Town of Morehead City
Hazard Mitigation Plan
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................................................... 2
PURPOSE OF THE PLAN..................................................................................................................................................... 3
PLANNING PROCESS............................................................................................................................................................ 4
Planning Process
Participants.............................................................................................. 4
Detailed Steps of
the Planning Process............................................................................... 5
ADOPTION.................................................................................................................................................................................. 6
MITIGATION GOALS............................................................................................................................................................. 6
MITIGATION STRATEGIES............................................................................................................................................... 7
IMPLEMENTATION OF MITIGATION
STRATEGIES........................................................................................ 11
PLAN IMPLEMENTATION.............................................................................................................................................. 21
PLAN MAINTENANCE...................................................................................................................................................... 28
APPENDIX A: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION............................................................................................................ 30
APPENDIX B: VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT.................................................................................................. 56
APPENDIX C: COMMUNITY CAPABILITY
ASSESSMENT.............................................................................. 67
APPENDIX D: INTERIM CONCLUSIONS
(ACCEPTIBILITY ASSESSMENT)........................................ 78
APPENDIX E: DOCUMENTATION OF PLAN
PROGRESS............................................................................... 80
APPENDIX F: STORM RECONSTRUCTION
POLICY.......................................................................................... 88
APPENDIX G: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
ACTION PLAN............................................................................. 90
APPENDIX H: COMMUNITY RATING SYSTEM
FIELD VERIFICATION REPORT............................ 92
APPENDIX I: DISASTER RESPONSE PLAN............................................................................................................96
APPENDIX J: MAPS.......................................................................................................................................................... 104
Map #1: Base Map.............................................................................................................104
Map #2: Water System Map............................................................................................ 105
Map #3: Sewer System Map............................................................................................ 106
Map #4: Growth Area Map.............................................................................................. 107
Map #5: Repetitive Loss Properties Map....................................................................... 108
Map #6: Critical Facilities and Hazardous Storage
Sites Map...................................... 109
Map #7: Flood Zones Map............................................................................................... 110
Map #8: Flood Zones and Repetitive Loss Properties.................................................. 111
Map #9: Storm Surge (Slow Moving Hurricane)........................................................... 112
Map #10: Storm Surge (Fast Moving Hurricane).......................................................... 113
Map #11: Historic Earthquakes, Tornadoes, Wind &
Hail Storms...............................114
Map #12: Flood Hazard Areas and Existing Land Use..................................................115
Map #13: Flood Hazard Areas and Future Land Use................................................... 116
Map #14: All Hazards Map............................................................................................... 117
APPENDIX K: RESOLUTION.......................................................................................................................................118
Generally:
In
2000, Congress adopted its Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA2K), which requires all
local governments to develop a hazard mitigation plan that describes actions to
mitigate hazards, risks and vulnerabilities that impact the community and
establish a strategy to implement those activities. The State of d state public assistance funds (effective
for state-declared disasters after November 1, 2004). According to the North Carolina Division of Emergency
Management (NCDEM), the minimum requirements for local governments
are as follows: enact and enforce building codes, zoning ordinances, and other
measures to enhance their legal capability in an effort to protect life and
property; make the public aware of hazards that present risks to people and
property and measures they can take to reduce their risk and possible losses;
and, comply with Federal and other regulations that are designed to reduce
disaster costs as well as preserve and protect natural, historical and cultural
resources. .
Community Profile and
Hazards:
Morehead
City is located in the heart of North Carolinas Crystal Coast. Although a beautiful place to live, work and
play, it is prone to a variety of natural disasters. Hurricanes and flooding, by far, top the list
of potential large-scale disasters. Thunderstorms,
erosion, tornadoes, extreme heat, hailstorms and severe winter storms also have
potential of striking.
Utilizing
the Hazard Identification and Analysis methodology suggested by the Hazard
Mitigation Section of the NCDEM North Carolina Department
of Emergency Management, the seriousness of each hazard was
ranked based on the likelihood of occurrence, intensity rating and the
potential impact. The outcome of the
analysis, which was performed by the Hazard Mitigation Planning Advisory Committee,
ranks the identified hazards as follows:
1. Hurricane/Coastal
Storm;
2. Flooding;
3. Drought/Heat Wave;
Winter Storm/Noreaster;
4. Winter
Storm/Noreaster; Thunderstorm;
5. Thunderstorm; Tornado;
6. Tornado;
Drought/Heat Wave;
7. Wildfire;
8. Hazardous
Materials; Earthquake;
9. Earthquake; Landslide; and,
10. Landslide; Dam/Levee Failure, Tsunami and Volcano.
11. Tsunamis; and,
12. Dam/Levee Failure
and Volcano.
(NOTE: Because earthquakes, landslides, dam/levee
failures, tsunamis and volcanoes are not
a threat to
The information
on the hazards identified above was obtained from a variety of sources,
including:
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
National Weather Service
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Federal Flood Insurance Rate Maps
National Climatic
United State Geological Survey (USGS)
Landslide Data
United State Geological Survey (USGS) Water
Data
Division of Soil and Water
Conservation
NC
State Climate Office of North Carolina
The Weather Channel
Southeast Regional Climate Center
North Carolina Geological Survey
University of Washington Geophysics Program
Neighboring
Local Governments
Local Long-Term Residents
A
more detailed description of the hazards, level of vulnerability,
Under
the direction of the Morehead City Council, the Morehead City Planning
Department spearheaded
the update process of composed
the Citys Hazard Mitigation Plan in accordance with 44 CFR 201.6.
