project locations within high hazard areas. • For utility mitigation projects, the majority of benefits often accrue from reductions in the calculated economic impacts (using FEMA standard methodologies) of the loss of utility services. • Project facilities which have major vulnerabilities which pose substantial risk of damages, economic impacts and (especially for seismic projects) deaths or injuries. • Mitigation project scope and budget are well documented. A further eligibility requirement for mitigation project grants is that the focal applicant must have a FEMA approved local hazard mitigation plan. Renton will continue to be eligible to apply for FEMA mitigation grants, once FEMA approves this updated Plan. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan A1-5 April 2010 � � APPENDIX 2 PRINCIPLES OF BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS April 8, 2009 � � Benefit-cost analysis is the tool that provides answers to a central question for hazard mitigation projects: "Is it worth it?" If hazard mitigation projects were free, individuals and communities would undertake mitigation with robust enthusiasm and the risks from hazards would soon be greatly reduced. Unfortunately, mitigation is not free, but often rather expensive. For a given situation, it must be determined if the investment in mitigation is justified? Is the owner(public or private) better off economically to accept the risk or invest now in mitigation to reduce future damages? Benefit-cost analysis can help a community answer these difficult questions. In the complicated real world of mitigation projects, there are many factors which determine whether or not a mitigation project is worth doing or which of two or more mitigation projects should have the highest priority. Consider a town which has two flood prone neighborhoods and each neighborhood desires a mitigation project.The two neighborhoods have different numbers and values of houses as well as different frequencies and severity of flooding. The first neighborhood proposes storm water drainage improvements at a cost of$3.0 million. The second neighborhood wants to elevate houses at a cost of$3.0 million. Which of these projects should be completed? Both? One or the Other? Neither? Which project should be completed first if there is only funding for one? Are there alternative mitigation projects which are more sensible or more cost-effective than the proposed projects? In determining whether or not a given mitigation project is worth doing,the level of risk exposure without mitigation is critical. Whether or not the project is worth doing depends on the level of risk before mitigation and on the effectiveness of the project in reducing that risk. For example, if the before mitigation risk is low(a subdivision street has a few inches of water on the street every couple of years, or a soccer field in a city park floods every five years or so)the answer is different than if the before mitigation risk is high (100 or more houses are expected to have flooding above the first floor every 10 years, or a critical facility is expected to be shut down because of flood damages every five years). All well-designed mitigation projects reduce risk, but just because a mitigation project reduces risk does not make it a good project. A$1,000,000 project that avoids an average of$100 per year in flood damages is not worth doing,while the same project that avoids an average of$200,000 per year in flood damages is worth doing. The principles of benefit-cost analysis are briefly summarized here. The benefits of a hazard mitigation project are the reduction in future damages and losses. To conduct benefit-cost analysis of a specific mitigation project the risk of damages and losses must be evaluated twice: before mitigation and after mitigation. The difference between the two are the benefits. The benefits of a hazard mitigation project are the future damages and losses avoided because a mitigation action was implemented. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan A2-1 April 2010 � � Because the benefits of a hazard mitigation project accrue in the future, it is impossible to know exactly what they will be. We do not know when future floods or other natural hazards will occur or how severe they will be. We do know, however,the probability of future floods or other natural hazards(if we have appropriate hazard data). The benefits of mitigation projects must be evaluated probabilistically and expressed as the difference between annualized damages before and after mitigation. To illustrate the principles of benefit-cost analysis, we consider a hypothetical single family home in the town of Acorn, located on the banks of Squirrel Creek. The home is a one story building; about 1500 square feet on a post foundation, with a replacement value of$60/square foot (total $90,000). We have flood hazard data for Squirrel Creek (stream discharge and flood elevation data) as well as elevation data for the first floor of the house. We can use these figures to calculate the annual probability of flooding in one-foot increments, as shown below. Table A2.1 Damages Before Mitigation Flood Depth Annual Probability Scenario Damages and Annualized Flood (feet) of Flooding Losses Per Flood Event Damages and Losses 0 0.2050 $6,400 $1,312 1 0.1234 $14,300 $1,765 2 0.0867 $24,500 $2,124 3 0.0223 $28,900 $673 4 0.0098 $32,100 $315 5 0.0036 $36,300 $123 Total Expected Annual(Annualized)Damages and Losses $6,312 Flood depths shown above in Table A2.1 are in one foot increments of water depth above the lowest floor elevation. Thus, a "three" foot flood means all floods between two and a half feet and three and a half feet of water depth above the floor. We note that a "zero" foot flood has, on average, damages because this flood depth means water plus or minus six inches of the floor. Even if the flood level is a few inches below the first floor,there may be damage to flooring and other building elements because of wicking of water. The scenario (per flood event) damages and losses include expected damages to the building, content and displacement costs if occupants have to move to temporary quarters while flood damage is repaired. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan A2-2 April 2010 � � The annualized (expected annual) damages and losses are calculated as the product of the flood probability times the scenario damages. For example, a four foot flood has slightly less than a 1%chance per year of occurring. If it does occur, we expect about $32,100 in damages and losses. Four foot floods are therefore expected to cause an average of about$315 per year in flood damages. Note that the smaller floods, which cause less damage per flood event, actually cause higher average annual damages because the probability of smaller floods is so much higher. By combining this data we are able to determine that the house is expected to average approximately$6,312 per year in flood damages. This expected annual or"annualized" damage estimate does not mean that the house has this much damage every year. Rather, in most years there will be no floods, but over time the cumulative damages and losses from a mix of relatively frequent smaller floods and less frequent larger floods is calculated to average $6,312 per yea r. Now, let us consider the owner deems this expense as unacceptable and explores mitigation alternatives to reduce the risk by elevating the house four feet. Table A2.2 below shows the estimated damages after raising the house four feet. Table A2.2 Damages After Mitigation Flood Depth Annual Probability Scenario Damages and Annualized Flood (feet) of Flooding Losses Per Flood Event Damages and Losses 0 0.2050 $0 $0 1 0.1234 $0 $0 2 0.0867 $0 $0 3 0.0223 $0 $0 4 0.0098 $6,400 $63 5 0.0036 $14,300 $49 Total Expected Annual(Annualized)Damages and Losses $112 By elevating the house four feet,the owner has reduced his expected annual or annualized damages from $6,312 to$112 (98%reduction) and greatly reduced the probability or frequency of flooding affecting his house. The annualized benefits are the difference in the annualized damages and losses before and after mitigation or$6,312-$112 =$6,200. Is this mitigation project worth doing? Common sense says yes, because the flood risk appears high and the annualized damages before mitigation are high ($6,312). To answer this question more quantitatively, we complete our benefit-cost analysis of this project. One key factor is the cost of mitigation. A mitigation project that is worth doing at one cost may City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan A2-3 April 2010 � � not be worth doing at a higher cost. Let's assume that the elevation costs$20,000. This $20,000 cost occurs once, up front, in the year that the elevation project is completed. The benefits, however, accrue statistically over the lifetime of the mitigation project. Following FEMA convention, we assume that a residential mitigation project has a useful lifetime of 30 years.We then compare the present value of the anticipated stream of benefits over 30 years in the future to the up-front out-of-pocket cost of the mitigation project. Money(benefits) received in the future has less value than money received today because of the time value of money. The time value of money is taken into account with a present value calculation. Simply multiplying the annual benefits times the lifetime would ignore the time value of money and give an incorrect, spurious result. A present value calculation depends on the lifetime of the mitigation project and on what is known as the discount rate. The discount rate may be viewed simply as the interest rate you might earn on the cost of the project if you didn't spend the money on the mitigation project. Let's assume this mitigation project is to be funded by FEMA,which uses a 7%discount rate to evaluate hazard mitigation projects. With a 30-year lifetime and a 7%discount rate,the "present value coefficient" is 12.41. That is, each $1.00 per year in benefits over the lifetime of the project(30 years) is worth $12.41 now. The benefit-cost results are detailed in Table A2.3. Table A2.3 Benefit-Cost Results Annualized Benefits $6,200 Present Value Coefficient 12.41 Net Present Value of Future Benefits $76,942 Mitigation Project Cost $20,000 Benefit-Cost Ratio 3.85 These results indicate a benefit-cost ratio of 3.85. In FEMA's terms the mitigation project is cost-effective and eligible for FEMA funding. The above discussion of benefit-cost analysis of a flood hazard mitigation project is intended to illustrate the basic concepts. Very similar principles apply to mitigation projects for earthquakes or any other natural hazards. For tornado and earthquake mitigation projects, one of the major benefits is life safety. For the purposes of benefit- cost analysis,the statistical values for deaths and injuries must be included in the benefit- cost analysis. The current FEMA statistical value for human life is$5.8 million. Given this high value, many tornado shelter mitigation projects and many seismic mitigation projects are deemed cost-effective and eligible for FEMA hazard mitigation grant funding. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan A2-4 April 2010 � � The role of benefit-cost analysis in prioritizing and implementing mitigation projects in Renton is addressed in Chapter 5 (Plan Adoption, Maintenance and Implementation). Although benefit-cost analysis is a powerful tool for helping to evaluate and prioritize mitigation projects, and a requirement for all FEMA hazard mitigation grants, benefit-cost analysis should not be considered the sole determinant for mitigation actions. In some cases, the potential for negative effects from a particular natural hazard may simply be deemed unacceptable, such as the potential for deaths and injuries, and mitigation may be undertaken without benefit-cost analysis. City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan A2-5 April 2010 � � APPENDIX 3 HAZUS REPORTS Earthquake—Seattle Fault Flood—Cedar River (100 year) March 10, 2010 �wr�° 'rr� HAZUS-MH: Earthquake Event Report Region Name: RentonEQ Earthquake Scenario: Run 1 Seattle Fault Mercer Epi Print Date: April 03,2009 Tota/s only reflect data for those census tracts/6/ocks included in the users study region. Disclaimer. The estimates of social and economic impacts contained in this report were produced using HAZUS loss estimation methodology software which is based on current scientific and engineering knowledge. There are uncerfainties inheient in any loss esfimation technique. Therefore, there may be significant differences behveen the modeled results contained in this report and the actual socia/ and economic /osses following a specific earthquake. These results can be improved by using enhanced inventory, geotechnical, and observed ground motion data. � � Table of Contents Section Page# General Description of the Region 3 Building and Lifeline Inventory 4 Building Inventory Critical Facility Inventory Transporfation and Utility Lifeline Inventory Earthquake Scenario Parameters 6 Direct Earthquake Damage 7 Buildings Damage Critical Facilities Damage Transportation and Utility Lifeline Damage Induced Earthquake Damage 11 Fire Following Earthquake Debris Generation Social Impact 12 Shelter Requirements Casualties Economic Loss 13 Building Losses Transportation and Utility Lifeline Losses Long-term Indirect Economic Impacts Appendix A:County Listing for the Region Appendix B:Regional Population and Building Value Data Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 2 of 20 '�:�✓ �.✓ _ __ _ HAZUS is a regional earthquake loss estimation model that was developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the National Institute of Building Sciences. The primary purpose of HAZUS is to provide a methodology and software application to develop earthquake losses at a regional scale. These loss estimates would be used primarily by local,state and regional officials to plan and stimulate efforts to reduce risks from earthquakes and to prepare for emergency response and recovery. The earthquake loss estimates provided in this report was based on a region that includes 1 county(ies)from the following state(s): Washington Note: Appendix A contains a complete listing of the counties contained in the region. The geographical size of the region is 114.11 square miles and contains 41 census tracts. There are over 78 thousand households in the region and has a total population of 199,627 people(2000 Census Bureau data).The distribution of population by State and County is provided in Appendix B. There are an estimated 60 thousand buildings in the region with a total building replacement value(excluding contents)of 16,252(millions of dollars). Approximately 97.00%of the buildings(and 77.00%of the building value)are associated with residential housing. The replacement value of the transportation and utility lifeline systems is estimated to be 3,843 and 815 (millions of dollars),respectively. Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 3 of 20 � � Buildinq InventorV HAZUS estimates that there are 60 thousand buildings in the region which have an aggregate total replacement value of 16,252(millions of dollars).Appendix B provides a general distribution of the building value by State and County. In terms of building construction types found in the region,wood frame construction makes up 90%of the building inventory. The remaining percentage is distributed between the other general building types. Critical Facilitv Inventorv HAZUS breaks critical facilities into two{2)groups:essential facilities and high potential loss(HPL)facilities. Essential facilities include hospitals,medical clinics,schools,fire stations,police stations and emergency operations facilities. High potential loss facilities include dams,levees,military installations,nuclear power plants and hazardous material sites. For essential facilities,there are 1 hospitals in the region with a total bed capacity of 204 beds. There are 80 schools,2 fire stations, 5 police stations and 0 emergency operation facilities. With respect to HPL facilities,there are 6 dams identified within the region. Of these,2 of the dams are classified as'high hazard'. The inventory also includes 112 hazardous material sites,0 military installations and 0 nuclear power plants. Transportation and Utilitv Lifeline Inventory Within HAZUS,the lifeline inventory is divided between transportation and utility lifeline systems. There are seven(7) transportation systems that include highways,railways,light rail,bus,ports,ferry and airports. There are six(6)utility systems that include potable water,wastewater,natural gas,crude 8�refined oil,electric power and communications. The lifeline inventory data are provided in Tables 2 and 3. The total value of the lifeline inventory is over 4,658.00(millions of dollars). This inventory includes over 176 kilometers of highways,121 bridges,3,254 kilometers of pipes. Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 4 of 20 � � Table 2:Transportation System Lifeline inventory System Component #locations/ ' Replacement value #Segments (millions of dollars) Highway Bridges ' 121 '. 2,930.80 Segments .. . _. _ 40_._ 774.90__ _ Tunnels 1 0.90 __ _ Subtotal '; 3,706.60 Railways ' Bridges 1 ': 0.10 _.. . < .... _. . � .. ...�._ .. Facilities 3 II 7.20 _.. _.._ . Segments 29 : 52.80 . _.. __ _. _. Tunneis 0 ; 0.00 __ . _ Subtotal � 60.10� Light Rail ' Bridges 0 0.00 Facilities 0 ;' 0.00 Segments _ 0 ' 0.00 Tunneis _ 0 , 0.00 Subtotal 0.00- Bus ' Facilities 0 ' 0.00 _. __ : _ . Subtota] 0.00 Ferry ' Facilities 0 ' o.00 __ _ __ _. __ Subiotal 0.00 Port Facilities 1 ` 2.20 _ 5ubtotal 2.20 Airport Facilities 1 ' 6.00 . _ _ __ Runways 2 ' 68.40 _._ Subfotal 74.40 __ _ Totai , 3,843.30_ Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 5 of 20 � �` Table 3:Utility System Lifeline Inventory #Locations/ Replacement value System Component Segments ' (miliionsofdollars) .,..,,:: <.._�.,.�.,.,,�. r�-.., ...,.,�.� _ Potable Water Distribution Lines NA ' 32.50 __ _ __ _ __.. _ .. .._ Facilities 3 ' 109.90 _ Pipelines 0 ' 0.00 _ __ __ _ . . ,.. sutiiotal 142.40 Waste Water ' Distribution Lines NA I 19.50 . _ _ _ _ . _ Facilities 3 219.80 _. __ _ ... Pipelines 0 ' 0.00 subtora� _ 239.30 Natural Gas ; Distribution Lines NA 13.00 Facilities__ _ , 1 __ 1.20 _ _ Pipelines 0 0.00 _ ___ _ _ _._ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ Suetotal 14.20 Oil Systems , Faciiities ; 0 0.00 .._ _ _ _. __.._ .._ Pipelines 0 ' 0.00 Subtotal �.0� Electrical Power ' Facilities ', 4 484.00 _._ . __� _. _. Subtota� 484.00 Communication Facilitles ' 8 '' 0.90 _ subtotal 0.90 ��.,,, <..2<M. :..«.�.�. ....--.,...... _ _ Tot�' 880.80 Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 6 of 20 � � HAZUS uses the following set of information to define the earthquake parameters used for the earthquake loss estimate provided in this report. Scenario Name Run 1 Seattle Fault Mercer Epi Type of Earthquake Arbitrary Fault Name NA Historical Epicenter ID# NA Probabilistic Return Period NA Longitude of Epicenter -122.19 Latitude of Epicenter 47.59 Earthquake Magnitude 6.70 Depth(Km) 10.00 Rupture Length(Km) 25.59 Rupture Orientation(degrees) 90.00 Attenuation Function WUS Shallow Crustal Event-Extensional Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 7 of 20 � � Buildinq Damaqe HAZUS estimates that about 10,921 buildings will be at least moderately damaged.This is over 18.00%of the total number of buildings in the region.There are an estimated 366 buildings that will be damaged beyond repair.The definition of the `damage states'is provided in Volume 1:Chapter 5 of the HAZUS technical manual.Table 4 below summaries the expected damage by general occupancy for the buildings in the region.Table 5 summaries the expected damage by general building type. Table 4:Expected Building Damage by Occupancy ' None Siight Moderate ', Extensive Complete Count' (%) Count (%) Count; (%)I Count: (%)" Count (%a) � .,."�� .�...„w�,� _ Agriculture 18 I 0.06' 12 0.06 10 0.11 4 0.29' _ � ' 0.40 ,.� ��,.,,,, ,......A,,�..W _ _ Commercial 524 1.77 334 1.68 394 4.37', 185, 12.03: 58 : 15.93 ,.,_....._._ .... .�..._....... _ __ __ _. _ _ __.. Education 15 0.05 10 0.05 �� 0.12 i 5' 0.35 r Z 0.47 ,-. ...,.,.,:..�«.Po,,.� ....�.a..�. _ _ _ Government 20 0.07 13 0.07 14 : 0.16 7I 0.42' 2 0.45 �r.a..,,. .,. .a,..,:,�,M, _,,._._ __ _ _ __ Industrial 144 0.49 85 0.43 103 ' 1.14 46' 2.gg 13 3.54 .,__�._�._......... ._.._____...._� __ _ _ OtherResidential 1,496 5.06 1,339 6.74 1,469 16.28' 732' 47.72, 148 40.40 .... 9-_n.,,�..�.,.,..w�,....�,. _ _ Reli �on 28 ; 0.09 19 0.09 �$ 0.20 9' 0.57' 3 ' 0.71 _._.9�...,,,_, �Y,._.__._...... _ _ __ _ __ Sin leFamil 27,334 92.41 18,043 90.88 �,��2 77.62 547; 35.64' 140 ' 38.10 Total , 29,580 19,854 ; ' 9,021 i ' 1,535; 366 ; Table 5:Expected Building Damage by Building Type(All Design Levels) None : Slight Mode�ate Eutensive Complete Count; (%)'; Count (%)', Count'; (%). Count' (%) Count': (%) Wood Vm� ^ 27,832 94.09 18508 93.22 7,051 78.16 497 ' 32.35 142 ' 38.69 ___.._..� __......�._....�. _ Steel 189 , 0.64 I 129 0.65I 185 ' 2.05', 81 '' 5.31 : 20 ' 5.49 __.,,,..� .�._.... .......... ._. _ Concrete 160 0.54 122 0.61 132 1.46 66 ' 4.30 i 14 3.83 .,m_.,_ -_._____...._.�._ _. __ Precast 154 . 0.52 I 87 ' 0.44' 119 '; 1.32 62 ' 4.03'i 18 ' 4.89 .___...._.,_...,�.._..._..,._ _ _ _ _ RM 792 ' 2.68 317 1.59 364 4.03 149 9.69 19 : 5.10 _�_�__�_. _�_.....,�.,_ _. URM 29 ` 0.10, 34 - 0.17 53 0.59'' 42 2.76'; 33 ' 8.94 _,._.�.,__......._.._.,.. _ __ _ __ MH 424 1.43 658 3.31 1,117 12.39' 638 41.56' 121 33.06 �__..,___- ........�.�_ _ _ .. _ _ __._ _ . Total 29,580: 19,854 9,021 1,535 366 'Note: RM Reinforced Masonry URM Unreinforced Masonry MH Manufactured Housing Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 8 of 20 � � Essential Facilitv Damaqe Before the earthquake,the region had 204 hospital beds available for use. On the day of the earthquake,the model estimates that only 109 hospital beds(54.00%)are available for use by patients already in the hospital and those injured by the earthquake. After one week,85.00%of the beds will be back in service. By 30 days,99.00%will be operational. Table 6:Expected Damage to Essentiai Facilities #Facilities Classification Total ' At Least Moderate ', Complete With Functionality Damage>50% ' Damage>50% >50%on day 1 Hospitals ' 1 ', 0 : 0 1 Schools 80 ': 0 0 50 EOCs 0 0 ' 0 ; 0 PoliceStations 5 '. 0 ' 0 2 FireStations 2 0 ' 0 ' 2 Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 9 of 20 � � Transportation and Utilitv Lifeline Damaqe Table 7 provides damage estimates for the transportation system. Table 7:Expected Damage to the Transportation Systems ' Number of Locations System Component Locations/' With at Least With Complete,.__ _ With Functionality>50% Segments' Mod.Damage Damage After Day 1 After Day 7 Highway ' Segments 40 ' 0 ' 0 40 40 ' Bridges ' 121 ' 25 ' 0 96 117 ' Tunnels 1 ' 0 ' 0 ; 1 1 Raiiways , Segments 29 : 0 ' 0 29' 29 Bridges 1 I 0 ' 0 ; 1' 1 Tunnels 0 ' 0 0 ! 0 0 � Facilities 3 ' 0 ' 0 3 3 Light Rail Segments ', 0 ' 0 ' 0 0 0 Bridges ' 0 ' 0 0 0 0 ' Tunnels ' 0 : 0 ' 0 0 0 = Facilities 0 ' 0 0 '; 0 0 Bus ' Facilities 0 ' 0 ' 0 ` 0 0 Ferry FaCilities ' 0 ' 0 0 Q' 0 Port Facilities 1 0 ' 0 I 1 1 airport Facilities 1 ' 0 ` 0 ' 1 1 Runways , 2 ' 0 0 2 2 Note:Roadway segments,railroad tracks and light rail tracks are assumed to be damaged by ground failure only. If ground failure maps are not provided,damage estimates to these components will not be computed. Tables 8-10 provide information on the damage to the utility lifeline systems. Table 8 provides damage to the utility system facilities. Table 9 provides estimates on the number of Ieaks and breaks by the pipelines of the utility systems. For electric power and potable water,HAZUS performs a simpiified system performance analysis. Table 10 provides a summary of the system performance information. Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 10 of 20 � � Table 8:Expected Utility System Facility Damage : #of Locations System Total# With at Least' With Complete W�th Functionality>50% Moderate Damage Damage I After Day 1 ' After Day 7 Potable Water 3 0. 0 i 3 ' 3 Waste Water 3 I 1; 0' 0 : 3 Natural Gas 1 I 0 0' 0 ' 1 Oil Systems 0 01 0' 0 0 Electrical Power ! 4,' 1` 0' 1 ' 4 Communication 8 6 0' 8 ; g Table 9:Expected Utility System Pipeline Damage(Site Specific) System : Total Pipelines, Number of ' Number of Length(kms)'; Leaks ': Breaks Potable Water 1,6271 474'' 118 Waste Water 976 i 375 ' 94 Natural Gas 651; 400 100 Oil 0 0` 0 Table 70:Expected Potable Water and Electric Power System Performance I Total#of '+ Number of Households without Service Households ': At Day 1' At Day 3 At Day 7 At Day 30 At Day 90 Potable Water 20,160! 4,715 0' 0' 0 78,482 _ _ _ : _ __ Electric Power , 0'' 0' 0'' 0 0 Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 11 of 20 � � Fire Followinq Earthquake Fires often occur after an earthquake. Because of the number of fires and the lack of water to fight the fires,they can often bum out of control. HAZUS uses a Monte Carlo simulation model to estimate the number of ignitions and the amount of burnt area. For this scenario,the model estimates that there will be 10 ignitions that will bum about 0.11 sq.mi 0.10%of the region's total area.) The model also estimates that the fires will displace about 249 people and bum about 18(millions of dollars)of building value. Debris Generation HAZUS estimates the amount of debris that will be generated by the earthquake. The model breaks the debris into two general categories:a)Brick/Wood and b)Reinforced Concrete/Steel. This distinction is made because of the different types of material handling equipment required to handle the debris. The model estimates that a total of 0.00 million tons of debris will be generated. Of the total amount,Brick/Wood comprises 0.00%of the total,with the remainder being Reinforced Concrete/Steel. If the debris tonnage is converted to an estimated number of truckloads,it will require 0 truckloads(@25 tons/truck)to remove the debris generated by the earthquake. Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 12 of 20 �" � Shelter Requirement HAZUS estimates the number of households that are expected to be displaced from their homes due to the earthquake and the number of displaced people that will require accommodations in temporary public shelters. The model estimates 1,656 households to be displaced due to the earthquake.Of these, 374 people(out of a total population of 199,627)will seek temporary shelter in public shelters. Casualties HAZUS estimates the number of people that will be injured and killed by the earthquake. The casualties are broken down into four(4)severity levels that describe the extent of the injuries. The levels are described as follows; �Severity Level 1: Injuries will require medical attention but hospitalization is not needed. �Severity Level 2: Injuries will require hospitalization but are not considered life-threatening •Severity Level 3: Injuries will require hospitalization and can become life threatening if not promptly treated. �Severity Level 4: Victims are killed by the eaRhquake. The casualty estimates are provided for three(3)times of day:2:00 AM,2:00 PM and 5:00 PM. These times represent the periods of the day that different sectors of the community are at their peak occupancy loads. The 2:00 AM estimate considers that the residential occupancy load is maximum,the 2:00 PM estimate considers that the educational,commercial and industrial sector loads are maximum and 5:00 PM represents peak commute time. Table 11 provides a summary of the casualties estimated for this earthquake Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 13 of 20 � � Table 11:Casualty Estimates Levell ' Level2 Level3 Level4 2 AM ' Commercial 9 ' 2 ' � ' � Commuting 0 0 0 ; 0 Educational 0 : 0 ' 0 ; 0 rr Hotels 5 ' 1 0 0 Industrial 8 ' 2 ' 0 ' 1 Other-Residential 123 i 26 ' 3 ' 6 : Single Family 118 : 15 1 : 1 7otal ' 263 ' 47 ' S " 9 2 PM Commercial 531 ! 137 . 21 42 __ _ _ _ __ _. _____ Commuting 0 I 0 1 ' 0 Educational 97 ' 25 4 7 I Hotels 1 ' 0 ' 0 ' 0 __ _ __ ___ __ _ _ _ ' industrial ' 62 ' 15 : 2 ; 4 Other-Residential 23 ' 5 1 1 Single Family 21 ' 3 ' 0 ' 0 __ _ __ _ _ _ __ _. _ rotal ' 735 ! 186 29 ' 55 5 PM Commercial ' 382 " 99 15 30 Commuting 22 ' 27 48 , 9 Educational 13 ' 3 1 ' 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ Hotels 1 ' 0 ' 0 ' 0 Industrial 39 i 9 ' 1 ' 3 Other-Residential 46 10 ; 1 2 Single Family ' 45 i 6 0 1 Total '' 548 ' 155 ' 66 l 45 Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 14 of 20 � � The total economic loss estimated for the earthquake is 1,785.78(millions of dollars),which includes building and lifeline related losses based on the region's available inventory.The following three sections provide more detailed information about these losses. Buildinq-Related Losses The building losses are broken into two categories:direct building losses and business interruption losses. The direct building losses are the estimated costs to repair or replace the damage caused to the building and its contents. The business interruption losses are the losses associated with inability to operate a business because of the damage sustained during the earthquake. Business interruption losses also include the temporary living expenses for those people displaced ftom their homes because of the earthquake. The total building-related losses were 1,414.90(millions of dollars); 15%of the estimated losses were related to the business interruption of the region. By far,the largest loss was sustained by the residential occupancies which made up over 54%of the total loss. Table 12 below provides a summary of the losses associated with the building damage. Table 12:Building-Related Economic Loss Estimates (Millions of dollars� Category Area Single , Other ; , Family. Residential ': Commercial Industrial; Others Total ....,,�.� ..__._ ._ __ __ _ _ _.... _.. Income Loses _. _ _ Wage . 0.00 . 576 . 66.28 3.07 2.78 77.88 Capital-Related 0.00 2.44 58.30 1.83 0.67 63.24 ,.:. _ „ Rental 10.70 20.41 35.56 1.20 1.22 69.09 Relocation 1.23 0.52 2.11 0.10 0.38 4.35 __.. . Subtotat ' 11.94 29.13 162.24 6.20 5.05 214.56 Capital Stock Loses _ _ ._.. __ . .. _ . _ ..�_. Structural 65.83 26.98 79.88 11.13 4.85 188.67 __ _ .... __ Non Structural 330.04 14178 . 180.63 34.19 13.56 700.20 _ ___ _ _ _ ___ _ __ __ _ __. ___. _ _ Content 118.14 36.37 ' 99.98 ': 32.51 ' 13.48 300.47 Inventory 0.00 _ 0.00 _ 3.90 6.91 _ 0.19 11.00 __ Subtotal 514.01 205.12 364.39 84.74 32.08 1,200.34 Total 525.95 234.25 '' 526.63 I 90.94 ; 37.13 ' 1,414.90 Ea�thquake Event Summary Report Page 15 of 20 �" � Transportation and Utilitv Lifeline Losses For the transportation and utility lifeline systems,HAZUS computes the direct repair cost for each component only. There are no losses computed by HAZUS for business interruption due to lifeline outages.Tables 13&14 provide a detailed breakdown in the expected Iifeline losses. HAZUS estimates the long-term economic impacts to the region for 15 years after the earthquake. The model quantifies this information in terms of income and employment changes within the region. Table 15 presents the results of the region for the given earthquake. Table 13:Transportation System Economic Losses (Millions of dollars) System Component inventory Value Economic Loss ; Loss Ratio(%) _..__.,,. Highway Segments 774.90 ' $0.00 0.00 • Bridges ._ __ _ 2,930.79 ' $254.67 8.69 Tunnels 0.89 ' $0.03 ! 2.91 Subtotal . 3706.60 254.70 Railways ' Segments 52.84 $0.00 0.00 _ Bridges ' 0.09 ' $0.00 1.28 Tunnels ' 0.00 $0.00 , 0.00 _ _ __ _ _ __ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ Facilities 7.19 ' $1.61 ''I 22.35 . _ . _..... ._,.._.._.. Subtotal 60.10 ' 1.60 Light Rail Segments ' 0.00 i $0.00 0.00 . Bridges ' 0.00 ! $0.00 0.00 _._ Tunnels ' 0.00 ' $0.00 i 0.00 Facilities ' 0.00 '' $0.00 ' 0.00 Subfotal _ 0.00 ', _._ 0.00 : gus Facilities 0.00 ' $0.00 I 0.00 __ _ _ Subtotal _ 0.00 ; _ 0.00 Ferry ' Facilities ' 0.00 $0.00 : 0.00 Subtotal _ _ 0.00 , 0.00 Port Facilities 2.25 ' $0.62 ° 27.70 5ubtotal ___ _ 2.20 ', 0.60 Airport Facilities 6.00 $1.59 ' 26.58 Runways 68.38 ' $0.00 ! 0.00 _ Subtotal _ 74.40 ; _ _ 1.60 _...._._ ,.,_._.__.,,�.__. _ _._. ,._ __. ___ Total 3843.30 I 258.50 Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 16 of 20 �" � Table 14:Utility System Economic Losses (Millions of dollars> System ' Component Inventory Value ' Economic Loss; Loss Ratio(%) Potable water Pipelines _ 0.00 $0.00 _ . 0.00 Facilities 109.90 $13.15 11.97 Distribution Lines 32.50 $2.13 6.55 _ . i sabtotal ' .. 142.44 $15.28 Waste Water ' Pipelines ' 0.00 $0.00 0.00 __. ' Facilities ' 219.80 . $32.79 : 14.92. _ . _... Distribution Lines 19.50 $1.69 8.63 __ __ . subtotal ' 239.31 $34.48 Natural Gas Pipelines 0.00 $0.00 0.00 ,. _.. _ ` Facilities 120 $0.17 14.16 �.. _ _.._. �. � . .. __ Distribution Lines 13.00 ' $1.80 13.84 _. _ _ . subtotal 14.22 $1.97 oi1 Systems i Pipelines 0.00 $0.00 0.00 _ Facilities 0.00 $0.00 0.00 _ __ _ _... subtota� 0.00 $0.00 , _ _ Electrical Power Facilities 484.00 ' $60.45 12.49 __ _._ __ _ . . S�� 484.00 $60.45 � Communication , Facilities , 0.90 $0.18 20.05 s�� 0.88 _ $0.18 _ TO� 880.84 ' $112.36 I Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 17 of 20 � � Table 15.Indirect Economic Impact with outside aid (Employment as#of people and Income in millions of$) LOSS Total % First Year �...__. .,.._,__.__� _,,,.. _._.._ ......_.,.^ ... ..__.._._.._.,.._.__.�.�..�..._. . ..,,_r_.�.......�, Employment Impact 5�6 0.51 Income Impact �9) -0.17 Second Year . ,W,,,,,_..,, �..�,.�, ,.,...,:..>.� .,., . ,...�,.�,. �,r,...._„��,,�,� ,.,�.,,,� �w.,.�.�., �u. � Employment Impact 189 0.19 Income Impact (32) -0.60 Third Year _...,,.m...___._..,�_..._ ....._�,...�.r.�.�_.__._.._�„_.._,�.�___�_ _..._ ��_,.._ Employment Impact 5 0.00 Income Impact (42) -0.79 Fourth Year �.,._... _.._�_._ __ ._,.,..__.........�_.___..��._..�..._.__._P....__.,,.._. ,,,.��...._� ___...__ __...._..__.._.�_..,_�_ Employment Im act � 0.00 Income Impact �42) -0.80 Fifth Year � m.....—...�.,�,,, �_,..,,�.�,�„ _,,,ay,,�.,,, ,.n..e , _�..a�.�<,�, �. ....�,..,,m�,,�, w. ��,��F..x,.�. , Employment Impact 0 0.00 Income Impact �42) -0.80 Years 6 to 15 �...._..._._.,...__,.,.... ...: ,_..._......__,,.,.�_ _.... . ._.__ . ..�.�.�..�_ .._....._� Employment Impact � 0.00 Income Impact (42) -0.80 Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 18 of 20 � � Appendix A: County Listinq for the Reqion King,WA Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 19 of 20 � � Appendix B: Reqional Population and Buildinq Value Data Building Value(millions of dollars) State County Name Population . Residential' Non-Residential Total Washington ', King 199,627 ', 12,567 3,685 16,252 Total State 199,627 ' 12,567 3,685 16,252 Total Region 199,627 ': 12,567' 3,685 ' 76,252 Earthquake Event Summary Report Page 20 of 20 �✓` `�•,� HAZUS-MH: Flood Event Report Region Name: Renton FLD Cedar Fiood Scenario: Cedar River Print Date: Friday,April 03, Zoo9 Disclaimer: Totals only reflect data for those census tracts/b/ocks included in the user's study region. The estimates of social and economic impacts contained in this report were produced using HAZUS loss estimation methodo/ogy soffware which is based on current scientific and engineering knowledge. There are uncertainties inherent in any loss estimation technique. Therefore,there may be significant differences behveen the modeled results contained in this report and the actual socia/and economic /osses following a spec�c F/ood. These results can be improved by using enhanced inventory data and flood hazard information. � � _. _ Table of Contents S tion Paae# General Description of the Region 3 Building Inventory 4 General Building Stock Essential Facility Inventory Flood Scenario Parameters 5 Building Damage 6 General Building Stock Essential Facilities Damage Induced Flood Damage 8 Debris Generation Social Impact $ Shelter Requirements � Economic Loss 9 Building-Related Losses 10 Appendix A: County Listing for the Region Appendix B: Regional Population and Building Value Data 11 Flood Event Summary Report Page 2 of 11 � � HAZUS is a regional multi-hazard loss estimation model that was developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA)and the National Institute of Building Sciences(NIBS). The primary purpose of HAZUS is to provide a methodology and software appiication to develop multi-hazard losses at a regional scale. These loss estimates would be used primarily by local, state and regional officials to plan and stimulate efforts to reduce risks from multi-hazards and to prepare for emergency response and recovery. The flood loss estimates provided in this report were based on a region that included 1 county(ies) from the following state(s): - Washington Note: Appendix A contains a complete listing of the counties contained in the region. The geographical size of the region is 114 square miles and contains 2,698 census blocks. There are over 86 thousand households in the region and has a total population of 222,338 people(2000 Census Bureau data). The distribution of population by State and County for the study region is provided in Appendix B. There are an estimated 74,785 buildings in the region with a total building replacement value(excluding contents) of 17,915 million dollars (2006 dollars). Approximately 91.79% of the buildings (and 78.76% of the building value)are associated with residential housing. Flood Event Summary Report Page 3 of 11 � � General Buildinq Stock HAZUS estimates that there are 74,785 buildings in the region which have an aggregate total replacement value of 17,915 million (2006 dollars). Table 1 and Table 2 present the relative distribution of the value with respect to the general occupancies by Study Region and Study Case respectively. Appendix B provides a general distribution of the building value by State and County. Table 1 Building Exposure by Occupancy Type for the Study Region Occupancy Exposure($1000) Percent of Total Residential 14,109,886 78.8% Commercial 2,923,593 16.3% Industrial 677 070 3.8% Aaricultural 20 003 0.1% Reliqion 100 346 0.6% Government 12 771 0.1% Education 71,442 0.4% Total 17,915,111 100.00% Table 2 Building Exposure by Occupancy Type for the Study Case Occupancy Exposure($1000) Percent of Total Residential 331,870 84.5% Commercial 52,422 13.3% Industrial 3 659 0.9% AQricultural 329 0.1% Religion 2 844 0.7% Government 0 0.0% Education 1,777 0.5% Total 392,901 100.00% Essential Facilitv Inventorv For essential facilities, there are 1 hospitals in the region with a total bed capacity of 204 beds. There are 83 schools, 2 fire stations, 5 police stations and no emergency operation centers. Flood Event Summary Report Page 4 of 11 �' � HAZUS used the following set of information to define the flood parameters for the flood loss estimate provided in this report. Study Region Name: Renton FLD Cedar Scenario Name: Cedar River Return Period Analyzed: 100 Analysis Options Analyzed: 0 Flood Event Summary Report Page 5 of 11 � � General Buildinq Stock Damaqe HAZUS estimates that about 121 buildings will be at least moderately damaged. This is over 41% of the total number of buildings in the study case. There are an estimated 8 buildings that will be completely destroyed. The definition of the`damage states' is provided in Volume 1: Chapter 5 of the HAZUS Flood technical manual. Table 3 below summarizes the expected damage by general occupancy for the buildings in the region. Table 4 summarizes the expected damage by general building type. Table 3: Expected Building Damage by Occupancy 1-10 11-20 21-30 31�0 41-50 Substantially Occupancy Count (%) Count (%) Count (°/a) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Agriculture 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Commercial 0 0.00 2100.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Education 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Government 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Industrial 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Religion 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Residential 0 0.00 14 11.76 69 57.98 12 10.08 16 13.45 8 6.72 Total 0 16 69 12 16 $ Table 4: Expected Building Damage by Building Type Building 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 Substantially Type Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (°/a) Count (%) Concrete 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 ManufHousing 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 8 100.00 Masonry 0 0.00 1100.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Steel 0 0.00 1100.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Wood 0 0.00 14 12.61 69 62.16 12 10.81 16 14.41 0 0.00 Flood Event Summary Report Page 6 of 11 � � Before the flood analyzed in this study case, the region had 0 hospital beds available for use. On the day of the study case flood event,the model estimates that 0 hospital beds are available in the region. Table 5: Expected Damage to Essential Facilities #Facilities At Least At Least Classification Total Moderate Substantial Loss of Use Fire Stations 2 0 0 0 .�M a�_ 2n-� �, Hos_pitals.._�r_ 1 0 , o _ _ o. _....._ __...�..._ .. ._. .,�.__��_�....�.. __....._�_..,_..� __ _..�.,..�.� .�.�..� �..��..�__.w�_____._.__.__�. .__.__�_. _......... Police Stations 5 0 0 0 _.._..�_.._._.._.._ __._�._ _ .._._.._..__.r__.....�....�_.___.. ..._�_ ._ __�__.. _____...__ . __..__._.. _.._.. . _.__.__.___.__..r._.._......,__..�..._.__._.r�„_.�._....�...._ SChoOls 83 0 0 0 If this report displays all zeros or is blank,two possibilities can explain this. (1) None of your facilities were flooded.This can be checked by mapping the inventory data on the depth grid. (2) The analysis was not run. This can be tested by checking the run box on the Analysis Menu and seeing if a message box asks you to replace the existing results. Flood Event Summary Report Page 7 of 11 � � Debris Generation HAZUS estimates the amount of debris that will be generated by the flood. The model breaks debris into three general categories: 1) Finishes (dry wall, insulation, etc.), 2) Structural (wood, brick, etc.) and 3) Foundations (concrete slab, concrete block, rebar, etc.). This distinction is made because of the different types of material handling equipment required to handle the debris. The model estimates that a total of 2,261 tons of debris will be generated. Of the total amount, Finishes comprises 76% of the total, Structure comprises 10% of the total. If the debris tonnage is converted into an estimated number of truckloads, it will require 90 truckloads (@25 tons/truck) to remove the debris generated by the flood. __ _. _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ Shelter Requirements HAZUS estimates the number of households that are expected to be displaced from their homes due to the flood and the associated potential evacuation. HAZUS also estimates those displaced people that will require accommodations in temporary public shelters. The model estimates 228 households will be displaced due to the flood. Displacement includes households evacuated from within or very near to the inundated area. Of these,473 people(out of a total population of 222,338)will seek temporary shelter in public shelters. Flood Event Summary Report Page 8 of 11 `�rr` � The total economic loss estimated for the flood is 24.39 million dollars, which represents 6.21 % of the total replacement value of the study case buildings. Buildinq-Related Losses The building losses are broken into two categories: direct building losses and business interruption losses. The direct building losses are the estimated costs to repair or replace the damage caused to the building and its contents. The business interruption losses are the losses associated with inability to operate a business because of the damage sustained during the flood. Business interruption losses also include the temporary living expenses for those people displaced from their homes because of the flood. The total building-related losses were 24.24 million dollars. 1% of the estimated losses were related to the business interruption of the region. The residential occupancies made up 69.85% of the total loss. Table 6 below provides a summary of the losses associated with the building damage. Table 6: Building-Related Economic Loss Estimates (Millions of dollars) Category Area Residential Commercial Industrial Others Total Buildinq Loss Building 10.17 1.33 0.18 0.05 11.72 Content 6.83 4.55 0.26 0.75 12.38 Inventory 0.00 0.08 0.05 0.01 0.14 Subtotal 16.99 5.95 0.48 0.87 24.24 Business Interruption Income 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.04 Relocation 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.04 Rentallncome 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Wage 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.06 Subtolal 0.04 0.08 0.00 0.03 0.15 ALL Total 17.03 6.03 0.48 0.84 24.39 Flood Event Summary Report Page 9 of 11 � � Appendix A: Countv Listinq for the Reqion Washington - King Flood Event Summary Report Page 10 of 11 � � Appendix B: Reqional Population and Buildinq Value Data Building Value(thousands of dollars) Population Residential Non-Residential Total Washinaton Kinq 222,338 14,109,886 3,805,225 17,915,111 Total 222,338 14,109,886 3,805,225 17,915,111 Total Study Region 222,338 14,109,886 3,805,225 17,915,111 Flood Event Summary Report Page 11 of 11 � � APPENDIX 4 PLANNING AND PUBLIC MEETING RECORDS August 2, 2011 � �.r� Appendix 4 Contents Planning Meeting 1 (11/6/2008) Records A4-2 Meeting Minutes Planning Meeting 4(4/2/2009) Records A4-8 Meeting Minutes Public Meeting 1 (4/9/2009) Records A4-13 Website Calendar Announcement Renton Reporter Announcement Sign-in Sheet Planning Meeting 5 (5/7/09) Records A4-16 Meeting Minutes . Sign-in Sheet Planning Meeting 6 (6/4/09) Records A4-25 Meeting Minutes Sign-in Sheet Planning Meeting 7 (7/2/09) Records A4-35 Meeting Minutes Sign-in Sheet Planning Meeting 8 (8/6/09) Records A4-44 Meeting Minutes Sign-in Sheet Planning Meeting 9 (2/4/10) Records A4-54 Meeting Minutes Public Meeting 2 (3/16/10) Records A4-59 Listing for Renton Reporter Announcement Website Calendar Announcement Sign-in Sheet Planning Meeting 10(4/1/10) Records A4-62 Meeting Minutes Sign-in Sheet A4-1 � � Emergency Management Group Meeting Minutes from November 6, 2008 Present: Kelley Balcomb-Bartok,Administrative,Judicial&Legal Services/Communications Specialist Dennis Conte,Community Services/Facilities Supervisor Jeff Dosch,Valley Medical Center/Security Manager Abdoul Gafour, Public Works/Water Utility Supervisor Jim Henriksen, Public Health/Emergency Prep Kayren Kittrick,CED/Engineering Supervisor Mindi Mattson, Fire& Emergency Services/Emergency Management Coordinator Norma McQuiller, Community&Economic Development/Neighborhood Program Coordinator Rachel Myers, Fire& Emergency Services/Emergency Management Intern Deborah Needham, Fire&Emergency Services/Emergency Management Director Linda Parks, Finance&Information Services/Director Robin Robertson, Human Resources& Risk Management/Risk Manager Karl Rufener, Fire& Emergency Services/Fire Battalion Chief/Safety Officer Mike Stenhouse, Public Works/Maintenance Services/Director Clark Wilcox, Police/Patrol Seroices Next Meeting: Thursday December 4,at 0900 at City Hall,7�'Floor Conferencing Center. Assignments: All Departments—Complete Exercise PlanningTeam Worksheet and Return to Director Deb Needham ASAP. Assign an Exercise Planning Team Member available to meet regularly. All Exercise Plannin�Team Members—Assist in selecting weekly team meeting time. Abdul Gafour-Contact Metro Treatment and invite them to participate in Flood Exercise 2/26/09. Contact Ron Straka about the Black River Pump Station to determine what impacts we should expect in the event of a flood. Kellev Bartok Balcomb—Contact Regional PIO to address having region-wide messaging/communication at the Flood Exercise. Deb Needham—Investigate having an EAS message go out as a part of the Flood Exercise. Contact Exercise Planning Team Members to identify regular meeting day/time. Hold a meeting to determine how a city-wide ICS structure will best be accomplished. Get a copy of REPA's Safe Water class PowerPoint to provide to all city employees. � � Key Decisions/Discussions: 1. Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan loose ends(EM Director Needham) a. Medical Reserve Corps is not in the plan yet under ESF 8, it will be added when completely set up b. We will be revising the plan on a more regular, paced schedule. Next year focus will be Long Term Community Recovery, Communications&Warning,Mass Care,and Damage Assessment. By starting on a few ESFs next year,we won't end up with the same crunch again in four years. c. Still need to get agreements with other agencies listed in our plan. d. Some organizations are working on stock language for all Cities to use in their plans and, in the future,this would allow us to use their language without the need for their individual review. e. The Plan is now before council—if there are any requests for more information, clarification, Director Needham will contact you. 2. Hazard Mitigation Plan on the Radar(Needham) a. Due simultaneously as the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan but does not affect as many Departments. If you have a mitigation piece and aren't listed/included, contact Director Needham. b. There is funding available for Mitigation Projects i.e.Station 11 seismic upgrades. If there are any other mitigation projects—any that the City could benefit from - please speak to/submit these to Director Needham. 3. Valley Medical Exercise(Dosch) a. Valley Medical Center is coordinating with 21 hospitals to do a large Pandemic Influenza exercise-November 13, 14, 15, 17,18. b. On the 13th will be a Communications Exercise-our EOC emai)will be pinged c. On the 14`h VMC will test Supply and Access for things like medicine and respirators. Renton Police need to be aware of this as there will be a WA State Patrol escorted semi truck in the area. d. On the 15th they will be doing Ham Radio and other radio communications testing. 4. Citywide Exercise Planning(All) a. Introductions (around the room)for non-City participants b. Exercise Planning Process Overview i. Need to comply with Federal Guidelines for exercise planning—rigid structure and paperwork. Needham carries the bulk of this responsibility but needs support. ii. Need to develop exercise objectives that are written as SMART objectives: specific,measurable,achievable, realistic,time-specific. iii. Handout—Exercise Planning Team—Please draft for your Department what you'd like to get out of this exercise and indicate your level of play. '��r✓ � iv. Need to create a planning team—want to identify this for each department and set up weekly time to meet(may not meet weekly,but want hold on calendars). v. The next exercise will be a flood exercise that may help focus attention on the. Green River Levees. The levee repairs that are planned as a result of the FEMA decertifications aren't predicted to be complete for 10 years. Even though it is a flood exercose we can add other aspects. vi. Council Members will be involved in this exercise and look at policy decisions in the recovery phase. vii. Decided on February 26`h,8 am to noon as the exercise time for field play. viii. In March,April, and May there will be follow-up tabletop exercises for council to participate in recovery stage decisions. c. Exercise Series/Structure Suggestions and Discussion i. Full Scale—all departments involved to some degree. The exercise will take place over about a 4 hour period. ii. Fire Station 14 is in the flood zone and will be affected. iii. Valley Medical-Communications Piece-Test influx of patients in Valley Com and how SR-167 flooding will affect how supplies get to us(95%come that way) iv. Fire—Evacuation elements, building of ICS structure to handle team,water rescue elements on lake Washington (pretend it is river)which will be a Zone3 water exercise—King County Sheriff Department wants to play along v. Consider using Red Cross Mobile Feeding Unit and/or the Soup Ladies for rehab or mass feeing—this is something they would want to be involved in,to train volunteers and cycle food products. Departments should keep the Red Cross Mobile Feeding Unit in mind for any drill,exercise or emergency events you have. vi. Should Metro Treatment be involved? It would be good to see if they would like to participate it could help identify needed improvements that could be grant funded—Abdul Gafour will contact them and invite them to participate. vii. Should we consider drinking water safety and other environmental issues in the exercise to include—waste water;flooding of septic systems and sewage back- ups;and supporting mass care-ensuring sanitation,feeding. Primarily Health Department would like to play in the recovery phase.Also think about Public Information and risk communication. There is a lot of intersection in the recovery phase—tabletop exercises with council will include this. viii. Public Information/Messaging—consider coordinating public messaging information regionally. Kelley Bartok Balcomb will investigate further by addressing/bringing up at the next Regional PIO meeting. ix. King County Sheriff Department and departments in the City of Tukwila are committed to participating in the exercise. x. Is it possible to issue an EAS message? If this is the month we are scheduled to test,definitely. If not,we can attempt to broker a trade. Deb Needham will � investigate further and attempt to schedule. � � xi. The Community Notification System will not be ready by the time of this exercise, but it will highlight areas of concern and demonstrate need for purchase if it has not been purchased by the time of the exercise. xii. Satellite phones are still an issue—there are only 10 minutes out of an hour where they might work but we are not able to open up our network to know with certainty which 10 minutes will work. We do have a great amateur radio notification system. A secure repeater will be available during the exercise. xiii. Will flood impact our communication systems/servers? With everything in the SW under water—at 167 height and lower—only Station 14 will be affected. It is likely that comms will still be up. It will impact Valley Medical Center parking. xiv. Black River Pump station? Abdul Gafour will check with Ron Straka to determine what impacts we would expect to have in the event of a flood. xv. Tukwila—their levee was not decertified,so flood maps don't take into account the potential for levee failure. Since any levee may break if subject to the appropriate stresses,we need a scenario for each potential levee failure and impacts,perhaps a simple elevation map. xvi. What about Station 11? This exercise considers Green River flooding and even in a worst case scenario Station 11 is in the clear until/unless the Cedar River floods. xvii. CED—Recovery phase decisions will include heavy involvement of CED xviii. Police—will participate, but asked about grant funding. None is currently available. xix. ICS needs to be a part of the exercise and be practiced by all of us jointly as a City. Public Works would be the IC with the Operations Section handling life/safety issues within appropriate branches. It is far easier to have one agency in charge and staff it in such a way that important functions get accomplished. AJLS would staff the public information function,whether in the EOC or in the field. We need to predetermine what incident command structure will look like for a flood and who is in charge. Action Item:have a discussion to figure out how ICS will work city-wide and predetermine an incident command structure. xx. Supply chain will be affected, need to do continuity planning. xxi. CERTwill have limited involvement—this is notthe best exercise to include them. Shelter Operations could be up and running instead. We are also looking at developing a volunteer mobilization center—something that coordinates volunteers who are showing up and want to help in event of disaster/etc(will try to have it ready in time.) xxii. Residential evacuation—focus on SW and businesses(not residential)—consider chemicals/gas petroleum in factories in flood zone. Storage tanks, pipeline— fuel impacts/Other Hazmat Facilities. Identify sites that have these materials and preplan what to do, including making an effort to secure in initial warnings xxiii. Washington State Department of Ecology has a role in hazmat mgmt functions. � � xxiv. Be sure to complete Exercise Planning Team handout. This will be reviewed in the exercise planning team and allow us to focus scenarios for departments (Tukwila,and any other jurisdictions,will do a parallel exercise and will come to some of the planning meetings to discuss big items.) xxv. Give thought to recovery lessons for City Council. xxvi. Be thinking about Agenty Department Participation 1. What level of participation for your agency/dept? 2. Time commitment the day of the major exercise? 3. Number of possible players from your agency/dept? 4. Desired activities for your staff? xxvii. Agency/Department Objectives 1. What measurable objectives do you want to see included? 2. What objectives do we share for the overall exercise? d. Exercise Date-Setting i. Need to have time for'hotwashes'directly following event. Then have one formal exercise debrief for summary of findings/lessons learned. ii. Thursday Feb 26`h 0800—need to have contingency plan for possible cancellation. iii. Tabletop exercises will continue through May'09 e. Exercise Planning Team Meeting Schedule i. Who will be your planning team rep? Make sure to think about this and include on your planning handout. ii. What is their availability for meeting Nov-Feb? Want recurring meeting time. Wed Morn or Thurs Afternoons are the only times that are open for current attendees on a regular basis. Action Item: Deb Needham will ask people yes/no on certain dates. iii. Flood maps are available in PDF firnat. Action ttem: Deb will email to everyone. Please use good judgment in how you speak about flood risk in Renton so that we are not alarmist.All levees are subject to failure under some unknown level of stress, but it is not certain that they will fail,or even highly likely.We still need to prepare,though,and that is our focus. iv. Need to do a round of EOC training before exercise. There is a Shelter training this weekend. Action Item:Deb Needham will send out information on weekly trainings that will not require overtime. Consider having staff attend the Renton Emergency Preparedness Academy(REPA)this Winter Quarter. Classes will include:the Police Citizen's Academy, Interacting with Emergency Responders,safe water for emergencies (this would be good to have as a PowerPoint for a/l city employees),Amateur Radio License Class, Introduction to Animal Rescue and a CPR Saturday on Feb 28,2009. f. Announcements? None. Thanks for coming! �rrr� �rr++' Important Dates: Fire&Emergency Services FireBall—December 6, 2008, at 1830 Flood Exercise—February 26, 2009,at 0800 CPR Saturday—February 28, 2009. � � Emergency Management Group Meeting Minutes from April Z, 2009 Present: Kelley Balcomb-Bartok, Communications Specialist, AJS Todd Black, Capital Projects Coordinator, Community Services Kent Curry, Commander,Police Suzanne Dale-Estey, Economic Development Director, Community and Economic Development Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Steve Lee, Surface Water Supervisor, Public Works Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire &Emergency Services George McBride, Information Services Director, Finance & Information Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire &Emergency Services Linda Parks, Fiscal Services Director, Finance & Information Services Next Meeting: 0900 on May 7th, 7�Floor Conferencing Center. Important Dates Apri120,2009 - City Council Tabletop Exercise II- Green River Flooding May 12,2009 - Continuity of Operations Planning Class-offered through REPA � May 18,2009-City Council Tabletop Exercise III- Green River Flooding June 6,2009-ATC 20/21 Training-offered through REPA June 13-14,2009 -Shelter Operations Training- offered through REPA Assignments: 1. All Departments-If you have any injects or items you want highlighted on short-term recovery at the next City Council Tabletop please contact M. Mattson. 2. All Departments-Review your stockpile of supplies to use in the event of an emergency for all of the members of your department. Identify what you have and what you need, and report this to D.Needham. Key Decisions/Discussions: D. Needham chaired the meeting. 1. Disaster Recovery Projects Handouts: City of Renton Project List, Preliminary Damages Assessment Summary Report. � '�*� Emergency Management Group—Apri12,2009 Minutes These two handouts should contain the same information. If you see any discrepancies please notify D. Needham. We've already had a few meetings with FEMA and believe we've arrived at the final list of applicable damages. We are claiming 4.8 million in damages and are eligible for receiving 75%back, or 3.75 million, making it worth the effort. We reviewed the Project List one project at a time. Project managers gave a summary of their project(s) and filled in the grey areas or identified a contact who could. Project 6, from the Airport, is a big project but no Letter of Intent for a mitigation project was submitted. Project 11 and 13 are also big projects. In regards to project 11, the next flood could have a large impact. Project 13 is a project to repair a spawning channel that was decimated by the flood and overtopped the permeable levee built in 2001. It is no longer a channel anymore and no spawning occurs. This may impact our dredging rights and increase flood risks. Projects 14-16 are in regards to the Cedar River Trail. If any projects are complete we can collect funds once this paperwork is submitted. 2. Mitigation Project Proposals Discussion and Recommendations We've been working on collecting the data necessary for our existing Hazard Mitigation Plan. Letters of Intent for mitigation projects are due to the state no later than May 1, 5 pm. The basic process for this is: a mitigation grant is proposed, then letters of intent are sent, the state then reviews all the submittals and then determines the level of support. Once this determination has been made, the full applications are prepared and are due in September. Limits are 1.5 million per project. Each City can have up to two projects. There is a matching requirement of 25%, which can include a soft match. We need to ensure we have the matching funds to complete the project and maintain funding. We currently have two proposals for mitigation projects. The first one is T. Black's project for Community Services with a projected cost of$3 million. We expect the total to go down as we know more and have more exact information. This is a project to improve the Cedar River Trail's gabions (wire baskets with rocks in them). The damage they sustained in recent floods reduced their effectiveness for erosion control and river bank protection. Part of this project is going to be completed by the Army Gorps of Engineers, for the lower portion of the trail. We should take this part out of the proposal before going to FEMA. This project will replace the gabions, at a minimum, with the same thing or a new thing. We are currently evaluating what to use, including logs or core logs (fabric encased materials where things can grow inside). More study is needed to determine the best course of action. The other project is S. Lee's Public Works/Water project currently projected to cost an estimated $1.5 million. The Elliot Levee was originally designed for 3000 CFS, but we have had events each year that overtop this amount. So, even if we build it back to current specs it will continue to be damaged. We are cunently doing a study to determine the best course of action, including looking at setting back the levee to the golf course fence. This would mean we wouldn't have to maintain the channel but would still get the bene�ts of the habitat. This would also protect the golf course from damage that Page 2 of 5 � � Emergency Management Group—April 2, 2009 Minutes is ineligible for FEMA reimbursement. The match required for this project would be $375,000. We do have a means to get this through the King County Flood Control District. It would come in small increments and would achieve the matching amount in approximately three to four years. We have three weeks to refine and pin this down. Please ensure you have support from your department in regards to the match and the City's level of support. 3. Hazard Mitigation Plan and Grant Eligibiliiy Updates We have to have a current hazard mitigation plan in place to be eligible for Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funding. The plan is currently being revised by a consultant the Community Services department retained. This year's plan won't be the most complete plan but will improve upon last year's plan and will increase the level of detail. The guidelines, for the plan and grant, include a requirement for public outreach. We are meeting these outreach requirements with a public meeting scheduled for Apri19. We are posting a notice about this meeting in the paper, and have done a press release. The purpose of the meeting is to gather input on what is a value to the community. We will explain the hazards to them, using a hazard map on display, and then we will garner their priorities. Names of possible department representatives were provided to attend the meeting and provide information to the public. For the meeting agenda, we are thinking about doing a quick introduction and then allow for questions. Do any attendees with more experience with public meetings have any suggestions? S. Dale-Estey suggested having a sidebar on this or contacting others in her department who could assist. 4. Council Tabletop Exercise Review We recently had our first of three table top exercises, using the Howard Hanson Dam scenario, with city council. No other cities have engaged their councils in this way but have asked for copies of our tabletop exercise. The handout Executive Roles in Disaster Response and Recovery was given to Council as reference in the tabletop exercise. It specifies their roles and responsibilities. The tabletop exercise gives them an environment where they can explore these issues and learn before they need to make decisions in a real emergency. Each council member had subject matter experts to refer to when they needed to. All Administrators had advance review of the exercise and injects at mayor's staff. Each Administrator ensured the injects and department specific information was accurate. Throughout the exercise, we ensured the mayor's authority was clear in the event of an emergency. Council respected this, allowing us to move swiftly when necessary. The first tabletop focused on response issues. The short-term recovery table top is scheduled for April 20 (to begin not later than 6pm). We'd like to get S. Dale Estey's expertise for the short-term recovery table top exercise. Following this one will be the long-term recovery table top. Chip Vincent and Norma McQuiller would be good resources for this exercise. Page 3 of 5 �r► � Emergency Management Group—Apri12, 2009 Minutes During the first exercise the City council asked for an update on the stockpiling of supplies for our employees. Remember, this is the responsibility of each department to manage. We may ask you to update us on this project so that we can give them an accurate representation of where the City is at in acquiring the necessary supplies. During the exercise we also looked at shelter operations and considered what it would be like to provide a shelter for our neighbors. Council responded well to this idea and discussed providing shelter and determining how we would pay for this. We also discussed flood fighting and the different costs of infrastructure and the costs to save it. The final thing covered in the exercise was, what will the City do if there are no funds and we can't cover the costs of things like payroll? Council began to look at this, which included discussion of a rainy day fund. This work will be a good starting point for the next exercise. Overall the first exercise was a success. Council members are still talking about it very positively. Please feel free to provide any inpudinjects for Council that you'd like them to wrestle with. It is important to remember to keep this at the policy level. Even if you don't have the wording for the inject and/or only have a concept for what you'd like them to look at, please contact M. Mattson so that it can be worked in. 5. Howard Hanson Dam Information Updates We recently attended the large overall planning meeting regarding the Howard Hanson Dam concerns. Seattle is participating in planning although they will be minimally impacted by the flood. D. Needham is leading the Notification and Warning Unit and developing the Standard Operation Guidelines and Information Resource for that group. A coordinated NOAA weather radio campaign is planned. We are also proposing an `opt in/opt out' for the new community notification system we are getting. We would like to allow businesses, via the web, to update us on what phone lines to use in the event of emergency. This is not only important for the businesses, but is important for the City of Renton because we have a limited number of free calls on the notification system. In the event of an emergency the remainder of the cost for the calls is partly reimbursable by FEMA, but we need to be aware that there is a cost. The planning group is trying to identify locations for mega-shelters for displaced Kent and Auburn residents. Rachel Myers is working on contacting hotels to learn their occupancy levels so that we can project evacuation plans. S. Dale-Estey pointed out that there could be some issues with this because it is protected corporate information, and suggested talking later about this. M. Mattson is working on the evacuation plan. The good news is that the Army Corps of Engineers are comfortable raising the Dam's pool level slightly, allowing us to increase the storage capacity. The bad news is that a second depression has been identified. They still think the dam will hold and projections are better than they were. CED is doing an informational mailing to businesses and property owners and are working on developing a business mailing list. Since we are spending hours working on developing this list it would be great to have a GIS system available to help, but we're not there yet. Page 4 of 5 ��w+' ;,�,' Emergency Management Group-Apri12,2009 Minutes 6. Project Accounting Justifying expenses for the EMPG grant can be difficult for our department because we have the smallest emergency management staff in the region. In addition, we don't have a blanket cost share that other emergency management departments have that allows for billing and recapturing costs for computers, facilities, printing, etc. Since we can't bill for this, we've billed for employee's time spent working on emergency management/hazard mitigation planning, meetings, etc (not for disaster events). Most people included in this have been figured for 1 or 2 hours a week for a year or 5% of their time, while some like Terry Vickers, Cyndie Parks, and Gary Harsh have been figured at 1/z of their time due to their line of work that fits emergency management definitions. G. McBride stated that he can provide a breakout of emergency management's costs for IS for the 2010 grant application. Last year we got $85,000 and are hoping to get approximately$110,000 this year. Since we started getting this grant,we've nearly tripled what we've gotten previously. The grant essentially pays for M. Mattson's position. When funding arrives it can be used for anything that supports emergency management, such as funding for police overtime for emergency management exercises and training. Be thinking about what you could use for your staff or the City as a whole. Since there is staff inember time attributed to emergency management and this grant we need to start tracking this time using project accounting. We have 22 people city-wide who need to start accounting for this time if they have not been doing it already. A project number is being created and when it is available it will be sent out to the applicable people. Please start tracking your time as soon as your receive this information. 