appendix c - meeting documentation - otsego county

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 1 OF 5

Meeting Otsego County Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) Steering Committee Kickoff Meeting

Date April 26, 2018 Time 10:00 a.m. – 12:15 p.m.

Location Otsego County Public Health Nursing Classroom, Meadows Office Complex, 140 County Highway 33W, Cooperstown, NY

Attendees

Heidi Bond, Public Health Director, Otsego County Department of Health

Rich Brimmer, Deputy Superintendent, Otsego County Highway

Jordan Clements, District Manager, Otsego County Soil and Water Conservation District

Tammie Harris, Planner, Otsego County Planning

Danny L. Hawles, Highway Superintendent, Town of Edmeston

Arthur Klingler, Emergency Services Coordinator, Otsego County Emergency Services

William L. Mason, Superintendent, Otsego County Highway

Rodney Renwick, Highway Superintendent, Town of Unadilla

Joe Roberts, Building/Fire Inspector, Otsego County Codes Enforcement

Erik Scrivener, Planner, Otsego County Planning

Karen Sullivan, Planning/Solid Waste Director, Otsego County Planning and Solid Waste

Tony Subbio, Project Manager, Tetra Tech

Purpose The purpose of the kickoff meeting was to initiate the planning process to update the Otsego County HMP. The

meeting provided an opportunity for the Steering Committee to meet Tetra Tech’s project manager and to discuss the

project.

Discussion Points This section summarizes each discussion point addressed during the kickoff meeting.

Introductions Mr. Scrivener welcomed attendees and summarized the planning process activities conducted so far. The existing

HMP expires in 2018, and he hopes to minimize the amount of time between the plan’s expiration date and the

activation date of the revised plan. Attendees introduced themselves, identified their experience in hazard mitigation

planning, and described their areas of focus and concern for the planning process. Those concerns are summarized

below.

• Mr. Scrivener wants to improve upon municipal outreach and participation from the planning process

conducted 5 years ago. He wants the plan to include actions that are specific and implementable. The

County submitted project funding applications that were rejected in the past because the benefit-cost

analysis did not meet grant requirements. Mr. Scrivener also stated that he would like to maintain

awareness of projects being implemented throughout the County on an ongoing basis.

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 2 OF 5

• Mr. Clements reiterated the need for implementable projects. The County has 500 culverts and flooding

starts at the pinch points at many of them. Mr. Clements pointed out that a watershed study in the County

was being completed. He stated that intergovernmental coordination is needed in implementing projects.

• Mr. Renwick also pointed out the need for implementable, specific projects. Water quality and culverts in

the County are a concern. In addition, he stated that emergency radio communications between Highway

staff and 9-1-1 need to be improved. The Unadilla Town Hall is in a floodplain, and has flooded twice. The

Town needs to relocate the building. The Town only has one culvert that remains a problem. Mr. Renwick

suggested that towns should put aside funds each year to be able to implement projects. He stated that

they have addressed 171 cross tubes, and have another 100 to go. He believes that the County or every

town should have a cache of cones, barrels, signs, and lights to block affected roadways. In addition, he

believes that the HMP should include the goal of educating town boards, supervisors, and other officials.

The Town of Unadilla has no identified shelters that are outside the floodplain. Mr. Renwick would like the

updated HMP to distinguish between actions that can be completed without outside funding versus projects

would that require outside funding.

• Mr. Roberts stated that streambank erosion is a problem in the County. Route 11 will be washed out in 5-6

years. The County conducted eight buyouts in 2006. Most communities have a Code Enforcement Official

who is also the Floodplain Administrator. Some municipalities use the County’s Code Enforcement; in those

municipalities, the County Code Enforcement Official is the municipal Floodplain Administrator.

• Ms. Sullivan stated that the County just completed an Agriculture Plan.

• Ms. Bond is concerned with the public health impacts of hazards.

• Mr. Hawles is concerned with political will and interest in carrying out projects. The municipal highway

superintendents meet as a group.

• Mr. Klingler wants to be sure that the fire chiefs in the County are involved in the planning process.

• Mr. Mason stated that scour at critical bridges is a concern. Of 88 County bridges, seven are flagged. The

County has spent time and effort on upsizing and replacing culverts. The County maintains heavy

equipment, but needs staff to be able to utilize it.

• Ms. Harris pointed out that the County’s Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) were updated 1 year ago.

Project Scope Review This section summarizes each phase of the project discussed at the kickoff meeting.

Phase 1 – Organize the Resources

Mr. Subbio discussed the formation of the Planning Partnership (the Partnership), which is the group of

representatives from jurisdictions and stakeholder agencies involved with the HMP update process. A kickoff meeting

will be held in a few weeks with the Partnership to introduce the members to the planning process and explain the

data-gathering worksheets that each jurisdiction will need to complete.

County departments to include in the planning process include those represented at this meeting, as well as the

Department of Social Services, Office for Aging, Sheriff’s Office, 9-1-1, and the 14 members of the Board of

Representatives.

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 3 OF 5

Mr. Scrivener has a list of points of contact in each municipality. County Highway maintains a list of the towns’

supervisors.

There are 13 school districts and two colleges in the County. Ms. Bond has a list of points of contact at the schools.

New York State agencies to invite to participate include the New York State Division of Homeland Security and

Emergency Services (NYS DHSES), Department of Environmental Conservation, Region 9 of the New York State

Department of Transportation, and the New York State Police (Mr. Klingler has a point of contact).

Otsego County, Cooperstown, Unadilla, and Richfield Springs each have chambers of commerce. Ms. Harris has a

contact at the tourism group “Destination Marketing This is Cooperstown.”

The local newspaper the “Daily Star” covers all of Otsego County. The Steering Committee members also have local

media contacts.

County departments can edit their own websites. The County Information Technology Department would need to be

involved to post anything to the main County site. The Planning Department’s website will be used to post

information during the planning process.

The County has one hospital: Bassett Hospital.

Other stakeholders to invite to participate in the Partnership include the Otsego County Conservation Association;

American Red Cross; and the Otsego, Delaware, and Schoharie Counties Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster

(VOAD).

Phase 2 – Risk Assessment

The following hazards will be profiled in the updated HMP:

• Drought • Flood (including dam

failure)

• Severe Storms (including

hurricanes and tornadoes)

• Earthquake • Invasive Species • Wildfire

• Extreme Temperatures • Landslide • Winter Storms

Giant Hogweed and Wild Parsnip are invasive species that have been an issue for the County. The flood analysis

will include information on flooding caused by beaver dams. Mr. Klingler stated that manmade hazards are

addressed in the County’s Hazard Vulnerability Assessment as part of the Comprehensive Emergency Preparedness

Assessment (CEPA), and the Steering Committee members agreed that manmade hazards do not need to be

addressed in the HMP. The County has had landslide events along Route 33/31 along the lake, and has spent

$600,000 on landslide events.

Upon completion of the hazard profiles, Tetra Tech will review the risk assessment with the Partnership and the

public.

Phase 3 – Mitigation Strategy

The Steering Committee will set the goals and objectives for the HMP and will share them with the Partnership. Tetra

Tech will use the information reported by the municipalities regarding their capabilities and the status of the mitigation

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 4 OF 5

actions from the 2013 version of the HMP to identify and prioritize mitigation actions for inclusion in the updated

HMP.

Tetra Tech will compile the information from the worksheets, risk assessment, capability assessment, and mitigation

actions into a jurisdictional annex for the County and each of its municipalities. The jurisdictional annexes detail the

analysis and information of the HMP for the respective jurisdictions to make the document easier to use for local

officials. Tetra Tech will conduct regional municipal support meetings in the County to finalize the annexes.

Phase 4 – Plan Maintenance

Tetra Tech will work with the Steering Committee to develop procedures for maintaining the HMP over the next 5

years. These procedures will be documented in the Plan Maintenance section of the HMP. This section will also

describe the ways in which the HMP is integrated with other planning mechanisms, such as comprehensive and

master plans, local regulations, etc.

Mitigation actions will be loaded into Tetra Tech’s Plan Review Tool to allow for ongoing plan maintenance.

Phase 5 – Draft and Final Plans

Throughout the planning process, Tetra Tech will develop the HMP document. The main body will profile the County,

explain the planning process, include the risk assessment and mitigation strategy, and discuss maintenance of the

plan. Each jurisdiction will have its own annex in the HMP, which will provide information specific to that jurisdiction.

The draft plan will be shared with the Steering Committee for review and comment throughout the planning process.

After making any required changes, Tetra Tech will post the HMP for public review. The public review period will be

advertised and will last for 30 days. Tetra Tech will then conduct a public meeting with the Partnership to gather

feedback on the plan draft and make any required changes.

Tetra Tech will then submit the draft for the State’s formal review. NYS DHSES will review the draft. If changes are

required, Tetra Tech will make the changes and resubmit the document to the State. After the State is satisfied with

the draft, the State will forward it to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Region II for review. FEMA

Region II will review the draft within 45 days, and Tetra Tech will make any required changes upon receipt of review

comments from FEMA. When FEMA is satisfied with the HMP, FEMA will grant the HMP “approvable pending

adoption” status to indicate that it meets all requirements.

The County and participating jurisdictions will formally adopt the HMP by resolution. After adoption, each jurisdiction

will receive a letter from FEMA stating that the HMP is formally approved.

Project Schedule Review Mr. Subbio reviewed the project schedule. If the towns and villages provide information in a timely manner and fully

participate in the planning process, the draft HMP will be ready for Steering Committee review by the end of August

2018. The Steering Committee and Tetra Tech will strive to complete the plan in the time allotted, but a schedule

extension for the County’s grant is possible.

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 5 OF 5

Next Steps The following next steps were discussed at the meeting:

• Steering Committee members will forward to Mr. Subbio any plans, regulations, or studies that may be

relevant to hazard mitigation. The County’s Strategic Plan, Agriculture Plan, and Solid Waste Management

Plan are available on the County website.

• The Planning Partnership Kickoff Meeting will be held from 5:30-7:30 p.m. on Thursday, May 10, 2018.

• Mr. Subbio will provide Mr. Scrivener with a list of geographic information system (GIS) data for use in the

planning process.

• Tetra Tech will begin developing hazard profiles for the hazards identified.

The meeting adjourned at 12:15 p.m.