The
first order of business was to establish a Hazard Mitigation Planning Advisory
Committee that included:
The
Committee was responsible for data collection and development of the draft
plan. Utilizing Local
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance Keeping
Natural Hazards from Becoming Disasters (prepared by FEMA the North Carolina Division of Emergency Management),
the Committee was able to develop a draft plan that adequately identifies
potential hazards and offers a plan of action for reducing the impacts to the
community and its citizens. The
Committees meetings were open to the public and individual members were
charged with gathering data and discussing local hazards and finding solutions
to mitigate hazards. Public notice was
given through postings in City buildings.
A variety of organizations were contacted via personal invitations,
including:
Utilizing
the information gathered by the individual members, existing planning documents
and data collected from a variety of other sources, the Committee completed the
first draft of the Hazard Mitigation Plan.
The Committee met six times as a group; however, information was turned
in to the Planning Department on a regular basis for inclusion in the
plan. Public meetings to review the draft were held
in April and ________
of 2009. These meetings were A public
meeting to review the draft was held on May 21, 2002. This meeting was advertised through a
public notice in the newspaper, postings in City Hall and on the Citys webpage.
1. Identify
Potential Natural Hazards:
Initially,
the Committee was tasked with reviewing identified hazards, evaluating potential new
hazards and gathering updated data on both.
gathering data on the hazards the occurred
in the planning area. This
information was obtained from a variety of sources, including local, State state and Federal federal
agencies; National Weather Service; various web sites; Carteret County News-Times; interviews with long time residents and
business owners and Carteret County Emergency Management staff. Maps were presented which included
topography, flood hazard areas, parcel information, repetitive loss properties,
SLOSH (Sea,
Lake and Overland Surges from Hurricanes) modeling; critical
facilities locations and infrastructure information. Population statistics were also
reviewed. Information gathered was used
to analyze the natural hazards affecting
2. Assess
Vulnerability:
The
information collected in Step 1 identified the potential natural hazards that
could impact
3. Assess
Community Capability:
Next,
the Committee looked at city policies that could potentially have an
impact on the creation of hazard mitigation policies or unintentionally hinder
mitigation efforts.
4. Form
Interim Conclusions (Acceptability Assessment):
Once
the information on the impact of natural hazards to
The
information was presented to the Planning Board and Town Council for
review. Both meetings were open to the
public and were
advertised in the newspaper and on the Citys website. Although the public was present at both meetings, no public comments
were received.
The Morehead City Planning Board reviewed
the draft plan during its April 21, 2009, May,
2002 meeting. It was forwarded to the Town Council, which
reviewed the draft plan on May 12, 2009 May 28,
2002.
Upon receipt of comments received from NCDEM NCEM, changes were made and the revised draft plan
was reviewed by the Planning Committee of the Town Council on _________, 2009 June 29, 2004 and the plan has been The plan was
then resubmitted
forwarded to the NCDEM North Carolina Division of Emergency Management
for comment.
Prior to final adoption, additional comments
from NCDEM NCEM were incorporated and the Plan was reviewed
by the Planning Board on _________,
2009 June 15, 2004.
Final adoption occurred on _________, 2009 October 12, 2004. A copy of the resolution of adoption can be
found in the appendices.
Generally:
The following
process was used to develop, review and update the goals of the Morehead City
Hazard Mitigation Plan. The These goals were established as a result of a
review of various City city
documents and plans, including but not limited to, the 2007 Morehead City Core CAMA Land Use Plan, Unified Development Ordinance
and Emergency
Operations Plan Emergency Management
Procedures Policy. Input received from members of the Hazard
Mitigation Planning
Advisory Committee and the general public was also used to develop
community goals.
The Hazard
Mitigation Planning Advisory Committee determined that the goal statements
contained in the previous mitigation plan continue to be applicable to the
current hazard conditions in Morehead City, and adequately guide the community
in its efforts to reduce and avoid long-term vulnerabilities.
The Committee
also reviewed the goal of the 2007 North Carolina State Hazard Mitigation Plan
and determined that the mitigation goals of Morehead City are consistent with
the mitigation goal of the State of North Carolina.
The Hazard
Mitigation Planning Advisory Committee has identified a number of mitigation
actions and projects to reduce the effects of each of the identified
hazards. Through consensus, the
Committee developed a list of potential mitigation actions, emphasizing new and
existing buildings and infrastructure and the future use of land that is
currently undeveloped in hazard areas. Once the goals were
established, objectives were identified and mitigation strategies were
developed. In
developing the mitigation strategies, the Hazard
Mitigation Advisory Committee considered the cost effectiveness,
environmental soundness and technical feasibility of each strategy. All mitigation strategies have been
determined to be:
a. Cost effective: The return or savings produced by
implementation of the action outweighs the cost of implementation;
b. Environmentally sound: Actions were taken to protect
environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands wetland that act as natural stormwater storage
areas;
c. Technically feasible: Most actions are to be undertaken by
the City using current staff and local funding.
For
larger projects, the City has identified a variety of funding sources.
The Committee
also reviewed the mitigation actions contained in the 2007 North Carolina State
Hazard Mitigation Plan and determined that the actions selected for the plan
update are consistent with those of the State.