7. Announcements/Good of the Order The REPA class schedule for Spring 09 has been published. Several classes have already proved to be very popular. Please take a look at the classes and spread the word. Minutes taken and submitted by: Kelly Carey,Admin Sec I, Fire &Emergency Services Page 5 of 5 City of Reiiton Home page � � Page 1 of 1 �, City��f.� ,:-. .w...�� n . , ,;�: ��„_ +�•�` ; � �� ;�' �1 ��=�: ..,��,�� :..�� :�,-- You are here:Calendar �Prmt Friencilv Version C�iendar < April 20i1 View Upcoming: Week�Month �Year » Su Mo Tu We TII Fr Sa Date Event Loca�on > 27 26 29 30 31 I 2 4(9 Hazard Mitigation Pfan Cltizen Input Meeting Renton City Hall,7th Floor > 3 4 5 6 7 � � 6;00 Ph1 The public meeting on April 9th,6:00-8:QQ pm in Council Chambers > � 11 12 i3 14 15 16 1O �unal Chambers on the 7th floor of Renton�ty 8:00 PM Ha11,1055 S.Grady Way,Renton.The cuRent Hazard > 17 18 �Q ZO 7i 22 � Mitigation Plan and loca[maps will be available for > � � Z� 1 28 29 30 review.The plan identifies hazards that muld affect > 1 2 3 4 5 ¢ Z residents,businesses,visitors,and infrastruciure T-- ----- within the Gty of Renton and fden6fies potentiat mitigation projects that could help protect the City �ilter Resalts From future disasters.Public input[s sought for the By Date Range:{mm/dd/yyyy) revision of this p[an.For more information,please 2l9/2009 contact DeEwrah Needt�am,Emergency Management Qirector at 425-430-7027. From: 8 _.._.....-- -- 4!9l2009 ro: 8 By Category and(or Keyword: All Categories�:= _.._...._. � Submtt;-; l�t+»•//rPntnr��va onv/caiPnr�ar a.�nx S/2SI2O11 Ps'»S '1 � :�� '�r 4�:a�r ^y � :;x�� ,,, ��,. s�Y. .�, .:e. r�,F � �� 'rf€t?�2 F�s"'a Y v j K�, �:� o- �Y'e�f 'i-k �oi �t��rk ��1 �.. �p{9�' e.t�.��a� �,�� ]��f��- �a �� "�e ; ��i_Yt � ;��,�� t� � sir ��z r�� s p� �� . + ` ' � >> ..,..�r. ��g,.,. - ,..�� ,a,.r�>�_��,�s.��x5:«��,r �..�r�a�.'�..�k'�`°��'�t�+'�N .,� .Ai'�^�,x,t ... �Y i? -'�,,^r,�S4..xaru,��k.�.�#Z�.`..�L ' �. .. ��. �.,�,' e�'�i 5�.��EM„.. ��. �- . ,^^�. , . �.M:-,.��.r .�n�.�.-�.,>..,.�.:�.- ..r-�,-.�a ��,. .,»� .�.r,.�. , ..,-..s x,. � ��` yx � j � .: �1 y 1 1� � '�+�Y ��ti;�'r Y� � � � L,� � � �� M�,�N4 ��, � � � ,�• �..�. y �j �t�i� �� I � w, ��'��r�F� �. � C �"i� .�-i 1 v � x ..�'�� .. ,;.�,{t � : � ny� ;�� ! ��'}JS�71��1�,��4�r�� i�.l�ll � � ` �rErdy �� ..�+�.il�i��ll��l.�� r� �2(�i9 � ., it � 1_,.Rr ,, ,r�.. ,.__ , ...� .. ,.�.�,�,. _. ,, .. ..._e_ � .._� ,...., ... . _., _ _. . ,_ k. 1 �r= � ' .. �� ,> � �,�� A � �� { '.0 COMMENTS . , je�;;EMAII �s LETTER .;,;�PRINT �FQLLOW�SNARE ; wn-� RentOn R� Ot'��P On � � � �, , City to hold publ�c meeting on , : � , . : : . � '� �,�;�'t'' Faeetr�ok p ��.. � Hazard Mitigation Plan � ��, � . Yo��ke ; ` `' �� " g�like �;a, � �� ReportE " � `'' Co��firm Page•ti e � Apr 02 2009 � � � +�,� � ��..,�� ? You like , �� =� � �� ^' The Cily of Renfon will hosl a public meefing on �• �' aner erd� p pa�� r� ��` � �� NR�ilat �. ' ` " Thursday,Apri)9,so thaf cifizens can review the � ��'�� u�� 382 people like Renton Reporter 381 ; ��'�' � ' ' currenf Hazard Mifigalion Plan and local maps. ; �� , people like Renton Reporter, °l>�. a�� , �€� 9 p Y �� . � �� d� ;;�� The meelin is 6-B .m.in lhe Cit Councii � �" ,�� " � chambers on the seventh floor of Renton Cify Hall, , �,', '� `� �� 1055 S.Grady Way. � � ��`, � �;til"�p��..��. . �: .. ...... ...... Th.�.. �.n�n� i ( F � '. `.�� r�- �`�' �rac��.��.:a��Iu;� The plan identifies hazards fhat couid affect � � j° _ residenls,businesses,visilors and infraslruclure � ' -' � - , .F} ,. ;� w..... _ . within the City of Renfon and idenlifies pofenlial �� -��- �- � �� " � ; �� ,��' ` miligalion projecfs fhaf could help protect the city � �� from future disasfers. ae�aren sTaeies � RentonReporter ��g�� , . Renton Planninq Comnission to holtl �� j Public inpul is soughf for the revision of lhis plan.For furfher � � publie heariog UVednesday on 5unsef Cllcr h�r�for a�t�lAfamaiia�l � informalion,confacf Deborah Needham,Emergency Managemenl rede�elooment �M,._ Direcfor al 425-430-7027. . Renfon C' Council to hold oublic hearina on Com,�ast hanchise Mondav ', i South King County ' . il o(Co��inqton olans puDlic meetina ', r ' � • YarmwBav and Covinoton reach ', �emenf en tra�ic m�jq fioa n and � � , Maole Hilis dev?�qpmenf 10 close out � � ��, �,� � �c �� k..��aL�'�4� � �� ?" �'.:x°v � � Fanel to hold(arum on Fload mrtigalian ', �M � �!£�.[l�t$ ' , mitigate river system I Hildreth � Citv to hold 2 Oood oreoaretlness ' m i , http:�Jwww,pnw�ocalnews,com�south king�ren�news�42338617,html[05�23�201111;26;11J i � ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGN iN !f you would fike to speak, please indicate as such next to your name with an "X",you will be calfed on in turn and given 5 rr�inutes to speak. Meet�n�: Hazard Miti�ation Plan Public Meetin� pate(sy; Apri19. 20�9 �rimes: 6:00 pm —8:OU pm Rocation: Renton Citv Hall Council Chambers � Print Name I would like to Speak{Xl Email address if you would like us to res,pond toyour inpuiry "�"�`% � .- �-eG�°�',c 1 r�it/t l�L�/� T�Y' C~'�'�/21� �� 1 ��e,.�q ., , � � ,� (/►�S �_ � �,�..Z,,�.�� -- , � ((E� S l �. �. •--� 'r � � i� � r(.,`�*c3 C��-R � L-n� -.,, -- ` .e-�� n�� /Z L �L Uj Z/�- _� +� G , I � l��R'� cn�'�� ,n c / � � � � Emergency Management Group Meeting Minutes from May 7, 2009 Present: Kelley Balcomb-Bartok, Communications Specialist, Administrative, Judicial & Legal Services Mark Baldridge, Facilities Technician, Community Services/Facilities Jeff Dosch, Security/Emergency Management, Valley Medical Center Floyd Eldridge, Commander, Police Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Fire &Emergency Services Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire &Emergency Services George McBride, Information Services Director, Finance & Information Services Joan Montegary, Assistant to the Chief, Fire & Emergency Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire &Emergency Services Preeti Shridhar, Communications Director, Administrative,Judicial & Legal Services Marty Wine, Assistant Chief Administrative Officer, Administrative, Judicial & Legal Services Next Meeting: 0900 on June 4th, 7�Floor Conferencing Center. . Important Dates May 12, 2009 - Continuity of Operations Workshop - EOC May 18, 2009 -Next City Council Tabletop Exercise June 6, 2009 - ATC 20/21 Training- offered through REPA June 13-14, 2009 - Shelter Operations Training- offered through REPA Assignments: 1. All Departments- Please assess your disaster preparedness supplies for all members ofyour department and report your findings to D. Needham by May 15. 2. All Departments- Ifyorr have anyinjects oritemsyou wanthighLghted on long-term recovery at the next City Council Tabletop please contact M. Mattson prior to May 15. 3. Police- Is there a mernber ofyour department willing to assist the multiagency Howard Hanson Dam planning by serving as a Deputy, a back-�p role, on the Evacuativn Branch? Ifso,please speak to D.Needham. 4. All Departments-Ifyorr'd like to have Fire&Emergency Services order pandemic fIu or disaster srrpplies in bulk for your departrnent, speak to R. Myers. 5. All Departments- Ifyou have any emergency management related events that a member of your departrnent needs funding to attend, speak to D.Needham. D. Needham chaired the meeting. �.�" ,�. Emergency Management Group—May 7, 2009 Minutes Key Decisions/Discussions: 1. "Business Not As Usual" -Video presentation on preparing for a pandemic flu The video we watched is available online at: http://www.kin c�, ountv.gov/healthServices/health/�reparedness/pandemicflu/video aspx Discussion occurred following the video. J. Dosch from Valley Medical mentioned that he is living it right now with the H1N1 "swine flu" virus. They are already seeing lower levels of service and supply delivery. D. Needham noted that we already had continuity planning on the work plan for this year. There is a plan in place for the Fire & Emergency Services Department, but we do not have one for the entire City. 2. Continuity Planning Overview-R. Robertson There will be a workshop on May 12th to discuss and begin our business continuity planning. R. Robertson has had experience with this and is here to share her expertise. She has written business continuity plans before and has been a consultant. She's here to provide information on what has worked for her previously and how to make this type of planning easier. This can be a simple process. It may seem like it is overwhelming and difficult, but it can be accomplished with teams. It is an ongoing process. Definitions of business continuity planning or a business continuity plan are as follows: processes and procedures an organization puts in place to ensure that essential functions can continue during and after a disaster; set of documents, instructions, and procedures which enable a business to respond to accidents, disasters, emergencies and/or threats without impacting key parts of business; and/or the logistical part of a disaster recovery plan. The purpose of the plan is to answer the questions of how you are going to get to the point that you are up and running in the immediate, and how you get to a full recovery point. A good way to start the planning process is to perform a Risk AssessmentlAnalysis. R. Robertson likes to start this at the smallest level-at your desk-and then meet as a group to look at the departmental level and then the organizational level. The focus of the assessmendanalysis is the key functions and priorities of your business. You can combine the individual and departmental plans to create the organizational plan. The goal is to minimize chaos and focus on the steps necessary to achieve recovery. A business continuity plan is a living document that will need to be changed and improved regularly. The continuity section of the plan addresses the: who, what, where, when., why and how of a disaster process. The recovery section involves an analysis of business processes and continuity needs. Disaster recovery describes how the organization will recover from the effects of a disaster. Page 2 of 7 � � Emergency Management Group—May 7, 2009 Minutes It is important to have members of your department walk around and do an asset inventory. A major inventory to include key information on each item inventoried including the vendor contact information. Major inventory, meaning the items that are expensive to replace, take a long time to replace or you cannot run your day to day business without them. The handout marked "#1" and titled Asset Recovery is an example of an inventory form. D. Needham wondered if there is a way to tie into IS's inventory system and have them give each department a list or report on their items, so we aren't redoing their work. Next you need to identify the top critical functions you want to maintain. Critical functions are those functions that must be recovered before any others. You'll need to make up a list and share the information with stakeholders. The list can be changed as needed. Once you have defined your critical business function you will need to complete a disaster business functions action plan. An example of this type of plan is provided in the handout marked `Form#2'. This piece makes up the bulk of your plan as it details every step necessary to recover each of the critical business functions step by step. For each business function you will need to identify a primary contact, support contact, immediate actions, mitigation actions and recovery actions. It should serve as a guide for the team after a disaster has occurred. Begin with the 10-15 critical functions you identified and then build on the plan as you become more comfortable with the process. The steps should be written so that a volunteer could follow them. . You must have a recovery plan for every continuity plan. You will need to create a process restoration priority, and identify the restoration priorities for every business function identified. Manual workaround processes also need to be documented step by step. Once you've completed all these pieces you're ready to combine them and write your plan. When your plan is completed you need to test it and evaluate it. This should be done at least annually. Procedures used to test the plan should be documented. We are having a business continuity planning workshop on May 12 at the EOC. If you're attending and have laptops, please bring them. We'll start looking at our own files and begin to work on things. This workshop will be a kick-start to the planning process. There will be forms available that we can be used city-wide. If you need more information, examples of forms, etc, please feel free to speak to R. Robertson. Please remember that this process can be overwhelming but it is doable and achievable. Creating this plan is a high priority and we need to achieve completion as soon as possible Page 3 of 7 � � Emergency Management Group-May 7,2009 Minutes 3. Disaster Updates a. Flu There are currently 23-29 confirmed cases- and the number is growing. 99% of the cases identified as probable H1N1 are being confirmed as H1N1. There could be additional cases because they are not testing or tracking people until their symptoms warrant it. There could be several people with minor symptoms who may have H1N1. While Public Health is doing updates three times a week, they are cunently ramping down now that the information is out to the public. They are stepping back and will monitor the situation. This disease is still considered a pandemic because it will be global, but at this time we don't know what level of impact it will have. Personal Protective Equipment and Supplies-R. Myers Members of the Fire &Emergency Services Department recently met and discussed what personal protective equipment the department should be providing for members. When Swine Flu was announced this group began thinking about other departments and discussed how to support them. One way could be assisting with bulk supply purchases. Fire & Emergency Services can order masks, gloves, etc, and bill your budget. They can also assist with rotating items that you may not use often so that they don't expire prior to being used. If you're interested in ordering supplies they just need a contact from your department to work with. The decision for the type and amount of supplies is done at the department level, with each department making decisions for their members. This allows you to determine the level of need based upon what services you provide, level of contact with the public, number of inembers, etc. The Fire & Emergency Services Department hasn't started a discussion on food/water supplies, but R. Meyers is willing to look into this further as well as provide information on what they currently have and use. The next tabletop for council on May 18 is regarding our current level of preparedness. We need to know where your department is in regards to food, water and emergency supplies for each member. Please email D. Needham by May 15 to let her know what you have and what you need. Administrators are responsible for ensuring that all employees have supplies, even if they are directed to bring them themselves. There should be some actions to follow up with Administrators to ensure they are aware that they need to assess their food/water supplies and address pandemic flu supplies immediately. Maybe the Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator can do this at the next Mayor's staff ineeting. Page 4 of 7 � � Emergency Management Group—May 7,2009 Minutes b. Howard Hanson Dam-P. Shridhar We recently did a mailing to all the businesses in the valley to alert them of the Howard Hanson Dam concerns and the different scenarios that could occur. We informed them of the current multiagency work happening, and the different resources available to them. Kudos to L. Garvich for her assistance with the mailing. The collaborative website kingcounty.gov/flood plans includes a calendar of events and additional information. Each City has information on their site. On May 11 there will be a public meeting regarding the Dam on the Kent campus. We are trying to ensure there is consistency in our messaging and information. We hope to have sufficient time between now and the next major weather event to allow for planning and response preparation. The US Army Corps of Engineers' Seattle Branch received funding from the stimulus package for the Howard Hanson Dam repairs. They received a total of $26 million, but we are unsure how much of this is for the Dam's righf abutment. The multiagency planning groups are looking for a member of one of the Police Departments to be a deputy in the evacuation branch, a back-up role. We have people from the City of Renton in various places, but they could use one of our Police Commanders or the like to step-up. It would not be a heavy role, with a lot of ineetings, etc. Please contact D. Needham if someone is willing to assist. c. Flood and Snowstorm Recovery ' If you have any projects that aren't being approved, speak to D. Needham. She is willing to work with you to fight for the project. Our projects with FEMA are currently being adjusted. We will be getting less than expected, but will still be getting $3 million. If the money from FEMA is returned within the same year, the money goes back to the department rather than the general fund. d. Project Accounting We need to begin tracking and accounting any time that is for disaster work and recovery. Handouts detailing the different project codes that should be used were passed out. Anytime disaster work is being done, please use the project codes for your time even if an event you're working on hasn't been `declared' a disaster yet. This will help us put a placeholder on these funds and attribute it to the appropriate disaster after the fact. After the disaster is declared we may assign a specific code or provide additional levels to differentiate between design, supplies and labor. We will keep you posted as these codes are defined. All work for the flu has a disaster project code. Even though it hasn't been identif'ied as a disaster, we need to track these funds in the event that it is declared and we would be eligible for retroactive pay. It can be difficult to do the project accounting, but will help us get funds. Page 5 of 7 `�` �rr� Emergency Management Group—May 7,2009 Minutes EMPG personnel are people who have 5% or more of their time attributed to Emergency Management. A handout with a list of the EMPG personnel was provided. These people need to use project accounting to track the amount of their salary that is related to emergency management. For example, Terry Vickers and Cindie Parks' time are both at a 50% due to their job descriptions and duties. Gary Harsh's time is also at 50% because of his HazMat work. L. Garvich is at 30%, P. Shridhar is at 10% and K. Carey is at 5%. Please start tracking your time now. If it isn't feasible to track your time on an hourly basis, consider doing a set amount of hours each pay period to z09200, f247. If it isn't possible for you to track your time, please notify us. If you're unsure which code to use, please code emergency management work using the general code/other project code. If everyone tracks their time and enters their hours under the project codes we will be able to respond to an auditor's request for proof of hours worked. This will also help us track the cost of emergency management for the City overall. We might even be able to utilize this information to argue for an increase on individual budgets for emergency management time/work. Building a history now, will help us make a case for more support later. e. Related Mitigation Projects We had two projects related to the recent floods. One of these projects, the one from Community Services, seems like it will be turned down. The project from Public Works seems like it will be approved. 4. Current Projects a. Hazard Mitigation Plan Status We recently learned that we don't have to have the Hazard Mitigation Plan completed by May 1, because FEMA changed when the plan had to be complete. The consultant we hired has prepared a plan and D. Needham is currently reviewing it with other members of Fire & Emergency Services Department. The consultant will be doing some additional work and the plan will be completed in- time for the new FEMA deadline. b. Council Tabletop Exercise Review The council members are really enjoying participating in the table top exercises and are learning what their roles and responsibilities are during a disaster and the recovery phases. The next table top will be May 18. One question was posed at that should be brought up at the next table top -given the flood concerns should we pose a moratorium on building in the valley? c. EOC Computer Upgrade The old laptops in the EOC have been replaced with new desktop computers. There is still some work for IS to do, like update the profiles and favorites on each computer so that they are all the same. Page 6 of 7 � � Emergency Management Group-May 7, 2009 Minutes d. Renton Emergency Preparedness Academy Renton Technical College's Community Education Budget has been cut drastically. This is the part of the college that we've been partnering with to put on the academy. We have had some exciting classes including water safety and self defense that have received a great response. If Renton Technical College can no longer host the academy we will find somewhere else, because is a great program that needs to be maintained. Fellow cities have even expressed an interest in doing something similar in their communities. 5. Announcements/Good of the Order J. Dosch-There will be a Bomb Threat exercise at Valley Medical at approximately 9 a.m. on June 23. It will only be a 4 hour exercise, but it might be good for members of the Fire & Emergency Services Department or Police to be present and observe. He will add a representative from these two groups to his email list. The next planning meeting is May 27 where they will confirm the time-line, and define when would be a good time for people to come and observe. Tim Troxel was recommended as a good person to add to the list. D. Needham- Great news! We were approved for all the funds we requested in the EMPG grant. We were able to defend our proposal based on the level of work members of the City are doing. We are even getting more than Bellevue. Due to this inflwc of funding, it is possible that when there are things like the Valley Medical Bomb Threat Drill the cost for staff to attend could possibly be billed to her budget. She'll need specific quantifiable amounts to do the billing, but if it is a learning experience related to Emergency Management in some way, and she has the funds, she wants to support it. If there is something like this coming up for your department please speak to D. Needham to discuss possible funding. Next meeting is June but may be a working meeting. Minutes taken and submitted by: Kelly Carey, Admin Sec I, Fire &Emergency Services Page7of7 ATTENDANCE - PL�ASE SIG(V lN Meeting: �� ,;�, � � Qatels)� ��.