Attachment 4 City of Chula Vista 2023 MJHMP Annex .pdf — Chula Vista City Council, October 24, 2023

Multi-Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan: City of Chula
Vista Annex
San Diego County, California
March 2023

This page is intentionally left blank.

SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 2 1. SECTION ONE: Determine the
Planning Area and Resources

1.1. Planning Area: City of Chula Vista

The city of Chula Vista is the second-largest city in San Diego County, with a population of 275,487, and the 21st largest of 450 California cities. Geographically, Chula Vista is comprised of more than 50 square miles of coastal landscape, canyons, rolling hills, and mountains. Chula Vista extends from the San Diego Bay on the west to the Otay Lake and Otay Mountain the in east. Chula Vista is located just over seven miles from U.S. international border of Mexico.

Chula Vista is considered to have a semi-arid climate with Mediterranean characteristics. As with the rest of California, Southern California in particular, the City of Chula Vista is affected by increasingly warmer temperatures.

Chula Vista is home to an estimated 44% of all businesses in the South Bay and continues to be one of the fastest growing cities in San Diego County. Chula Vista ranks among the nation's top ten governments in terms of employee productivity and local debt levels. Two of the larger developments in the City of Chula Vista will include the new Chula Vista Bayfront and the University Innovation District. Chula Vista is also home of the Elite Athlete Training Center, a 155-acre training center for Olympic & Paralympic athletes. The Sweetwater Union High School District (largest secondary school district in California), the Chula Vista Elementary School District (49 schools), and Southwestern Community College also reside within the city of Chula Vista.

1.2. Community Rating System Requirements
The Community Rating System (CRS) is a FEMA program and rewards communities that go beyond the minimum standards for floodplain management under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Communities can potentially improve their Community Rating System and lower NFIP premiums by developing a CRS Plan.

Community Rating System
(CRS) Planning Steps
Local Mitigation
Planning
Handbook Tasks
(44 CFR Part 201)

Step 1. Organize
Task 1: Determine the Planning Area and
Resources
Task 2: Build the Planning
Team 44 CFR 201.6(c)(1)

Step 2. Involve the public
Task 3: Create an Outreach Strategy
44 CFR 201.6(b)(1)

Step 3. Coordinate
Task 4: Review Community Capabilities
44 CFR 201.6(b)(2) & (3)
Step 4. Assess the hazard
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 3 Step 5. Assess the problem
Task 5: Conduct a Risk
Assessment 44 CFR
201.6(c)(2)(i)
44 CFR 201.6(c)(2)(ii) & (iii)
Step 6. Set goals Task 6: Develop a Mitigation
Strategy 44 CFR 201.6(c)(3)(i)
44 CFR 201.6(c)(3)(ii)
44 CFR 201.6(c)(3)(iii)
Step 7. Review possible activities

Step 8. Draft an action plan

Step 9. Adopt the plan
Task 8: Review and Adopt the Plan
44 CFR 201.6(c)(5)

Step 10. Implement, evaluate, revise
Task 7: Keep the Plan Current
Task 9: Create a Safe and Resilient
Community 44 CFR 201.6(c)(4)
TABLE 1: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 1.1 DESCRIBES THE CRS REQUIREMENTS MET BY THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY MULTI -JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN .

Any jurisdiction or special district may participate in the hazard mitigation planning process.

However, to request FEMA approval, each of the local jurisdictions must meet all requirements of 44 CFR §201.6. In addition to the requirement for participation in the process, the Federal regulation specifies the following requirements for multi-jurisdictional plans:
• The risk assessment must assess each jurisdiction’s risk where they may vary from the risks facing the entire planning area. (44 CFR §201.6(c)(2)(iii)) • There must be identifiable action items specific to the jurisdiction requesting FEMA approval or credit of the plan. (44 CFR §201.6(c)(3)(iv))
• Each jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan must document that is has been formally adopted. (44 CFR §201.6(c)(5))
The hazard mitigation plan must clearly list the jurisdictions that participated in the plan and are seeking plan approval. The Chula Vista Annex to the San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and meets all requirements.

SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team
4 2. SECTION TWO: Build the Planning
Team

2.1. Planning Participants

Name Title Department
Marlon King Emergency Services Coordinator Fire
Justin Gipson Fire Marshal Fire
Lou El-Khazen Building Official Development Services
Cheryl Goddard Senior Planner Development Services
Laura Black Assistant Director Development Services
Patrick Moneda Senior Civil Engineer Engineering
Bill Valle Director of Engineering Engineering
Frank Rivera Principal Civil Engineer Engineering
Boushra Salem Principal Civil Engineer Engineering
Sam Oludunfe Open Space Manager Public Works
Matt Little Director Public Works
Angelica Aguilar Assistant Director Public Works
Cory Downs Conservation Specialist II Economic Development Coleen Wisniewski Environmental Sustainability Manager Economic Development Rommel Reyes GIS Specialist Information Technology Services Robert O’Donnell GIS Manager Information Technology Services

2.2. Planning Process

The City of Chula Vista Planning Team held an initial meeting in January 2020 to discuss the new hazard mitigation planning process and brainstorm any new hazards and challenges the city faces. In addition to whole team meetings, the Emergency Management Division held one-on- one meetings with key staff in lead City departments to discuss previous accomplishments and new goals/objectives in hazard mitigation.

SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team
5 Additionally, each key department held internal meetings to discuss new priority mitigation actions as associated tasks that will help to accomplish the objectives. Each department discussed key elements of the priority actions to determine if they are feasible, set reasonable expectations, brainstorm implementation costs and timelines.

See the San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan’s Section Two for details about the county-wide Planning Process.

SECTION THREE | Create an Outreach Strategy
6 3. SECTION THREE: Create an
Outreach Strategy

See the San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan’s Section Three for details about the county-wide outreach strategy.

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
7 4. SECTION FOUR: Review Community
Capabilities

Local mitigation capabilities are existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources that reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities and must be included in a hazard mitigation plan. The planning team also may identify additional types of capabilities relevant to mitigation planning.

4.1. Capability Assessment
The primary types of capabilities for reducing long-term vulnerability through mitigation planning are:
• Planning and regulatory
• Administrative and technical
• Financial
• Education and outreach

4.1.1. Planning and Regulatory
Planning and regulatory capabilities are the plans, policies, codes, and ordinances that prevent and reduce the impacts of hazards. The jurisdiction currently has the following planning and regulatory capabilities:

Plans Yes/No
Year
Does the plan address hazards?
Does the plan identify projects to include in the
mitigation strategy?
Can the plan be used to implement mitigation actions?
Comprehensive/Master Plan
Yes
2005
The Chula Vista City Council approved an updated General Plan on December 13, 2005. The General Plan looks out to the year 2030 and guides the City’s future growth and
development for the next 25 years. It is the first
comprehensive update of the City’s General Plan since
1989. The General Plan identifies how land will be used, how needs for transportation, parks and other public
facilities and services will be met, and how natural
resources and the community’s heritage will be protected.

Chapter of the General Plan addresses the Public Facilities and Services Element, which describes the public safety planning necessary to ensure the safety of the communities and minimize/mitigate risk to the public. The goals outlined in the plan can be used to establish hazard mitigation goals and actions.

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
8 Plans Yes/No
Year
Does the plan address hazards?
Does the plan identify projects to include in the
mitigation strategy?
Can the plan be used to implement mitigation actions?
Capital Improvements Plan
Yes
2022
Yes. Establishing the annual CIP includes ranking
proposals and projects by reviewing the scopes, preliminary cost estimates, locations, and feasibility of each proposal.