1

Otsego County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Steering CommitteeKickoff Meeting

Agenda

Introductions

Project Scope Review

Project Schedule Review

Next Steps

Questions

Introductions

Name

Agency

Mitigation Experience

Focus and Concerns

Project Scope Review


– Planning Partnership

County Departments State Agencies General Public

Municipalities Neighboring Counties

Soil and Water Conservation District

Chamber of Commerce

Schools and Higher Education

Tourism Groups

Project Scope Review (Continued)

Phase 1 – Organize the Resources (Continued)

– Jurisdiction Worksheets Outline (contact information)

Events and Losses

Capability Assessment

National Flood Insurance Program

Mitigation Action Review

Capability Assessment and Plan Integration

New Development

Shelters, Evacuation Routes, Temporary Housing


Phase 1 – Organize the Resources (Continued)

– Stakeholder Outreach Information for the County Website

Survey

Planning Partnership Meetings(Open to the Public)

– Risk Assessment Review

– Plan Draft Review

2



– Hazards of Concern (2013)

Dam Failure • Flood • Tornado

Drought • Hurricane • Wildfire

Earthquake • Landslide • Winter Storm

Extreme Temperatures


Phase 2 – Risk Assessment (Continued)

– HAZUS-MH Analysis Flood – 1-percent and 0.2-percent

annual chance floodplains

Earthquake – 500-year MRP event

Wind – 100-year or 500-year MRP event

– Quantitative Analysis for Geographic Hazards

– Qualitative Analysis for Landslide Hazard

– Review Risk Assessment with Planning Partnership



– Develop Goals and Objectives Develop with Steering Committee

Review with Planning Partnership

– Assess Capabilities

– Mitigation Strategy Workshop

– Annex Development

– Annex Support Meetings (up to 5)



– Annual Review

– Integration with Other Planning Mechanisms

– BAToolSM


– Develop the Document Develop and finalize main body

Finalize jurisdictional annexes

– Draft Plan Reviewed by the Steering Committee Throughout the Process


Phase 5 – Draft and Final Plans (Continued)

– Public Review

– Draft Plan Review Meeting (open to the public)

– Submission to NYS DHSES and FEMA

– Update as Necessary

– “Approvable Pending Adoption”


3

Next Steps

Document Request

GIS Data

Planning Partnership Kickoff Meeting

– May 10, 2018, 5:30-7:30 p.m.

– Location: To Be Determined

Risk Assessment Update

Questions?

Thank you for your time!

Contacts

Erik Scrivener

[email protected]

(607) 547-4225

Tony Subbio

[email protected]

(717) 545-3580

AGENDA

OTSEGO COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE Steering Committee Kickoff Meeting

Thursday, April 26, 2018 | 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

1. Introductions

2. Project Scope Review

a. Phase 1 – Organize the Resources

b. Phase 2 – Risk Assessment

c. Phase 3 – Mitigation Strategy

d. Phase 4 – Plan Maintenance

e. Phase 5 – Draft and Final Plans

3. Project Schedule Review

4. Next Steps a. Document Request

b. GIS Data

c. Planning Partnership Kickoff Meeting

d. Risk Assessment Update

5. Questions

Otsego County HMP Update 2018

Proposed Project Schedule Subject to Change

Task Timeframe


► Project Kickoff Meeting conducted in early-April 2018

► Planning Partnership Kickoff Meeting conducted in mid-April 2018

► Public outreach conducted throughout the planning process

► Project Closeout Meeting conducted after the updated HMP receives “Approvable Pending Adoption” status


► Hazards profiled by end of May 2018


► Capabilities assessed by the end of May 2018

► Goals and objectives identified by end of May 2018

► Mitigation Strategy Workshop conducted in mid-June 2018

► Regional municipal support meetings in the end of June 2018

► Jurisdictional annexes complete by mid-July 2018


► Procedures developed by early October 2018

► BATool℠ program developed by end of January 2019


► Plan development to begin at the beginning of the project

► Draft plan provided to Steering Committee for review by mid-August 2018

► Draft plan reviewed by Steering Committee and updated by early September 2018

► Public review period from mid-August to early September 2018

► Draft Plan Review Meeting conducted in early to mid-September 2018

► Draft plan finalized and submitted to NYS DHSES at the end of September 2018

► NYS DHSES reviews draft plan by the end of October 2018

► Update draft plan based on NYS DHSES comments and resubmit by early November 2018

► NYS DHSES and FEMA Region II review updated draft plan through early December 2018

► Plan receives “Approvable Pending Adoption” status by mid-January 2019

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 1 OF 5

Meeting Otsego County Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) Planning Partnership Kickoff Meeting

Date May 10, 2018 Time 5:30 p.m. – 7:40 p.m.

Location Otsego County Emergency Services Classroom B, Meadows Office Complex, 140 County Highway 33W, Cooperstown, NY

Attendees

Peter Booth, Environmental Health and Safety Officer, State University of New York, Oneonta


Tammie Harris, Planner, Otsego County Planning

William A. Hribar, Highway Supervisor, Town of Otsego

Lynn Joy, Town Supervisor, Town of Morris

George Korthauer, City Manager, City of Oneonta

Danny Lapin, County Representative, Otsego County Board of Representatives

Nancy Martin-Mathewson, Town Board, Town of New Lisbon

Paul Neske, Town of Oneonta/ Town of Maryland/ Village of Milford

Patrick Pidgeon, Oneonta Fire Department/Emergency Management

Erik Scrivener, Planner, Otsego County Planning*

Harold Southworth, Bassett Network

Barbara Spaulding, New York State, Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Services

Sgt. Michael Stalter, Otsego County Sheriff

Karen Sullivan, Planning/Solid Waste Director, Otsego County Planning and Solid Waste

William Whitaker, Highway Superintendent, Town of New Lisbon

Kristen Gelino, Deputy Project Manager, Tetra Tech, Inc. (Tetra Tech)

*Attended, but did not sign in.

Purpose The purpose of the Planning Partnership Kickoff Meeting was to initiate the update process for the Otsego County

HMP with jurisdiction representatives and other stakeholders. The meeting provided an opportunity for the Planning

Partnership to meet Tetra Tech’s deputy project manager and to discuss the planning process.

Discussion Points This section summarizes each discussion point addressed during the kickoff meeting.

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 2 OF 5

Introductions Ms. Sullivan welcomed attendees and provided some brief background information on the HMP update process. Ms.

Sullivan also introduced Ms. Gelino, who led the remainder of the meeting. Attendees introduced themselves and

identified any particular areas of focus or concern they have for this planning process.

Quick Introduction to Hazard Mitigation Ms. Gelino provided a brief introduction to the concept of hazard mitigation by defining types of mitigation activities

and describing the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) grant

program. In addition, Ms. Gelino provided a brief overview of federal and New York State (NYS) planning

requirements for HMPs.

Planning Process This section summarizes each phase of the project discussed at the kickoff meeting.

Organization

Ms. Gelino discussed the roles of the Steering Committee and Planning Partnership (the Partnership). She identified

organizations included in the Partnership, such as County departments, local jurisdictions, schools, NYS

departments, FEMA Region II, community groups, neighboring jurisdictions, and others. As members of the

Partnership, each attendee should work with stakeholders to provide and solicit information about the hazards that

affect the County, actions that can be taken to mitigate the impact of those hazards, and the steps of the planning

process.

Ms. Gelino discussed stakeholder outreach that would be conducted during the planning process. The County of

Otsego Planning Department website will host information on the plan including planning process information and

draft documents for review. Tetra Tech will also develop a simple survey for members of the public to provide

information on their knowledge of the hazards they face and what can be done to mitigate impacts from those

hazards. There will also be two planning meetings that will be open to the general public: one to review the results of

the updated risk assessment and one to review the draft plan.

Data Collection

Ms. Gelino discussed plans, regulations, and reports that may be relevant to the planning process. She pointed out

that existing plans, such as capital improvement plans and watershed plans, may include several projects that could

be included in the HMP. Ms. Gelino indicated that a Tetra Tech staff person would be assigned to each jurisdiction

within the County and that Tetra Tech representatives would be requesting any such plans and reports. She also

requested that other participants provide relevant documents for review and incorporation into the HMP update

process.

Ms. Gelino introduced the data collection worksheets and indicated that she would be speaking in more detail about

each worksheet later in the meeting.

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 3 OF 5

Risk Assessment

The following hazards will be profiled in the updated HMP:

• Drought • Flood (including dam failure) • Severe Storms (including

hurricanes and tornadoes)

• Earthquake • Invasive Species • Wildfire

• Extreme Temperatures • Landslide • Winter Storms

The potential for including invasive species as a hazard of concern was raised during the previous Steering

Committee Kickoff meeting. Ms. Gelino asked the Partnership members in attendance at this meeting if they had any

comments on whether or not to include invasive species. After a brief discussion, it was determined that information

on invasive species will be included in the County profile section of the plan and the impacts that invasive species

have on the severity of the hazards of concern will be included in each hazard profile, as appropriate.

Upon completion of the hazard profiles, Tetra Tech will review the risk assessment with the Partnership and the

public.

Mitigation Strategy

The Steering Committee will set the goals and objectives for the HMP and will share them with the Partnership. Tetra

Tech will use the information reported by the municipalities regarding their capabilities and the status of the mitigation

actions from the 2013 version of the HMP to identify and prioritize mitigation actions for inclusion in the updated

HMP.

Tetra Tech will compile the information collected from the worksheets, risk assessment, capability assessment, and

mitigation actions into a jurisdictional annex for the County and each of its municipalities. The jurisdictional annexes

detail the analyses conducted and information compiled in the HMP for the respective jurisdictions to make the

document easier for local officials to use. Tetra Tech will conduct regional municipal support meetings in the County

to finalize the annexes. Ms. Gelino emphasized that more time can be allotted to discussing potential projects at

these meetings if worksheets are completed beforehand.

Draft and Final Plans

Throughout the planning process, Tetra Tech will develop the HMP document. The main body will profile the County,

explain the planning process, include the risk assessment and mitigation strategy, and discuss maintenance of the

plan. Each jurisdiction will have its own annex in the HMP, which will provide information specific to that jurisdiction.

As part of the plan development, Tetra Tech will work with the Steering Committee to develop procedures for

maintaining the HMP over the next 5 years. These procedures will be documented in the Plan Maintenance section

of the HMP and will focus on helping the Planning Partnership maintain the HMP as a living document. This section

will also describe the ways in which the HMP is integrated with other planning mechanisms, such as comprehensive

and master plans, local regulations, etc. Ms. Gelino briefly described the tool that Tetra Tech has developed to assist

jurisdictions in plan maintenance activities. Mitigation actions identified in the plan will be loaded into Tetra Tech’s

Plan Review Tool to allow for ongoing plan maintenance.

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 4 OF 5

The draft plan will be shared with the Steering Committee for review and comment throughout the planning process.

After making any required changes, Tetra Tech will post the HMP for public review. The public review period will be

advertised and will last for 30 days. Tetra Tech will then conduct a public meeting with the Partnership to gather

feedback on the plan draft and make any required changes.

Tetra Tech will then submit the draft for the State’s formal review. NYS Division of Homeland Security and

Emergency Services (DHSES) will review the draft. If changes are required, Tetra Tech will make the changes and

resubmit the document to the State. After the State is satisfied with the draft, the State will forward it to FEMA Region

II for review. FEMA Region II will review the draft within 45 days, and Tetra Tech will make any required changes

upon receipt of review comments from FEMA. When FEMA is satisfied with the HMP, FEMA will grant the HMP

“approvable pending adoption” status to indicate that it meets all requirements.

The County and participating jurisdictions will formally adopt the HMP by resolution. After adoption, each jurisdiction

will receive a letter from FEMA stating that the HMP is formally approved.

Project Schedule Review Ms. Gelino reviewed the project schedule. If the city, towns, and villages provide information in a timely manner and

fully participate in the planning process, the draft HMP will be ready for Steering Committee review by the end of

August 2018. The Steering Committee and Tetra Tech will strive to complete the plan in the time allotted, but a

schedule extension for the County’s grant is possible.