��="7 Times: CJ%t� ca _ / G�s C"> Location; `� � �v�,�- �.�,-h:f'.— � Print Name ___ Department Position Ext � 4 �t,...L'.J(..•.M" �� r F,/`. �" (.C'�„��i1"��- , �.. �,,,}� (...�!'Y'�Cr{"' . .� ! �.�""u. C`v �/ j'"� 7 �.^^7 � �.. �%.CsYI Ce::. L'f�:k ,..i..s�trt..�t^..,/�"'_Y/�/�`• / ��- � �'�F�.t�.�` ``��.�,.��.��'-, ��.��_ �� '�� `°' � - � - �`...�.��`t�'1 , ��'��:.� , �� `�.......�,.u.. � °` '- ,� C � �/c�c � � � f �-,� � k�' �� µ?-�'' ��.��- �°��a �. C-� G�� -� �r}��"�?,'��1` �."��b'1` `��.�...n.-- � ' ,..., ,._, '� � � fp _ ._ _� _F � ' t � k �-� �� . � •r:� ��Jj f� ��--i�'=�;,�� `1f� ��._i�1 �`��,�1, ��.�., ��'� �,��.•��_,- f � r, �� a � ,� � .,n �?,�`�, r '� r � ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGfV IN Meeting: �� `" `'`� Date(s): ��'7 /'�-c;�C? `�/ Times: C,�`�� •� /��3 �,`� Lacation: ��` (��*�.�- (�c��- �'7`� + Print Name Debartment Position Ext. �. �. l . (� } �� (�/� I Yl fl/� �,�.�/�,`��1�'� J "�� .1D��)'��< �'/�� I cia---�`—'�1�,--�--.-r-- a i v �- ��S �."� �1\ �`, �lr'�.�..Q( I( '�1,�� :��l:�- ��r� 1� (� �� l�1 �„ �� , � �(� /} �� T �-, -----�; � (\� � , -^-7 � 'a..� �'� `7 � (�L. �...J �c'��... ..� �� . `� (Q.� t� � � ' ` - ��'�^"Y•_"T'."". / , w . 1 �a�- (/�, (p�, � �^�^ . �„,...,......� .. .. . .... , / j � , (7 v'ti . / G''�`..,.-. ��G.�..� l ti�.,,,.`�,—� w" L./.�'�% � .� /L�,- �� _.r. ...,5 �C. G�� '" �� -- f�/''�c" �G,�a-7,r,y,.� �/� "i ..�"v'�'� ,1 . ' __ ' � ;�j.�'.C�Y'G��.; �`�r,��(��1 f `; �_.�� " �� Emergency Management Group Meeting Minutes from June 4, 2009 Present: Mark Baldridge, Facilities Technician, Community Services/Facilities Jan Conklin, Development Services Representative, Community&Economic Development Kent Curry, Commander, Police I. David Daniels, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator, Fire &Emergency Services Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Fire & Emergency Services George McBride, Information Services Director, Finance & Information Services Norma McQuiller, Neighborhood Coordinator, Community &Economic Development Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services David Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Mark Peterson, Deputy Fire Chief, Fire &Emergency Services Mary Roy, Administrative Secretary, Finance & Information Services Ray Sled, Water Manager, Public Works Preeti Shridhar, Communications Director, Administrative, Judicial & Legal Services Next Meeting: 0900 on July 2�d, 7�Floor Conferencing Center. Important Dates June 6, 2009 -ATC 20/21 Training-offered through REPA June 13-14, 2009 -Shelter Operations Training- offered through REPA June 15, 2009-FEMA Disaster Costs Submittals DUE June 18, 2009 -Hazard Mitigation Plan Review in Writing DUE June 20, 2009-Bomb Drill-Valley Medical Center July 1, 2009 - Continuity Planning Forms DUE Assignments: 1. All Departments-Please review the Hazard Mitigation Plan and put your additions or corrections in writing by June 18, 2009 and provide to D. Needham. Please pay close attention to tables, highlighted areas, and pages described on page 7-8 of these minutes Files are located at Q:IEmergencyManagementlPLANSAND PROCEDURESIHazard Mitigation Plan IDRAF7'REVISION Z. All Departments-Ifyou have anyremaining disaster costs forFEMA,please submit to D. Needham prior to June 15, 2009 3. All Departments-Please nominate at least two appropriate members in your department to serve on the City s Incident Management Team. �' '`� Emergency Management Group-May 7, 2009 Minutes 4. All Departments- Complete initial Continuity of Operations Planning(COOP) worksheets by July 1, 2009. Worksheets for each department are located at Q:I Emergency Management I PLANS AND PROCEDURES IRENTON COOPI Draft 5. All Departments-Ifyou have any emergency management related training that a member ofyorrr departrnent needs funding to attend, speak to D. Needham. D. Needham chaired the meeting. Key Decisions/Discussions: 1. Howard Hanson Dain/Flooding Planning Update (D. Needham) They have filled the depressions in the dam and are in the process of slowly raising the pool level to determine the full extent of the dam's capabilities. The good news is that we gained a little flood buffering capability. The bad news is that the cause for the depressions is still unknown and could be a result of a structural problem in the right abutment. So, an increased flood risk is still present for the next 2 to 6 years. We have updated flood maps for Renton. Different versions show what would happen at different flood levels. In several versions, Renton will be adversely affected with at least a foot of water over I-405. 13,900 cubic foot per second would result in minimal effects; but it is a very unlikely scenario, unless we have a really dry flood season. The flood scenarios that demonstrate 17,600 or 19,500 cubic feet per second(cfs)or 7ess of water are most likely. At the low end, these scenarios project that the valley area of Renton will have one foot of water in parts, and at the high end (19,500) some areas will have 3-4 feet of water or more. This won't affect roads that much, and Fire Station 14 is okay for these two scenarios. At the 25,000 cfs flow, however, most of the valley is under a significant amount of water. Chief Daniels asked how quickly the water would come and how much warning would be possible. Auburn is very close, so depending on the intensity of the rain and the release, we could have water on our hands in a very short pe�riod of time, as in a matter of a few hours. What is more likely is that the water will come at a slower pace and take days to reach full levels. We are working on developing our notification and warning systems to ensure there is as much lead time as possible. The US Army Corps of Engineers, National Weather Service, and King County Flood Warning Center are all currently working on their prediction technology. 2. Incident Management Team (DC Peterson) When we were aware of the impending storm in December 2008,we prepared for the event by putting together an incident command post. We had different departments, like Public Works, Fire &Emergency Services, Police, etc. sit down together to develop an incident action plan for the next operational period (12 hours). This worked out well as Page 2 of 8 � � Emergency Management Group—May 7,2009 Minutes we ensured we weren't duplicating efforts and improved our efficiencies. Using this successful experience as a model, we'd like to establish an Incident Management Team so that if there is another event, we can have a team ready to meet, develop a plan, and run an incident. We would use an Incident Management Team for all types of major events from a water main break or an earthquake. We could also do this for public events like Renton River Days and the 41h of July. The person/department in charge during any incident would depend on the type of event. When a person is the incident commander they need to be able to delegate and stay abreast of the situation. The ICS command and general staff positions need people who are ready, experienced and trained, so that we are able to support an incident over time and multiple operational periods. Initially we need two members from each department who would be willing to be a part of the Incident Management Team. They need to be available to take the training necessary, as well as be ready to work on the team when an incident occurs. If we have people designated for the necessary roles we will be better prepared to respond. The Incident Command department will be in charge of the Incident Management Team and focus their staff in Operations and others will take on support (primarily planning/logistics/finance/PIO) roles. Time commitment would be attending an in-depth ICS training that would ideally be a week long to cover Command and General staff training, and eventually for the specific position being trained for (Planning Section Chief, for instance). After that, the time commitment would be minimal. There would be exercises/practice, but they would be scheduled based on people's availability. Whoever is identified for these roles would need to be able to be available during an event. Since it is a week of training we will have people specialize in different chief sections/roles. If we could accomplish the training prior to flood season (November) we'll be in a good place. We will balance people's skills and interests with the City's needs. We are looking at eventually training 40 to 50 people city wide across the departments. The majority of these people will be from the Fire & Emergency Services, Public Works, Police, and Community Services departments. Representatives from the Finance department would probably be sent for training offsite, instead of bringing an instructor here. We would like to accomplish this by October before flood season begins in November. Discussion: Time commitment is an issue, how do we balance this training with all the different efforts we are working on for emergency management? It might help to consider this as an investment in the City's future, rather than a time commitment. We could consider doing the training in pieces and have a one or two day training prior to the flood season-what you absolutely need to know-and then build on it later. If we are bringing the instructor in, we can tailor the training to Renton's needs. 3. Regional Shelter Task Force Dennis Conte and Sonja Mejlaender were unable to come today, so r�ve will discuss what we can without them. Recreation has taken the lead on providing this for the City of Page 3 of 8 � � Emergency Management Group—May 7, 2009 Minutes Renton. Facilities are going to provide back-up support (open doors, provide tables and chairs, etc). The King County Reglon 6 Shelter Table handout provides information on what the region has planned for sheltering. We are currently looking at combining efforts with neighboring cities depending on sheltering needs, to ensure we have enough staffing and Red Cross volunteers. At this point in time, we currently do not have enough people to run one largeshelter at the staffing levels recommended by Red Cross for one entire 24 hour period. We are building up what we can do, but the region-wide plan may be a good solution. According to the Red Cross 32, staff are needed to run a shelter based on the different duties and tasks involved. We only have a few mega shelter sites in the region and none are located in Renton. There is a zone dormitory shelter in south King county, if we only have a few people in need of shelter. If we have as many as 90 citizens in need of a shelter, we would probably set up a dormitory shelter here in Renton. When thinking about an incident, we need to think about the homeless and provide shelters or alternate locations if they aren't able to go to existing shelters. We also need to be aware of citizens who require a medical needs shelter. Public health will provide that type of shelter, but we need to triage shelter clients and direct the medical needs elsewhere. We should also be sure to evaluate the situation and determine what level of sheltering is needed. What if food is all that citizens need? We can offer a location to get free meals and have people return home afterwards. This would be easier to do, and require less staff. The sheltering and mass care decision tree handout helps with decision making. What do we do if we have a small amount of people? Should we provide a shelter or give out hotel certificates? It also addresses what to do with animals and could be very helpful. We need to have a representative from Renton on the regional task force looking at shelteringfor the region. Please contact D.Needham ifyorr or someone from your department is interested. 4. H1N1 Flu Update (D. Needham) The H1N1 flu is definitely out there and there are more cases than you realize. It is extremely prevalent. If staff are symptomatic they should be sent home. We need to prevent the spread of this highly infectious disease. There have been some people who have died due to this flu, but they had pre-existing conditions. What we are concerned about is the potential for this flu to mutate later in the actual flu season and become more dangerous. Tamiflu, an anti-viral, does not cure it, but stops the virus from replicating so the flu doesn't get much worse than it already is. If someone has a mild H1N1 and they aren't susceptible to developing a bad case, they aren't given Tamiflu. If they have strong symptoms, or they are vulnerable, they are given Tamiflu. They are trying to conserve the Tamiflu to ensure we have enough of it and that it doesn't become ineffective. Page 4 of 8 � � Emergency Management Group-May 7, 2009 Minutes If you need a poster/sign to encourage hand washing ask D. Needham. Remember to cough or sneeze into your elbow or into a tissue, and then throw the tissue away. 5. Continuity Planning Check-In (All) We had the continuity planning training last month where each department was tasked with completing the worksheets for their workgroup by July 1. The forms are located on the "Q" drive. D. Needham will send out a link to the group today, and then a deadline reminder before they are due. A check-in with each department was done to determine where people were at in khe process: Fire & Emergency Services-Haven't done much since the workshop, but will. AJS - Communications may need to do special planning beyond their department's borders. Legal-New department, but working on it. Finance-They are currently working on it and the meeting rep will remind those working on the project of the July 1 deadline. IS- G. McBride is certain that Young Yoon has finished this task. Public Works-They have started working on this. They had a staff ineeting regarding the forms and each manager is working on their own section. Community Services-Representative is not sure where they are at. Police-Floyd Eldridge attended the training and K. Curry hasn't had the chance to connect with him, but will attempt to do so within the next few days. CED - Has started the forms, most of the work done so far was done at the training, but they are still working on it. 6. CodeRED Service (D. Needham) The necessary paperwork is in process. Legal noted that the service has an automatic renewal clause we will need to keep abreast of, because we will need to go through the council approval process for the renewal as the price will go up to $25,000 in the next year. Once the paperwork is done, we will have little to do on our end, as far as setting up the system is concerned. We have arranged to get the E911 King County database for free. We will most likely have a temporary employee come in for a short time to clean up this list for our use. This money was already budgeted. We can use the published phone number database legally for non-emergency messages-think about this option for your departments if you may find a good use for it and can pay for the minutes used. CodeRED is a hosted website service. We will provide a link from our home page. Legally, we will only be able to use the King County E911 database for a true emergency. CodeRED will have an opt-in and opt-out option. People will be able to go to our website and add their cell phones and/or identify that their phone is TTY. If someone opts in, they will be added to both databases. Business or other systems with PBX lines can opt out to ensure we don't overload their systems or aren't calling phones that shouldn't be called. Ensuring we aren't making unnecessary calls is fiscally important, because while we are allotted a certain amount of minutes we have to pay for any additional minutes over our limit. Page 5 of 8 � � Emergency Management Group—May 7, 2009 Minutes The question was raised regarding letting people who do not live in the City opt-in. There are some issues with this, including concerns about the costs to call everyone. The Gity of Auburn is limiting who can be on their list-if they don't live in the city, they will be put on the list only if it is a life safety issue, like a family member they care for lives in the city. Since there are other public notification means that people outside of the City will have access to, including the media and the Emergency Alert System, not everyone with an interest needs to be on the list. CodeREDwill not be a method that is used often and/or used alone. It will be, however, an excellent system for notifying neighborhoods/areas if there is a police lock down or a hazmat. Either way, it will be a difficult balancing act to determine who should be on the list. Cell phones are replacing landlines more and more and used more often. D. Needham will be working on a written procedure for emergency notification. Once CodeRED contract is signed we are approximately 30 days from putting the code on the website. The CodeRED plan comes with five username/passwords. The cost is $150/each for additional username/passwords. We need to discuss and determine who needs to have access. The question was raised whether Valley Comm will administer a shared notification system for the region. It would be great if Valley Comm would do this like Norcomm and Clark County does, but Valley Comm has no interest in doing this and have not responded positively to requests in the past. Each city in the area has had to get their own system, but fortunately most are choosing the same one. This will allow us to tie our databases together for incidents that cross lines/boundaries. 7. Communications Staffing Update (P. Shridhar) P. Shridhar was able to get a grant for a new VISTA/Americorps volunteer in her section. She had to leave the meeting early, so she will talk about this next month. 8. EM/Disaster Cost Recovery Efforts (D. Needham) The deadline for wrapping up the costs, bids and paperwork for FEMA is June 15, 2009. They are being very particular about submittals right now and very good documentation is needed to ensure funding. Community Services has had to work hard to get their claims approved and FEMA is questioning some costs. Paperwork needs to be put in AND points have to be argued with FEMA before June 15 or it could result in reimbursement delays. Please be sure to do project accounting if applicable. We need to support our increase in funding by documenting the work we are doing. Remember that EMPG funding is available for emergency management related training. For example, there is a bomb exercise at Valley Medical on June 20, 2009. If there are employees who'd like to participate and need to be funded, speak to D. Needham. She will not be able to pay for this event outright, but could pay the department back when the funds become available. Page 6 of 8 �W `'�.�'` Emergency Management Group-May 7, 2009 Minutes 9. Hazard Mitigation Plan Draft Overview (All) (The documents can be found at Q:�Emergency Management\PLANS AND PROCEDURES�Hazard Mitigation P1an�DRAFT REVISION) A consultant hired by Community Services has been working on updating the Hazard Mitigation Plan. D. Needham and R. Meyers have gone through the draft and made changes/additions. At this point we need representatives from each department to review the draft, paying close attention to the highlighted sections, and notify D. Needham of their edits/answers. Both the new plan and the old plan are being provided because there are points where you need to reference the old plan. Please let us know if you see errors as you go through this. The entire plan needs to be completed by the end of the month, so we need feedback in writing within the next two weeks. A review of highlighted sections during the meeting identified: Page 2-l: Map needs to be changed-need to secure map from GIS Pages 2-4, 2-5, 2-6: Need more information from CED Chapter 3: This chapter is currently filler, D: Needham needs to write it, so it can be skipped when reviewing for now. Page 4-3: Need everyone to look at the goals and answer the question- Do we want to commit to these? Pages 4-4, 4-5: Look at the information and make sure it is accurate-Public Works/Facilities need to look especially hard at this section. Need to be able to discuss these by the next meeting. Page 6-l: Need brief descriptions/narrative for Community Services and Transportation should include discussion of road/damages on 169. Page 6-3: We may not be able to provide the flood inundation map due to legal issues. Page 6-7: Could really use Public Works help with a list that includes all areas of concern to include: street flooding, localized flooding, wetlands that spill over, etc. Page 6-8: We need Ron Straka to provide some data here on flood plain inventory, critical facilities and transportation. We also need data on insurance coverage in the city, D. Needham will check with Ron Straka on this. Page 6-9: Ron Straka needs to look at this and add his input. Page 6-12:Need ALL Departments to look at the table and make sure that everyone is okay with what is listed. We need to be very careful to look at what we are committing to and ensuring we can provide it. Page 7-3: We need more information regarding responses to storm water flooding from Ron Straka and R. Sled. Page 7-8: We need to review and revise the table and prioritize it for the City of Renton. Public Works, Community Services and CED have pieces. Chapter 8: This chapter is on earthquakes. D. Needham searched through four or more binders that were at least four inches thick on the Nisqually earthquake. After looking through these we still cannot locate a synopsis of the damage to the City of Renton from the Nisqually or earlier earthquakes. Does anyone know Page 7 of 8 � � Emergency Management Group-May 7,2009 Minutes where we can find this information? One suggestion was the Renton Reporter. Another was to use the county-wide data we do have and extrapolate the City's costs. R. Sled stated that he had a book with some of this information for the State of Washington, and will get it to D. Needham. Page 8-13:Evaluating short term solutions like strapping computer monitors or desktops down and better fastening of servers. Facilities isn't equipped to handle this task. It makes sense that IS would do this for computers/etc. It is a huge cost savings if we protect our expensive equipment. Facilities will need to work on ensuring large pieces of furniture are secured so that they will not fall over. We need to check with IS to determine what timeline is feasible for strapping down computer equipment and how much of their budget is available for this project. We may have some funding from EMPG for this, but really hope we can count on departments to cover these costs. Page 9-2: Need to correct graphic. Page 9-5: Should take out consultant's notes. Map may need further review. Page 12-5:Need to speak to DC Flora to cite the fire code for hazardous materials. Page 12-7: Change wording regarding cause of pipeline break to "a common cause" rather than "the most common cause". Chapter 13: Need to hear overall feedback from IS and Police on this chapter. Page 13-5: Need more action items. Everyone should look at every table to determine your department s commitments Feedback in written form is needed within 2 weeks -June 18th. Need to do final review at July meeting. Minutes taken and submitted by: Kelly Carey, Admin Sec I, Fire &Emergency Services Page 8 of 8 . .. :... .. , .:::. .. ...: _ ... �.... .. ...... ........, .,.,. . ...._.. ..,_,. .. . ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGN IN Meeting: ��_�✓"v�-� ' Date(s): � � �' Times: 4 Or�' �- (d3� Locatian: �o'Yt� . �N.._ '� ��-� Print Name Deaartment Position Ext. �, � � � � �,� i r�. . �`� � �.,(c� �� a....�,. �. 7 e�.� �O�o�-{ � �l SA ��U �� - �.S �° v�2u� ,� �,u S d� �. ,,..