Projects are placed in order with the highest ranked
receiving top priority, based on the following categories:
• City Needs - Does the proposal address an existing need, problem and/or safety concern?
• City Benefit - Does the proposal provide a benefit
citywide or for a specific area?
• Does the proposal link to one of the City’s Strategic Goals?
• Regulatory Concerns, Implementation Pathways - Is the proposal feasible based on time and cost necessary to
meet federal, state and city regulations?
• Methodology - Is the proposed scope and location
consistent with a “guiding document”?
• Funding Limitations/Availability – Does the proposal
require funding from the General Fund? Is the proposal fully or partially funded by grant funds?
The CIP plan addresses projects committed to improving
the safety of the community in a number of areas including traffic safety and pedestrian safety. Although these are not the top hazards within the City, these areas can be used to implement mitigation actions outside of the Hazard
Mitigation Plan.

Economic Development Plan
Yes
2019
Yes, the mission of the Economic Development Plan is to create a sustainable economy by providing the essential resources to businesses and the development community to promote, attract, retain and expand; employment
opportunities, stimulate the local economy, expand the
local sales and property tax bases; all while maintaining a positive balance between the economy, the environment
and the community. The Economic Development Plan
addresses climate change, and also stresses the need for the City to partner with the business community to move the City forward. Both climate change and public private
partnerships are addressed in hazard mitigation actions.

Local Emergency Operations Plan
Yes
2021
Yes, the Emergency Operations Plan helps to prepare the City’s response to all-hazards faced within Chula Vista.

The Emergency Operations Plan does not address hazard
mitigation projects, but it doesn’t identify hazards that need to be mitigated. In reviewing the Emergency Operations
SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
9 Plans Yes/No
Year
Does the plan address hazards?
Does the plan identify projects to include in the
mitigation strategy?
Can the plan be used to implement mitigation actions?
Plan, the City’s Emergency Management Program can
identify focus areas for hazard mitigation.

Continuity of Operations Plan No The City does not yet have a formal COOP.

Transportation Plan Yes
Yes. The Chula Vista Active Transportation Plan (ATP)
focuses on enhancing the safety and comfort for existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities as well as increasing connectivity to key attracting land uses such as schools, employment centers, retail districts, and recreational areas.

This plan was developed by taking a comprehensive look at the current transportation environment and users as well as previous planning efforts. This information combined with input from residents and project stakeholders shaped the development of recommendations for bicycle and
pedestrian improvements and the overall ATP.

Stormwater Management Plan
Yes
2004
Yes. The mission of the Storm Water Management
Program is to maintain and promote the quality of water and environmental resources for the Citizens of Chula Vista and ensure compliance with water quality regulations. The Storm Water Management section of the City of Chula
Vista Public Works Department is responsible for overall management of all storm water quality issues in the City of Chula Vista. Through public education and outreach, the Storm Water Management section ensures that all residents, businesses, and municipal departments are familiar with federal, state and local laws and regulations pertaining to storm water quality issues and comply with those laws and regulations.

The Stormwater Management Plan does not currently have
projects to be listed in the City’s hazard mitigation plan.

Community Wildfire Protection Plan Yes
Yes, the CWPP addresses the City’s largest threat of
wildfire. The CWPP includes bot regional and community
specific projects that can be implemented to mitigate the wildfire hazard. From these projects, the planning team can determine mitigation actions.

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
10 Plans Yes/No
Year
Does the plan address hazards?
Does the plan identify projects to include in the
mitigation strategy?
Can the plan be used to implement mitigation actions?
Other special plans (e.g., brownfields
redevelopment, disaster recovery, coastal zone
management, climate change adaptation)
Yes
Climate Action Plan
Multiple Species Conservation Program
Wastewater Master Plan
Traffic Signal Communications Master Plan
Sewer System Management Plan
Chula Vista Fire Department Strategic Plan
How can these capabilities be expanded and improved to reduce risk? Future opportunities for regulatory enhancement should focus on amending the City of Chula Vista’s General Plan Safety Element to incorporate the 2022-2027 San Diego County MJHMP and City of Chula Vista Annex by reference. Additionally, the City should develop a formal Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) incorporating best practices from recent disasters.

TABLE 2: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.1 DATA.

4.1.2. Administrative and Technical
Administrative and technical capabilities include staff and their skills and tools that can be used for mitigation planning and to implement specific mitigation actions. Some smaller jurisdictions without local staff resources, may rely on public resources at the next higher-level government that can provide technical assistance.

Administration Yes/No
Describe capability
Is coordination effective?
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with knowledge of
land development and land management
practices
Y
• Development Services
• Public Works Departments
The City employs engineers and land use planners that
can help determine the safety of new construction as it relates to various hazards within the City. The planners coordinate with the Emergency Management Program as
necessary.

Engineer(s) or professional(s) trained in
construction practices related to buildings
and/or infrastructure
Y
• Engineering
• Development Services
The City employs structural engineers familiar with best practices for development areas. Coordination with these personnel is effective.

Planners or Engineer(s) with an understanding
of natural and/or manmade hazards Y • Engineering
• Development Services
SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
11 • Fire Department
The City employs personnel with knowledge of natural
and man-made hazards and utilizes these personnel in
development of plans, policies, and procedures for
emergency planning and response.

Mitigation Planning Committee Y
• All City Departments represented as necessary to
provide subject matter expertise. The City
departments coordinate well with the Emergency
Management Program to provide necessary
personnel resources.

Maintenance programs to reduce risk (e.g.,
tree trimming, clearing drainage systems) Y
• Public Works
The Public Works Department implements all
maintenance programs on a continual basis.

Mutual aid agreements Y
• Public Works
• Fire
• Police
Many City departments, most notably those listed above, maintain mutual aid agreements for response operations.

Staff Yes/No
FT/PT1
Is staffing adequate to enforce regulations?
Is staff trained on hazards and mitigation?
Is coordination between agencies and staff effective?
Chief Building Official
Yes
FT
Yes, staffing is adequate to enforce regulations. Staff who are assigned to participate on the hazard mitigation planning team are educated/trained about hazard
mitigation and they coordinate well with other planning team members.

Floodplain Administrator
Yes
FT
Yes, staffing is adequate to enforce regulations. Staff who are assigned to participate on the hazard mitigation
planning team are educated/trained about hazard
mitigation and they coordinate well with other planning team members.

Emergency Manager
Yes
FT
Yes, staffing is adequate to enforce regulations, however additional emergency management staff would enhance
the City’s capabilities. The City’s Emergency Manager is experienced in hazard mitigation and coordinates the
hazard mitigation planning team and development of the
hazard mitigation plan.

Surveyors
Yes
FT
Yes, staffing is adequate to enforce regulations. Staff who are assigned to participate on the hazard mitigation planning team are educated/trained about hazard
mitigation and they coordinate well with other planning team members.

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
12 Staff with education or expertise to assess the
community’s vulnerability to hazards
Yes
FT
Yes, staffing is adequate to enforce regulations. Staff who are assigned to participate on the hazard mitigation
planning team are educated/trained about hazard
mitigation and they coordinate well with other planning team members.

Community Planner Yes
Yes, staffing is adequate to enforce regulations. Staff who are assigned to participate on the hazard mitigation
planning team are educated/trained about hazard
mitigation and they coordinate well with other planning team members.

Scientists familiar with the hazards of the
community No N/A
Civil Engineer Yes
Yes, staffing is adequate to enforce regulations. Staff who are assigned to participate on the hazard mitigation planning team are educated/trained about hazard
mitigation and they coordinate well with other planning team members.

Personnel skilled in GIS and/or HAZUS Yes
Yes, staffing is adequate to enforce regulations. Staff who are assigned to participate on the hazard mitigation planning team are educated/trained about hazard
mitigation and they coordinate well with other planning team members.

Grant writers Yes
No. Although there are several staff with grant writing experience, there are not enough staff dedicated to
locating and applying for grants. Few staff have
experience in hazard mitigation grants.

Other
How can these capabilities be expanded and improved to reduce risk? Future enhancements may include securing additional hazard mitigation funding for City projects and coordinating with grant writers and the scientific community to further understand the hazards in our city. We may also consider providing hazard training for staff.