By
goal, the mitigation strategies are as follows:
GOAL #1: Identify
and reduce potential hazard vulnerability to
Application: All Hazards.
Description:
After reviewing
Objective 1-1. Influence decision making in both the public
and private sectors to minimize the communitys vulnerability to hazards.
Application:
All Hazards.
Description: Without
the support of the key decision makers in both the public and private sectors,
it is difficult to have an effective hazard mitigation plan.
Mitigation Strategies:
1. Sponsor/co-sponsor a hazard mitigation
seminar or
similar program for elected officials, interested citizens and business
leaders which include educational information on natural hazards that affect
Morehead City, the potential impact, and mitigation measures to reduce risk.
2. Maintain a current Emergency Operations response Plan.
3. Review ordinances that are relevant to hazard
mitigation to assure:
a. the
effectiveness in reducing exposure to natural hazards; and
b. the
effectiveness in protecting natural resources via best management practices,
stormwater management, wetlands preservation, etc.
4. Maintain and update
5. Include a review of Morehead Citys hazard
mitigation efforts as part of the Land Use Plan update process.
6. Educate City employees on hazards that impact
Morehead City and provide training on City policies related to hazards.
7. Familiarize local public officials with the
principles and practices of emergency management and emergency operations.
Objective
1-2. Increase the publics awareness of hazards, both natural and manmade.
Application:
All Hazards.
Description:
Education is an
important tool in mitigating hazards. By
sharing knowledge with the general public (i.e. retrofitting existing
structures),
Mitigation
Strategies:
1. Include articles in the Citys newspaper newsletter explaining hazard mitigation and
preparing for natural hazards.
2. Promote nationally recognized awareness
weeks (i.e. hurricane preparedness, severe weather preparedness, etc.) through
the local media.
3. Display U.S. and State Government printed
brochures that discuss hazards relevant to Morehead City and make them
available for distribution to the public.
4. Continue to provide Provide
the public links to relevant hazard mitigation links websites on the Citys
website.
5. Develop public service announcements (PSAs)
on natural hazard mitigation programs and activities to be used by local radio
and television stations.
6. Conduct a natural hazard awareness program in
the
GOAL #2: Promote sound public policy to protect
citizens, critical facilities, infrastructure and property.
Application: All
Hazards.
Description: Protection
of life, critical facilities, infrastructure and property is a key goal that
Objective 2-1. Reduce the potential impact of flooding in Morehead City. and the number of repetitive loss properties to maximize
credit received under FEMAs Community Rating System (CRS) and continue
participation in CRS.
Application: Flood
Hazards.
Description: Reducing
the potential number of repetitive loss properties and continued participation
in FEMAs Community Rating System will continue to make Morehead City more
hazard resistant when it comes to flooding.
Mitigation
Strategies:
1. Continue participation in FEMAs Community
Rating System (CRS).
2. Continue
to enforce
3. Promote sound land
use planning for developed and undeveloped properties through rezoning and
other mechanisms taking into consideration known hazard locations and
repetitive loss areas.
Objective 2-2. Avoid costly repair and
replacement of public and private investments.
Application: All Hazards.
Description:
Mitigation
Strategies:
1. Maintain the Storm
Reconstruction Policy Establish a
reconstruction policy that includes a procedure for issuance of
building permits after a natural disaster.
The
current Storm Reconstruction Policy can be found in Appendix F.
2. Continue
enforcement of the International Building Code.
3. Continue to
monitor trees and vegetation on publicly owned property to assure that no
property or utility damage will occur as a result of diseased or dying
trees/vegetation.
4. The
City will work with utility companies to identify potential problem areas and
work to eliminate them where feasible.
5. Evaluate
the location of water/sewer utility extensions related to hazard mitigation.
6. Locate and preplan
targeted hazardous material risk areas.
7. Continue enforcement
of the 2006 North Carolina State Building Code: Fire Code.
Objective 2-3. Insure continued
functionality of critical services and facilities after a hazard event.
Application: All
Hazards.
Description:
Mitigation
Strategies:
1. Evaluate
current emergency operation practices to determine what areas need improvement.
2. Maintain the Establish an
alternate Emergency Operation Center (EOC) in the event that the primary EOC
cannot function.
3. Maintain
backup generators for all critical public facilities. Evaluate the equipment on a regular basis to
assure it continues to meet the needs of the operations occurring at each
facility.
4. Inspect
fire hydrants regularly.
5. Maintain the
Citys Hazardous Materials Action Plan (see Appendix G). Prepare
a hazardous material action plan that addresses spills, etc.
GOAL #3: Prove eligibility for government aid and
grant programs.
Application: All
Hazards.
Description: Through
creation of a formal hazard mitigation plan,
Objective 3-1. Seek funding opportunities to develop and implement Morehead Citys
hazard mitigation activities.
Mitigation Strategies:
1. Include
discussion of natural hazard mitigation grant opportunities available to
2. Establish
local and regional partnerships to identify funding sources for natural hazard
mitigation activities and seek to obtain such funding.
GOAL #4: Form effective community-based
partnerships for hazard mitigation purposes.
Application: All Hazards.
Description:
In order to form partnerships between different agencies, the private
sector and the public, it is first necessary to have communication and build
relationships. Through this process,
Objective 4-1. Maintain partnerships that have been formed as a result of the
development of the Hazard Mitigation Plan.