� - � � '" ��"� � n::�.., M:K,. ��,� a�"' .fi..�;",t+" i�:.,">y y, .�„ �„�r ,� 1. � � �r�-�� ^ � � C'�� ' s S''.s' f� ,� c {�� ,.,, �'�-�" S' �� C�-�� ?0 2 � `�, i A�/t 1�: r'�(!� � �-..5� �M�1v i S"�2r�-c'"6"2_ CJ�� ( -�f� ��n .�� ` � .�.�� "��...,' � =��y��-. _ � �'� �= r��-,�,�. ��'�.�= f /�- �"r� � l � r�� f�v,nv �2� �� . . �,,�(' _..._:_...__ - �. _. ._.�._... .��._.._.._.......w,.__ . . ; �--�., '��' �� t��'"'"�'� ;.�`��°'�..�,s.�` ��=` �,..�,��„��...�+,i� �,ti�kf� �"��.�'..�,�� ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGN (N Meeting: Date(s): Times: Location: Print Name Department Position Exfi. �,�.�,'�(.;'� ' �J'��-� S�-(,A'� �"� � wt �u`c::�a.(`�C�� - . '►�v �� ` �.`'G-��`� G�/ G��/``��.. r�(,�� . .�: � � � ;�(,,`c- � G .-' ' � ` � � � Emergency Management Group Meeting Minutes from July 2, 2009 Present: Dennis Conte, Facilities Supervisor, Community Services/Facilities Kent Curry, Commander, Police I. David Daniels, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator, Fire &Emergency Services Jeff Dosch, Security/Emergency Management, Valley Medical Center Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Abdoul Gafour, Utility Engineering Supervisor, Public Works Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Fire &Emergency Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management D'uector, Fire &Emergency Services Ray Sled, Water Manager, Public Works Pauletta Sulky, Risk Analyst, Human Resources & Risk Management Next Meeting: 0900 on August 6,2009,7�Floor Conferencing Center. Important Dates July 9, 2009 - Red River Flood Team Seminar, RSVP at ecc.kc@kingcounty.gov Assignments: 1. All Departments- Please review tfie Hazard Mitigation Plan and put your additions or corrections in wrrtirrg by July 15, 2009 and provide to D. Needham. Please pay close attention to tasks ar2d agenda items and the iterrls noted on page 4-6 of these rriinutes. Files are located at Q:IEmergencyManagementlPLANSAND PROCEDURESIHazard Mitigatlon Plan IDRAFT REVISION 2. All Departments-Ensure all Continuity of Operatior�s Planning(COOP) worksheets are completed, edited,printed out and ready to be corrrpiled at the August 6 meeting. Worksheets for each department are located at Q:IEmergencyManagementlPLANSAND PROCEDURESIRE�VTON COOPIDraft 3. All Departments- Please review the Evacuation Plan. 4. All Departments-Ifyou have a member ofyour department who would like to work on the CodeRED rollout and/or needs access to the system,please contact D. Needham. 5. All Departments-Ifyou have any classes that would begood for the Renton Emergency Preparedness Academy,please contact D. Needham. D. Needham chaired the meeting. � � Emergency Management Group—July 2, 2009 Minutes Key Decisions/Discussions: 1. Current Threat Updates (D. Needham) a. Howard Hanson Dam The US Army Corps of Engineers has issued another press release notifying the community that issues with the right abutment remain, and they had to lower water levels at the Dam. We now have similar flood pool restrictions we had in January. The boundaries for the flood plain remains unchanged, but the statistical likelihood of flooding is higher than when flood pool restrictions are not in place. There is a briefing scheduled for next week between the US Army Corps and community leaders to include Chief Daniels and D. Needham. Green River Flood Response-When planning for this we need to talk about communications. Valley Comm no longer has a VHF license, so they can't patch anymore. We will need to figure out how to do the patching ourselves and other forms of communications. We will discuss this at the August meeting. b. H1N1 The virus is still out there and people are still getting sick. We have had one death related to the disease in King County. It is being rated a phase 6 pandemic, the highest rating possible. Our concern is for the fall, and any issues we will face if it mutates to become more deadly. Flu season generally begins in October/November. In late September/October we should get the message out to our employees that the disease is still out there and remind departments of sick employee policies to ensure that people don't come in if they are a risk for spreading the disease. Given the timing for other things and events, it might be best to start looking at this issue in August. Right now healthcare professionals are gearing up to ensure we have the appropriate medications and are ready for the high number of cases expected. 2. Renton Emergency Preparedness Academy (REPA) changes (D. Needham) We had a change in the location for the Academy because Renton Technical College had to drop their community education programs. We are working with Community Services to host REPA classes and are cunently working on class descriptions. Ifyou have a class related to emergencies, disasters, etc, that might be good,please speak with D. Needham. We have offered a lot of different classes including interacting with emergency responders and water safety. We have had great successes with these classes. R. Myers shared a story where the emergency responder course proved useful to a citizen who attended. It would be great to have a discussion/class on utility emergencies and/or what to do if there is an interesting incident a citizen wants to watch. It would be good to put some of the class information on Channe121. We are considering taping some REPA classes and developing informational videos from them for the website and channe121, helping us really reach out to the Public. 3. Communications Staf�ing Update Page 2 of 7 '�+` �.rr�' Emergency Management Group—July 2, 2009 Minutes Postponed -Preeti Shridhar was not available to attend the meeting. 4. September Outreach Efforts (D. Needham) a. Ready in Renton This is Renton's version of National Preparedness Month. This year we will be focusing on communications. We will be encouraging citizens to have an out of area contact or some communication plan in place. b. CodeRED rollout to public We are currently working on getting CodeRED set up now. We have determined that the Police Command Duty Officers, the Fire & Emergency Services Duty Chief, the Emergency Management Duty Officer, the Mayor's Office and the Public Works Managers all need to have access to this system. If there is anyone else who needs access,please speak with D. Needham. We will be able to use the published numbers for sending out messages, but there is a cost for making phone calls in excess of the allotted 75,000 minutes/year. The system can be useful, but we need to be mindful of the costs. The good news is that in the event of the emergency and disaster declaration, we can be refunded the cost of the minutes, at 75% of cost. We will be doing a press release and public roll-out of CodeRED once it is ready. When this occurs we will have talking points for staff. The opt-in program will be available on the web in September. We want businesses to opt-out the majority of their phone numbers and identify only a few key numbers. This will ensure we don't tie up ours lines or theirs. For cost division, triggers for use,non-emergency announcements, etc. we will need to develop SOPs and will borrow from other cities to create these. Ifyou have anyone you would like to help partieipate in this or would be interested,please speak to D, lJeedham. c. NICHE rollout We are currently working out the details and locations for this program. We have CERT members signed up with the City of Renton ready to assist and help. They, along with other community members, are working on identifying good locations in their neighborhoods for a NICHE-centralized location in neighborhoods where emergency information will be posted. CERTs will receive the information and post it at these locations during an emergency. We are working on mapping all the people with amateur radio licenses, so that we can effectively work with them to do low tech communications. d. Business outreach We are considering having a luncheon with businesses to get information regarding flood risks out to the business community. Suzanne Dale-Estey pointed out that most of the businesses in the valley are not Chamber members, so we are considering Page 3 of 7 �' � Emergency Management Group—July 2, 2009 Minutes doing a lunch at City Hall or another location. This project is in the works for September. 5. Evacuation Template (D. Needharn) This handout is our recently completed evacuation plan on the preferred template for King County. It was completed by Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, and your input is needed. We would like to add Community Services as a support agency- Community Services accepted this role. Page 9: Who has the authority to order an evacuation? We do not cunently have an ordinance that defines this in Renton. One suggestion would be to have the people authorized to activate the EOC able to activate an evacuation. If an ordinance is drafted to address this, it will need to clearly define the difference between an evacuation and a temporary move. For instance on page 8, the ordinance should define what level of evacuation is covered. We will also need to work on defining a procedure for activating an evacuation and put a structure in place for each of the types of evacuations. The ordinance would be for large scale evacuations only. There is a tabletop exercise scheduled for the Green River Valley cities on Sept. 9, 2009. Please take a look at the draft and let D. Needham know ofany comments, etc. 7'he plan is also available on the Q drive, ffyou rrlake changes to the documer�t,please use track char�ges. 6. Hazard Mitigation Plan Draft Overview (ALL) (These documents can be found at Q:�Emergency Management�PLANS AND PROCEDURES�Hazard Mitigation P1an�DRAFT REVISION) D. Needham received comments from most departments. She has yet to hear back from Community and Economic Development (C'EI�j, and since they do not have a representative at the meeting, D. Needham will follow up with therrr. Public Works added all facilities and open spaces in table 4-1 and they added damages from the 2000 flood on page 1 of chapter 6. At this point, we still need a brief synopsis of the damage, including cost, to the golf course. Can Public Works contact transportation and get more information on the damage to the highway? D. Conte offered to add the description in. The one he just got addresses the road slightly. The original estimate was a few million but the actual cost was way less. D. Needliam wrll chase down the Fnal costs for flie darnage. D. Conte will continue to go through the rest of the chapters. Page 6-7: Storm water-We need to identify the roads and other areas that flood, that aren't mapped in the flood plain. D. Needham imagines that Public Works and Facilities would have good idea of these areas. If these areas are listed in the plan we can put in for funding to improve them. A. Gafour agreed to contact Ron Straka about this. This document is supposed to be updated every 5 years at the least. We are currently overdue for an update, but we will have it ready in time for upcoming grants. D. Needham recommended that we schedule review/updating of the plan on a four year Page 4 of 7 � '� Emergency Management Group—July 2, 2009 Minutes schedule so that we have two years between each type of plan revisions. This year we had to do 2 plan revisions at once and it was a lot of work. We have Steve Lee's proposal for hazard mitigation coming up. We need to have it finalized, and through FEMA and the state before September. Given FEMA and state time frames, and having to go through council to get this approved, we need to have an updated plan submitted to Council for adoption as soon as possible. Page 6-8: We need someone who is an expert in flood issues to fill in the shaded areas. A. Gafour wrll eontact Ron Straka about fhis one as well. Page 6-9: D. Needham hasn't heard back from Ron Straka on this one. For all departments-please look at all the chapters and rrtake sure you're okay rvith the designated tasks. Page 7-3: We need to put the input on�'ood areas here as well. Page 7-8: Project List-We need to have a discussion about what the priorities are, make sure they are accurate and put them in the proper order. D. Needharrr wrll work with CED to er�sure we ha ve their input here. Page 8-6: Landslides-Emergency Management received conflicting information that that the slide in the Jones Rd area was due to heavy rains and not the Nisqually. The earthquake was confirmed as the cause. All that needs fo be added to this section are the damage figures. Chief Flora reported that a home was destroyed. Non structural seismic fastenings: Facilities is not able to do this project. It would be best if Information Services can build this into their budget and do it as part of the costs of doing business. D. Conte mentioned that he has a table of seismic information that identifies what year buildings were built and to what version of the code. He agreed to look at chapter 8 and determine where it should be included. Page 8-10: Need anecdotal information on tlle damages from the Nisqually earthquake. Please insert what you know, and D. Needham will clean it up before the draft is final. For example we've heard that 1 in 10 chimneys were damaged and two reservoirs were damaged. For buildings like Carco, City Hall, etc., give a full sentence on what was damaged. Page 9-2: Consultant will fix the numbers on this page. Page 9-3: Need defrnifions ofhigh or moderate areas on the map. CED probably has all of that information. Page 9-8: Need CED to look at this, as it talks about limiting development. Page 11-2: GIS piece Page 12-5: Do we have a fire code reference we can quote that specifies what applies to hazardous materials? ChiefFlora willlookinto this. Page 12-7: We might want to ask Carolyn Boatsrrlan, to make sure we are saying it right. Page 5 of 7 � � Emergency Management Group—July 2, 2009 Minutes Page 13-5: These are our action items. We are considering adding two or three more items, but are concerned about the availability of funding. We recently had an offer from David Holcomb from the Department of Homeland Security to evaluate our facilities and areas, and provide information on our security/tenorism risks for free. Are we interested in having this done? Given that there was interest, D. Need�iarrr agreed to set up a meeting wlth D. Holcomb, and a representative from Facilities and Police. We need to have one more public meeting to get required citizen input on the process/plan. D. Needharrl will set a date arrd send it out. D. Needham is also working on developing an introduction 10 the plan-a one page essay summarizing threats and events citizens might face. ALL DEPARTMENTS-Please get edits to D Needham withifl 10 days 7. Continuity Planning progress-ALL (20 min) (worksheet folders found at Q:�Emergency Management�PLANS AND PROCEDURES�RENTON COOP�Draft) How is everyone doing on the continuity plan worksheets? At some point a representative from each department will need to tie everything together in a summary overview that includes identifying how much square feet is needed for everyone to do their mission critical functions. Legal- Done Communications- Still working on these. This is a fairly new group, but working on the plans has really opened people's eyes. Police-Not sure. Commander Curry will check with Floyd Eldridge who was assigned to the task and ask him to touch base with D. Needham. Facilities/Community Services -Will check on progress and report back. Public Works- Some pieces are complete like utility billing, but other parts are still in progress. HR/RM-Working on it, nearly done. Fire &Emergency Services-Majority of forms are complete. Need to compile, edit and consolidate. The worksheet deadline was yesterday. When we come together next month we need to fmish and polish the plan. We will take an hour at the next meeting to discuss the information and how to make it useable and useful. Please print your own copy for reference at the next meeting. Police suggested inviting F. Eldridge to the next meeting. The compiling work is huge, so we may need to hire a consultant to help pull this all together. 8. Announcements/Good of the Order Page 6 of 7 `�rr�' `�.r� Emergency Management Group—July 2, 2009 Minutes • There is a Red River flooding team training on July 9. The training might be of interest to HR, Fire & Emergency Services, and Public Works. If you are interested be aware that an RSVP is required. Talk to D. Needham ifyou need more informatron. • If you would like assistance with purchasing preparedness supplies, and flu preparedness supplies, let R. Myers know about it and she can pick out and order supplies at a cost saving. • Based on our experience with two recent fires, it might be prudent to change water hydrant coloring to differentiate high vs. low pressure water. • The Valley Medical Bomb Threat Drill was cancelled due to H1N1 issues. Minutes taken and submitted by: Kelly Carey, Admin Sec I,Fire &Emergency Services Page7of7 q . ab; ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGN IN Meeting: ��.��°/ ! C �r�:��-c.t..a�'� tr �— , Date(s): :,�- � Times:�)-- f�..�� Location: ��'' r "�;''r=��F.�� -� Print Narrie De artment Position Ext. , �. ^ .. � �. � �.�C �� , , ' � � C�..�,r�r.,� �;��',.�* �. � ` � P'�'G. �cJ ��'/s"�xu ,� � .-.�.�, C�m � �,� ^ � „��/�.�. �LG�.E''��- �/�� ' , ,1 ,� /_�l'�?'�� l�'�',�=�" �C`-�l�� :�� c��e.4— G��a'l C ��cA�ti_f�.�:�"�li`i �r�l..i-z2��y�r�c� c:;.s�-7.� .. __.- , ( ` ,� � , .. � ,. � t �� !� ll��..r� �s ,�' r � ,� ',... � � ...... .._ ._. , f . � � ..�C.�""f�'-�.� f �� /.�r�'�,e"��'� ( /�'°!fl � T� �!f�''�/,��,,... .q ��'��"� � '�,"",. �� ^"�,��,�''"'". ��,:9C'��i,�,...,�-- o,�-,,,ro..A ,m. �.,-�� . �''� . t, �e,- c 1,f,�,�'��Gt. � �`�! �? ��'� n` .�- r��'�.f;�'� � f� � _ �. �.,.,;. �, ,.� ,. .,,,..w, ,. ..: ,�_ - _.. _. ._ _._.. _.,. _._ _..._. _._. . .., �.,,� . .. .. ,. ... ... .. , .. .� ..M ,.,. , ;p,, , ,�.� ..�. � :�.�: � � . - _ _.., . .. . � Yh ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGN IN Meeting: �� c. 7 �� —� f��' , �.... / �. . < . Date(s):�/2.�T�`F/'" Times: �5 c �' Location: �� c'�-f��.�— ��"�--�~ .:��--�, Rrint Name Department Position Ext. , � � � � I C." t`.r�- �.�..�: �f��`G��`1��( .0 ��-� C�i%��t��, �, f�E�' �,�C��`'�� .... �..,� , � � � _ �,��/�. - �, ��.-�=.,�.. � _, � � �-h- �. �,� � .� .� `�?c�s,.�. ..�:`-<..�.�..� i'� �� f t;."2.-� = `� ��vs��v S�z��`�... '� � � , ,,,,, , ,,,, ... _;m. � .._ - _ _ . _.._ _ _ _.._. _ . _ _ � � Emergency Management Group Meeting Minutes from August 06, 2009 Present: Dennis Conte, Facilities Supervisor, Community Services/Facilities Kent Curry, Commander, Police Suzanne Dale-Estey, Economic Development Director, Community& Economic Development I. David Daniels, Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator, Fire& Emergency Services Bill Flora, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Abdoul Gafour, Utility Engineering Supervisor, Public Works Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Executive Department Peter Hahn, Deputy Administrator, Public Works Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency Services George McBride, Information Services Director, Finance & Information Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire& Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services Linda Parks, Fiscal Services Director, Finance & Information Services David Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal, Fire & Emergency Services Tim Troxel, Deputy Chief, Police Ray Sled, Water Manager, Public Works Pauletta Sulky, Risk Analyst, Human Resources & Risk Management Clark Wilcox, Commander, Police Greg Zimmerman,Administrator, Public Works Next Meeting: 0900 on September 3, 2009, 7th Floor Conferencing Center. Important Dates August 21,2009 -Continuity of Operations Planning FINAL DUE DATE September 1, 2009 -CodeRED Rollout September 9, 2009 - Evacuation Annex Table Top October 5, 2009 -Committee of the Whole Presentation Assignments: 1. All Departments—Ensure a/l Continuity of Operations Planning (COOP) worksheets are completed and ready to be compiled by August 21. Worksheets for each department are located at Q:�Emergency Management�PLANS AND PROCEDURES�RENTON COOP�Draft 2. A!I Departments—NIMS training needs to be co�npleted by September 3Q. 3. All Departments—Please read and become familiar with the Evacuation Plan. '�✓ :,,�,,," Emergency Management Group-August 6,2009 Minutes 4. All Departments—If you have a member of your department who would like to work on the CodeRED policies,please contact D. Needham. S. SIDEBAR—D. Needham,S. Dale-Estey, L.Garvich- Determine what type of business community outreach we would like to do in response to the Green River flood threat, to include discussion of joining ShoWare event. 6. SIDEBAR—Chief Daniels, D. Needham, P.Sulky—Further discuss possibility of HR/Risk Management developing City-wide policies and procedures that deal with the potential of a parrdemic to include health screenings and exclusion policies. D. Needham chaired the meeting. Key Decisions/Discussions: 1. Green River Flood Risk Update and Issues—(D. Needham&G.Zimmerman) There is currently a lot of outreach and events going on in different cities in regards to potential Green River flooding, with the main push being in September. Preeti Shridhar is coordinating with them and will keep us informed. A major concern in the event of a flood event is the potential for sewage back-up in Renton. The sewer system could become surcharged or overloaded, causing sewer manholes to pop off and release sewage into the valley. Residents wouldn't be able to use their toilets. This should only happen in a worst case scenario flooding event. Public Works will be having a large internal meeting to brainstorm regarding this issue and generate a task force. We are going to look at the different flood scenarios the Army Corps of Engineers have provided, including the worst one with 5 or 6 feet of water at our feet, and evaluate city vulnerabilities including: lifeline roads; protection of key properties; operations of utilities including sewers; waterlines,we have no pumping systems in the valley and will need to consider contamination; acquisition of resources and the level of assistance we will provide to private companies. We will need to develop a good blend of service to private and public entities. We will also look at potential road closures, barricades and investigate any mutual aid agreements we should create with neighboring cities that won't be under water. If we have a huge flood we would probably have to shut down the sewage plant meaning part of South Seattle will not have sewage service either. What do we do if sewage is released? What will be our policy for providing assistance to other cities in trouble? What facilities do we need to protect? Bob Hansen is on our engineering staff and has been through similar flooding in Snohomish valley. We are encouraging private businesses to have their own engineers come take a look and advise them on what to do. Following this first internal meeting Public Works will be looking to the other departments for more information and to exchange ideas. We will need to make a presentation on our plan to the Committee of the Whole on October 5. Since Public Works is talking to businesses, it is important that we think about all of the types of business outreach the City's doing. With all of the stuff going on in the community, we want ours to be a coordinated message. We need to be talking now about what we will do in September. L. Garvich addressed the possibility doing a hosted lunch at Renton Page 2 of 8 � � Emergency Management Group-August 6,2009 Minutes Technical College with a small reservation fee, offer it as an opportunity for businesses and residents to come and get information. S. Dale-Estey suggested thar we have a sidebar to talk about all the different options. We should consider joining the event at the ShoWare Center and make it a regional event. The ShoWare Center may attract interest in and of itself, and joining the event shows the solidarity of the different cities working together to address the flood risk. In regards to sheltering, our region has decided to use a regional sheltering model. This is the best method to ensure we have sufficient staffing—most cities don't have enough for one shelter. They are currently determining the best location for a Regional Medical Needs Shelter. The one they thought they had identified has fallen through. They asked if the region could use our community center(RCC), but since it is on the Cedar River it may not be a good location. If we do offer RCC it wilt potentially decrease City revenues for rentals. The good news is that under the terms of the Regional Disaster Plan we can charge a rental fee for the facility that other cities will have to pay. The other cities can get reimbursed or King County can get reimbursed for the rental fee(s). In the end, there would be no loss of income for the City and we might even earn a small amount of revenue. We do have two other neighborhood facilities in the highlands, but they are not big enough for a shelter of this type. King County Public Health defined RCC as suitable—and is in fact the only facility identified as suitable in our City. They are also looking elsewhere to avoid the sewer impact area. We should be able to bill the requesting agency/jurisdiction for all related costs (including staff OT) and then they can get reimbursed by FEMA at 75%. We are currently looking at different ways to protect Station 14 with water barriers and/or covering openings and relying on the walls to hold back flood waters. An evaluation of the construction of the building and the different costs associated with protecting the building will be done by Facilities. Barriers would cost between 45 and 75K. The Army Corps of Engineers are spending 8.8 million to slow the seepage, but they will not be able to test the flood pool over the winter. Any water coming in will go out. The dam is currently only at 1/3 capacity. This year is going to be a tenuous year. They will test the Dam next summer, which means we will probably be better protected for the following flood season. To fully fix the dam will take years and hundreds of millions dollars, and will require assistance from the federal government. In addition to spending 8.8 million on seepage they are doing repairs on five different levees. There was a rumor that Kent was raising levees and how that might cause water to go to other cities, but they are trying to improve it and at this point aren't expecting to displace water. 