TABLE 3:FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.1 DATA CONTINUED.

4.1.3. Financial
The City of Chula Vista has access to or is eligible to use the following funding resources for hazard mitigation:

Funding Resource
Access/
Eligibility
(Yes/No)
Has the funding resource been used in past and for
what type of activities?
Could the resource be used to fund future mitigation
actions?
SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
13 Community Development Block Grants
(CDBG) Yes
No
Yes, as resources are available and to the extent the
funds are used to benefit eligible census tracts
Capital improvements project funding Yes
No
Yes, as resources are available
Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Yes
Yes, taxes have been approved by voters for funding
of public safety personnel and funding for facilities
repair and maintenance.

Yes, but requires Proposition 218 Voter Approval (2/3
of all voters, simple majority of property owners for
assessments). Voter approval highly unlikely in most
cases.

Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric service Yes
Yes, the revenue from these fees are reinvested into
the utility infrastructure
Yes, Sewer Fees only. City does not own or operate
water, gas or electric utilities
Impact fees for homebuyers or developers for
new developments/homes Yes
No
No
Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes
No
No
Incur debt through special tax and revenue
bonds Yes
No
No
Incur debt through private activity bonds Yes
No
No
Community Development Block Grants
(CDBG) Yes
No
No
How can these capabilities be expanded and improved to reduce risk? The City can update other plans, such as the CIP to incorporate hazard information and include hazard mitigation actions and climate adaptation strategies that relate to infrastructure systems resiliency associated with the water and wastewater systems. Capital investments and improvements related to seismic retrofits, cooling center upgrades, drainage systems, and water supply systems, should all be prioritized in the City’s financial plan as they are related to hazard mitigation. Additionally, given the prioritization of flooding mitigation projects, the City should apply for HMGP grants to fund implementation costs associated with key CIP projects, and related projects in the City’s mitigation strategy. These fiscal capabilities may be supported by City staff or augmented with consultant staff.

TABLE 4: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.1 DATA CONTINUED.

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
14 4.1.4. Education and Outreach
The following education and outreach programs and methods exist to implement mitigation activities and communicate hazard-related information:

Program/Organization
Yes/No
Describe program/organization and how relates to
disaster resilience and mitigation.

Could the program/organization help implement
future mitigation activities?
Local citizen groups or non-profit
organizations focused on environmental
protection, emergency preparedness, access
and functional needs populations, etc.

Yes
Chula Vista partners with several citizen groups and
non-government organizations related to South Bay
resources, sensitive habitat management protection,
community emergency response, and access and
functional needs coordination, all of which help
implement mitigation activities
Ongoing public education or information
program (e.g., responsible water use, fire
safety, household preparedness,
environmental education)
Yes
Chula Vista has several community engagement and
educational programs in several City departments,
including fire, police, and sustainability. The Fire
Department PIO coordinates presentations and events
with local community organizations, schools, etc.
educating on the importance of fire safety and
preparedness. The Chula Vista CERT members host
courses for the community on disaster preparedness,
basic safety skills, CPR, active shooter training, and
more. The sustainability division provides community
education on recycling, composting, energy efficiency,
etc.

All of these educational activities can be embedded into hazard mitigation projects.

Natural disaster or safety related school
programs Yes Both the fire and police departments offer disaster and safety programs to local schools
StormReady certification No N/A
Firewise Communities certification No N/A
Public-private partnership initiatives
addressing disaster-related issues No None
Other
How can these capabilities be expanded and improved to reduce risk? SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
15 The City can expand their education and outreach capabilities by seeking more certification from disaster preparedness organizations such as StormReady and Firewise, as well as the establishment of public -private partnerships with the business community. Specific enhancements may include continued public involvement through social media posts and advertisements focused on hazard mitigation project successes. Focused outreach to under-represented and special-interest groups in the City is another great strategy to expand education.

TABLE 5: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.1 DATA CONTINUED.

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
16 4.2. Safe Growth Audit
Identify gaps in the city’s growth guidance instruments and improvements that could be made to reduce vulnerability to future development:

Comprehensive Plan Yes No
Land Use

1. Does the future land-use map clearly identify natural hazard areas? X

2. Do the land-use policies discourage development or redevelopment within natural hazard areas?
X

3. Does the plan provide adequate space for expected future growth in areas located outside natural hazard areas?
X

Transportation

1. Does the transportation plan limit access to hazard areas? X

2. Is transportation policy used to guide growth to safe locations? X

3. Are movement systems designed to function under disaster conditions (e.g., evacuation)? X

TABLE 6: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.2 DATA.

Comprehensive Plan (continued) Yes No
Environmental Management

1. Are environmental systems that protect development from hazards identified and mapped? X

2. Do environmental policies maintain and restore protective ecosystems? X

3. Do environmental policies provide incentives to development that is located outside protective ecosystems?

Public Safety
SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
17 1. Are the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan related to those of the FEMA Local Hazard Mitigation Plan? X

2. Is safety explicitly included in the plan’s growth and development policies? X

3. Does the monitoring and implementation section of the plan cover safe growth objectives? X

TABLE 7: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.2 DATA CONTINUED.

Zoning Ordinance Yes No

1. Does the zoning ordinance conform to the comprehensive plan in terms of discouraging development or redevelopment within natural hazard areas? X

2. Does the ordinance contain natural hazard overlay zones that set conditions for land use within such zones? X

3. Do rezoning procedures recognize natural hazard areas as limits on zoning changes that allow greater intensity or density of use? X

4. Does the ordinance prohibit development within, or filling of, wetlands, floodways, and floodplains? X

Subdivision Regulations Yes No

1. Do the subdivision regulations restrict the subdivision of land within or adjacent to natural hazard areas? X

2. Do the regulations provide for conservation subdivisions or cluster subdivisions in order to conserve environmental resources? X

3. Do the regulations allow density transfers where hazard areas exist? X

TABLE 8: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.2 DATA CONTINUED.

Capital Improvement Program and Infrastructure Policies Yes No

1. Does the capital improvement program limit expenditures on projects that would encourage development in areas vulnerable to natural hazards? X

2. Do infrastructure policies limit extension of existing facilities and services that would encourage development in areas vulnerable to natural hazards? X SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
18 3. Does the capital improvement program provide funding for hazard mitigation projects identified in the FEMA Mitigation Plan?
X

Other Yes No

1. Do small area or corridor plans recognize the need to avoid or mitigation natural hazards? X

2. Does the building code contain provisions to strengthen or elevate construction to withstand hazard forces? X

3. Do economic development or redevelopment strategies include provisions for mitigation natural hazards? X

4. Is there an adopted evacuation and shelter plan to deal with emergencies from natural hazards?
X

TABLE 9: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.2 DATA CONTINUED.

Questions were adapted from Godschalk, David R. Practice Safe Growth Audits, Zoning Practice, Issue Number 10, October 2009, American Planning Association.

4.2.1 Growth and Development Trends
The table below depicts the city of Chula Vista growth trends since the 1990s:

Year Population Change % Change
1990 135,243 - -
2000 175,608 40,365 30%
2010 243,916 68,308 39%
2020 276,466 32,550 13%
2022 277,220 754 > 1%

Chula Vista has seen significant population growth because of its thriving economy and the support that is offered for small businesses. The population has continued to post growth in the double-digit percentages every ten years, indicating that growth is thriving, and the city is likely to continue growing larger. The City’s Growth Management Element of the General Plan describes the City’s planning factors, objectives, and policies for managing the growth and expansion of Chula Vista.

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
19 The following table details the city’s infrastructure related growth since the 2018 Hazard Mitigation Plan:

Residential and Commercial Growth
Property Use 2019 2020 2021 2022
Residential 840 2,707 1,699 1,175
Commercial 25 20 20 40
Total 865 2,727 1,899 1,215

All developments were completed in accordance with all current and applicable development codes and standards. Each new development should be adequately protected from structural damage as a result of the City’s priority hazards. Thus, except for more people living in areas potentially exposed to natural hazards, this growth should not cause a significant change in vulnerability of the city to identified hazards.

