Loading...
Northampton MA APA ReviewLOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL - APA City of Northampton, MA The Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool demonstrates how the Local Mitigation Plan meets the regulation in 44 CFR §201.6 and offers States and FEMA Mitigation Planners an opportunity to provide feedback to the community. The Regulation Checklist provides a summary of FEMA’s evaluation of whether the Plan has addressed all requirements. The Plan Assessment identifies the plan’s strengths as well as documents areas for future improvement. The Multi-jurisdiction Summary Sheet is an optional worksheet that can be used to document how each jurisdiction met the requirements of each Element of the Plan (Planning Process; Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment; Mitigation Strategy; Plan Review, Evaluation, and Implementation; and Plan Adoption). The FEMA Mitigation Planner must reference this Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide when completing the Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool. Jurisdiction: City of Northampton, MA Title of Plan: The City of Northampton Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan 2020 Update Date of Plan: 2020 Single or Multi-jurisdiction plan? Single jurisdiction New Plan or Plan Update? Update Local Point of Contact: Wayne Feiden, FAICP Title: DirectorNorthampton Planning and Sustainability Agency: City ofNorthampton Planning and Sustainability Phone Number: 413-587-1265 E-Mail:wfeiden@northamptonma.gov Regional Point of Contact: N/A Address: 210 Main St, City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 State Reviewer: Jeffrey Zukowski Title: Hazard Mitigation Planner Date: 8/11/2020 FEMA Reviewer: Jay Neiderbach Brigitte Ndikum-Nyada Title: FEMA Community Planner FEMA Community Planner Date: 88/17/2020 8/17/2020 – 8/18/2020 Date Received in FEMA Region I 8/11/2020 Plan Not Approved Plan Approvable Pending Adoption 8/18/2020 Plan Adopted Plan Approved SECTION 1: REGULATION CHECKLIST INSTRUCTIONS:The Regulation Checklist must be completed by FEMA. The purpose of the Checklist is to identify the location of relevant or applicable content in the Plan by Element/sub-element and to determine if each requirement has been ‘Met’ or ‘Not Met.’ The ‘Required Revisions’ summary at the bottom of each Element must be completed by FEMA to provide a clear explanation of the revisions that are required for plan approval. Required revisions must be explained for each plan sub-element that is ‘Not Met.’ Sub-elements should be referenced in each summary by using the appropriate numbers (A1, B3, etc.), where applicable. Requirements for each Element and sub-element are described in detail in this Plan Review Guide in Section 4, Regulation Checklist. 1.REGULATION CHECKLIST Location in Plan (section and/or page number) Met Not Met Regulation (44 CFR 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans) ELEMENT A. PLANNING PROCESS A1. Does the Plan document the planning process, including how it was prepared and who was involved in the process for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(1)) pp. 1 –6, Appendix A X A2. Does the Plan document an opportunity for neighboring communities, local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, agencies that have the authority to regulate development as well as other interests to be involved in the planning process? (Requirement §201.6(b)(2)) pp. 1 –6, Appendix A X A3. Does the Plan document how the public was involved in the planning process during the drafting stage? (Requirement §201.6(b)(1)) pp. 1 –6, Appendix A X A4. Does the Plan describe the review and incorporation of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information? (Requirement §201.6(b)(3)) pp. 109-145, 161-163,citations throughout X A5. Is there discussion of how the community(ies) will continue public participation in the plan maintenance process? (Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(iii)) p. 163 X A6. Is there a description of the method and schedule for keeping the plan current (monitoring, evaluating and updating the mitigation plan within a 5-year cycle)? (Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(i)) p. 163 X ELEMENT A: REQUIRED REVISIONS ELEMENT B. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT B1. Does the Plan include a description of the type, location, and extent of all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction(s)? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i)) pp. 13 – 108, Appendices C & D X B2. Does the Plan include information on previous occurrences of hazard events and on the probability of future hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i)) pp. 13 – 108, Appendices C & D X B3. Is there a description of each identified hazard’s impact on the community as well as an overall summary of the community’s vulnerability for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) pp. 13 – 108, Appendices C & D X B4. Does the Plan address NFIP insured structures within the jurisdiction that have been repetitively damaged by floods? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) p. 113 X ELEMENT B: REQUIRED REVISIONS ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY C1. Does the plan document each jurisdiction’s existing authorities, policies, programs and resources and its ability to expand on and improve these existing policies and programs? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)) pp. 109 – 145 X C2. Does the Plan address each jurisdiction’s participation in the NFIP and continued compliance with NFIP requirements, as appropriate? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(ii)) pp. 7 – 8, 113 X C3. Does the Plan include goals to reduce/avoid long-term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(i)) p. 109 X C4. Does the Plan identify and analyze a comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions and projects for each jurisdiction being considered to reduce the effects of hazards, with emphasis on new and existing buildings and infrastructure? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(ii)) pp. 148 – 160 X C5. Does the Plan contain an action plan that describes how the actions identified will be prioritized (including cost benefit review), implemented, and administered by each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iv)); (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iii)) pp. 148 – 160 X C6. Does the Plan describe a process by which local governments will integrate the requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms, such as comprehensive or capital improvement plans, when appropriate? (Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(ii)) pp. 161 – 162 X ELEMENT C: REQUIRED REVISIONS ELEMENT D. PLAN REVIEW, EVALUATION, AND IMPLEMENTATION (applicable to plan updates only) D1. Was the plan revised to reflect changes in development? (Requirement §201.6(d)(3)) p. 4, 7 – 8 X D2. Was the plan revised to reflect progress in local mitigation efforts? (Requirement §201.6(d)(3)) pp. 109-154 X D3. Was the plan revised to reflect changes in priorities? (Requirement §201.6(d)(3)) pp. 150-160, 162-163 X ELEMENT D: REQUIRED REVISIONS ELEMENT E. PLAN ADOPTION E1. Does the Plan include documentation that the plan has been formally adopted by the governing body of the jurisdiction requesting approval? (Requirement §201.6(c)(5)) p. 2 E2. For multi-jurisdictional plans, has each jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan documented formal plan adoption? (Requirement §201.6(c)(5)) N/A ELEMENT E: REQUIRED REVISIONS ELEMENT F. ADDITIONAL STATE REQUIREMENTS (OPTIONAL FOR STATE REVIEWERS ONLY; NOT TO BE COMPLETED BY FEMA) F1. F2. ELEMENT F: REQUIRED REVISIONS SECTION 2: PLAN ASSESSMENT A. Plan Strengths and Opportunities for Improvement This section provides a discussion of the strengths of the plan document and identifies areas where these could be improved beyond minimum requirements. Element A: Planning Process Strengths: There was an excellent effort to have a robust planning process despite pandemic-related challenges, with strategies such as virtual meetings and multiple opportunities for public involvement. The City should consider sharing the successes of the Steering Committee holding virtual Zoom meetings for public engagement to complete this update. The results of previous planning initiatives, such as the Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness program, were incorporated into the plan’s development, increasing coordination and building momentum between different efforts. The plan provides a clear description of recent mitigation-related projects being undertaken in the City. The description of how the Steering Committee members are involved in these projects helps to identify how they can help to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into other work. Opportunities for Improvement: None Element B: Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Strengths: The impacts of each hazard were broken down by individual sectors, including vulnerable populations, which encouraged a more comprehensive assessment. The plan assesses how the probability and severity of hazards may change in the future. The extent of each hazard is described in detail, with the use of scientific scales and best available data when possible. Previous hazard occurrences are explained with as much local event data as possible, particularly for snowstorms and flooding. It is commendable to mention that the City HMP Committeeelected to address “Covid-19 pandemic” as anadditional hazard that affects theCity. Great incorporation of RiskMAP information in this update as well as the community getting ready for the new FEMA map in 2021-2022. Opportunities for Improvement: Build upon the ranking of hazards by also creating a summary of the City’sgreatest specific vulnerabilities, in order to better identify the specific challenges that the City is trying to address in its mitigation strategy. Element C:Mitigation Strategy Strengths: The plan includes a detailed assessment of existing capabilities, organized by which hazards they relate to, and with updates on how each can be expanded. The plan includes specific, targeted mitigation actions that address the community's key vulnerabilities. Actions are detailed with information on funding, resources, timeframes, and responsible personnel. Great discussion on Northampton’s National Floodplain Insurance Program (NFIP) program continued compliance and its membership in the CRS. Opportunities for Improvement: For actions that will take over 5 years to complete, consider describing what intermediate steps will occurover the next 5 years. This will make it easier to monitor progress and evaluate the actions during the next plan update. Element D: Plan Update, Evaluation, and Implementation (Plan Updates Only) Strengths: Kudos to the City of Northampton, on updating this plan and to adopt prior to the expiration of previous August 2015 Plan. Well done! Also well done is providing the following information to excellently address element D1.a. “There has not been anydevelopment in flood zones or other areas determined to be at high risk fromthe hazards identified in this plan.” Progress on mitigation actions from the previous plan is clear and comprehensive. Opportunities for Improvement: Consider including a discussion on how recently implemented mitigation activities have increased the community’s resilience. The plan mentioned ‘on-going’ to describe the status of mitigation actions from the previously adopted plan. According to ‘on-going program’ note to expand the explanation of the status of these actions in this update, consider converting these actions into mitigation program or capability. B. Resources for