Introduce Worksheets Ms. Gelino reviewed each of the eight worksheets with the Partnership. She recommended that jurisdictions review

each of the worksheets are write down any questions. Ms. Gelino indicated that a Tetra Tech staff person would be

assigned to each jurisdiction and would be available to answer questions.


• The County, city, towns, and villages will complete the information-gathering worksheets by May 25, 2018.

Jurisdictions are encouraged to submit whatever they have completed by that time. Electronic versions of

the handouts will be distributed.

• Partnership members will forward any plans, regulations, or studies that may be relevant to hazard

mitigation to Ms. Gelino.

• Tetra Tech will continue developing hazard profiles for the hazards analyzed in the HMP.

• Tetra Tech will provide a list of links to other area hazard mitigation plans.

• Tetra Tech will provide the contact information for the staff person assigned to each jurisdiction within the

County.

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 5 OF 5

• The County will consider how to address New York State Environmental Quality Review Act requirements

for the HMP and will update participating jurisdictions as appropriate.

• Tetra Tech will provide additional information on how actions that will be conducted by special-purpose

districts or other planning partners be included in the plan.


AGENDA

OTSEGO COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE Planning Partnership Kickoff Meeting

Thursday, May 10, 2018 | 5:30 – 7:30 p.m.

1. Introductions

2. Quick Intro to Hazard Mitigation

3. Planning Process

a. Organization

b. Data Collection

c. Risk Assessment

d. Mitigation Strategy

e. Draft and Final Plans

4. Project Schedule Review

5. Introduce Worksheets

6. Next Steps

7. Questions

1


Planning PartnershipKickoff Meeting

Agenda

Introductions

Quick Intro to Hazard Mitigation

Planning Process


Introduce Worksheets

Next Steps

Questions

Introductions

Name

Agency

Mitigation Experience

Focus and Concerns

2

Quick Intro to Hazard Mitigation

National Preparedness System: Mission Areas

Prevention Protection Mitigation Response Recovery

Hazard Mitigation is any action taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from disasters.

Quick Intro to Hazard Mitigation (Cont.)

• Updating building codes• Integrating risk into Master Plans

Local Plans and Regulations

• Flood insurance information• Know your risk! campaign

Education and Awareness Programs

• Preserving natural floodplain functions• Protecting well recharge areas

Natural Systems Protection

• Constructing a levee• Elevating a house above the base flood

level

Structure and Infrastructure

Projects


Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000

– Risk assessment

– Public outreach and participation

– Process for update

– Formal State and FEMA review

– Documentation of acceptance by the community

Hazard Mitigation Assistance

3


New York State Additional Requirements

– Jurisdictional teams

– Assess critical facilities

– Plan for displaced residents

– Plan for evacuation needs and sheltering

– Document past mitigation accomplishments

– Include jurisdictional annexes

– Develop mitigation actions

– Identify funding sources

– Plan for climate change


Per FEMA’s 2017 National Institute of Building Sciences report, mitigation saves $$$ !

Planning Process

4

Planning Process

Organization

– Steering Committee

– Planning Partnership County Departments

Municipalities

Stakeholders

General Public

– Public Outreach County Website

Survey

Public Meetings

Planning Process (Continued)

Data Collection

– Reports and Plans

– Worksheets Outline (contact information)

Events and Losses

Capability Assessment

National Flood Insurance Program

Mitigation Action Review

Capability Assessment and Plan Integration

New Development

Shelter and Evacuation Information


Risk Assessment

– Hazards of Concern

– Review with Planning Partnership

• Drought • Flood (include dam failure)

• Wildfire

• Earthquake • Severe Storm (including hurricane and tornado)

• Winter Storm

• Extreme Temperatures

• Landslide

5


Mitigation Strategy

– Develop Goals and Objectives Develop with Steering Committee

Review with Planning Partnership

– Capability Assessment

– Identify and Prioritize Actions Carry-overs

Mitigation Strategy Workshop

– Annex Development Municipal support meetings (up to 5)


Draft and Final Plans

– Develop the document

– Submit Draft Plan for Review by the Steering Committee and Planning Partnership throughout the process

– Public Review

– Draft Plan Review Meeting

– Submission to NYS and FEMA

– Update as necessary

– “Approvable Pending Adoption”

– BAToolSM program to track actions


B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E


Phase 1: Organize the Resources

Project KickOff Meeting

Planning Partnership Kick-Off Meeting

Public Outreach

Project CloseOut Meeting

Phase 2: Risk Assessment

Phase 3: Mitigation Strategy

Assess Mitigation Capabilities

Develop Goals and Objectives

Mitigation Strategy Workshop

Regional Municipal Support Meetings

Develop Annexes

Phase 4: Plan Maintenance

Develop BATool℠

Phase 5: Draft and Final Plans

Draft Plan

Review Draft with Steering Committee

Update Based on Steering Committee Comments

Public Review Period

Draft Plan Review Meeting

Finalize Draft Plan

Submit to NYS DHSES for Review

NYS DHSES Review Period

Update Based on NYS DHSES Review

Submit Final Draft HMP to NYS DHSES/FEMA for Review

NYS DHSES/FEMA Review Periods

Receive APA Status

Compile Final Plan Deliverable

Project Management

Phase and TaskDec

OTSEGO COUNTY HMP UPDATE PROPOSED TIMELINEOct Nov Jan '19Apr '18 May Jun Jul Aug Sep

6


Mid-June

• Mitigation strategy workshop

End of June

• Regional municipal support meetings

Mid-July

• Annexes completed

Mid-August

• Plan steering committee review draft

Mid-January

• Approval pending adoption

Introduce Worksheets

Outline

# Worksheet Name

Who is Responsible to Complete and Submit this

Worksheet?Where do you find the requested

information?

1 Events/LossesOEM, Police, Fire, DPW,

EngineerFEMA Project Worksheets (PWs)

DPW records, Police response records

2 Capability AssessmentCode Official, Planner, CFO/Fiscal Rep, Clerk

Code Book, e-Code, Municipal ordinances, Master Plan

3NFIP Floodplain Administrator

Floodplain Administrator NFIP Records

4 Mitigation Action Progress HMP Main POC – see

‘Responsible Party’ column in the table provided for guidance

LOIs, NYS DHSES Grants, Capital Improvement records

5Plan Integration Questionnaire

HMP Main POCDiscuss with Engineer, Clerk,

Administrator, Planner, CFO, and Municipal Mayor/Administrator

6 New Development TableEngineer, Planner, Building

DepartmentRedevelopment Plans, Permits

7Evacuation and Sheltering Needs

OEM, Code Official, Planner Master Plan, Emergency Plans

Primary Point of Contact Alternate Point of Contact

Name and Title

Telephone

E-Mail Address

Mailing Address

Introduce Worksheets (Continued)

Worksheet 1 – Events and Losses

– Event and Loss Summary Table 4 major events started for you

– Community-Specific Vulnerabilities

– Event and Loss Summary Sheet

7


Worksheet 2 – Capability Assessment

– Planning and Regulatory

– Administrative and Technical

– Fiscal Capability

– Education/Outreach Community Classifications

– Self-Assessment of Capability


Worksheet 3 – NFIP FPA

– Flood Vulnerability Summary

– Resources

– Compliance History

– Regulatory


Worksheet 4 – Mitigation Action Review

– 2013 HMP Strategy

– Additional Projects/Activities

8


Worksheet 5 – Plan Integration

– Planning

– Regulatory

– Administrative/Technical Resources and Programs

– Public Education and Outreach

– Fiscal Resources


Worksheet 6 – New Development

– Recent Development

– Known or Anticipated Development


Worksheet 7 – Shelter and Evacuation Information

– Temporary Housing

– Evacuation and Sheltering Needs

– Evacuation Routes

9

Next Steps

Complete worksheets

– Send to Erik Scrivener by May 25, 2018

Provide reports and plans

– Tt staff person will request

Update risk assessment

Next meeting – Risk Assessment Review

Questions?


Contacts

Erik Scrivener

[email protected]

(607) 547-4225

Tony Subbio

[email protected]

(717) 545-3580

Kristen Gelino

[email protected]

(646) 576-4029


Proposed Project Schedule Subject to Change

Task Timeframe


► Project Kickoff Meeting conducted on April 26, 2018

► Planning Partnership Kickoff Meeting conducted on May 10, 2018

► Public outreach conducted throughout the planning process

► Project Closeout Meeting conducted after the updated HMP receives “Approvable Pending Adoption” status

Phase 2 –Risk Assessment

► Hazards profiled by end of May 2018


► Capabilities assessed by the end of May 2018

► Goals and objectives identified by end of May 2018

► Mitigation Strategy Workshop conducted in mid-June 2018

► Regional municipal support meetings in the end of June 2018

► Jurisdictional annexes complete by mid-July 2018


► Procedures developed by early October 2018

► BATool℠ program developed by end of January 2019


► Plan development to begin at the beginning of the project

► Draft plan provided to Steering Committee for review by mid-August 2018

► Draft plan reviewed by Steering Committee and updated by early September 2018

► Public review period from mid-August to early September 2018

► Draft Plan Review Meeting conducted in early to mid-September 2018

► Draft plan finalized and submitted to NYS DHSES at the end of September 2018

► NYS DHSES reviews draft plan by the end of October 2018

► Update draft plan based on NYS DHSES comments and resubmit by early November 2018

► NYS DHSES and FEMA Region II review updated draft plan through early December 2018

► Plan receives “Approvable Pending Adoption” status by mid-January 2019

OTSEGO COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE

Outline of Worksheets

Hazard Mitigation Plan – Otsego County, New YorkApril 2018

1

Please work with your municipal planning team and complete this worksheet. Please send electronic Word version by May 25, 2018 to: Erik Scrivener

Phone: (607) 547-4225 E-mail: [email protected]

# Worksheet Name

Who is Responsible to Complete and Submit this

Worksheet? Where do you find the requested

information?

1 Events/Losses OEM, Police, Fire, DPW,

EngineerFEMA Project Worksheets (PWs)

DPW records, Police response records

2 Capability Assessment Code Official, Planner, CFO/Fiscal Rep, Clerk

Code Book, e-Code, Municipal ordinances, Master Plan

3 NFIP Floodplain Administrator

Floodplain Administrator NFIP Records

4 Mitigation Action Progress HMP Main POC – see

‘Responsible Party’ column in the table provided for guidance

LOIs, NYS DHSES Grants, Capital Improvement records

5 Plan Integration Questionnaire HMP Main POC Discuss with Engineer, Clerk,

Administrator, Planner, CFO, and Municipal Mayor/Administrator

6 New Development Table Engineer, Planner, Building

DepartmentRedevelopment Plans, Permits

7 Evacuation and Sheltering Needs

OEM, Code Official, Planner Master Plan, Emergency Plans

Please indicate a primary and alternate point of contact whom we can contact with any follow up questions.