A summary of new development in hazard zones, between 2019-2022, is shown in the tables and maps below:

Property Use Very High Fire Hazard Severity
Zone (VHFHSZ) Flood Zone
Residential 3 4

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
20 Property Use Very High Fire Hazard Severity
Zone (VHFHSZ) Flood Zone
Commercial 13 1

4.3. National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
As a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), a community develops capabilities for conducting flood mitigation activities.

The City of Chula Vista is a participant in FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

Chula Vista officially began participating in the NFIP on April 8. 1977, established by City ordinance 1842. This program provides flood insurance for structures located within the floodplain areas in the city and as designated by FEMA. Chula Vista started utilizing the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) to determine floodplain/floodway boundaries on August 15, 1983.

As a part of NFIP, the City must meet certain annual requirements. The City must abide by the Floodplain Ordinance to meet the NFIP requirements. FEMA reviews the City’s ordinance and determines whether the ordinance is adequate or provides recommendations when the ordinance needs to be updated. The City last updated its ordinance on 12/3/2019 (Ord 3477). FEMA and/or

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
21 the State Department of Water Resources typically performs audits on the City’s Floodplain Management Program every 3 to 5 years to ensure compliance.

The City has Floodplain Administrator that administers, implements, and enforces standards of the City’s floodplain regulations, identified in Chapter 14.18 of the City’s Municipal Code. The City’s Floodplain Administrator is responsible for the implementation of flood policies that reduce exposure to flood hazard and minimize/eliminate flood damage. The City of Chula Vista manages the permitting of any proposed developments and improvements within the floodplain areas per the FEMA guidelines and requirements.

Whenever development or capital improvement projects are near FEMA designated floodplains/floodways, projects are routed to the Engineering Advanced Planning section to determine FEMA related requirements for the proposed project. The City’s Floodplain Administrator (City Engineer) has the right to stop a project that does not meet the Floodplain Regulations Ordinance.

The City continues to be an active participant in the NFIP and the following table details the City’s participation:

NFIP Topic Source of Information Comments
Insurance Summary
How many NFIP policies are in the
community? What is the total premium
and coverage?
State NFIP Coordinator or
FEMA NFIP Specialist
N/A
How many claims have been paid in the
community? What is the total amount of
paid claims? How many of the claims
were for substantial damage?
FEMA NFIP or Insurance
Specialist
N/A
How many structures are exposed to
flood risk within the community?
Community Floodplain
Administrator (FPA)
Exact number of structures currently within SFHA
is unknown.

Describe any areas of flood risk with
limited NFIP policy coverage
Community FPA and
FEMA Insurance
Specialist
Not aware of any areas with limited NFIP policy
coverage.

Staff Resources
Is the Community FPA or NFIP
Coordinator certified?
Community FPA No
Is floodplain management an auxiliary
function?
Community FPA Floodplain Management is performed through the Advanced Planning section of the Engineering Dept.

Provide an explanation of NFIP
administration services (e.g., permit
review, GIS, education or outreach,
inspections, engineering capability)
Community FPA Engineering Dept: Pre-Application Review, Plan and Permit Review; GIS, General Public
Information.

Building Division: Inspections
SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
22 What are the barriers to running an
effective NFIP program in the
community, if any?
Community FPA
Compliance History
Is the community in good standing with
the NFIP?
State NFIP Coordinator,
FEMA NFIP Specialist,
community records
Yes
Are there any outstanding compliance
issues (i.e., current violations)?
No
When was the most recent Community
Assistance Visit (CAV) or Community
Assistance Contact (CAC)?
Unsure
Is a CAV or CAC scheduled or needed? No
TABLE 10: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.3 DATA.

NFIP Topic Source of Information Comments
Regulation
When did the community enter the
NFIP?
Community Status Book
http://www.fema.gov/
national-flood-insurance-
program/national-flood-
insurance-program-
community-status-book
Init FHBM Identified: 04/08/77
Init FIRM Identified: 08/15/83
Are the FIRMs digital or paper? Community FPA Both
Do floodplain development regulations
meet or exceed FEMA or State
minimum requirements? If so, in what
ways?
Community FPA Yes, it meets the FEMA minimum
requirements.

Provide an explanation of the permitting
process.

Community FPA, State,

FEMA NFIP
1) Developer approaches City with Permit
Pre-Application Review or Permit
Application.
2) City Planning Dept forwards all
Applications in the vicinity of FEMA
SFHA to Engineering Dept for FEMA
NFIP Review.
3) Engineering Dept provides
comments/requirements for development
in SFHA; Staff works with Developers to
ensure all FEMA conditional approvals
are met prior to Grading/Construction
Permit issuance.
4) Construction Inspections and Building
Inspector staff ensure all above
requirements are met during construction
before certificate of occupancy is issued.

Flood Insurance Manual
http://www.fema.gov/
flood-insurance-manual
Community FPA, FEMA
CRS Coordinator, ISO
representative
SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
23 NFIP Topic Source of Information Comments
5) At project completion, City works with
Developer to finalize any FEMA Map
Revisions as necessary.

Community Rating System (CRS)
Does the community participate in
CRS?
Community FPA, State,

FEMA NFIP
No
What is the community’s CRS Class
Ranking?
Flood Insurance Manual
http://www.fema.gov/
flood-insurance-manual
N/A
What categories and activities provide
CRS points and how can the class be
improved?
N/A
Does the plan include CRS planning
requirements
Community FPA, FEMA
CRS Coordinator, ISO
representative
N/A

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
24 5. SECTION FIVE: Conduct a Risk
Assessment

The planning team conducts a risk assessment to determine the potential impacts of hazards to the people, economy, and built and natural environments of the community. The risk assessment provides the foundation for the rest of the mitigation planning process, which is focused on identifying and prioritizing actions to reduce risk to hazards.

In addition to informing the mitigation strategy, the risk assessment also can be used to establish emergency preparedness and response priorities, for land use and comprehensive planning, and for decision making by elected officials, city and county departments, businesses, and organizations in the community.

When the plan revision process began in 2019, a complete review of the hazards identified in the original plan and first update was conducted to determine if they were still valid and should be kept as a target for mitigation measures or removed from the list. The planning team also reassessed hazards that were not considered for mitigation actions in 2018 to determine if that decision was still applicable or if they should be moved to the active list. Finally, the team examined potential or emerging hazards, including climate change, to see if any should be included on the active list.

While many of the mitigation measures listed in 2018 plan and revision were implemented and accomplished, the risk of the hazard did not significantly diminish. This is easily seen in both the wildfire and earthquake hazards. While mitigation measures have been put in place (such as the update of the fire code and vegetation management measures), wildfire remains, and will continue to be, the greatest hazard risk to the city of Chula Vista.

5.1 Performing a Risk Assessment
Risk Assessment requires the collection and analysis of hazard-related data to enable local jurisdictions to identify and prioritize appropriate mitigation actions that will reduce losses from potential hazards.

Risk Assessment is the process of identifying the potential impacts of hazards that threaten an area, including both natural and human-caused events. A natural event causes a hazard when it harms people or property. Such events would include floods, earthquakes, tornadoes, tsunami, coastal storms, landslides, and wildfires that strike populated areas. Human-caused hazard events are caused by human activity and include technological hazards and terrorism.

Technological hazards are generally accidental and/or have unintended consequences (for example, an accidental hazardous materials release). Terrorism is defined by the Code of Federal Regulations as “…unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
25 coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”
Natural hazards that have harmed the County in the past are likely to happen in the future.

Consequently, the process of risk assessment includes determining whether the hazard has occurred previously. Approaches to collecting historical hazard data include researching newspapers and other records, conducting a planning document and report literature review in all relevant hazard subject areas, gathering hazard-related GIS data, and engaging in conversation with relevant experts from the community.