Mitigation Strategies:
1. Maintain
the hazard mitigation committee meetings to continue relationship building and
keep updated on mitigation measures that are taking place throughout the
community.
2. Identify
all municipal, county and regional organizations with responsibilities for, or
an interest in, natural hazard mitigation, and share the plan with local
support organizations, such as the American Red Cross and Salvation Army,
private businesses and other community partners.
Objective 4-2. Enhance coordination of emergency planning and operations between
local governments.
Mitigation Strategies:
1. Maintain one E-911 dispatch center
countywide and eliminate individual municipal dispatch centers.
The following process was used to assign implementation and
administrative responsibilities for the actions identified for inclusion in the
plan update: The Hazard Mitigation Planning Advisory Committee met on February
5, 2009, and reviewed the mitigation actions developed on October 8, 2008. With input from departmental staff, the
Committee verified responsibilities, designated start and completion dates,
identified funding or potential funding sources, and ranked the priority of
each of the selected mitigation actions.
Potential funding sources were identified by reviewing current local
operating budgets, as well as outside sources of funding including FEMA and
State pre- and post-disaster mitigation grant programs.
The Mitigation Strategy Table found on the following pages
contains the selected mitigation actions along with the type of targeted
hazard, the responsible party, start and completion dates, potential funding
sources, and priority ranking.
The process for prioritizing the selected mitigation actions
included discussions by the Hazard Mitigation Planning Advisory Committee about
the advantages and drawbacks of each identified action carried over from the
previously approved plan as well as new actions identified during the update process. The Committee sought input from Department
Heads responsible for implementation of each action.
The Hazard Mitigation Planning Advisory Committee used the
following criteria to prioritize the identified hazard mitigation actions as High, Medium, or Low:
1)
Cost vs. Benefit: Actions with the highest
benefits in relation to cost will receive higher priority.
2)
Results of the Risk
Assessment: Actions which address problems identified
during the updated risk assessment will receive higher priority.
3)
Results of the Community
Capability Assessment: Actions which are within the existing
capability of the jurisdiction, or which may become actionable with additional
resources, will receive higher priority.
4)
Technical Feasibility: Actions that provide a
long-term solution to identified problems, with no or minimal negative
secondary impacts, will receive higher priority.
5)
Political Acceptability: Actions that have political
support for implementation will receive higher priority.
6)
Legality: Actions must comply with
all relevant federal, state, and local statutes, regulations and ordinances.
7)
Environmental Soundness: Actions with no or
mitigateable negative environmental impacts will receive higher priority.
8)
Compatibility with Local
Goals: Actions that are effective in meeting hazard
mitigation goals and other complimentary community goals will receive higher
priority.
FEMA
provides six mitigation policy categories for identifying mitigation strategies
and measures. They are as follows:
1. Prevention (P): Preventive activities are intended to keep
hazard problems from getting worse. They
are particularly effective in reducing a communitys future vulnerability, especially
in areas where development has not occurred or capital improvements have not
been substantial.
2. Property Protection (PP): Property protection measures protect existing
structures by modifying the building to withstand hazardous events or removing
structures from hazardous locations.
3. Natural Resource Protection (NR): Natural resource protection activities reduce
the impacts of natural hazards by preserving or restoring natural areas and
their mitigative functions. Such areas
include floodplains, wetlands and dunes.
Parks, recreation or conservation agencies and organizations often
implement these measures.
4. Structural Projects (SP): Structural mitigation projects are intended
to lessen the impact of a hazard by modifying the environment or natural
progression of the hazard event. They
are usually designed by engineers and managed or maintained by Public Works Staff
public works staff.
5. Public Information (PI): Public information activities are used to
advise residents, business owners, potential property owners and visitors about
hazards, hazardous areas and mitigation techniques they can use to protect
themselves and their property.
6. Emergency Services Measures (ES): Although not typically considered a
mitigation technique, emergency service measures do minimize the impact of a
hazard event on people and property.
These are actions commonly taken immediately prior to, during, or in
response to a hazard event.
The following table identifies the
mitigation strategies and measures by the six mitigation policy categories
provided by FEMA, a brief description of the action to be undertaken, the
hazard the action addresses, relative priority, funding source, responsible
party and target completion date.