2. CodeRED Policies and Procedures Development (D. Needham) The official rollout date is September 1, but we are up and running now. We had a training on how to use the program yesterday. A handout that specifies who is authorized to use the program was passed out. We need to add D. Pargas to the list under Emergency Management. CodeRED can be used even if online access isn't available. It will most likely be used in conjunction with other warnings rather than alone. We need to develop policies and procedures that define the triggers for when and how we will use it. Page 3 of 8 � � Emergency Management Group-August 6,2009 Minutes What are the situations or triggers for CodeRED use in emergency situations? Discussion included the following: • Water Main Breaks—is that a life safety issue? • Road Closures/Snow—depends on how widespread. • Sinkhole- may want to notify the neighborhood. • A non-emergency use could be notification of land action use in areas-allowing us to use less paper, and be more efficient—we will need to clarify if applicable/appropriate. • Levy failure, pre-identify the group using GIS,and be ready in the event that it breaks. Have a pending alert, all have to do is send it. Probably use this and a media release. This will help ensure that we contact as many people as possible. • Another non emergency use would be WaterShut-offs; we might even charge the expense of the notification to the person. • Police lockdowns or evacuations would be good use for system. • Missing person announcements—children/elderly—still believed to be in the neighborhood. • Notify public of con artist collecting utility bills? One factor to consider is how widespread the issue is, if it is widespread, we would probably use different forms of notification like a media release. CodeRED has reports we can access that identify who was actually contacted, if it was an answering machine, etc. The system can work with cell phones as well. We can even use a comma delimited list and import it directly into the system without data entry. One of the challenges will be getting the addresses with these reports. We currently cannot access this, but are Iooking into why we cannot and how to gain access. It is important for us to define how we are going to use the system and that what is listed on the website is how the system will be used. Since CodeRED has a limited number of minutes,we will need to evaluate how to pay the costs for going beyond the limit. If we expand to non-emergency use, departments will have to budget for it. We can include the cost of minutes in the cost of projects/events where notification is needed. We need to recognize that it is unusual to get 100%connect rates leaving us to pick up the odds and ends. We may have issues with notifying apartment complexes. Will never get everybody, but will help contact those gaps. System has a slight issue with providing messages in multiple languages:we can use another language but need a translator, etc and may not have time in emergency event. Who should have the authority to issue a CodeRED announcement? D. Needham recommends tying the authority to those who have authority to activate the EOC. Do we need the Mayor's blessing, a department head's blessing or what? When we need it, it will be a time-sensitive issue. Who should have the authority? Can we get in trouble? If we use the e911 list when it isn't an emergency we could be fined/penalized, but otherwise no trouble, except for the cost. Page 4 of 8 � � Emergency Management Group-August 6,2009 Minutes The group suggested it should be Administrators and up. Each department would set the policy for who they want to empower to be a delegate, so authorized parties would be an administrator or designee. There will still need to be a formal City Policy. What about notification—are we telling the Mayor or City Council or Emergency Management when this is done? Administrators could tell them? There is an all-call feature where we can identify people to be called every time a message is sent out. For example, Emergency Management is already set to receive a notice every time so they will know what is going out. The City policy we develop needs to govern the finance end of things as well. We have 75,000 minutes total. If we go over 75,000,we can only purchase minutes in 10,000 increments. We could start with 25,000 per department and then reconcile at the end of the year or divide the 75,000 for emergency use only between those groups that send emergent messages like Police, Fire & Emergency Services, Emergency Management and Public Works. We could require all departments sending out non- emergency messages to budget/pay for them. They will need to build in their use, but if at the end of the year we don't have any cost, i.e., we don't go over the minutes, we'll work it out between departments. The 'year'for the 75,000 minutes is June to June. By March we need to determine if we want to continue with the contract and at what level, it is currently set up to auto renew. We can do free text messages and email notifications to your own staff using the system. Don't rely on it for emergency communications, because it could be backlogged and/or people may not get them, but there are pertinent uses. Individual department users can work on setting up groups for their staff. When thinking about the different types of inessages you'll send out, there is an advantage to doing shorter messages. The shortest a message can be is 30 seconds. 3. Personnel Policies in a Pandemic—(P.Sulky& D. Needham) Given the impending swine flu pandemic we need to consider different pandemic related policies for the City. The CDC recommends having policies that address health screening of employees, restricted travel, evacuating employees, employee exclusion and sick policies among other things. HR/Risk Management has reviewed this and is unsure that this is a policy development or revision issue. There is concern that required health screening might violate HIPPA laws. Chief Daniels noted that doing a health screening is legal and we have EMTs who could do this. A shift/crew could be assigned to perform this duty. Is there an issue with sending someone home? If it becomes necessary we should have a check in process for when people come into the building. If other jurisdictions do this and we don't, it would be a problem. When we do,we will have to tie it to a pandemic event and a mayor's proclamation. Chief Daniels and D. Needham stressed that this is an HR policy issue. We need policies that define what we would do if there were a pandemic event. For example, what exactly switches on extra precautions, and what are the precautions we'll be taking? Does the CDC have a template for these policies and procedures? Since everyone is going to be doing the same thing is a policy needed? HR/Risk Management, again, is not sure this is a policy Page 5 of 8 �' � Emergency Management Group-August 6,2009 Minutes development or revision. They aren't comfortable dictating what is going to happen. There would need to be guidelines after it has happened but it isn't a policy HR/Risk Management would do in advance. Chief Daniels and D. Needham disagreed, stating that we need to know what the policy will be in advance. If we are sent home, when and how will we be allowed to return? Are we going to remove doctor note requirements, especially if they can't get one in a pandemic? Right now it is not a deadly strain so we do not need tents and screening now, but the potential is there. What is the threshold? We will need to tie into public health standards for the threshold. What about sick leave? An exclusion policy comes into play. HR/Risk Management feels there will be guidelines developed by outside agencies but that a City Policy isn't needed. Others feel like we are putting our head in the sand if we don't develop something to deal with this and leave it up to individual departments. We can remind supervisors to monitor employees now, but this doesn't help if we need to exclude people. On a philosophical level are we going to do something? Flu season is coming soon. We need to start talking about it now so that any new policies are in place in time. It was recommended that Fire&Emergency Services and HR/Risk Management have a sidebar on this issue. This work will need to be done along with Unions. P. Sulky will pull related policies and provide them to Fire & Emergency Services. They will then meet with Robin Robertson in HR/Risk Management. If we don't do anything internal we won't be able to do anything external. If other people do it and we don't,we will be in trouble. Need to have these policies in place,even if we don't use them. It would be good to have these policies tied to an emergency proclamation from the Mayor. We may want to get Legal involved when creating these policies. 4. Incident Management Team/NIMS Training—(D. Needham) We held a meeting a week and a half ago on Incident Management Team development. We are putting together a team and will have an intense NIMS training for these members. We have some opportunities for upcoming NIMS 300 or 400 trainings. If you have not signed up there is one for 400 the dates left at this time are August 31/Sept 1�. There are more date openings for NIMS 300. D. Needham will send out reminders about the trainings, particularly those that can be taken online. Please let D. Needham know if there is anyone who can't take it online. Last call for NIMS compliance is September 30. If anyone is going to act as an Incident Commander they need NIMS 400. If they are going to be Command & General Staff they need NIMS 300. All people taking the week-long intensive trainings in Planning or Logistics need to have taken everything including NIMS 300 and 400. Supervisors need to have NIMS 100, 700 and 200 if they will have a field emergency response role. All emergency responders need NIMS 100 and 700. NIMS 800 is really only needed by those who will deal with the Feds directly, but will confirm. 5. Communications update—(L.Garvich) As of July 1�, AJLS became the Executive Department and has a newly formed Communications division with 7 people. The hope for this change is to streamline and increase the efficiency of communications for the City. By bringing graphic design and Page 6 of 8 � � Emergency Management Group-August 6,2009 Minutes community outreach together we should be able to provide a greater resource to the City. The division will be providing support for Ready in Renton in September and the Howard Hanson Dam issue. They will also play a key role in the EOC when it is activated. 6. Evacuation Annex Finalization-(M. Mattson) M. Mattson has completed the Evacuation Annex based on all comments. By the end of Friday it will be final. If you have any edits, let her know ASAP. Last month we talked about adding Community Services as a support agency, this was confirmed at the meeting. The great news is that we now have a plan in place. King County provided an evacuation template with questions leading us through the process. It has been vetted throughout the City and is a good plan. The last thing to do is add the appendixes. King County is going to be putting on a table top exercise to explore the plan. We will have our own table top exercise,to explore our plan and see if it works, in the morning of September 9. Everyone participating should familiarize themselves with their plan, show up and be ready to play. Please send good representation to the tabletop so they can help identify how we want things to be done and highlight any issues. Currently Fire & Emergency Services and Police are listed jointly for evacuation. We would like to make Police primary, and Fire & Emergency Services a support, because the Police handle the actual movement of people. Public Works will help support them with the movement, and Community Services will support them by designating where people will go. The recommendation is that Fire & Emergency Services or Public Works can designate the need for an evacuation and Police will be the incident commander for the actual evacuation. Is this okay with Police? Whoever designates this will need to provide them with comprehensive information so that they can lead the evacuation properly. Need to know soon, because the plan is due now. 7. Hazard Mitigation Plan Finalization - (D. Needham) (Documents found at Q:\Emergency Management\PLANS AND PROCEDURES\Hazard Mitigation Plan\DRAFT REVISION) This is the last call for any changes to the Hazard Mitigation Plan. D. Needham will have to chase CED down for a couple things. Please look at the Action Plan handout. If there is a project that you would like to get extra funding for through Hazard Mitigation,you should add it to this list ASAP. Changes can be made to the draft direct/y. The `Drop Dead Date' for the plan is next Wednesday,August 12. S. Continuity Planning Next Steps-(D.•Needham) (Worksheet folders found at Q:\Emergency Management\PLANS AND PROCEDURES\RENTON COOP\Draft) D. Needham has reviewed the work that has been done. Police didn't have as much as we thought, Public Works had more than we thought but needs to consolidate, Executive/AJLS needs more, Fire & Emergency Services needs to consolidate some, Finance/IS still has sections to complete, HR/Risk Management did a good job, CED has a lot to do and Legal is done. D. Needham will be contacting individual departments and let them know what Page 7 of 8 `�' wr� Emergency Management Group-August 6,2009 Minutes needs to be done. Some have a little polish work and others have a bit more to do. Each Department should go back to their folders and ensure that it is done, particularly in the event of a pandemic. We need to identify how much space is needed for mission critical functions. Don't worry about identifying alternate locations. Facilities will look at the square footage needs and determine what should be done. Everyone needs to complete the facilities worksheet. Be creative about what your mission critical functions are and how you will meet them. Alter regular plans like work schedules of 8/5 working from home, calling in, etc. The plan needs to be complete enough to make sense to someone outside of your Department. At that point a consultant may be our best choice to help us tie it together and compile what all the departments will be doing. Our deadline has already passed. We need to complete this ASAP. It should be in place before pandemic or flooding occurs, with enough time for a consultant to pull it together into a final format. Please make sure your plans are ready for an outside look, and are the fina!draft, b y August 21. Minutes taken and submitted by: Kelly Carey,Admin Sec I, Fire& Emergency Services Page 8 of 8 __ ._ __ __ _. _ ._ __ _ __ _ _..._ . ..___. _. ___ ._ ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGN IN �� ,...., Meeting:__„� �. � -;��. �' .,, :,��.�>.,� �� ,; „ , : , � �,� . .,� -. -� � .� �, •> Location: ..�;.�_ � ..�>,� .. ��,.... Date(s)' � �� ...a��.y<:� Times: �-'� �r �� `� ^� �`� . , .. .n . . � h., Print Name De artment Position Ext. �� s , ��. �w. ... .?.� . � �� ,.,.�.. '�'i �n�.. k ;. `� �t:.� �`..;'. G..tiv��`!. ( ,..;:J .�9 �'��l7.''a a". L rl.:"R"*' 7�r"�r^ �� o- . ^ � µf,,) ,: ,,.. ... �. .�� A , '�.� � Q� �wv ,�...-�:� G�-C "J `�� t`" ,�. =�, . ,s�"�'" � �„,v� � C, -�a�r-�,. �'.S��"�" ��%�-� .�c�/�"', � � `7�� i r�,� ° �� v;� ��'�'�� `��%G"� C`.'c�?�''�J�t�:��r'l l >��' � ;�� ° -vV'�,- ��.��`�. ,/' � f="� �7� �'�� /i't'T",�"✓� r�l/f?UC��l-�'vc. ( / ��_ <-T--( , /�.�.. �t.�;z�-° �,�' .!�'. S ,,�'��. ��'�% � �°< < °� '� ' �� , �� ' � � �� ''��- � � l�` �z�'-� r ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGN lN ��'Y' / ' �.��'V"\ 2.f' a;s.•o-^s�,.F,.,�,�,•7� `�.f.,�.-F-...t�t....,q,. Meeting: � ..� t.�-T.-�:..�� .� � �� _ , � , ,� . Date(s): �'' !',ra � > r~°� .,'� Times:: C'�<;��,.�G,7 .- f ��.:� t;;� Locatian: �.r�":�"1��,,�'�'^"a,.x-� r"�:.,��t'�F:.vt. �ta.��..� Print Na e De artment Position Ext. ' �� 1;F� , �,.� �.-, �; �. � - �. _..�� } � � �:-�' ..�: �_� � �. `��. ��..�.�� ' �� t�� < �r � c.,�� t � t�-�C:..�.-�. `��. `��?1d� 11 ° " � � 1. �,,;� �z��..�' r g � Q�,�,r l��t�,(�' �� .}��'� ��`'�...�.� � �....��..�'"� �",�t�t��.� �'j �� . .,�, �%�'z4C'f�r— ��f `�� ' �. ' , �� ti G ��. S`�,.v�. �r� . 7ci�'I ` �`1-" �L.- �'��,.�c � :b�P�;( C.i�� r=� �5� � ' �7�1 n�l R��. � � � Emergency Management Group Meeting Minutes from February 4, 2010 Present: Kelly Carey,Administrative Secretary, Fire&Emergency Services Dennis Conte, Facilities Supervisor, Community Services Kent Curry,Commander, Police Suzanne Dale-Estey, Economic Development Director,Community&Economic Development Sonja Mejlaender, Community Relations Specialist,Community Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire&Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire& Emergency Services David Pargas,Assistant Fire Marshal, Fire&Emergency Services Colleen Shannon, System Technician, Human Resources & Risk Management Ray Sled,Water Manager, Public Works Important Dates: 0900 on March 4,2010,Next EM Group Meeting,7�Floor Conferencing Center 0800 on Apri16-7,2010,Parrners in Preparedness Conference,GTCTC Assignments: All Departments: a. Please take a final fook at the Hazard Mitigation Plan and notify K. Carey of the coordinating organizations in the Action ttems. b. Please notify K. Carey who wifl be the representative at the public meeting for the Hazard Mitigation P/an. e. Please review indirect costs requests for grants (section 5 of the minutesJ and provide to Director Needham ASAP. d. Please update the disaster assignments list for your department and provide to Director Needham ASAP. e. Please review the Gets Card list and notify Director Needham of critical positions that need the card(and those rhat don'f). f. Please review the 2010 work plan and notify Director Needham to add or remove any projects. g. Update EOC callout- determine one or two contact numhers that are always answered. Provide to Director Needham ASAP. h. Please be sure to track any fime working on Emergency Management using EM coding in tTS or Telestaff. i. Notify Director Needham if inembers are interested in attending the Partners in Preparedness Conference for free. � � Emergency Management Group-February 4,2010 Minutes Director Needham chaired the meeting. Key Decisions/Discussions 1. Green River Update—S. Dale-Estey • Community and Economic Development has been working with the Communications Division to create a mass communication plan in regards to Green River Flooding. o We were getting inundated with calls and experienced issues with misinformation and/or how facts were presented, so we have tried to get organized internally. o We were meeting every two weeks to touch base and share information. Coordinating City interfaces with businesses allowed us to act quickly and effectively when any red flags came up. ■ Vivienne Lietz at extension 6582 was/is the funnel for business contacts and is maintaining a list of contacts to review at the meetings. o We offered a forum for brokers in the community to hear our perspective on the facts. o We have been using an email list and have created a lot of redundant systems to communicate with businesses in the valley as well as the property owners. o It is an ongoing challenge. Please continue to share information! • Fundraising—is now job#1—so we can arrange permanent fixes to the Dam and levy system that meet FEMA standards. Improving our currently poor floodplain rating will increase interest in coming to Renton. o We are coordinating with neighboring cities to determine what needs to happen to fix this issue. The current quote for a permanent fix is 540 million. o If every city submits the same request it should help us get what is needed. o S. Dale-Estey and the Mayor are going to Washington D.C. to discuss this issue. • The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers design process is usually six years long. This will not work for both dam and levies. They are attempting to expedite the design process as well as evaluate alternative analyses. • This year's remaining flood threat is low, but next year will be a big concern. 2. 2010 Work Plan Finalization • The 2010 Work Plan handout summarizes the results of last month's meeting—The names listed are the leads for the projects. • Please skim through and see where your department falls. lf there is anything we need to take off the table or add,please let Director Needham know. • Disaster assignments—We've received HR/RM, Community Services and Police's assignments. We still need them from ti�e other departments. o K. Carey will send out a template to help with the disaster assignments listing. If you need individual assistance with this, please contact Director Needham. 