5.1.1. Levels of Risk
The level of risk associated with each hazard in each jurisdiction was also estimated and assigned a risk level of high, medium, or low depending on several factors unique to that hazard.

The hazards assessed were both natural and human-caused.

Probability of future events are described in the plan as:
• Highly Likely – Occurs at intervals of 1 – 10 years
• Likely - Occurs at intervals of 10 - 50 years
• Somewhat Likely - Occurs at intervals greater than every 50 years Analyzing risk involves evaluating vulnerable assets, describing potential impacts, and estimating losses for each hazard. Vulnerability describes the degree to which an asset is susceptible to damage from a hazard. Vulnerability also depends on an asset’s construction, contents, and the economic value of its functions.

Like indirect damages, the vulnerability of one element of the community is often related to the vulnerability of another. Often, indirect effects can be much more widespread and damaging than direct effects. Risk analysis predicts the extent of injury and damage that may result from a hazard event of a given intensity within an area. It identifies the effects of natural and human- caused hazard events by estimating the relative exposure of existing and future population, land development, and infrastructure to hazardous conditions.

The analysis helps set mitigation priorities by allowing local jurisdictions to focus attention on areas most likely to be damaged or most likely to require early emergency response during a hazard event.

Exposure analysis identifies the existing and future assets located in an identified hazard area. It can quantify the number, type and value of structures, critical facilities, and infrastructure located in those areas, as well as assets exposed to multiple hazards. It can also be used to quantify the number of future structures and infrastructure possible in hazard prone areas based on zoning and building codes.

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
26 5.2. Hazard Assessment Summary
The planning team reviewed the hazards identified in the 2018 Hazard Mitigation Plan and evaluated each to see if they still posed a risk to the jurisdiction. In addition, the hazards listed in the FEMA Local Mitigation Planning Handbook were also reviewed to determine if they should be added to the list of hazards to include in the plan revision.

Hazard identification is the process of identifying all hazards that threaten an area, including both natural and human-caused events. In the hazard identification stage, the planning team determined hazards that potentially threaten the city of Chula Vista.

All hazards identified by FEMA included: avalanche, coastal storm, coastal erosion, dam failure, drought/water supply, earthquake, expansive soils, extreme heat, flooding, hailstorm, house/building fire, land subsidence, landslide, liquefaction, severe winter storm, tornado, tsunami, wildfire, windstorm, and volcano.

Although not required by the FEMA Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, human-caused hazards, such as hazardous materials release, nuclear materials release, and terrorism, were also reviewed by the planning team. Climate change was also reviewed and discussed as potential hazard.

The hazard screening process involved narrowing the all-inclusive list of hazards to those most threatening to the city. The screening effort required extensive input from a variety of stakeholders, including representatives from County agencies, special districts, community members, and the private sector.

The City received significant support from the County of San Diego Office of Emergency Services (County OES), County Geographic Information Systems (GIS) experts from the County of San Diego’s Planning and Development Services, and used information from FEMA and other nationally and locally available databases to map the hazards, infrastructure, critical facilities, and land uses. This mapping effort was utilized in the hazard screening process to identify the top hazards with the greatest impact on the City.

5.2.1. Hazard Classifications
Definitions for Classifications
Location (Geographic Area Affected)
• Negligible: Less than 10 percent of planning area or isolated single-point occurrences • Limited: 10 to 25 percent of the planning area or limited single-point occurrences • Significant: 25 to 75 percent of planning area or frequent single-point occurrences • Extensive: 75 to 100 percent of planning area or consistent single-point occurrences

Maximum Probable Extent (Magnitude/Strength based on historic events or future probability)
• Weak: Limited classification on scientific scale, slow speed of onset or short duration of event, resulting in little to no damage
SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
27 • Moderate: Moderate classification on scientific scale, moderate speed of onset or moderate duration of event, resulting in some damage and loss of services for days • Severe: Severe classification on scientific scale, fast speed of onset or long duration of event, resulting in devastating damage and loss of services for weeks or months • Extreme: Extreme classification on scientific scale, immediate onset or extended duration of event, resulting in catastrophic damage and uninhabitable conditions

Hazard Scale / Index Weak Moderate Severe Extreme
Drought Palmer Drought Severity Index3 -1.99 to
+1.99
-2.00 to
-2.99
-3.00 to
-3.99
-4.00 and
below
Earthquake Modified Mercalli Scale4 I to IV V to VII VII IX to XII Richter Magnitude5 2, 3 4, 5 6 7, 8
Hurricane Wind Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind
Scale6 1 2 3 4, 5
Tornado Fujita Tornado Damage Scale7 F0 F1, F2 F3 F4, F5

Probability of Future Events
• Unlikely: Less than 1 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years.
• Occasional: 1 to 10 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years.
• Likely: 10 to 90 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 1 to 10 years
• Highly Likely: 90 to 100 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of less than 1 year.

Overall Significance
• Low: Two or more criteria fall in lower classifications, or the event has a minimal impact on the planning area. This rating is sometimes used for hazards with a minimal or unknown record of occurrences or for hazards with minimal mitigation potential. • Medium: The criteria fall mostly in the middle ranges of classifications and the event’s impacts on the planning area are noticeable but not devastating. This rating is sometimes used for hazards with a high extent rating but very low probability rating. • High: The criteria consistently fall in the high classifications and the event is likely/highly likely to occur with severe strength over a significant to extensive portion of the planning area.

o Cumulative meteorological drought and wet conditions: http://ncdc.noaa.gov/ o Earthquake intensity and effect on population and structures: http://earthquake.usgs.gov o Earthquake magnitude as a logarithmic scale, measured by a seismograph: http://earthquake.usgs.gov o Hurricane rating based on sustained wind speed: http://nhc.noaa.gov o Tornado rating based on wind speed and associated damage: http://spc.noaa.gov

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
28 The table below is a summary of the hazards reviewed and their significance to the city:

Hazard
Location
(Geographic Area
Affected)
Maximum Probable
Extent (Magnitude/Strength)
Probability of
Future Events
Overall
Significance
Ranking
Avalanche Negligible Weak Unlikely Low
Climate Change Extensive Moderate Likely Medium
Dam Failure Significant Moderate Unlikely Low
Drought Negligible Moderate Occasional Low
Earthquake Significant Severe Likely High
Erosion Limited Weak Unlikely Low
Expansive Soils Extensive Weak Unlikely Low
Extreme Cold Extensive Weak Unlikely Low
Extreme Heat Extensive Moderate Occasional Medium
Flood Significant Moderate Occasional Medium
Hail Extensive Weak Unlikely Low
Hurricane Negligible Weak Unlikely Low
Landslide Negligible Weak Unlikely Low
Lightning Extensive Weak Unlikely Low
Sea Level Rise Negligible Weak Unlikely Low
Severe Wind Extensive Moderate Occasional Medium
Severe Winter
Weather Significant Moderate Occasional Low
Storm Surge Negligible Weak Unlikely Low
Subsidence Extensive Weak Unlikely Low
Tornado Negligible Weak Unlikely Low
Tsunami Negligible Weak Unlikely Low
Wildfire Significant Extreme Likely High
TABLE 11: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 5.1 DATA.

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
29 5.3. Hazard Profiles
The following is a brief rationale of what has been determined as the most significant hazards in the city of Chula Vista.

Wildfire/Structure Fire
Description of Hazard
A structure fire hazard is one where there is a risk of a fire starting in an urban setting and spreading uncontrollably from one building to another across several city blocks, or within high- rise buildings.

A wildfire is an uncontrolled fire spreading through vegetative fuels and exposing or possibly consuming structures. They often begin unnoticed and spread quickly. Naturally occurring and non-native species of grasses, brush, and trees fuel wildfires.