|
MOREHEAD CITY MITIGATION ACTION PLAN |
|||||||
|
Mitigation Strategy |
Targeted Hazard |
Priority |
Funding Source |
Responsible Party |
Start Date |
Completion Date |
Monitoring |
|
Prevention |
|||||||
|
Maintain and update
Morehead Citys GIS System |
All |
High |
Local |
Planning Dept |
Continuous |
Continuous |
Annual |
|
Review Morehead Citys
Hazard Mitigation Policies identified in the CAMA Land Use Plan |
All |
High |
Local and DCM |
Planning Dept |
5 Yr. cycle (started
2005) |
Every 5 years |
Every 5 years |
|
Sponsor/Co-sponsor a
hazard mitigation seminar for elected officials and business leaders which
includes educational information on natural hazards, potential impact and
mitigation measures to reduce risk |
All |
Medium |
Local |
City/County Planning
Dept |
Every 4 years (began in 2007) |
Every 4 years |
Every 4 years |
|
Continue to enforce
Morehead Citys Flood Prevention Ordinance and update as necessary |
Flood |
High |
Local |
Building Inspections
Department |
July 2004 |
Continuous |
Daily |
|
Continue participation
in FEMAs Community Rating System |
Flood |
High |
Local |
Building Inspections
Department |
July 2004 |
Continuous |
Annual |
|
Provide links to relevant
hazard mitigation websites via Citys website |
All |
Medium |
Local |
Systems Administrator |
2008 |
Continuous |
Continuous |
|
Maintain the |
All |
Medium |
Local |
Building Inspections
Department |
2003 |
Continuous
|
Continuous |
|
Evaluate the location
of water/sewer utility extension related to hazard mitigation |
All |
Medium |
Local |
Public Utilities
Department |
July 2004 |
Continuous |
Continuous |
|
Apply for grant funding
to enhance the Citys hazard mitigation effort, as applicable |
All |
Medium |
Varies |
All City Departments |
As grants open and
local match is available |
Varies |
As available |
|
Establish local and
regional partnerships to identify funding sources for natural hazard
mitigation activities and seek to obtain funding |
All |
Medium |
Varies |
All City Departments |
Continuous |
Varies |
As Available |
|
Maintain the Hazard
Mitigation Planning
Advisory Committee to continue relationship building and keep updated on
mitigation measures taking place throughout the community |
All |
Medium |
N/A |
All City Departments |
July 2004 |
Continuous |
Continuous |
|
MOREHEAD CITY MITIGATION ACTION PLAN |
|||||||
|
Mitigation Strategy |
Targeted Hazard |
Priority |
Funding Source |
Responsible Party |
Start Date |
Completion Date |
Monitoring |
|
Prevention |
|||||||
|
Promote sound land use planning for developed
and undeveloped properties through rezoning and other mechanisms taking into
consideration known hazard locations and repetitive loss areas. |
Flood |
Medium |
Local |
Planning Dept |
Continuous |
Continuous |
Annual |
|
MOREHEAD CITY MITIGATION ACTION PLAN |
|||||||
|
Mitigation Strategy |
Targeted Hazard |
Priority |
Funding Source |
Responsible Party |
Start Date |
Completion Date |
Monitoring |
|
Property
Protection |
|||||||
|
Review ordinances that
are relevant to hazard mitigation to assure: the effectiveness in reducing
exposure to natural hazards and the effectiveness in protecting natural
resources via best management practices, stormwater management, wetlands
preservation, etc. |
All |
Medium |
Local |
All City Departments |
July 2004 |
Continuous |
Annually, or more frequently if necessary |
|
Continue participation
in FEMAs Community Rating System |
Flooding |
Medium |
Local |
Building Inspections
Department |
July 2004 |
Continuous |
Review every 5 years |
|
Continue to enforce
Morehead Citys flood prevention ordinance and update as necessary |
Flooding |
High |
Local |
Building Inspections
Department |
July 2004 |
Continuous |
Review as necessary |
|
Maintain the |
All |
Medium |
Local |
Building Inspections
Department |
2003 |
Continuous
|
N/A |
|
Monitor trees and
vegetation on publicly owned property to assure that no property or utility
damage will occur as a result of diseased or dying trees/vegetation. |
High Winds, Hurricanes,
Severe Thunderstorms |
Low |
Local |
Public Works Department |
Spring 2005 |
Continuous |
Inspection to occur
every Spring |
|
The City will partner
with Utility Companies to identify problem areas and work to eliminate them
where feasible. |
All |
Low |
Local and Private |
Planning, Public Works,
Public Utilities, and Building Inspections Departments |
January 2005 |
Continuous |
Review Annually |
|
Evaluate the location
of water/sewer utility extensions related to hazard mitigation |
All |
Low |
Local |
Public Utilities
Department |
July 2004 |
Continuous |
Include as part of
review when considering line extension locations |
|
MOREHEAD CITY MITIGATION ACTION PLAN |
|||||||
|
Mitigation Strategy |
Targeted Hazard |
Priority |
Funding Source |
Responsible Party |
Start Date |
Completion Date |
Monitoring |
|
Property
Protection |
|||||||
|
Promote sound land use planning for developed
and undeveloped properties through rezoning and other mechanisms taking into
consideration known hazard locations and repetitive loss areas. |
Flood |
Medium |
Local |
Planning Dept |
Continuous |
Continuous |
Annual |
|
MOREHEAD CITY MITIGATION ACTION PLAN |
|||||||
|
Mitigation Strategy |
Targeted Hazard |
Priority |
Funding Source |
Responsible Party |
Start Date |
Completion Date |
Monitoring |
|
Natural
Resources Protection |
|||||||
|
Conduct a natural
hazard awareness program in Morehead City Schools |
All |
Low |
Local |
Planning Department |
2004-2005 School Year |
Continuous
|
Annual
|
|
Prepare a Hazardous
Material Action Plan that addresses proper containment of spills, etc. |
All
|
Low |
Local |
Fire Department |
2008 |
2008 |
Annual |
|
Include discussion of
natural hazard mitigation grant opportunities available to Morehead City
during annual budget process |
All |
Medium |
Varies |
All City Departments |
March 2005 |
Continuous |
Annual during the
budget process |
|
Sponsor/Co-sponsor a
hazard mitigation seminar for elected officials and business leaders which