Primary Point of Contact Alternate Point of Contact

Name and Title

Telephone

E-Mail Address

Mailing Address


Worksheet #1 – Events and Losses


1



Municipality: Name and Title of Individual Completing Worksheet:

Who can provide information about events and losses: OEM Coordinator, Police, Fire, DPW, building inspector, municipal engineer. Refer to FEMA Project Worksheets (PWs), DPW records, police response records, etc.

In the table below, please identify events in which your community suffered significant damages/losses and describe these losses (e.g., flooded roads, road closures, DPW/Police overtime, debris management, opened shelter for two days, etc.). Please add other non-declared events that affected your community that are not listed.

Then, please fill out an ‘Event and Loss Summary Sheet’ for all events that have incurred significant damages/losses. Feel free to add additional sheets for other major events that impacted your community.

Dates of Event

Event Type (Disaster

Declaration if applicable)

Otsego County

Designated?

Did your community suffer losses/costs

from this event? (Yes/No - If "yes"

please complete an Event Loss Summary Sheet for this event.) Notes on damages within community

June 26-July 11, 2013

Severe Storms and Flooding (DR-4129)

Yes

May 13-22, 2014

Severe Storms and Flooding (DR-4180)

Yes

November 17-27, 2014

Severe Winter Storm,

Snowstorm, and Flooding

(DR-4204)

No

March 14-15, 2017

Severe Winter Storm and Snowstorm (DR-4322)

Yes

Below, please identify other events that caused damage/losses in your community. Use additional rows if necessary.




2

Dates of Event

Event Type (Disaster

Declaration if applicable)

Otsego County

Designated?

Did your community suffer losses/costs

from this event? (Yes/No - If "yes"

please complete an Event Loss Summary Sheet for this event.) Notes on damages within community

Please identify any specific vulnerabilities that you are aware of in your community (e.g. floodprone areas or specific properties, critical facilities that lack backup power, etc.):




3

Event and Loss Summary Sheet DR-4129 – June-July 2013 – Severe Storms and Flooding

Life Safety (evacuation, sheltering, injuries, deaths):

Loss of Service (e.g. road closures, utility outages, commercial closures – include location, time of closure and/or number of affected):

Infrastructure Damage (e.g. roads, bridges, culverts, treatment facilities, lift stations, etc.):

Facility/Structural Damage – Public (e.g. police, school, etc.):

Facility/Structural Damage – Private (e.g. residential, commercial property, etc.):

Public Assistance Requested (Yes/No – if “yes” please provide any supporting docs):

Other Loss Information (e.g. emergency protective services such as police overtime, costs for cleanup and debris removal, etc.):




4

Event and Loss Summary Sheet DR-4180 – May 2014 – Severe Storms and Flooding











5

Event and Loss Summary Sheet DR-4322 – March 2017 – Severe Winter Storm and Snowstorm











6

Event and Loss Summary Sheet

Event Date and Description (incl. DR# if applicable): _______________________________________









Worksheet #2 – Capability Assessment


1



Municipality: Name and Title of Individual Completing Worksheet:

1. Planning and Regulatory Capability: Please indicate whether the following planning or regulatory tools and programs are currently in place or under development for your jurisdiction by placing an "X" in the appropriate box, followed by the date of adoption/update. Then, for each particular item in place, identify the department or agency responsible for its implementation. In addition, indicate the code chapter, and name of plan including any explanation of authority in the right-most column.

Who can assist with completing this table: Municipal Planner, Clerk, Code Official. Refer to your municipal codes and ordinances, Master Plan.

Tool / Program (code, ordinance, plan)

Do you have this? (Yes/No)

If Yes, date of adoption or update

Authority (local,

county, state,

federal)

Dept. /Agency

Responsible

Code Citation and Comments (Code Chapter, name of plan, explanation of authority, etc.)

Planning Capability

Master Plan

Capital Improvements Plan

Floodplain Management / Basin Plan

Stormwater Management Plan

Open Space Plan

Stream Corridor Management Plan

Watershed Management or Protection Plan

Economic Development Plan

Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan

Emergency Operation Plan

Post-Disaster Recovery Plan

Transportation Plan

Strategic Recovery Planning Report

Other Plans:

Regulatory Capability

Building Code Yes State & Local

Zoning Ordinance

Subdivision Ordinance

NFIP Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance

Yes Federal,

State, Local




2

Tool / Program (code, ordinance, plan)

Do you have this? (Yes/No)

If Yes, date of adoption or update

Authority (local,

county, state,

federal)

Dept. /Agency

Responsible

Code Citation and Comments (Code Chapter, name of plan, explanation of authority, etc.)

NFIP: Cumulative Substantial Damages

NFIP: Freeboard Yes State, Local State mandated BFE+2 for all construction

Growth Management Ordinances

Site Plan Review Requirements

Stormwater Management Ordinance

Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)

Natural Hazard Ordinance

Post-Disaster Recovery Ordinance

Real Estate Disclosure Requirement Yes State NYS mandate, Property Condition Disclosure Act, NY Code - Article 14 §460-467

Other [Special Purpose Ordinances (i.e., sensitive areas, steep slope)]

2. Administrative and Technical Capability: Please indicate whether your jurisdiction maintains the following staff members within its current personnel resources by placing an “X” in the appropriate box. Then, if YES, please identify the department or agency they work under and provide any other comments you may have in the space provided or with attachments.

Who can assist with completing this table: Planner, Code Official, Clerk, and Administrator.

Resources

Is this in place?

(Yes or No) Department/ Agency/Position

Administrative Capability

Planning Board

Mitigation Planning Committee

Environmental Board/Commission

Open Space Board/Committee

Economic Development Commission/Committee

Maintenance Programs to Reduce Risk

Mutual Aid Agreements

Technical/Staffing Capability

Planner(s) or Engineer(s) with knowledge of land development and land management practices

Engineer(s) or Professional(s) trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure

Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards

NFIP Floodplain Administrator Yes*

Surveyor(s)




3

Resources

Is this in place?

(Yes or No) Department/ Agency/Position

Personnel skilled or trained in GIS and/or HAZUS-MH applications

Scientist familiar with natural hazards

Emergency Manager

Grant Writer(s)

Staff with expertise or training in benefit/cost analysis

Professionals trained in conducting damage assessments

*If you participate in the NFIP, then you have a Floodplain Administrator.

3. Fiscal Capability: Please indicate whether your jurisdiction has access to or is eligible to use the following local financial resources for hazard mitigation purposes (including as match funds for State of Federal mitigation grant funds). Then, identify the primary department or agency responsible for its administration or allocation and provide any other comments you may have in the space provided or with attachments.

Who can assist with completing this table: Administrator, CFO

Financial Resources Accessible or Eligible to Use

(Yes/No)

Community development Block Grants (CDBG, CDBG-DR)

Capital Improvements Project Funding

Authority to Levy Taxes for specific purposes

User fees for water, sewer, gas or electric service

Impact Fees for homebuyers or developers of new development/homes

Stormwater Utility Fee

Incur debt through general obligation bonds

Incur debt through special tax bonds

Incur debt through private activity bonds

Withhold public expenditures in hazard-prone areas

Other Federal or State Funding Programs

Open Space Acquisition Funding Programs

Other




4

4. Education/Outreach and Community Classifications: Education and outreach refers to public outreach programs and methods that the municipality has in place that may be used to implement mitigation activities and further communicate risk to residents. The classifications listed below relate to the community’s ability to provide effective services to lessen its vulnerability to the hazards identified. These classifications can be viewed as a gauge of the community’s capabilities in all phases of emergency management (preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation) and are used as an underwriting parameter for determining the costs of various forms of insurance.

Who can assist with completing this table: Code Official, Floodplain Administrator, OEM Coordinator

Program

Do you have this?

(Yes/No) Classification (if applicable)

Date Classified (if applicable)

Community Rating System (CRS)

Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS)

Public Protection (ISO Fire Protection Classes 1 to 10)

NYDEC Climate Smart Community

Storm Ready Certification

Firewise Communities classification

Natural Disaster/Safety Programs in/for Schools

Organizations with Mitigation Focus (advocacy group, non-government)

Public Education Program/Outreach (through website, social media)

Public-private partnership initiatives addressing disaster-related issues

N/A = Not applicable. NP = Not participating. - = Unavailable. TBD = To be determined.

Criteria for classification credits are outlined in the following documents:• The Community Rating System Coordinators Manual

• The Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule (https://www.isomitigation.com/bcegs/iso-s-

building-code-effectiveness-grading-schedule-bcegs.html)

• The ISO Mitigation online ISO’s Public Protection website at

https://www.isomitigation.com/ppc/

• The National Weather Service Storm Ready website at

http://www.stormready.noaa.gov/index.html

• The National Firewise Communities website at http://firewise.org/




5

5. Self-Assessment of Capability: Please provide an approximate measure of your jurisdiction's capability to work in a hazard-mitigation capacity and/or effectively implement hazard mitigation strategies to reduce hazard vulnerabilities. Using the following table, please place an "X" in the box marking the most appropriate degree of capability (Limited, Moderate or High) based upon best available information and the responses provided in Sections 1-4 of this survey.

Area

Degree of Hazard Mitigation Capability

Limited (If limited, please

indicate your obstacles?)* Moderate High

Planning and Regulatory Capability

Administrative and Technical Capability

Fiscal Capability

Community Political Capability

Community Resiliency Capability

Capability to Integrate Mitigation into Municipal Processes and Activities.

*Example obstacles: • Limited staff; Few people have numerous roles/responsibilities • Not aware of FEMA mitigation funding sources


Worksheet #3 – NFIP Floodplain Administrator Questionnaire


1



Municipality:

NFIP Floodplain Administrator Name/Title:

Flood Vulnerability Summary

1. Does the municipality maintain lists/inventories of properties that have been flood damaged? If so,

does this inventory identify property owners who are interested mitigation (e.g. elevation,

acquisition)?

2. Characterize/quantify the number of structures damaged during the June-July 2013 severe storms and

flooding, May 2014 storms and flooding, March 2017 severe winter storm and snowstorm, or other

events. If possible, can you provide a table of these structures indicating the number of residential /

commercial / industrial?

3. Do you make Substantial Damage estimates, and how many were declared for the June-July 2013

severe storms and flooding, May 2014 storms and flooding, March 2017 severe winter storm and

snowstorm, or other events?

4. How many are interested in mitigation (elevation or acquisition), and how many are currently in the

process of mitigation?

5. What is the funding source(s) for those being mitigated (e.g. property owner, flood insurance and

ICC, grant funding)?

Resources

6. Are you the sole person assuming the responsibilities of floodplain administration, or do you have

other staff or use contract staff if needed?

7. Provide an explanation of the NFIP administration services and functions you and your department

provide (e.g. permit review, inspections, damage assessments, record-keeping, GIS, education and

outreach).


Worksheet #3 – NFIP Floodplain Administrator Questionnaire


2

8. Do you provide any education or outreach to the community regarding flood hazards/risk, and flood

risk reduction through NFIP insurance, mitigation, etc.? Please describe.

9. Are there any barriers to running an effective floodplain management program in your community?

10. Do you feel that you are adequately supported and trained to fulfill your responsibilities as the

municipal floodplain administrator?

11. Would you consider attending continuing education and/or certification training on floodplain

management if it were offered in the County for all local floodplain administrators?