A wildfire is in a wildland area in which development is essentially nonexistent—except for roads, railroads, power lines and similar facilities. An Urban-Wildland/Urban Interface fire is a wildfire in a geographical area where structures and other human development meet or intermingle with wildland or vegetative fuels. Areas that have experienced prolonged droughts or are excessively dry are at risk of wildfires.

Nature of Hazard
Chula Vista has several residential communities and commercial structures built in and around many wildland and open space areas. A number of these structures were developed prior to the enactment of the City’s Urban-Wildland interface Code in 2000. Additionally, Chula Vista abuts a rural mountainous region on the eastern boundary of the city that is rated as a very high fire hazard severity zone. Furthermore, Chula Vista is home to a large transient population, a community who often causes accidental vegetation fires throughout the year in the City’s riverbeds and open space areas. Couple these factors with the ongoing southern California drought and growing impacts of climate change, wildland/structure fires present the greatest hazard to the City of Chula Vista.

Past Occurrences
Chula Vista has an average of 42 vegetation fires per year, and any one of these fires, under the right conditions, could expand into a major incident. Chula Vista has experienced major historical fires in 2003 and 2007 and natural vulnerabilities to major wildfires continue to exist.

Significance, Likelihood and Probability
Wildfire is rated as a “high” hazard within the City because of the amount of open space and canyon areas that are located in the center city. These areas, if involved in a wildland fire, have the potential to affect a majority of the City’s population. The wildfire criteria consistently fall in the high classifications and the event is likely/highly likely to occur with severe strength over a significant to extensive portion of the planning area. Wildfire conditions could be extreme, and SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
30 there is 90 to 100 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of less than 1 year.

Location
The figures below display the location and extent of the profiled fire hazard areas for Chula Vista:

Chula Vista Fire Hazard Severity Zones

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
31 Chula Vista – Fire Threat

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
32 SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
33 Chula Vista – Wildland Urban Interface

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
34 SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
35 Chula Vista – Communities at Risk from Wildfire

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
36 SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
37 Flooding/Dam Inundation
Description of Hazard
A flood occurs when excess water from snowmelt, rainfall, or storm surge accumulates and overflows onto a river’s bank or to adjacent floodplains. Floodplains are lowlands adjacent to rivers, lakes, and oceans that are subject to recurring floods. Most injuries and deaths from flood occur when people are swept away by flood currents, and property damage typically occurs as a result of inundation by sediment-filled water.

Several factors determine the severity of floods, including rainfall intensity and duration. A large amount of rainfall over a short time span can result in flash flood conditions. A sudden thunderstorm or heavy rain, dam failure, or sudden spills can cause flash flooding. The National Weather Service’s definition of a flash flood is a flood occurring in a watershed where the time of travel of the peak of flow from one end of the watershed to the other is less than six hours.

Dam failures can result in severe flood events. When a dam fails, a large quantity of water is suddenly released with a great potential to cause human casualties, economic loss, lifeline disruption, and environmental damage. A dam failure is usually the result of age, poor design, or structural damage caused by a major event such as an earthquake or flood.

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
38 Nature of Hazard
Significant portions of the southerly, northerly, and westerly-developed areas of the City of Chula Vista are within FEMA-mapped 100-year floodplains. The City continues to reduce the flooding threat due to its emphasis on identifying and prioritizing for improvement a number of undersized and inadequate storm drains and drainage channels since the late 1960’s. Additionally the lower end probability of the occurrence of flood-producing storms in any given year and the requirement that new development includes flood-detention and flood control facilities also reduces the City’s flood risk. However, there are still several areas in the City that experience nuisance flooding that often causes damage.

Furthermore, the city of Chula Vista is downstream of two major dams – the Savage (Lower Otay) Dam and the Sweetwater Dam – the possibility of dam inundation in and adjacent to the Sweetwater and Otay River Channels exists, although the likelihood of failure of these dams is considered relatively small due to their construction.

Past Occurrences
Chula Vista experienced a dam break incident in 1916, which is known as the Great Flood of 1916, when the Sweetwater Dam broke a swept through the South Bay. The Otay Dam has experienced water overflowing through the spillway in 2017, flooding the Otay River Valley.

Although this is a natural occurrence and designed to function as such, these situations require coordinated mitigation and response actions.

Chula Vista also experiences nuisance flooding of roadways and ponding in portions of the City during large rain events. Most recently in 2017, a severe weather storm flooded several properties within the City. The City proclaimed a local emergency for this winter storm event that cost the City over $1 million in response and recovery. According to County provided data, Chula Vista has one repetitive loss property due to flooding.

Significance, Likelihood and Probability
Flooding and dam inundation are rated as a “medium” hazard within the City because of the two large dams that exist within the City and some of the older engineering in portions of the City have experienced flooding problems in the past. The criteria fall mostly in the middle ranges of classifications and the event’s impacts on the planning area are noticeable but not devastating.

This rating is sometimes used for hazards with a high extent rating but very low probability rating. Additionally, although the severity of complete dam is very high, there is only an occasional probability, a 1 to 10 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years.

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
39 Location
The figures below display the location and extent of the profiled fire hazard areas for Chula Vista:
100-Year Floodplain

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
40 500-Year Floodplain

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
41 Dam Inundation Areas

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
42 Geologic (Earthquake, Landslide, Liquefaction)
Description of Hazard
An earthquake is a sudden motion or trembling that is caused by a release of strain accumulated within or along the edge of the Earth's tectonic plates. The effects of an earthquake can be felt far beyond the site of its occurrence. They usually occur without warning and, after just a few seconds, can cause massive damage and extensive casualties.

Common effects of earthquakes are ground motion and shaking, surface fault ruptures, and ground failure. Ground motion is the vibration or shaking of the ground during an earthquake.

When a fault ruptures, seismic waves radiate, causing the ground to vibrate. The severity of the vibration increases with the amount of energy released and decreases with distance from the causative fault or epicenter. Soft soils can further amplify ground motions. The severity of these effects is dependent on the amount of energy released from the fault or epicenter. One way to express an earthquake's severity is to compare its acceleration to the normal acceleration due to gravity. The acceleration due to gravity is often called "g". A 100% g earthquake is very severe.

More damage tends to occur from earthquakes when ground acceleration is rapid. Peak ground acceleration (PGA) is a measure of the strength of ground movement. PGA measures the rate in change of motion relative to the established rate of acceleration due to gravity (980 cm/sec/sec). PGA is used to project the risk of damage from future earthquakes by showing earthquake ground motions that have a specified probability (10%, 5%, or 2%) of being exceeded in 50 years. These ground motion values are used for reference in construction design for earthquake resistance. The ground motion values can also be used to assess relative hazard between sites, when making economic and safety decisions.

Another tool used to describe earthquake intensity is the Richter scale. The Richter scale was devised as a means of rating earthquake strength and is an indirect measure of seismic energy released. The scale is logarithmic with each one-point increase corresponding to a 10-fold increase in the amplitude of the seismic shock waves generated by the earthquake. In terms of actual energy released, however, each one-point increase on the Richter scale corresponds to about a 32-fold increase in energy released. Therefore, a magnitude (M) 7 earthquake is 100 times (10 X 10) more powerful than a M5 earthquake and releases 1,024 times (32 X 32) the energy. An earthquake generates different types of seismic shock waves that travel outward from the focus or point of rupture on a fault. Seismic waves that travel through the earth's crust are called body waves and are divided into primary (P) and secondary (S) waves.

Because P waves move faster (1.7 times) than S waves they arrive at the seismograph first. By measuring the time delay between arrival of the P and S waves and knowing the distance to the epicenter, seismologists can compute the Richter scale magnitude for the earthquake.

The Modified Mercalli Scale (MMI) is another means for rating earthquakes, but one that attempts to quantify intensity of ground shaking. Intensity under this scale is a function of distance from the epicenter (the closer to the epicenter the greater the intensity), ground acceleration, duration of ground shaking, and degree of structural damage. This rates the level of severity of an earthquake by the amount of damage and perceived shaking, as displayed in the table below:

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
43 MMI
Value
Description
of Shaking
Severity
Summary
Damage
Description Used
on 1995 Maps
Full Description
I. Not felt
II. Felt by persons at rest, on upper floors, or favorably placed.