includes educational information on natural hazards, potential impact and
mitigation measures to reduce risk |
All |
Medium |
Local |
City/County Planning
Department |
Every 4 years (began in 2007) |
Every 4 years |
Every 4 years |
|
Establish local and
regional partnerships to identify funding sources for natural hazard
mitigation activities and seek to obtain such funding |
All |
Medium |
Varies |
All City Departments |
July 2004 |
Continuous |
Annual review of
funding sources and partnership opportunities |
|
Maintain the hazard
mitigation committee to continue relationship building and keep updated on
mitigation measures that are taking place throughout the community |
All |
High |
Varies |
All City Departments |
July 2004 |
Continuous |
Annual |
|
Update identified |
All |
High |
Varies |
All City Departments |
Fall 2004 |
Continuous
|
Update organizational data annually |
|
|
|||||||
|
Mitigation Strategy |
Targeted Hazard |
Priority |
Funding Source |
Responsible Party |
Start Date |
Completion Date |
Monitoring |
|
Structural
Projects |
|||||||
|
Contract to maintain backup generators for all
critical public facilities. Evaluate
the equipment on a regular basis to assure it continues to meet the needs of
the operations occurring at each facility |
All |
High |
Varies |
Public Utilities Department |
July 2004 |
Continuous |
Spot checks of
equipment at various intervals |
|
Locate and preplan targeted risk areas |
Hazardous Materials |
High |
Local |
Fire Department |
2008 |
2009 |
Annual |
|
Continue enforcement of the International
Building Code |
ALL |
High |
Local |
Building Inspections Department |
2004 |
Continuous |
Continuous |
|
Fire Code Enforcement |
Hazardous Materials, Wildfires |
High |
Local |
Fire Department |
2008 |
Continuous |
Continuous |
|
Mitigation Strategy |
Targeted Hazard |
Priority |
Funding Source |
Responsible Party |
Start Date |
Completion Date |
Monitoring |
|
Public
Information |
|||||||
|
Sponsor/Co-sponsor a
hazard mitigation seminar for elected officials and business leaders which
includes educational information on natural hazards, potential impact and
mitigation measures to reduce risk |
All |
Medium |
Local |
City/County Planning
Department |
Every 4 years (began in 2007) |
Every 4 years |
Every 4 years |
|
Educate City employees
on hazards that impact |
All |
High |
Varies |
All City Departments |
January 2005 |
Continuous |
As required |
|
Include articles in
the Citys newsletters explaining hazard mitigation and preparing for natural
disasters |
All |
Medium |
Local |
All City Departments |
Summer 2005 |
Continuous |
Annual |
|
Promote nationally
recognized awareness weeks (i.e. hurricane preparedness, severe weather
preparedness, etc.) through local media |
All |
Medium |
Varies |
Planning Department |
July 2004 |
Continuous |
Annual |
|
Display U.S.
Government brochures that discuss hazards relevant to |
All |
Medium |
Varies |
Planning Department |
January 2005 |
Continuous |
Continuous |
|
Provide public links
to relevant hazard mitigation websites |
All |
Low |
Local |
Planning Department |
2008
|
Continuous |
Annual |
|
Develop public service
announcements (PSAs) on natural hazard mitigation programs and activities to
be used by local media |
All |
Low |
Local |
Planning Department |
2009 |
Continuous |
Annual |
|
MOREHEAD |
|||||||
|
Mitigation Strategy |
Targeted Hazard |
Priority |
Funding Source |
Responsible Party |
Start Date |
Completion Date |
Monitoring |
|
Emergency
Services |
|||||||
|
Maintain the hazard
mitigation committee to continue relationship building and keep updated on
mitigation measures that are taking place throughout the community |
All |
High |
Varies |
All City Departments |
July 2004 |
Continuous |
Annual |
|
Identify all
municipal, county and regional organizations and share plan with local
support organizations such as the Salvation Army, American Red Cross, etc. |
All |
High |
Varies |
All City Departments |
Fall 2004 |
January 2005 |
Update organizational data annually |
|
Maintain current Emergency
Operations Plan |
All |
High |
Local |
Fire Department |
2009 |
Continuous |
Annual |
|
Familiarize local
public officials with the principles and practices of emergency management
and emergency operations |
All |
Medium |
Local |
Administration
|
January 2005 |
Bi-annual following
election |
Biannual |
|
Evaluate current
emergency operation practices to determine what areas need improvement |
All |
Medium |
Local |
Police and Fire
Departments |
Fall 2004 |
Continuous |
Annual |
|
Maintain |
All |
High |
Local |
Police and Fire
Departments |
Fall 2004 |
Continuous
|
Continuous
|
|
Contract to maintain backup generators for all
critical public facilities. Evaluate equipment on a regular basis to assure
it continues to meet needs of operations occurring at each facility |
All |
High |
Varies |
Public Utilities Department
|
July 2004 |
Continuous |
Spot checks of
equipment at various intervals |
|
Inspect fire hydrants
regularly |
Fire |
Medium |
Local |
Fire Department |
July 2004 |
Continuous |
Annual |
|
Prepare a Hazardous
Material Action Plan that addresses proper containment of spills, etc. |
All
|
Low |
Local |
Fire Department |
2008
|
2009
|
Annual |
|
Maintain one E-911
dispatch center countywide and eliminate individual municipal dispatch
centers |
All |
High |
Varies |
County Emergency
Services Department |
2009 |
|
Annual |
|
Coordinate with Carteret County to obtain
oblique imagery and incorporate into emergency response practices |
All |
High |
Local |
City Departments & County Tax Office |
2009 |
As available |
Biannual or Following a Hurricane |
Process:
The
Morehead City Mitigation Plan will be implemented through the delegation of
assignments as specified in the Hazard Mitigation Action Plan. Each implementation action includes the
assignment of responsibility to specific City Departments along with the
establishment of a target date for completion of the activity.