Compliance History

12. Is the community in good-standing in the NFIP? If not, what are the outstanding compliance issues?

13. When was the most recent compliance audit [e.g. Community Assistance Visit (CAV)]?

Regulatory

14. Do your floodplain management regulations/ordinances exceed the FEMA and State minimum

requirements?

15. Are there other local ordinances, plans or programs (e.g. site plan review) that support floodplain

management and meeting the NFIP requirements? For instance, does the planning board or zoning

board consider efforts to reduce flood risk when reviewing variances such as height restrictions?

16. Has the community considered joining (or rejoining) the Community Rating System (CRS) program

to reduce flood insurance premiums for their insured? If so, would your community attend a CRS

seminar if offered locally?

Otsego County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Worksheet #4 - Mitigation Action Review Worksheet

Otsego County

Hazard Mitigation Plan – Otsego County, New York 1 April 2018

Please work with your municipal planning team and complete this worksheet. Please send electronic Word version by May 25, 2018 to: Erik Scrivener Phone: (607) 547-4225 E-mail: [email protected]

Who can provide you information about past mitigation actions: See the ‘Responsible Party’ column in the table below which identifies who put this action in the 2011 HMP (e.g., DPW, Engineer, Code Official, Planner, OEM Coordinator).

Please use the following table to indicate progress and next steps on your community’s mitigation strategy identified in the 2013 HMP. Please be as detailed as possible.

Pro

ject

#

Project Hazard(s) Addressed

Brief Summary of the Original

Problem Responsible

Party

Status (In

Progress, No

Progress, Complete)

Evaluation of Success

(if project status is complete)

Next Steps1. Project to be included in

2018 HMP or Discontinue 2. If including action in the

2018 HMP, revise/reword to be more specific (as appropriate).

3. 3. If discontinue, explain why.

Initiate a public awareness program county-wide to increase awareness of climate change affected by natural hazards, and promote water and air quality county-wide.

Wildfire, Flood, Drought, Extreme

Temperature

Planning, Health & Human

Services, EOC

Choose an item.

Cost 1. Choose an item.Level of

Protection 2.

Damages Avoided; Evidence of Success

3.

Identify the location of beaver dams near municipalities/structures via GPS unit.

Flood

County Planning,

County Highway

Choose an item.


Protection 2.


3.

Work with communities to identify public or private land to place temporary short-term and long-term housing units for residents displaced by a disaster.

Flood

Emergency Services,

Public Works, Hazard

Mitigation Committee

Rep.

Choose an item.


Protection 2.


3.


Otsego County


Pro

ject

#



Problem Responsible

Party

Status (In

Progress, No

Progress, Complete)







Work with communities to develop, coordinate, and implement a program to protect critical facilities to the 500-year flood before, during and following a flood event.

Flood

Emergency Services,

Public Works, Hazard

Mitigation Committee

Rep.

Choose an item.


Protection 2.


3.

Implement emergency stream intervention training for municipal highway departments.

Flood Otsego

County Soil and Water

Choose an item.


Protection 2.


3.

Implement Certified Floodplain Manager Training for Soil and Water personnel.

Flood Otsego

County Soil and Water

Choose an item.


Protection 2.


3.

Improve natural hazard dataset(s) to increase technical data availability for spatial data to mitigate against landslide and/or subsidence.

Landslide, Subsidence

Otsego County

Planning Dept. OES,

County Highway

Choose an item.


Protection 2.


3.


Otsego County


Pro

ject

#



Problem Responsible

Party

Status (In

Progress, No

Progress, Complete)







Work with communications providers and local jurisdictions for expanding cell phone coverage in areas of the County where there are no cell towers, or limited service.

Winter Storm, Extreme

Temperature, Drought, Flood,

Wildfire, Tornado, Hurricane, Landslide,

Earthquake, Dam Failure

County Planning

Dept.

Choose an item.


Protection 2.


3.

Educate property owners about potential contamination and applicable restrictions in municipal water supplies and watersheds draining to affected county and municipalities’ water supplies.

Flood, Thunderstorm, Winter Storm

County OES, County

Planning

Choose an item.


Protection 2.


3.

Purchase laptop and other equipment to assist County in implementing, monitoring, and updating the Otsego County Hazard Mitigation Plan as Subgrantee and Planning Team lead.





County Planning

Dept.

Choose an item.


Protection 2.


3.

Ensure that critical facilities at 197 Main St. are able to provide essential services during a power outage including purchase of backup generator(s).





County Planning

Dept.

Choose an item.


Protection 2.


3.


Otsego County


Pro

ject

#



Problem Responsible

Party

Status (In

Progress, No

Progress, Complete)







Ensure that critical facilities at 242 Main St. are able to provide essential services during a power outage including purchase of backup generator(s).





County Planning

Dept.

Choose an item.


Protection 2.


3.

Identify and assess known beaver dams threatening municipal, private and commercial property. BMP implementation dependent on assessment.

Flood SWCD Choose an

item.


Protection 2.


3.

Conduct Emergency Stream Intervention Training for Municipal Highway Crew Members and Local Contractors.


item.


Protection 2.


3.

Implement woody debris removal program for area streams and waterways.


item.


Protection 2.


3.


Otsego County


Pro

ject

#



Problem Responsible

Party

Status (In

Progress, No

Progress, Complete)







Implement stream bank stabilization program.


item.


Protection 2.


3.

Implement Berm Removal and Floodplain Reconnection program.


item.


Protection 2.


3.

Conduct county-wide LiDAR Mapping. Flood SWCD Choose an

item.


Protection 2.


3.

Conduct Watershed-Wide Flood Attenuation Studies.


item.


Protection 2.


3.

Establish new wetland complexes and restore those lost through previous land use changes.


item.


Protection 2.


3.


Otsego County


Pro

ject

#



Problem Responsible

Party

Status (In

Progress, No

Progress, Complete)







Implement programs for Stream Corridor Restoration.


item.


Protection 2.


3.

Implement Municipal Stormwater Mapping and Assessment program.


item.


Protection 2.


3.


Otsego County


Please identify any completed, in-progress or proposed/potential mitigation projects/activities that are not included in the table above.

Mitigation Action Lead Agency Comments/Details


Worksheet #5 – Capability Assessment and Plan Integration Worksheet


1

Municipality:

Name and Title of Individual Completing Worksheet:



For a community to succeed in reducing long-term risk, hazard mitigation must be integrated into the day-to-day local government operations. We would like to gather an

understanding of your community's progress in plan integration, as well identify potential integration opportunities that your community may pursue in the future.

Who can assist with completing this table: The HMP main point of contact should discuss with the Engineer, Clerk, Mayor/Administrator, Planner, CFO, Building Code

Official, NFIP Floodplain Administrator, etc.

Applicable Department/Agency Plan, Program, Mechanism, etc.

Planning

Planner (staff or contract); Planning Board; Zoning Board of Adjustments (ZBA)

Does your municipality have a Master/Comprehensive Plan (land-use plan), or are you currently working on an update of your Master/Comprehensive Plan?

If so, does it include, or are you considering, areas of natural hazard risk (e.g. flood-prone areas, steep slopes)?

Does your Master/Comprehensive plan refer to a local or Countywide Hazard Mitigation Plan?

Planner (staff or contract); Stormwater Manager

Are you an MS4 Regulated Community, and do you have a formal Stormwater Management Plan?

If so, does this plan specify projects/actions/initiaives to reduce the volume of stormwater, or otherwise mitigate stormwater flooding?




2


Planner (staff or contract)

Does your community have any of the of the following plans, and if so, please specify if and how they help to manage natural hazard risk?

• Re-Development Plan

• Growth Plan

• Economic Development Plan

• Open Space Plan

• Watershed or Stream Corridor Management Plan

• Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan

All departments

Does your community or Department have a Continuity of Operations/Continuity of Government (COOP/COG) plan(s) that will serve to protect your local government and operations from natural hazard disruptions?

Emergency Management Coordinator Does your community have a Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan? Does it refer to the HMP?

Planner (staff or contract); OEM

Does your community have a Post-Disaster Recovery Plan, or Strategic Recovery Plan? Does it refer to the HMP? Does it include specific mitigation projects and activities?

Regulatory

Planning Board; Zoning Board of Adjustments; Planner (staff or contract)

Does your municipal zoning and subdivision regulations, and/or site plan review process, consider natural hazard risk (e.g. the presence of floodplains, steep slopes, etc.)?

Planning Board; Zoning Board of Adjustments; Planner (staff or contract)

What data, information, tools and resources is your Planning Board and/or ZBA provided to guide their decisions with respect to natural hazard risk mangement, and what other resources would assist this process?

Planning Board; Zoning Board of Adjustments: Planner (staff or contract

Does your municipal zoning and subdivision regulations, and/or site plan review process, require developers to take additional actions to mitigate natural hazard risk (e.g. undergrounding utilities, stormwater detention, creating easements in areas/zones of hazard risk)?




3


NFIP Floodplain Administrator (specified in your Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance); Building Code Official

Does your NFIP Flood Damage Protection Ordinance include provisions that exceed the minimum Federal and State NFIP regulatory requirements (e.g. increased freeboard, cumulative substantial damages)?

Administrative / Technical Resources and Programs

Planner (staff or contract); Planning Board; Zoning Board of Adjustments

Do you have a municipal planner or contract planning firm, and what are their functions with respect to natural hazard risk reduction?

Planning Board; Zoning Board of Adjustments

Do you have a Planning Board and/or Zoning Board of Adjustments, and what are their functions with respect to managing natural hazard risk and compliance with related natural hazard regulations (Federal, State and local ordinances) and plans (Master/Comprehensive Plan, Stormwater Management Plans, Local Waterfront Revitalization Plans)?

Mayor, Administrator, Clerk, Council/Committee

Do you have any other Boards or Committees that include functions with respect to managing natural hazard risk?

Stormwater Manager, Mayor, Administrator, Council/Committee

Who performs the Stormwater Management functions in your community (name and position, or contractor)?

Mayor, Administrator, Clerk, Council/Committee

Who performs the NFIP Floodplain Management functions in your community (name and position)?

Engineering, Building Department/Code Officials

Do you have staff, or do you contract with firms, that have experience with developing Benefit-Cost Analysis?

Building Department/Code Officials Do you have staff, or do you contract with firms, who can perform Substantial Damage Estimates?

Mayor, Administrator, Clerk, CFO Do you have staff, or do you contract with firms, that have experience in preparing grant applications for mitigation projects?

All Departments Does your staff get training or continuing professional education which supports natural hazard risk reduction?




4


All Departments

Can you identify areas that your staff would benefit from additional training and/or certification with respect to natural hazard risk management?

Mayor, Administrator, Clerk, DPW Do you have other hazard mangement programs in place such as vegetation management?

All Departments

Do any of your staff have job descriptions that specifically include identifying and/or implementing mitigation projects/actions or other efforts to reduce natural hazard risk?

All Departments

Do any of your staff or Departments participate in associations, organizations, groups or other committees that support natural hazard risk reduction and build hazard management capabilities? (e.g. building code officials groups, LEPCs, flood task forces, etc.)?