III. Felt indoors. Hanging objects swing. Vibration like passing of light trucks. Duration estimated. May not be recognized as an earthquake.

IV. Hanging objects swing. Vibration like passing of heavy trucks; or sensation of a jolt like a heavy ball striking the walls. Standing motorcars rock. Windows, dishes, doors
rattle. In the upper range of IV, wooden walls and frame creak.

V. Light Pictures Move Felt outdoors; direction estimated. Sleepers wakened.

Liquids disturbed, some spilled. Small unstable objects displaced or upset. Doors swing, close, open. Shutters, pictures move. Pendulum clock stop, start, change rate.

VI. Moderate Objects Fall Felt by all. Many frightened and run outdoors. Persons walk unsteadily. Windows, dishes, glassware broken.

Knickknacks, books, etc., off shelves. Pictures off walls.

Furniture moved or overturned. Weak plaster and
masonry D cracked.

VII. Strong Nonstructural
Damage
Difficult to stand. Noticed by drivers of motorcars.

Hanging objects quiver. Furniture broken. Damage to
masonry D, including cracks. Weak chimneys broken at
roofline. Fall of plaster, loose bricks, stones, tiles, cornices. Some cracks in masonry C. Small slides and
caving in along sand or gravel banks. Concrete irrigation ditches damaged.

VIII. Very Strong Moderate Damage Steering of motorcars affected. Damage to masonry C, partial collapse. Some damage to masonry B; none to
masonry A. Fall of stucco and some masonry walls.

Twisting, fall of chimneys, factory stacks, monuments,
towers, and elevated tanks. Frame houses moved on
foundations if not bolted down; loose panel walls thrown out. Cracks in wet ground and on steep slopes.

IX. Very
Violent
Extreme Damage Most masonry and frame structures destroyed with their foundations. Some well -built wooden structures and
bridges destroyed. Serious damage to dams, dikes,
embankments. Large landslides. Water thrown on banks
of canals, rivers, lakes, etc. Sand and mud shifted
horizontally on beaches and flat land.

X. Rails bent greatly. Underground pipelines completely out of services.

XI. Damage nearly total. Large rock masses displaced. Lines of sight and level distorted. Objects thrown into air.

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
44 Nature of Hazard
Due to its relative distance from the closest known active earthquake fault (Rose Canyon Fault), the city of Chula Vista is at low to moderate earthquake shaking potential, with the majority of risk confined to the western portion of the city. The most shaking would come from the Rose Canyon Fault scenario. The landslide threat is focused in the older developed areas around steep canyon slopes of known slide potential. The threat of liquefaction is relatively low; however, the alluvial areas of the Sweetwater and Otay Rivers and the Telegraph Canyon Channel are subject to liquefaction in both developed and undeveloped areas.

Past Occurrences
Historically, shaking from several earthquakes has been felt in Chula Vista but no identifiable damage has been reported as a result.

Significance, Likelihood and Probability
Earthquakes are listed as a “high” hazard significance for Chula Vista because of its close proximity to known fault zones and the construction of the west side of the City prior to established building codes.

The criteria for earthquake consistently fall in the high classifications and the event is likely/highly likely to occur with severe strength over a significant portion of the city.

Earthquakes are common in southern California and are likely to occur, with a 10 to 90 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 1 to 10 years.

Location
The figures below display the location and extent of the profiled earthquake hazard areas for Chula Vista:

Know Your Hazards – Earthquake (Chula Vista)

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
45 Earthquake - Rose Canyon Scenario (Magnitude 6.9)

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
46 SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
47 Earthquake - Mt. San Jacinto Fault Scenario (Magnitude 7.1)

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
48 SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
49 Earthquake - Elsinore Fault Scenario (Magnitude 6.8)

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
50 SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
51 Soil Liquefaction Areas

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
52 Climate Change Risks
Description of Hazard
Climate change refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns. These shifts may be natural, such as through variations in the solar cycle. Climate change changes the usual weather found in a particular place. This could be a change in how much rain a place usually gets in a year. Or it could be a change in a place's usual temperature for a month or season. Climate change affects the frequency and intensity of the various weather conditions. The consequences of climate change now include, among others, intense and longer periods of drought, water scarcity, more frequent and severe wildfires, rising sea levels, flooding, and catastrophic storms.

Nature of Hazard
While the City of Chula Vista enjoys a mild, Mediterranean climate the community is still susceptible to extreme weather events, which are being amplified by climate change. Scientists have seen that average San Diego County temperatures have increased 3 F over historical
averages and forecast average summer temperatures will be 5 F to 10
F warmer by the end of
the century, with extreme heat events also becoming more frequent and intense in the region. These heat events present a direct hazard to residents without air-conditioning and to vulnerable populations (such as seniors, the medically fragile, homeless, outdoor workers and others who are not able to take shelter). While inland areas typically see larger temperature increases, the strongest health impacts have been found at the coast, where residents are used to relatively mild temperatures and are not acclimated to heat. Extreme heat events can also impact local air quality conditions through the increase of smog-forming, ground-level ozone levels and result in additional public health concerns. Finally, the highly variable precipitation and sustained dry weather conditions further stress local water supplies as well as increase wildfire threats with the potential to increase the area burned in the County by up to 50%. While there is an overall trend towards less precipitation, there is also an expected increase flooding risk because the wettest days are expected to be up to 30% wetter by the end of the century. These events will also be exacerbated along the bay shoreline due to sea level rise that could be as much as 0.8 feet by 2050 and almost 5 feet by 2100.

Past Occurrences
Climate change has never been directly linked to any disasters within Chula Vista. While the planning team noted that climate change is of concern, no specific impacts of climate change could be recalled. Planning team members agree that the strength of storms does appear to be increasing and that temperatures are getting hotter.

Significance, Likelihood and Probability
Climate change is listed as a “medium” hazard significance for Chula Vista because of the trends we continue to see weather impacts having on natural disasters.

The criteria for climate change risks consistently fall into the medium-moderate rating. The occurrences of climate change events cannot be directly tied to any disasters experienced by the gradual increase in climate change is likely to have some occasional impact on the disasters.

Climate change impacts are noticeable but not devastating at this time.

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
53 Location
There are no specific locations that are impacted by climate change risks. The entire city is vulnerable to climate change risks.

Extreme Heat
Description of Hazard
Extreme heat is a period of high heat and humidity with temperatures above 90 degrees for at least two to three days. In extreme heat your body works extra hard to maintain a normal temperature, which can lead to death. Extreme heat is responsible for the highest number of annual deaths among all weather-related hazards.

Nature of Hazard
In most of the United States, including the entire planning area, extreme heat is a long period (2 to 3 days) of high heat and humidity with temperatures above 90 degrees. Although extreme heat does not cause structural damage like floods, fires, and earthquakes, heat waves claim many lives due to heat exhaustion and heat stroke. According to a California Energy Commission Study, from 1994 to 2009, heat waves have claimed more lives in California than all declared disaster events combined.

Despite this history, not a single heat emergency was formally proclaimed at the state level or as a federal disaster between 1960 and 2008. However, the California State Hazard Mitigation Plan considers extreme heat a legitimate disaster type.

Past Occurrences
Chula Vista has experienced many extreme heat events, with increasing significance since the last update of the MJHMP. During these events across the County, measures are taken to help aid the community in battling the extreme conditions, including opening and operating “Cool Zones’ to provide temperature-controlled sheltering for individuals who have no alternate reprieve.

Most recently, San Diego County was pounded with a record-breaking heat wave that lasted for two weeks. Daytime temperatures were above 90 degrees for the entre time period, and nighttime lows were in the seventy to eighty degree range.