It
will be the responsibility of the City Manager to ensure that these strategies
are addressed by the target completion dates unless reasonable circumstances,
e.g. lack of funding, prevent timely implementation. In the case where a target date is not met,
the reason for such failure to complete the activity in a timely manner will be
noted in the annual progress report.
Funding
Sources:
Although
in the long-term
hazard mitigation actions will save money by avoiding the loss of lives or
property damages;
, in the short-term
each action will have an associated cost.
The City will rely heavily on local funding sources; however, the City
will also seek funds from interested State and Federal agencies for both pre-
and post-disaster activities. A short
description of major disaster assistance programs is included here.
Cities
depend upon local property taxes as the primary source of revenue. Property taxes are typically used to finance
services that must be available and delivered on a routine basis to the general
public, e.g. emergency management services, etc. If local budgets allow, these funds can also
be used for other purposes in the he general public interest which would include
programs to further hazard mitigation planning.
Local funds are most effective when used as a local match for Federal
and State grants.
Federal Programs
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program Federal
Emergency Management Agency
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000
created a national program to provide a funding mechanism that is not dependent
on a Presidential disaster declaration.
The Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Program provides funding to states and
communities for cost-effective hazard mitigation activities that complement a
comprehensive mitigation program and reduce injuries, loss of life, and damage
of property.
The funding is based on a 75% Federal
share plus a 25% non-Federal share of costs.
The non-Federal match can be fully in-kind or cash or a combination of
the two. Special accommodations are made
for small and impoverished communities who are eligible for 90% Federal share
plus 10% non-Federal.
Flood Mitigation Assistance Program
Federal Emergency Management Agency
The Flood Mitigation Assistance Program
(FMAP) was established by the National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994. This program provides grants for
cost-effectiveness measure to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of flood
damage to existing structures, with an emphasis on sites that historically have
been subject to repetitive losses under the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP). These grants are also available
for planning assistance to identify flood risks and actions to reduce risk, to
provide a process for approving flood mitigation plans, and to provide grants
to implement measures to decrease flood losses.
Examples of projects that are eligible
for grants under this program include elevating or flood proofing pre-FIRM
structures, i.e. structures that were brought into the regulatory floodplain by
a revision of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps, to acquire land or structures in
flood hazard areas, to relocate relocation or
demolish existing structures, to construct detention or retention ponds to aid
in the control of flood waters, to flood proof sewer systems, to modify
drainage culverts and to obtain technical assistance, e.g. hiring a
professional consultant.
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)
Federal Emergency Management Agency
The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
(HMGP) provides funding for mitigation measures following authorized a Presidential disaster
declarations. The HMGP is funded in most part by the
Federal Government
government and administered by
State
Governments state governments. FEMA can fund up to 75% of project costs and
the State or local share can be cash or in-kind services.
HMGP funds can be used for projects such
as acquisition or relocation of structures from hazard-prone areas, retrofitting of
existing structures to protect them from future damages, and development of
state or local mitigation standards designed to protect buildings from future
damages, comprehensive state and local mitigation plans (up to 7% of total State grant),
structural hazard control, and the purchase of equipment to improve
preparedness and response.
Public Assistance (Infrastructure)
Program Federal Emergency Management Agency (Section 406)
The Public Assistance (PA) Program
provides funding to local governments following a Presidential disaster
declaration. Funds may be used for
mitigation activities in conjunction with the repair of damaged public
facilities and infrastructure.
Mitigation activities must be related to eligible disaster-related
damages and must directly reduce the potential of future disaster damages.
Projects are evaluated for
cost-effectiveness, technical feasibility, and compliance with statutory,
regulatory and executive order requirements.
The evaluation must ensure that the mitigation measures do not
negatively impact facility operation or risk from another hazard.
Small Business Administration Disaster
Assistance Program US Small Business Administration
The Small Business Administration (SBA)
Disaster Assistance Program provides low-interest Physical Disaster Loans loans to
businesses following various a Presidential disaster declarations. The loans target the businesses with repair and
replacement of uninsured and underinsured property
damages including real estate, personal property, machinery and
equipment, inventory and business assets supplies. Businesses of all sizes, homeowners, renters, and
non-profit organizations are eligible. More than 1.9
million disaster loans have been granted for nearly $47 billion since the
creation of the program in 1953.
http://www.sba.gov/services/disasterassistance/index.html
Community Development Block Grants US
Department of Housing and Urban Development
The Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) program assists communities in rehabilitating substandard dwelling
structures and in expanding economic opportunities, primarily for low to
moderate income families. However, as a
result of a Presidential disaster declaration, CDBG funds may be used for
long-term needs such as acquisition, reconstruction and redevelopment of
disaster-affected areas.
State Programs
Statewide Floodplain Mapping Initiative
The State of will
assume primary ownership and responsibility for Flood Insurance Rate
Maps (FIRMs) for all will include
conducting flood hazard analysis and producing updated, digital FIRMs
(DFIRMs).