Public Education and Outreach

Mayor, Administrator, Clerk

Please describe any public outreach mechanisms/programs you have in place to inform citizens on natural hazards (e.g. safe use of generators, emergency preparedness, flood hazard information).

Mayor, Administrator, Clerk

Can you identify any enhancements that would promote further public outreach and education in your community with respect to natural hazard risk management?

Fiscal Resources

Mayor, Council/Committee, Administrator, CFO

Does your municipal/operating budget include line items for mitigation projects/activities?


Does your community have a Capital Improvements Budget, and does it include budget for mitigation-related projects (e.g. improved stormwater management/drainage, hardening of critical facilities and infrastructure)?




5



Has your community pursued or been awarded grant funds for mitigation-related projects, and if so, for each please identify the project, funding source, amount of funding, and if local matches were required and how they were met?


Does your community have any other mechanisms to fiscally support hazard mitigation projects?

OTSEGO COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE Worksheet #6 – Potential New Development


1



Municipality:

Name and Title of Individual Completing Worksheet:

Please indicate any recent development within your community from 2013 to present. Additionally, please indicate known or anticipated major residential and/or commercial development and major infrastructure development that are identified for the next five (5) years in your community.

Property or Development Name

Type (e.g. Res., Comm.) # of Units / Structures

Address and Parcel ID

Known Hazard Zone(s) Description/Status of Development

Recent Development from 2013 to Present

Known or Anticipated Development in the Next Five (5) Years


Worksheet #7 – Shelters, Evacuation Routes, Temporary Housing




Municipality: Name and Title of Individual Completing Worksheet*:

*Who should provide information about housing, shelter, and evacuation capabilities: Municipal officials or residents with historical knowledge including OEM Coordinator, Police, Fire, DPW, building inspector, municipal engineer. Refer to existing emergency plans, Master Plan, etc.

Temporary Housing Intermediate and long-term housing options must be available to relocate displaced residents to maintain post-disaster social and economic stability. For those municipalities containing 1-percent annual chance flood areas, they MUST identify potential sites that are compliant with the NYS Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code for the placement of temporary housing units for residents displaced by disaster. Additionally, municipalities MUST identify potential sites within the community suitable for relocating homes out of the floodplain or building new homes once properties in the floodplains have been acquired.

If the municipality contains 1-percent annual chance flood areas, please answer provide the following information. Please note that this plan must document the location of viable sites and include a letter from the local floodplain administrator certifying viability, or listing the actions that must be taken to make the locations viable (e.g., install sewer infrastructure, run power lines, etc.). If there are no viable sites, the municipality needs to identify potential mitigation actions to ensure conformance.

1. Please identify potential sites in your municipality for the placement of temporary housing for residents displaced by a disaster.

Site Name Site Address Capacity

Actions Required to Ensure Conformance with the NYS Uniform Fire Prevention and

Building Code

2. Please identify any potential sites within your municipality suitable for relocating houses of the floodplain and/or building new homes once properties in the floodplain are acquired.

Site Name Site Address Capacity

Actions Required to Ensure Conformance with the NYS Uniform Fire Prevention and

Building Code


Worksheet #7 – Shelters, Evacuation Routes, Temporary Housing


Evacuation and Sheltering Needs Evacuation and sheltering measures must be in place and available for public awareness to protect residents and mitigate risk, stress and personal hardships during hazard events.

Your municipality must identify routes and procedures to evacuate citizens prior to and during an event, and identify shelters for evacuated citizens. Provisions must be included for a range of medical needs, accommodations for pets, and compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. This plan must document (or refer to an existing plan) evacuation routes and procedures, location of shelters (outside of the 1-percent annual chance flood area), and specific information about how these plans are accessible and available to the public or include the related narrative for those plans as an appendix in this plan.

Sheltering Needs In the table below, please identify any designated emergency shelters located in your community. Please include facility name, address, and provisions.

Shelter Name Address Capacity

Accommodates Pets?

ADA Compliant?

Backup Power?

Types of Medical Services Provided

Other Services Provided

Evacuation Routes Please identify your community’s routes and procedures to evacuate your residents prior to and during an event.

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 1 OF 3

Meeting Otsego County Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) Risk Assessment Review Meeting

Date November 14, 2018 Time 6:00–8:00 p.m.

Location Otsego County Board of Representatives Meeting Room, Otsego County Offices, 197 Main Street, Cooperstown, NY

Attendees

Karen Sullivan, Planning Director, Otsego County Planning and Solid Waste

Erik Scrivener, Senior Planner, Otsego County Planning and Solid Waste

Art Klinger, Coordinator, Otsego County Office of Emergency Services


Deborah Wingert, Clerk, Town of Burlington

Paul Irwin, Councilman, Town of Butternuts

Ian Fuelner, Village Board Trustee, Village of Cherry Valley

Danny L. Hawes, Superintendent of Highways, Town of Edmeston

Doreé VanTassel, Supervisor, Town of Exeter

Harold Palmer, Supervisor, Town of Maryland

Paul Neske, Zoning Enforcement Officer, Town of Maryland; Code Enforcement Officer, Town of Oneonta

Peg Leon, Councilperson, Town of Middlefield

Bernadette Atwell, Supervisor, Town of Milford

Lynn Joy, Town Supervisor, Town of Morris

Patrick Pidgeon, Fire Chief/Emergency Manager, Oneonta Fire Department/Emergency Management

Paul Palumbo, Supervisor, Town of Richfield

Tony Subbio, Project Manager, Tetra Tech, Inc. (Tetra Tech)

Purpose The purpose of the Risk Assessment Review Meeting was to review the results of the updated risk assessment

analysis performed by Tetra Tech, collect feedback on the analysis, and identify problem areas or issues for each of

the hazards identified.

Discussion Points This section summarizes each discussion point addressed during the meeting.

Review Risk Assessment Feedback on the analysis of each hazard is provided below.

• Drought

o Most farmers do not have crop insurance.

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 2 OF 3

• Earthquake

o An earthquake a few years ago broke some windows. Otherwise, attendees were not particularly

concerned with this hazard.

• Extreme Temperatures

o No feedback was provided. Attendees were not particularly concerned with this hazard.

• Flood

o Tropical Storms Irene and Lee in 2011 and Superstorm Sandy in 2012 were the floods of record.

o Mr. Clements reported that culverts are a major issue in the County. In the Butternut River

watershed, which encompasses 7 towns and 3 villages, there are 1,000 culverts. Of those, 1/3 are

undersized. Mr. Clements has been awarded funding to assess three watersheds for ice jam and

flooding threats. Mr. Clements has been pushing for agencies to maintain detailed documentation

of flood issues. He maintains a list of upgrade projects that have been implemented. Mr.

Clements stated that the County needs a countywide plan to deal with flooding issues. Piecemeal

solutions have not worked.

o Mr. Scrivener stated that half of the culverts in the County are undersized.

o Only the City of Oneonta has stormwater management regulations in effect.

o Attendees stated that beaver dams cause a great deal of flooding in the County.

o Town of Burlington

▪ The Creek Road culvert washed out during an October rainstorm. The Town spent

$10,000 to evacuate people in the area.

o Town of Edmeston

▪ A streambank is giving way. The Town has partnered with the County to secure a

National Fish and Wildlife Fund grant to reinforce the bank. The overall project cost

$130,000, but the Town only had to pay $6,200 in total.

o Town of Maryland

▪ The Schenevus Creek is eroding its banks and threatens a residential area.

o Town of Middlefield

▪ The Highway Department buildings and salt garage flood. They are in the 1 percent

annual chance floodplain. The Town has property to which these facilities could be

relocated. They could possibly use the State’s Water Quality Improvement Project

(WQIP) program funding for that project.

o Village of Morris

▪ The Silver Creek flooded twice and destroyed bridges. Bridges on County Route 13,

State Highway 93, and Grove Street are choke points.

o City of Oneonta

▪ The West End of the City (Winney Hill) has an issue in which there is a pinch point in the

Presidential District. Drainage pipes make a 90 degree turn. There are four undersized

culverts.

▪ The wastewater treatment plant needs $8 million in upgrades. Three small streams need

maintenance. One stream cuts off the high school when it floods.

o Town of Oneonta

▪ A mobile home park on State Highway 23 is vulnerable to flooding.

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 3 OF 3

▪ The Town is undergoing a stream project to fix a flat spot to provide stormwater retention.

▪ The Town updated a culvert at the Walmart.

o Town of Pittsfield

▪ Beaver dams are an issue.

o Town of Unadilla

▪ Backwater flooding is an issue.

▪ The Town Hall floods.

o There are over 1,800 structures in the 1 percent annual chance floodplain throughout the County,

but only 183 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) policies in effect. There is a substantial

amount of uninsured property at risk.

• Landslide

o There is a steep grade at Otsego Lake in the Town of Middlefield along County Highway 33.

o The embankment along State Highway 23 at the Oneonta Ford dealership was lost to the

Susquehanna River in the Town of Oneonta.

• Severe Storms

o Power companies have been good at trimming back vegetation from power lines.

o Mr. Klinger reported that the whole stretch of County Route 31 in the Town of Middlefield has

experienced outages. It is the same stretch of road as is vulnerable to landslides.

• Severe Winter Storm

o Each town has only 4-5 staff on 1 crew to plow roads. Plowing stops when they have to take a

break.

• Wildfire

o No feedback was provided. Attendees were not particularly concerned with this hazard. They

were surprised that the State had records of 400–800 wildfires from 2003–2017.

Risk Ranking Mr. Subbio discussed the risk ranking scores received by each hazard. These scores are based on Tetra Tech’s

current ranking methodology, but that methodology is evolving based on feedback on plans throughout the State.

Local capabilities to minimize the impacts of hazards will be incorporated into the new methodology. The final

version of the HMP will include an updated risk ranking table and discussion.


• Municipal representatives will continue to complete the information-gathering worksheets and provide them

to Mr. Scrivener and/or the Tetra Tech planner assigned to the jurisdiction.

• Tetra Tech’s planners will work with the jurisdictions to identify additional problem areas and issues related

to the hazards analyzed.

• The New York State Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services will conduct a Mitigation

Strategy Workshop in late January 2019. More information on that workshop will be forthcoming.