2 �11�` '�1�"' - Emergency Management Group-February 4,2010 Minutes o The positions identified on this should only be those who do not have a critical position during a disaster job (not response-level positions). • Notice the Community Risk Reduction Community listed at the end of the plan. o This is a Fire & Emergency Services committee that works on reducing risks through prevention (think Renton Heart Month) but there is no public input. o Since all of the departments perform prevention work,this committee could be developed further to include all Departments and public input. The vision would be for this group to be like the EM group but with the public perspective on how to reduce risks in the community. • ESF 14—CED is the lead, but we need to identify a representative. If this isn't the year to do it, let us know. 3. School Emergency Planning—R. Myers • The Emergency Management Institute offers a course on Multi-Hazard Planning for schools. o We'd like teams from each school in the Renton School District to attend during June,July or August. o We'd like to get internal commitments and identify back-ups before approaching the schools. We need reps from Fire, Police & Emergency Management. o R. Myers has a form she can send out to those people who should attend. o Costs—(In addition to week of time from employees attending) ■ Travel is reimbursed but departments would have to front the money. ■ Departments would have to pay for the meal ticket-$91/week. o Relationship with schools is improving—they have agreed to support the NICHE program—but the`emergency planning relationship is very weak. ■ Issue is not necessarily that they aren't doing planning, but that they aren't coordinating with City to ensure good response. ■ We need to gather copies of the emergency plans for our schools—so that we know what they expect from us and what we can expect from them. o Private school (Renton Christian,St. Anthony's) connections are good. Similarly preschool training and communication is good. 4. Hazard Mitigation Plan • Trying to put a wrap on this plan, but we need ALL departments to review the action items and update with coordinating organizations. How much time is needed to add_ress the action items?The group agreed to two weeks—Feb 18, 2010. • We also need everyone to take a final look at the plan to address the consultant's notes and ensure everything is the way it should be. o We need CED to laok at inserts and update with requested information. o Want everyone to think about projects that should be included=be creative- we can put things in the plan that we may never accomplish, but we might be 3 �' � Emergency Management Group-February 4,2010 Minutes able to do in the future. The projects would improve the plans' approval rating as well as the likelihood of getting those projects accomplished. • Please mark the hard copy, send to K. Carey and we'lI compile. • We also need one more public meeting prior to completing the plan and sending it to the state. o Please provide K. Carey with names of the representative(s)from each department who witl come to public meeting to answer questions. o The meeting would most like start with an open house from 6:00-6:30 p.m. and then 6:30 p.m. to 8 p.m.for questions. o P. Shridhar wondered if this could be combined with a City Council Meeting. Director Needham is going to investigate this idea further. • Peter Renner is applying for a grant and the plan has to be in the place in order to receive the grant. (Good motivation to get it done quickly). 5. Grant Update and Information Needs • We've received a slight'blow' in regards to EMPG eligibility guidelines. o Previously we could count any salary time spent on Emergency Management as long as the annual amount was 5%or more. o The state has changed the requirement so that we can only count those people who are within Director Needham's chain of command. o To make up the `difference' we need to determine all of Emergency Management's indirect costs including: ■ Facility costs—annual cost per person in Emergency Management ■ IS costs—computer, phones, pagers, support, etc. ■ Finance/HR/RM—cost to support Emergency Management Employees ■ Please contact Director Needham with these costs as well as any others she cou/d include. 6. Disaster Reimbursements—K.Carey • K. Carey has been working on Disaster Reimbursements from FEMA. • Since October she has processed over$250,000 in funds for the City. • If you are working on one of the FEMA projects and/or have questions about Disaster Reimbursements, please speak to her. 7. Target Capability List Priorities • Passed out a list distributed yesterday by Homeland Security. Please look at the green highlighted items and help us identify which,from our local perspective, are our highest priorities: (in no particular order) o Discussion identified the following priorities ■ 25—City Evacuation &Shelter in Place ■ 33—Mass Care 4 � � Emergency Management Group-February 4,2010 Minutes ■ 37—Economic& Community Recovery ■ 36—Restoration of Lifelines ■ 17—Volunteer Management and Donations ■ 2—Communications ■ 10—Critical Infrastructure Protection o We may be able to create a project that addresses one of these priorities if someone is willing to pilot it and it has regional effect. Please consider this, and the list, and contact Director Needham if you have a project orsuggestions. 8. Gets Card • The list of current Gets Card holders was passed out. Please read the fact sheet. • We need to review the list and identify who should and shouldn't have a card. o Who is critical? Please review and get back to Director IVeedham. 9. Announcements/Good of the Order • Partners in Preparedness Conference—let Director Needham know who attended (ast year so we can bill and pay for it. o If inembers of your department want to attend this year's conference, Emergency Management should be able to cover the cost—please let Director Needham know who would like to attend. 5 � � For publication in the Renton Reporter not later than 3/12/2010 CITY OF RENTON CITIZEN INPUT MEETING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN The city administration will be hosting a public meeting on March 16`h,6:00-8:00 pm in the 7th Floor Conferencing Center, Room#726 on the 7`h floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 S.Grady Way, Renton.The city has been working on a revision of the Hazard Mitigation Plan over the past year.The plan and local maps will be available for review.The plan identifies hazards that could affect residents, businesses, visitors,and infrastructure within the City of Renton and identifies potential mitigation projects that could help protect the City from future disasters. Public input is sought for the finalization of this plan. For further information, please contact Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director at 425- 430-7027 or view the plan at rentonwa.gov. City of Renton Home page � � Page 1 of 1 . �'r c;it}•of.� ?- ,r . . . �;*,�; —,.._._-,P..0 C� r �� '� r�,�.,�("1 _�r, ��.�� _ You are here:Calendar � �Prirrt Frie�icliY Version �21�elldaf < April 2011 Vie►v Upcaming: W2Ek� Month� ey�ir » s� Mo Tu we T�� Fr sa Date Event toca6on > 27 2g 29 �0 �I. 1 2 3/26 Hazard Mitigation Plan Renton City Half,7th Ffoor > 3 4 S � Z � � 6:00 Ph1 to Addifional input is sought as the City of Renton Conferencing Center > 10 ]� 12 � 14 15 � a�00 PM finalizes its Hazard Miitigation Pian.The Hazard NSitigation Plan identifies hazards and risks present ' 1? � 1� ZD ?1 22 � within a community and suitable measures to > � � 26 27 �$ � �4 address the risks oF disaster to fessen the potential > 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 for injuries or damage.Read ntare... Filter Results By Date Range:{mm/dd/yyyy) ___ �2�„Zfl'{� � From: 8 3!'f 6/2010 To: 8 [3y Category and/or Key�vord: - A!I Categories;':= _....._____--._._____ — - �._. ' Submrt_- t,i+„•1/ranhnncva onVIC;1TP.tlt�al'_aSDX 5/25/2011 .,� ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGN iN � nneeting: i W�,t�"t' �'+,'� �°�av, �1��:� fi _h� Date(s): �I{Q ��..._ Times: ��,2GL — �--�-�C�_ Location: �,o��,--��/� �-��. , — , Print Na 'e De artment Position Ext. C�.`z-tZ..� � .-- �.�Y��ti c�+� -� Sss �O�f1 ��'4.��—�� ^ c�J � �v� • S r J 1�0✓ �Z-�8 � '�zu��S �o�� r2C � S ��G�� 2r�`( � �� f� � �tl W�� rit��r✓T � �,v��c-�2 `7YoD �j � � T` e �u �.c 3 �t��..1 ��6�'�"ti..U'`7 ��P�� '�".L1c�s'C�L..�c�-S_ L`Z-��-�- 71 C9� �--� � .�� .� � � .-�- �a a�� l-� ; C-�� ir�� o� �� . � � � Emergency Management Group Meeting Minutes from April 1, 2010 Present: Craig Burnell, Plan Review, Community& Economic Development Kelly Carey,Administrative Secretary, Fire & Emergency Services Suzanne Dale-Estey, Economic Development Director, Community& Economic Development Bill Flora, Deputy Chief, Fire & Emergency Services Abdoul Gafour, Water Utility Supervisor, Public Works Lisa Garvich, Communications Specialist, Executive Gina Jarvis, Fiscal Services Director, Finance& Information Services Mindi Mattson, Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire & Emergency Services Sonja Mejlaender, Community Relations Specialist, Community Services Rachel Myers, Emergency Management Intern, Fire & Emergency Services Deborah Needham, Emergency Management Director, Fire & Emergency Services Ann Nielsen,Assistant City Attorney, City Attorney Preeti Shridhar, Communications Director, Executive Ray Sled, Water Manager, Public Works Tim Troxel, Deputy Chief, Police Important Dates: 0800 on Apri16-7,2010,Partners in Preparedness Conference,GTCTC 0900 on May 6,2010,Next EM Group Meeting,7�Floor Conferencing Center 0800 on October 6-7,2010,SOUNDSHAKE 2010-SAVE THE DATE! Assignments: All Departments: a. The Continuity of Operations Plan is due May 12, 2010 a. Please submit updates to the fotlowing items for your Department ASAP to K. Carey: i. Disaster assignments, NIMS training, GETS Card list and the EOC callout list b. Please hegin gathering expense data for Green River f/ood p/anning and protection measures. c. Please determine which staff will participate in SoundShake at the EOC and save the dates—October 6 and 7. If you have injects for SoundShake contact M. Mattson. "� `".,,,,, Emergency Management Group-Apri11,2010 Minutes CED, CS, HR& Fire: • Please coordinate to determine the primary department for ESF 23. PW & Parks: • Please identify who can work on the Debris Management plan and notify Director Needham. Director Needham chaired the meeting. Key Decisions/Discussions 1. Green River Update • US Army Corps of Engineers are starting to refill the reservoir and test capacity. • This year will be a "neutral" winter historically known for greater flooding. o The grout curtain has been installed and there are plans to expand the curtain, which will take approx. 1 yr.The permanent repair work will take 5 years. o Flood risk will decrease back to previous levels when project is complete. • Levees are still a concern. a. Restricted Access Authorization Pass • Local emergency managers have created a draft and are meeting with the State next week to present it to them. • The pass will be in color, difficult to forge and will have an expiration date. • A safety caution/disclaimer will be included. • Emergency managers will provide passes only to critical infrastructure providers or others with a public safety mission in the area. o The committee recommended that a specific person be named on the pass and that passes be limited. o Some companies with Hazardous Materials may need emergency mitigation assistance. • Once public safety hazards are mitigated, access will be allowed for all impacted businesses/residents. They will not need a special pass.They will only need their ID and proof that they have legitimate business in the blocked off area. b. Debris Management Planning Status Check • Parks accepted responsibility for doing the Debris Management Plan but has not had time to work on it. • In the absence of another plan, Public Works had begun developing their own. • We had a consultant offer to assist Parks with this for free, but the offer ended April 1- did Community Services or Public Works connect and/or contact the consultant for assistance? No. • We need Public Works and Community Services to work together on this. Please let Director Needham know who are the best people to assign. • There is a very easy-to-use regional template available for this plan so that we just have to fill in the narrative blanks. 2 � � Emergency Management Group-Apri11,ZO10 Minutes 2. Blue Cascades Exercise • Flu/Flood Tabletop Exercise that included businesses, local, state and federal government, King County Public Health, Dept of Homeland Security, DSHS, etc. • It was useful for businesses that hadn't done the flu/flood planning in advance. • Pointed out that there is not enough bandwidth for everyone, especially when you count children,to telecommute. 3. Regional Catastrophic Planning a. Regional Long Term Care Mutual Aid Plan • Tabletop Exercise for long term care facilities. The point was to encourage them to develop mutual aid plans in the event of an emergency. Liability issues, transportation issues, appropriate resources, etc were discussed. • Care providers were encouraged to be creative and develop solutions if/when current plans aren't available. • Renton's long term care facilities were not present. King County Public Health is going to follow up with them, we will assist as needed. b. Regional Volunteer Management Issues • Workshop reviewed the current volunteer management plans local jurisdictions have and determined that most don't have them. • Renton, however, is prepared to register emergency workers for our own use. • Workshop also addressed how to connect resources—connect people with needs with those who are willing to help without liability concerns. We don't have the staff to create a volunteer reception center and do the connections. • They are currently looking for a private partner to assist with this need. If anyone has an idea or suggestion please notify M. Mattson. 4. Hazard Mitigation Plan Finalized • Special thanks to Kelly Carey for doing the wrap-up and pulling the plan together. • It will be sent to the State of Washington Emergency Management Division and FEMA for review. It will also be sent to the City Council via memo. Council approval will be sought after the State and FEMA review. • If you have edits send them in TODAY. We must send in as soon as possible to ensure hazard mitigation grant eligibility. 3 °�r` "✓ Emergency Management Group-Apri11,2010 Minutes 5. Seismic Building Codes/Lessons from Chile • Discussed an OpEd Article in the NY Times regarding seismic building codes in Chile. • Chile had 9.5M earthquake recently. Since they are in a subduction zone like us, we have the potential for the same size quake here. • If we were struck with a quake of this magnitude we would be greatly impacted. • Generally our codes are strict, but we have a lower seismic code than California. • Is frequency the best way to determine seismic codes? Of course, we need to balance this with costs for development with stronger codes. • Building codes here could be strengthened, but aren't for this group to discuss. • Are there some talking points we could prepare for calls of this nature? • Director Needham will meet with C. Burnell and Neil Watts to create talking points, and defer calls to them when expert information is needed. 6. SoundShake Workshop Discussion a. Building Officials Workshop Tying into Renton Damage Assessment Planning • Larger jurisdictions like Seattle and King County have developed lists of people qualified to provide rapid building assessments for a fee. o We need a roster like this for our jurisdiction. • ATC 20 is a course that trains people to perform this assessment. City employees from Facilities, Fire Inspection and Building have taken this. o We should compile a list of who has taken the training to determine if more trained City staff members are needed. � An emergency proclamation is needed prior to doing assessments to ensure the people doing the work are indemnified. • There are several businesses that cannot open until they have been assessed. We need to make sure we have sufficient support to help these reopen. • We also need to set up mutual aid relationships with otherjurisdictions, like Eastern Washington, in the event that we have a huge disaster. • Non-emergency services agencies are not as tied into mutual aid arrangement like emergency services agencies. o Renton is signatory to the Regional Disaster Plan that includes a legal payment agreement between King County agencies, but if it was a county- wide disaster, we would need larger agreements to reach outside of the area. • Currently we have three departments listed as joint primaries:CED, Community Services and Fire. We need one clear lead to take on primary responsibility for this ESF to organize p/anning meetings. Consider Risk Management as the organizer and have the other three as supporters actually doing the work? • Need to develop a way for people to report in from the field,to include P/W and CS, and we could have massive information if they provide the input. • Using Engines and Aid Cars to do damage assessment is not the best use of our materials and resources. 4 �' "� Emergency Management Group-Apri11,2010 Minutes o We have a large number of people assigned to do Damage Assessment, but there are concerns about using personal vehicles, personal versus city insurance,traffic congestion, identification -more brainstorming is needed. o Public Works trucks all have radios and they will assess bridges immediately, in addition to documenting fires and other damage. They could send all information to City Shops and that information could be relayed to the EOC. o King County Office of Emergency Management is currently working on an internet application that would allow people to click on general categories to indicate the type of damage and then GPS tag it. Our IS department is currently working with them. • Revisit next month. Really need to tackle this now in preparation for the 2012 review of the entire plan. b. Long-Term Housing Workshop Tying into Renton ESF 6/Mass Care Planning • Plan to limit shelter use to two weeks, if need extends beyond that, we will need to look at providing temporary housing. • Currently need to identify shelters and temporary housing in Renton, even with planning there will definitely be gaps-especially with a big disaster. 7. Exercise Participation Decisions a. Dam Sector Exercise • There will be a Green River tabletop exercise around the same time as . SoundShake. Due to the timing, we are unsure if we will be able to participate. b. Green River Integrated Emergency Management Course(IEMC) • Planned for 2011. Similar to Emmetsburg, being brought to us. c. SoundShake 2010 • King County is putting this together and is currently putting on workshops. They provided little notice, but we are participating as best we can. • Two day exercise with an EOC focus, Oct. 6 and 7, running 12 hours each day. o Main focus will be EOC operations,to include shift changes. The handout includes King County objectives for the exercise-we can add to them o Let M. Mattson know if you have things you'd like to add. • More EOC training will be scheduled prior to the exercise. We currently only have enough people to fully staff one operational period. • Need to identify additional staff to get the training and able to rotate through. • We are still trying to set up a Logistics Chief training this year—is there a time that is best for people? We are not having much luck finding a free trainer. • Please review your lists and identify if there are any others you can add to the EOC list and who could participate October 6 and 7—hold these dates. 8. Community Risk Reduction Committee Reorganization . • Postponed until next month. 5 "1�n+ `rrr'` Emergency Management Group-April 1,2010 Minutes 9. Assignments Check-in • Continuity of Operations Plan is due May 12tn • Still have not received disaster assignments, GETS Card, EOC Contact updates from several Departments—please send them in. We will send out a specific list shortly. 10. RCPT Grant • We can provide a match for this regional grant by looking at Green River planning work that has crossover applications to the RCPT project list. Please review the list and document any hours and expenses. 11.Announcements/Good of the Order • None. 6 ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SIGN lN , Meeting: �.' Date(S): ✓ ! Times: � � ��j' 7d Location: �G� �� f Print Name Deqartment Position __ Ext. � 1�� -n;< <S� l r715 - n , �z , � 1 � r�.L � � : �ic � s��-�Y . � ' �� Q � '��'� r -�z 1�� `.�- " ` I� �' .i t� `�� c�'l V r r� � � ' �-� �—r� ' /�-� � ToG1 . � `�i��t CU t� � � r!'�'�,��.�'� C.�.�� ' � ` � ,�,�. � � [ � Sl� � , 1� t��- � < . �r `�-�" �sS�'� ' '� n a�u� �i��c,a%� Q w I 1�tRTC-w � �-2�o � � � � �— d�`i��'..�z. ��–rt�is�-v�' � G� ` � ' � Lt/ G✓ � � j� � , 1-t� csF-t�'c '� ��C �� ,�e� 6S� , ' i�f!I'�f/)O'�G�'�/V • `ti��0��+`��^ . �� /V�./ l�� S.J�r( V:J ' � : / / A ~ � • 1./ �'' 'J t�l '�' � t/'a � t,J �.�•`7'�'3 '` f r/f'1, r �� -�i� �� G�'l � �� ., ATTENDANCE - PLEASE SfGN iN M e eti ng: Date(s): Times: location: Print Name Deaartment Position Ext. � ��1 IYi l� �1G��5� �� f�1 r `� 7a`� l � r 4 �� { ` � � �a ��Y� �? � �j' `{ V�d A� 1 .. 1 � � � APPENDIX 5 CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL TBD � � CITY t�F RENT�I�,WASHINGTaN �St)T�U"�TQI��4...�3�.�,..CL A RESQLUTIQN Q�' 'THE CITY UF REiwITTQN, �YASHII�GTUhTr ADOPTT�G T�E HA.ZA�tD M�TI�ATIQN PL.�l1T. W�ERE.A.S, �ectio�322,�itigation P�a��in�, �£th�Ra�rt T. St�afford Dis�ter R�li�f and Emergency Assistance Aet, ena�tec€ by Section 104 0�the Disaster Mitigatioz� Act c�f 200fl (I)MA)(�'.L. 146-390)provides n�w and revitalized appraach�s�o mitigatian p�g;�cl "�HE�EAS, the I�isast�r �itiga�ion Act establishes the requirem�nt �r state a�ad k�cal governtnent zr�itigatic�n pl�nt�u�g�s a conditian of d.isaster assistaz�ce;and �'HEItEAS,the Mayc�r and City Cauncil recc>gniz.e that miti�ation planning, aiong with �tl�ear ernergency pr�paredness actians, pra�vides a significant ap�rtunity to redu�e �he City's disaster Iosse�?and VVHEREAS, the City has dzveloped tha City of R�nton Hazard MitigatiQn Plan and is commi�ted ta fi.�ifillizxg t:�e r�it:�gation gaals and objectives aut�d in th�Plan; NUW, THEREFORE� THE CITY C�tJNCII. O� THF CITY C}F REN'I`�Ns WAS�-IINGT4N,DO RESOLVE AS F�LLOWS: SE+CTICIN I. The abov�fmdings aze true�d cc�rrect in a11 respects. SECT�(}N II. Tiie ��ty o�Renton�-I,azard Mitigation Plan is adopted by the City and at1 r�spo�.sibl� clepartnaents are auth�rized tc� execute their res�ons��iilities uz im�Ieme�ti�g tlus Plan. 1 � � It�SOLUTION 1�4. 3 6 8 0 P�SSED BY THE CITY C(�UNC�G this 2 2 nd da3 of De�:�m�r ,2003. r ;� / �y� ,�'�1.e�t�l�_�l� Cs i�.�t_.� $annie I. Walton, City�lerk AP�'RQ`t��BY TH�MAYC3R t:�is 2 2nd tia.y o� I�ecember , �f�03. �� Jesse er,May€�r Approv+ed as to farm: �-�� (��3'`' '' , �?��--x,��..e =� Lawrence J. Warren, Cify Attorney RES.1 U27:121101 t33:ma. 2 � � CITY OF RENTON Renton City Council NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 2nd day of April, 2012, at 7:00 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the seventh floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, to consider: Adoption of the City of Renton Hazard Mitigation Plan, a plan that categorizes the hazards that may impact Renton, assesses Renton's vulnerability to such hazards, and identifies actions to take to reduce risk and loss. This would supersede the plan adopted in December 2003. To review the written plan, visit the City web site at www.rentonwa.gov or contact the City Clerk office at 425-430-6510. All interested parties are invited to attend the hearing and present written or oral comments regarding the proposal. For those unable to attend the public hearing, written comments submitted to the City Clerk by 5:00 p.m. on the day of the hearing will be entered into the public hearing record. Written comments must include the submitter's full name and address. Renton City Hall is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. For information, call 425-430-6510. ��..��rl. l,Ja�� Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Published Renton Reporter March 16, 2012 Account No. 50640