Implementing Your Approved Plan Refer to the Massachusetts Integrated State Hazard Mitigation and Climate Action Plan, Resilient MA Climate Clearinghouse, and State’s Climate Action Pageto learn about hazards relevant to Massachusetts and the State’s efforts and action plan. Technical Assistance: FEMA FEMA Climate Change: Provides resources that address climate change. FEMA Library: FEMA publications can be downloaded from the library website. These resources may be especially useful in public information and outreach programs. Topics include building and construction techniques, NFIP policies, and integrating historic preservation and cultural resource protection with mitigation. FEMA RiskMAP: Technical assistance is available through RiskMAP to assist communities in identifying, selecting, and implementing activities to support mitigation planning and risk reduction. Attend RiskMAP discovery meetings that may be scheduled in the state, especially any in neighboring communities with shared watersheds boundaries. Other Federal EPA Resilience and Adaptation in New England (RAINE): A collection of vulnerability, resilience and adaptation reports, plans, and webpages at the state, regional, and community levels. Communities can use the RAINE database to learn from nearby communities about building resiliency and adapting to climate change. EPA Soak Up the Rain: Soak Up the Rain is a public outreach campaign focused on stormwater quality and flooding. The website contains helpful resources for public outreach and easy implementation projects for individuals and communities. NOAA C-CAP Land Cover Atlas: This interactive mapping tool allows communities to see their land uses, how they have changed over time, and what impact those changes may be having on resilience. NOAA Sea Grant: Sea Grant’s mission is to provide integrated research, communication, education, extension and legal programs to coastal communities that lead to the responsible use of the nation’s ocean, coastal and Great Lakes resources through informed personal, policy and management decisions. Examples of the resources available help communities plan, adapt, and recovery are the Community Resilience Map of Projects and the National Sea Grant Resilience Toolkit NOAA Sea Level Rise Viewer and Union for Concerned Scientists Inundation Mapper: These interactive mapping tools help coastal communities understand how their hazard risks may be changing. The “Preparing for Impacts” section of the inundation mapper addresses policy responses to protect communities. NOAA U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit: This resource provides scientific tools, information, and expertise to help manage climate-related risks and improve resilience to extreme events. The “Steps to Resilience” tool may be especially helpful in mitigation planning and implementation. State Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency: The Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Officer (SHMO) and State Mitigation Planner(s) can provide guidance regarding grants, technical assistance, available publications, and training opportunities. Massachusetts Departments of Conservation and Recreation and Environmental Protection can provide technical assistance and resources to communities seeking to implement their hazard mitigation plans. MA Mapping Portal: Interactive mapping tool with downloadable data Not for Profit Kresge Foundation Online Library: Reports and documents on increasing urban resilience, among other topics. Naturally Resilient Communities: A collaboration of organizations put together this guide to nature-based solutions and case studies so that communities can learn which nature-based solutions can work for them. Rockefeller Foundation Resilient Cities: Helping cities, organizations, and communities better prepare for, respond to, and transform from disruption. Funding Sources: Massachusetts Coastal Resilience Grant Program: Funding for coastal communities to address coastal flooding, erosion, and sea level rise. Massachusetts Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness program: Provides support for communities to plan for climate change and resilience and implement priority projects. Massachusetts Water Quality Grants: Clean water grants that can be used for river restoration or other kinds of hazard mitigation implementation projects. Grants.gov: Lists of grant opportunities from federal agencies (HUD, DOT/FHWA, EPA, etc.) to support rural development, sustainable communities and smart growth, climate change and adaptation, historic preservation, risk analyses, wildfire mitigation, conservation, Federal Highways pilot projects, etc. FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA): FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Assistance provides funding for projects under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM), and Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA). States, federally recognized tribes, local governments, and some not for profit organizations are eligible applicants. GrantWatch: The website posts current foundation, local, state, and federal grants on one website, making it easy to consider a variety of sources for grants, guidance, and partnerships. Grants listed include The Partnership for Resilient Communities, the Institute for Sustainable Communities, the Rockefeller Foundation Resilience, The Nature Conservancy, The Kresge Climate-Resilient Initiative, the Threshold Foundation’s Thriving Resilient Communities funding, the RAND Corporation, and ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability. USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) and Rural Development Grants: NRCS provides conservation technical assistance, financial assistance, and conservation innovation grants. USDA Rural Development operates over fifty financial assistance programs for a variety of rural applications.