1


Risk Assessment ReviewMeeting

Welcome

Agenda

Review Risk Assessment

– Drought

– Earthquake

– Extreme Temperature

– Flood

– Landslide

– Severe Storm

– Severe Winter Storm

– Wildfire

Next Steps

Questions


Drought

– History Five droughts since 1998

Abnormally dry conditions 11 more times since 1998

– Impacts About $64,000 in crop damage since 2012


Drought (continued)

– Entire population is vulnerable

– Reduction in firefighting capability

– No direct effects on structures; may increase vulnerability to wildfires

– Severe economic impacts on agriculture 995 farms

180,750 acres


Earthquake

– History Nine earthquakes with Magnitude 5 or greater were epi-centered

in the County since 1816

– Location Known fault lines exist in

the County

– Impacts Shaking

Evacuation of buildings

No damage so far

– Probability - frequent

2


Earthquake (continued)

– Entire population is exposed, especially: Urban areas

Elderly

Individuals living below the poverty line

– On soft soils 26,138 people (42.0% of the County population)

12,425 buildings (42.0% of the County total)

$5.6 billion in property replacement cost


Earthquake (continued)

– 500-year Mean Return Period (MRP) earthquake 3 households displaced

1 person injured

$3.6 million in damage

$1.5 million in income loss

Critical facilities – no significant damage

Debris

– 1,999 tons of brick/wood debris

– 577 tons of concrete/steel debris


Extreme Temperature

– History (since 1950) 15 extreme lows

4 extreme high

– Impacts Health effects

Drought

Utility load

– Probability 19 events in 68 years -

28% chance each year

Review Vulnerability Assessment

Extreme Temperature

– Entire population is vulnerable, especially: Elderly

Infants and children

The sick

Low-income individuals who cannot afford heating/cooling

Overexertion/hypothermia

– All structures are vulnerable Overloaded HVAC systems

Frozen/bursting pipes

– Loss of business, cost of repairs


Flood

– History 19 Presidential Disaster Declarations

59 events since 1950

– Location 1% annual chance floodplain

0.2% annual chance floodplain

Ice jams

Flash flooding


Flood (continued)

– Impacts $118.8 million in reported property damage since 1950

– Probability 59 events in the last 69 years – 86% chance each year

3


Flood (continued)

– 1% Annual Chance Floodplain 3,647 people (5.9% of total population)

1,814 buildings (6.1% of total)

$756 million in structure and contents replacement cost value

$154.4 million in expected losses

63 critical facilities, not counting bridges or dams

11,790 tons of debris


Flood (continued)

– 0.2% Annual Chance Floodplain (Exposure Only) 5,701 people (9.2% of total population)

2,571 buildings (8.7% of total)

$1.11 billion in structure and contents replacement cost value

80 critical facilities, not counting bridges or dams


Flood (continued)

– Flood insurance statistics (as of June 30, 2018) 477 policies in the County

183 policies in the 1% annual chance floodplain

466 claims

$9.4 million in payments

– Repetitive Loss (RL) Two or more reported losses over $1,000 in any 10-year rolling

period since 1978

57 total; 54 were residential


Landslide

– Entire County has low incidence

– Historyo July 2006 – Route 33/31 in the Village

of Cooperstown

o State identifies 7 since 1837, but norecords are available

– Impacts – two injuries

– Landslide Hazard Areaso Greater than 25% slope – adjacent to

Route 31 along Otsego Lake shoreline

o No people, buildings, or critical facilitiesare on slopes greater than 25% grade


Severe Storm

– Hail

– Wind

– Lightning

– Thunderstorms

– Tornado

– Hurricane/Tropical Storm


Severe Storm (continued)

– History 14 Presidential Disaster Declarations

251 events since 1950

– Impacts 21 injuries, 2 fatalities since 1950

$6.5 million in property damage since 1950; $1.4 million in crop damage since 2011

Utility failure

– Probability 251 events since 1950 – 100% chance each year

4


Severe Storm (continued)

– Every structure is vulnerable

– HAZUS Model – 500-year MRP Event 54-64 mph

$1.4 million in structure damage

No critical facilities impacted

Insignificant income loss

12,419 cubic yards of debris (mostly tree)


Severe Winter Storm

– Heavy Snow

– Blizzards

– Ice Storms


Severe Winter Storm (continued)

– History 5 Presidential Disaster Declarations since 1954

2 USDA declarations - in 2012 and 2016

89 major events since 1950

– Impacts $1.6 million in property damage

$11,250 in crop damage

Accidents

Travel delays

– Probability 89 events in 68 years – 100% chance each year


Severe Winter Storm (continued)

– Entire population is vulnerable Increase in traffic accidents

Overexertion

Hypothermia

Reduction in ability to access emergency services

– All buildings exposed - $6.8 billion

– Loss of functionality of critical facilities

– Economic impacts from loss of business


Wildfire

– History No County records of events

400-800 from 2003-2017, according to state records

– Location Wildland/urban interface

– Interface

– Intermix

1.5 miles from wildland

– Impacts No records

– Probability Frequent


Wildfire (continued)

– Population exposed 45,913

73.7% of County

– Building stock 21,686 buildings exposed

$8.17 billion in value exposed

73.0% of total building value

5

Risk Ranking Next Steps

Complete Worksheets

Identify Problems

Next Meeting – Develop Mitigation Actions

Questions?


Contacts

Erik Scrivener

[email protected]

(607) 547-4225

Tony Subbio

[email protected]

(717) 545-3580

AGENDA

OTSEGO COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE Risk Assessment Review Meeting

Wednesday, November 14, 2018 | 6:00 – 8:00 p.m.

1. Welcome

2. Review Risk Assessment

a. Drought

b. Earthquake

c. Extreme Temperature

d. Flood

e. Landslide

f. Severe Storm

g. Severe Winter Storm

h. Wildfire

3. Next Steps a. Complete worksheets

b. Identify problems

c. Next meeting – Develop Mitigation Actions

4. Questions

Otsego County HMP 1 Risk Ranking

Otsego County Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP)

Risk Ranking – Countywide

Hazard of Concern Probability Impact

Total =

(Probability x Impact)

Drought 3 12 36

Earthquake 1 10 10

Extreme Temperature 3 12 36

Flood 2 6 12

Landslide 1 6 6

Severe Storm 3 16 48

Severe Winter Storm 3 16 48

Wildfire 3 16 48

Mitigation Strategies for Consideration

Otsego County Hazard Mitigation Plan 1

Please consider the questions below for the update of actions and initiatives for your mitigation strategy.

Suggested actions will be developed based on an analysis of Otsego County’s needs and capabilities, or

will be carried over from the previous hazard mitigation plan (HMP) update based on your responses in

Worksheet 4. Some questions may not apply to your municipality.

1. Which properties in your jurisdiction are most at-risk to flood events and would have the greatest

need for retrofitting or other flood hazard mitigation measures? Specific property addresses do

not need to be listed (to ensure residential privacy), but names of streets or neighborhoods can be

included.

2. What public outreach and education actions would you be most interested in implementing?

Circle any that apply.

A. Provide general natural hazard risk preparedness and mitigation and related National

Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) information in regular newsletters and mailings.

B. Provide natural hazard risk and risk reduction information through social media channels

and e-mail blast systems.

C. Post flyers and other readily available NFIP informational materials at municipal hall or

distribute at regular civic meetings.

D. Develop/maintain a natural hazard risk management webpage on the municipal website

where information and mapping can be posted.

E. Encourage private business owners and managers of infrastructure that provide critical

services in post-disaster situations to develop Continuity of Operations Plans or Business

Continuity Plans.

F. Enhance public outreach to residents in NFIP floodplain areas, which may include

distributing periodic articles and including handouts in the annual newsletter, to inform

them of annual grant opportunities.

G. Other:

3. Which critical facilities still need or would benefit from a backup generator or redundant power

supply?

Mitigation Strategies for Consideration

Otsego County Hazard Mitigation Plan 2

4. Which critical facilities have been damaged by flood events and require floodproofing or

relocation?

5. Which roads would benefit from mitigation or structural projects to reduce vulnerability to flood

or stormwater incidents? Also, please specify the types of projects that would most help a

high-risk road (for example, new/expanded culvert, road elevation, repaving, etc.), if this

information is available.

6. What areas in the municipality are still in need of stormwater rehabilitation and upgrades?

7. What other mitigation projects are you interested in or targeting for completion during the next 5

years? Please provide as much detail as possible.

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 1 OF 2

Meeting Otsego County Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) Mitigation Strategy Workshop

Date February 19, 2019 Time 5:00 – 7:30 p.m.

Location Otsego County Board of Representatives Meeting Room, Otsego County Offices, 197 Main Street, Cooperstown, NY

Attendees





Amy Herr, Clerk-Treasurer, Village of Cherry Valley

Barbara Monroe, Code Enforcement Officer, Town of Laurens, Town of Milford, Town of Worcester

Harold Palmer, Supervisor, Town of Maryland

Bernadette Atwell, Supervisor, Town of Milford

Rush French, Board Member, Village of Morris

Michael Newell, Mayor, Village of Morris

Robert R. Eklund, Councilman, Town of New Lisbon

Greg Mattice, City Engineer, City of Oneonta

Paul Neske, Code Enforcement Officer, Town of Oneonta

Meg Kiernan, Supervisor, Town of Otsego

William Hribar, Sr., Highway Superintendent, Town of Otsego

Keith Chapman, Councilman, Town of Plainfield

Paul Palumbo, Supervisor, Town of Richfield

Tim Procter, Highway Superintendent, Town of Richfield

Patti Gustafson, Supervisor, Town of Roseboom

Mitchell VanBuren, Highway Supervisor, Town of Roseboom

Curtis VanDewerker, Board Member, Town of Roseboom

Garland Chapman Lorraine, Unadilla Forks Fire Department

Corrina Cavallo, Mitigation Planning Supervisor, New York State Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services (NYS DHSES)

Kevin Clapp, Planning Manager, NYS DHSES

Christa Hay, NYS DHSES

Barbara Spaulding, Hazard Mitigation Planner, NYS DHSES

Gretchen VanValkenburg, NYS DHSES

Paul Hoole, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Region II

Heather Apgar, Planner, Tetra Tech, Inc. (Tetra Tech)

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 2 OF 2

Chris Huch, Planner, Tetra Tech

Tony Subbio, Project Manager, Tetra Tech

Purpose The purpose of the Mitigation Strategy Workshop was to develop implementable mitigation actions for inclusion in the

updated Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP).


Overview Mr. Scrivener and Ms. Cavallo welcomed attendees to the meeting and explained its purpose. Upon the completion

of Ms. Cavallo’s welcome, attendees split into groups. Each group worked with a member of the New York

State Division of Homeland Security & Emergency Services (NYS DHSES) mitigation staff or Tetra Tech to discuss

their problems, identify solutions, complete action worksheets, and provide information for inclusion in the

jurisdictional annexes.


• Jurisdictions will continue documenting mitigation actions on Action Worksheets.

• NYS DHSES staff and Tetra Tech’s planners will work with the jurisdictions to complete the Action

Worksheets for inclusion in the updated HMP.

• Tetra Tech’s planners will work with the jurisdictions to complete their jurisdictional annexes.


AGENDA

OTSEGO COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE Mitigation Strategy Workshop

Meeting Date / Time: Tuesday, February 19, 2019 – 5:00-8:00pm

Location: Otsego County Meadows Office Complex – EMS Classroom A – 140 County Hwy 33W,

Cooperstown

1. Background and Introductions

2. Project Status

3. Overview – Developing Mitigation Strategies

4. Breakout Working Groups to Develop Mitigation Strategies

a. Review, Refine, Revise Problem Statements

b. Consider Options

c. Select Best Choice – write down the specific action selected

d. Review Action Worksheet – complete as much as practical today

e. Discuss Opportunities for Integrating mitigation into daily operations

5. Next Steps

6. Adjournment

OTSEGO COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATEMitigation Strategy Workshop

MEET| NG DATE/TIME: February t9,2Ot9 | 5:00 - 8:00 p.m.SIGN.IN

&<nrruA C*,tano NVS blt<€S {n( 'PLr,-,A goli na. pata,lls elrt sn1.5o, j(J -272-lF?