The State began acquiring raw elevation
data for the will
addressed
these six river basins, which were the basins most impacted by Hurricane
Floyd. These six river basins account
for approximately one-half of the area of the State, impact 48 counties and 334
incorporated municipalities and encompass over 21,000 miles of streams and
rivers.
The data being collected will be used to
develop Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) and update flood hazard data and to
produce draft Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRMs) for
the affected counties and communities. To date,
sixty-eight (68) counties within North Carolina have adopted DFIRMs, including
Carteret County. Draft DFIRMs for the
White Oak River basin were adopted effective July 17, 2003. It is anticipated
that the State of North Carolina will have remapped the entire State by 2010, and will continue to follow a regular maintenance
schedule of 2.5-3.5 years once complete.
This updated flood hazard data will provides current, accurate information for communities
and property owners to make sound locating and design decisions when building
new structures and infrastructure and when retrofitting existing
structures. If consistently used by
communities for floodplain management, this information should help to
dramatically reduce future flood losses in North Carolina.
http://www.ncfloodmaps.com/index.html
Water and Sewer Grant Programs NC Rural
Economic Development Center, Inc.
The Rural Center administers three programs that assist rural communities with
development of public water and sewer systems needed to support local economic
growth and to ensure a reliable supply of clean water. The programs are funded by appropriations
from the NC General Assembly and through proceeds from Clean Water Bonds
approved by voters in November 1998.
1.
The
Supplemental Grants Program enables local governments and qualified non-profit
organizations to improve local public water and sewer systems. Projects may address public health,
environmental and/or economic development critical needs. $400,000.
2.
The Planning Capacity Building Grants Program provides funding
for local governments to undertake planning efforts that support strategic
investments in public water and sewer facilities. Funds typically are used to prepare
preliminary engineering reports, master water and sewer plans, capital
improvement plans, water and sewer feasibility studies, rate studies and grant
applications. The maximum grant amount
is generally
$40,000 $400,000.
http://www.ncruralcenter.org/grants/water.htm
Clean Water Management Trust Fund CWMTF
Board of Trustees
The Clean Water Management Trust Fund was
created in 1996 for the purpose of purposeof
making grants to local governments, state agencies, and conservation non-profit
organizations to help finance projects that address water pollution. CWMTF will fund projects that 1) enhance or
restore degraded waters; 2) protect unpolluted waters; and/or 3) contribute
toward a network of riparian buffers and greenways for environmental,
educational, and recreational benefits.
The program is funded annually through a
portion of unreserved credit in balance in the NC General Fund for a minimum of
$30 million per year. The CWMTF Board of
Trustees, an independent body of 18 members, has responsibility for allocation
of fund revenues.
CAMA (Coastal
Area Management Act) Local Planning and Management Grants Program NC
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Coastal Management
The NC Division of Coastal Management
assists local governments within the designated 20 coastal counties with local
land use planning and management projects through the CAMA Local Planning and
Management Grants Program. Eligible
projects include new or updated CAMA land use plans, implementation projects,
land use ordinances, beach or waterfront access plans, stormwater management
plans, hazard mitigation plans and capital facilities plans.
Water Resources Development Grant Program
NC Department of Environmental and Natural Resources, Division of Water
Quality
The Water Resources Development Grant
Program funds can be used as the non-federal share of water resources
development projects. Eligible projects
include: 1) general navigation projects; 2) recreational navigational projects;
3) flood control and water drainage projects; 4) stream restoration; 5)
protection of privately owned beaches with public access; 6) land acquisition
and facility development for water-based recreation; and 7) aquatic weed
control projects.
Natural Heritage Trust Fund
The Natural Heritage Trust Fund was
established in 1987 and is funded by 25% of the annual state deed excise stamp
tax revenues and a portion of personalized license plate sales. The fund is managed by the Board of Trustees
and the Natural Heritage Program in the Division of Parks and Recreation (DPR)
in the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). Since 1987, the grant has taken part in conserving over
264,500 acres of land. 332 applications have requested $176 million. $80.6 million has been awarded for 1 project
to help protect 145,000 acres of land. Four hundred
twenty projects have been supported through $218 million in grant funding.
http://www.ncnhtf.org/pages/fundedprojects.htm
NC Parks and Recreation Trust Fund (NCPARTF) NCPARATF
The NC Parks and Recreation Trust Fund
was established in 1994 1993 and is funded by 75% of the annual state
deed excise stamp tax revenues. State
parks receive 65%; local parks, 30%; and beaches and waterfronts, 5%; and
administration, 3%. Approximately $22 million is
available each year. The program is
managed by the Board of Parks and Recreation Authority and the Division of
Parks and Recreation (DPR) in DENR.
Since 1995, local governments have
submitted 599 549 applications requesting over $84 $76 million for capital improvements and land
acquisition. The Parks and Recreation
Authority has approved 317 226
projects for a total of $48.4 $33.7
million. Over 1950 1400
acres have been added to local parks.
The Authority has approved 191 140 State Park state park land acquisition and facility projects
for a total of $104
$71.7 million. PARTF has funded the addition of 13,554 8,466 acres to the State Park System.
(http://www.ncparks.gov/About/grants/partf_main.php)
(http://www.cwmtf.net/fundsum.htm)
http/ / ils/unc.edu/parkproject/partfund
Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF)
The Land and Water Conservation Fund was
established in 1964 to provide for funding for federal land acquisition and to
provide matching grants for State state
and local governments to acquire parkland.
The Federal
Government federa