^ 4"#1*", U {pVi.416r,gr.&6 i,v51,1r,.s m'l .?lan,r,nq

o Grcklq- ypnea(Kr.["a e)drrrs. ^\.aal d\- ]42-trf3

[gal*{.lq*,.L*^,'" L[cl]l{"",.tFDr.r*rllu[.**ronr({,^,1,"i :.t4{{-C,/]fthst+D-Aon DtH.a" brt-s56 Clr,s\".ha."db*vs.dy r,

,F!il !lrrff* .!o,gh.. T_a.t^ ffn,n[,.! t(e,.thzt. AY;," ,i@:i",.,1 3t;--qo(t.stzy

W"ft# U@":eK)*- \*'Mk**t iry.';;!j;:dA,y"rto7.*il"/ffi8'rn 'lrP2# , ar1 *4'/-tb;" sg1l_4"-i R"*U'n-

-r.*g.J(+._",-,p*u,*rcO 3mq.; [

. cq/5orb"- /rttaa-//aO '"fil\a, h.re^s,wo".tuk- milivlnlze, @X>a,t. t.m l.oz-au-t-z6 t-211 8u,'a Cta,lt pt",a^,'aq tvlqr tV G D lt(E/ k€.n'n.(to;?@eth(eL, , o())t,

u)n?-z&6o

Q,o": ?5,,"'zit Dth,./,,t",r,,0/+7.G-"r7SWrD chr,-4Qsr6.ro,r,rl*,,"., 6sz-+.17-6.g7//a.--tQ fO L-t,-, 9fe,-,160n n"7Lao l;-.p4"-".e y.L*...^ 6a7-63g-ra13

Page 1

OTSEGO COUNTY HMARD MITIGATION PIAN UPDATE

Mitigation Strategy WorkshopMEETING DATE/TIME: February t9,2Ot9 | 5:00 - 8:00 p.m.

SIGN.IN

da At n\ .0ornr..laod7 /rct-, uF F*)to^ru& fieropet) rtu^,;- @,Q,i,\.tyt bo'z -b23- aagq

\bA"r^ n'At'u' iluX 1,p, toutn Rosl",n flo*r'+""h,,yd yH,t.c^ 6o1' J7v- 1?r's

(,tf : l/o7gr wrror Dg),S,,Frvrs". -T)..rr oF K"scb'or.t cvanlt." lf@ luai). t"n &n'2eq -?tlsa

fJrv",f U"-"r Q)etk:\ruz,q,er U \Vory ef0^o,1Vrt, C,.tr\ir@ tu{ap,rroa bn'ab({-3)1)fiealhu ltpqU IL+t\"TUh th@rne(.aoaa/

@ +r+tqta" c11'b?0.6046c4,6 l/,rl ,u t<k+-k.lt .t",. 1",&')kir"t,T ?73-b1o-6?t7

T-, 6 o$fl&-QlwlLL ^ t^g@ufrl*W,,-t4t, ,IF lb(rf--(6rvl rlti\f.ir<t-tou uauyr1*s .a \rrhao bol - t1&-505b

i<,rna, S"u,p)v e* S,i1rr-ar*@ 1a^*'{o{-r-, caa uo1-5V1-s("31

AA//..n /l/;&- gl Q,%,u, NVl,-7_ 1-a, 6o7-z6z,7oj2GfurV S*twn< " [lsga L

-t=t Fce^& i,tt"y-rll**t ru4, ,l,r<w,",Aalw,,,.*,co'^ La? -zv4-frt{lllt L4 lll"..t<. o tl(oT. o+ v'\ot'rts. Y\ Nc."-,.i/ @.SINy 'f 4c o n-

'fi ^ P.<**s Por( Pdu^Lu -r ann oL Rc Ll,(- t-icrt(+ tJ - vleasor @5lfif .rr.co,n 3F9,8tL1s-Gtg Mdl'4., C ir€"A[.+ C,r,f AEah gma Hics gon!ed+",ny.ar 60+-'(3l- liLS

'/o", S&,", Vt, /z.k '/ol ky.t-t[* o t kLl.,^ ]\7 -{,tt- 3tnz

Page 3

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 1 OF 2

Meeting Otsego County Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) Draft Review Meeting

Date November 25, 2019 Time 2:05 – 3:15 p.m.

Location Meadows Office Complex, Classroom A, 140 County Highway 33W, Cooperstown, New York

Attendees




Danny L. Hawes, Superintendent of Highways, Town of Edmeston

Greg Mattice, Engineer, City of Oneonta

Kevin Clapp, Planning Manager, New York State Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services (NYS DHSES)

Elizabeth Kenndey, Planning Manager, NYS DHSES

Tony Subbio, Project Manager, Tetra Tech, Inc. (Tetra Tech)

Purpose The purpose of this meeting was to collect comments on the complete draft of the updated HMP.


Draft Plan Review Mr. Scrivener welcomed attendees to the meeting.

Mr. Clapp described the grant funding available to implement mitigation actions. He stated that NYS DHSES is

working with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to secrete an 18-county disaster declaration that

will make mitigation funding available across the state.

Mr. Subbio led a discussion regarding each of the sections of the HMP. These sections are available on the Planning

and Solid Waste Department website. Information addressed in each section is summarized below:

Section 1: Introduction describes mitigation planning, identifies the participating jurisdictions, and provides

an overview of the HMP.

Section 2: Plan Adoption describes the plan adoption process.

Section 3: Planning Process identifies the participants of the planning process, describes the planning

activities undertaken during the HMP update process, and describes how the planning process will continue

after the draft is approved.

Section 4: County Profile describes the history of the County, its physical features, the population and

demographics, building stock, land use and trends, and critical facilities.

Section 5: Risk Assessment identifies the hazards of concern, describes how each hazard is prioritized

based on the level of risk it poses to the County and its jurisdictions, and includes full profiles of each hazard

of concern.

MEETING NOTES

PAGE 2 OF 2

Section 6: Mitigation Strategies describes past accomplishments in implementing hazard mitigation

initiatives throughout the County; lists the hazard mitigation goals and objectives; describes the federal,

State, County, and local capabilities that can be leveraged to reduce vulnerability to hazards; and describes

how mitigation actions were identified, evaluated, and prioritized by each jurisdiction.

Section 7: Plan Maintenance identifies the HMP Coordinator and describes the responsibilities associated

with this role. Mr. Scrivener will be the Otsego County HMP Coordinator. Section 7 also identifies members

of the Planning Partnership that will maintain the plan over the next 5 years and describes how the plan will

be monitored, evaluated, and updated. This section also describes the ways in which the HMP is integrated

into other planning mechanisms and vice versa.

Section 8: Planning Partnership lists the participating jurisdictions and introduces the content of the

jurisdictional annexes.

Section 9: Jurisdictional Annexes contains an annex for each participating jurisdiction. Each annex

identifies the primary and alternate points of contact for the jurisdiction, describes the jurisdiction, assesses

the risk posed to the jurisdiction by the hazards of concern, identifies critical facilities, describes the

jurisdiction’s capabilities to implement hazard mitigation, lists the status of all mitigation actions in the 2013

version of the HMP, identifies the actions that the jurisdiction included in the HMP update, and prioritizes

those actions.

Mr. Subbio invited attendees to offer comments related to the sections of the updated HMP. The Town of Westford

did not fully participate in the planning process. If the Town of Westford wishes to be eligible for mitigation funding,

the town will have to meet the requirements described in Appendix H (Linkage Procedures). Mr. Clapp stated that

the Town of Westford could apply for Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) funding, but would need to have a

mitigation plan in place within one year of applying for HMGP funds.

Next Steps The following next steps were identified during the meeting:

Comments on the draft plan will be accepted by Mr. Scrivener until Friday, December 6, 2019.

The draft plan will be finalized by Tetra Tech.

Upon finalization, the plan will be submitted to the New York State Division of Homeland Security and

Emergency Services (NYS DHSES) and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for formal

review.


1


Plan Draft Review Meeting

Welcome

Agenda

Welcome

Draft Plan Review

Next Steps

Questions

Draft Plan Review

Section 1: Introduction

– Mitigation Planning

– Participating Jurisdictions

– Overview

Section 2: Plan Adoption

– Adoption Process

Section 3: Planning Process

– Participants

– Activities

– Ongoing Process

Draft Plan Review

Section 4: County Profile

– History

– Physical Setting

– Population and Demographics

– General Building Stock

– Land Use and Population Trends

– Critical Facilities

Section 5: Risk Assessment

– Hazards of Concern

– Hazard Ranking

– Hazard Profiles

Draft Plan Review

Section 6: Mitigation Strategies

– Past Accomplishments

– Goals and Objectives

– Capability Assessment Plans, Programs, and

Resources Available

Administrative and Technical Capabilities

Fiscal Capabilities

– Mitigation Strategy Development and Update Action Identification

Evaluation and Prioritization

Benefit/Cost Review

2

Draft Plan Review

Section 7: Plan Maintenance

– HMP Coordinator

– Ongoing Planning Partnership

– Monitoring

– Continuous Evaluation and Progress Reports

– Updating

– Integration of Hazard Mitigation with Existing and Future Programs

– Continued Public Involvement

Draft Plan Review

Section 8: Planning Partnership– Participating Jurisdictions

– Introduce Jurisdictional Annexes

Section 9: Jurisdictional Annexes– Municipal Planning Team

– Municipal Profile

– Hazard Event History

– Vulnerabilities

– Capabilities

– Mitigation Strategy

– Status of Past Mitigation Actions

– Current Mitigation Actions

Draft Plan Review

Appendices

– Appendix A – Sample Adoption Resolution

– Appendix B – Participation Matrix

– Appendix C – Meeting Documentation

– Appendix D – Public and Stakeholder Outreach Documentation

– Appendix E – Risk Assessment Supplementary Data

– Appendix F – Critical Facilities

– Appendix G – Plan Review Tools

– Appendix H – Linkage Procedures

Next Steps

Finalize the Draft Plan

Submit the HMP to NYS DHSES

Revise and Submit the Plan to FEMA

Plan Adoption

Questions?


Contacts

Erik Scrivener

[email protected]

(607) 547-4225

Tony Subbio

[email protected]

(717) 545-3580

AGENDA

OTSEGO COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE Plan Draft Review Meeting

Monday, November 25, 2019 | 2:00 – 4:00 p.m.

1. Welcome

2. Draft Plan Review

a. Section 1: Introduction

b. Section 2: Plan Adoption

c. Section 3: Planning Process

d. Section 4: County Profile

e. Section 5: Risk Assessment

f. Section 6: Mitigation Strategies

g. Section 7: Plan Maintenance

h. Section 8: Planning Partnership

i. Section 9: Jurisdictional Annexes

j. Appendices

3. Next Steps a. Finalize the Draft Plan

b. Submit the HMP to NYS DHSES

c. Revise and Submit the Plan to FEMA

d. Plan Adoption

4. Questions

appendix c - meeting documentation - otsego county

Documents