Significance, Likelihood and Probability
Probability of future events is highly likely: 90 to 100 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of less than 1 year. The overall significance is rated as high, meaning the criteria for extreme heat conditions consistently fall in the high classifications and the event is likely/highly likely to occur with severe strength over a significant to extensive portion of the city.

Location
The entire planning area is facing an increase in the frequency, duration, and strength of heat waves in the coming decades. Research also indicates that heat waves are likely to become more humid in the future and with nighttime temperatures staying high, further stressing public health.

SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
54 Severe Wind
Although severe wind is listed as a “medium” ranked hazard for the City of Chula Vista. This hazard is omitted from a complete hazard profile because wind events in Chula Vista do not meet the criteria for severe wind as defined by the National Weather Service. To be considered severe, associated wind gusts must be 58 mph or greater (50 knots or greater). Damaging winds are classified as those exceeding 50-60 mph. The city of Chula Vista does not experience sustained winds or wind gusts that reach those levels.

5.4. Potential Hazard Exposure and Loss Estimates
The City of Chula Vista reviewed a set of jurisdictional -level hazard maps and data provided by the County of San Diego, including detailed critical facility information and localized potential hazard exposure/loss estimates related to residential, commercial, and critical asset /facilities to identify the top hazards threatening their jurisdiction. Potential hazard exposure/loss estimates are summarized in the tables below:

SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL HAZARD -RELATED EXPOSURE /LOSS IN

CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Residential Commercial Critical Facilities
Hazard Type
Exposed
Population
Number of
Residential
Buildings
Potential
Exposure Loss
for Residential
Buildings
Number of
Commercial
Buildings
Potential
Exposure
Loss for
Commercial
Buildings
Number of
Critical
Facilities
Potential
Exposure for
Critical
Facilities
Coastal Storm 0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0
Sea Level Rise
Coastal Flooding 116 0 $0 0 $0 1 $6,670,000
Mean Higher High
Water 0 0 $0 0 0 1 $6,670,000
Dam Failure 15,822 2,297 $892,614,200 628 $189,875,800 28 $1,141,742,000 Earthquake (Loss)
(Annualized Loss -
Includes shaking,
liquefaction and
landslide components)
3,170 3,342 $2,005,904,611 342 $163,269,000 4 $127,500,000 100 Year 0 0 $0 0 $0 0 0
500 Year 0 0 $0 0 $0 0 0
Rose Canyon M6.9
Scenario 210,011 46,508 $18,068,358,000 4,483 $1,355,435,050 156 $8,601,070,500 Floods (Loss)
SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
55 100 Year 1,741 633 $245,983,800 169 $51,097,150 18 $1,019,576,000 500 Year 14,651 3,628 $1,409,840,800 556 $168,106,600 29 $2,102,884,000 Rain-Induced Landslide
High Risk 865 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0
Moderate Risk 0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0
Tsunami 228 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0
Wildfire/Structure Fire
High Fire Hazard 8,464 2,863 $1,112,275,500 57 $17,233,950 6 $67,438,000 Very High Fire Hazard 15,354 2,583 $1,003,753,800 64 $19,350,400 2 $50,048,000 SECTION FIVE | Conduct a Risk Assessment
56 TABLE 5.2B INVENTORY EXPOSURE FOR INFRASTRUCTURE

CITY OF CHULA VISTA

Hazard Type Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Coastal Storm Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) $0 $0 $0 $0
Sea Level Rise
Coastal
Flooding Total KMs 1.83652 0.46008 0 2.30
Exposure
(x$1,000) $12,245,915 $314,235 $0 $12,560,150
Mean Higher
High Water Total KMs 0.78439 0.19520 0 0.98
Exposure
(x$1,000) $5,230,333 $133,320 $0 $5,363,652
Dam Failure Total KMs 114.036169 4.894356 1.94398 120.87 Exposure
(x$1,000) $760,393,175 $3,342,845 $2,915,970 $766,651,990 Earthquake (Loss)
100 Year Total KMs 3.168 0 0 3.168
Exposure
(x$1,000) $0 $0
500 Year Number 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) $0 $0 $0 $0
Flood (Loss)
100 Year Total KMs 31.6111 3.4751 0.13 35.22
Exposure
(x$1,000) $210,782,781 $2,373,489 $193,889 $213,350,159 500 Year Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) $0 $0 $0 $0
Rain-Induced Landslide
High Risk Total KMs 0.000257 0 0 0.000257
Exposure
(x$1,000) $1,714 $0 $0 $1,714
Moderate Risk Total KMs 0.441002 0.000002 0 0.44
Exposure
(x$1,000) $2,940,601 $1 $0 $2,940,602
Tsunami Total KMs 0.34857 0 0 0.34857
Exposure
(x$1,000) $2,324,265 $0 $0 $2,324,265
Wildfire/Structure Fire
Total KMs 32.84054 1.49899 0 34.34
High Fire Hazard Exposure
(x$1,000) $218,980,701 $1,023,809 $0 $220,004,510
Very High Fire
Hazard
Total KMs 41.085761 3.757584 0 44.84
Exposure (x1000) $273,959,854 $2,566,430 $0 $276,526,284 Total Number 226.152309 14.281312 2.07398 242.506827
Total Exposure (x $1,000) $1,486,859,339 $9,754,129 $3,109,859 $1,499,723,326 SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
57 6. SECTION SIX: Develop a Mitigation
Strategy

The mitigation strategy serves as the long-term blueprint for reducing potential losses identified in the risk assessment. The mitigation strategy describes how the community will accomplish the overall purpose, or mission, of the planning process.

The mitigation strategy is made up of three main required components: mitigation goals, mitigation actions, and an action plan for implementation. These provide the framework to identify, prioritize, and implement actions to reduce risk to hazards.

Mitigation goals are general guidelines that explain what the community wants to achieve with the plan. They are usually broad policy-type statements that are long-term, and they represent visions for reducing or avoiding losses from the identified hazards Mitigation actions are specific projects and activities that help achieve the goals.

The action plan describes how the mitigation actions will be implemented, including how those actions will be prioritized, administered, and incorporated into the existing planning mechanisms.

Although not required, objectives can be used to help define or organize mitigation actions.

Objectives are broader than specific actions, but are measurable, unlike goals. Objectives connect goals with the actual mitigation actions

6.1. Mitigation Action Evaluation

The table below was used to evaluate and prioritize each mitigation action being considered by the planning team. For each action, the planning team evaluated the potential benefits and/or likelihood of successful implementation for the criteria defined below.

Rank each of the criteria with a -1, 0 or 1 using the following scale:
• 1 = Highly effective or feasible
• 0 = Neutral
• -1 = Ineffective or not feasible

Example Evaluation Criteria:
• Life Safety – How effective will the action be at protecting lives and preventing injuries?
• Property Protection – How significant will the action be at eliminating or reducing damage to structures and infrastructure?
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
58 • Technical – Is the mitigation action technically feasible? Is it a long-term solution? Eliminate actions that, from a technical standpoint, will not meet the goals. • Political – Is there overall public support for the mitigation action? Is there the political will to support it?
• Legal – Does the community have the authority to implement the action? • Environmental – What are the potential environmental impacts of the action? Will it comply with environmental regulations?
• Social – Will the proposed action adversely affect one segment of the population? Will the action disrupt established neighborhoods, break up voting districts, or cause the relocation of lower income people?
• Administrative – Does the community have the personnel and administrative capabilities to implement the action and maintain it or will outside help be necessary? • Local Champion – Is there a strong advocate for the action or project among local departments and agencies that will support the action’s implementation? • Other Community Objectives – Does the action advance other community objectives, such as capital improvements, economic development, environmental quality, or open space preservation? Does it support the policies of the comprehensive plan? Mitigation Action Life Safety Property
Protection Technical Political Legal Environme
ntal Social Administra
tive
Local
Champion
Other
Communit
y
Objectives
Total Score
Local Plans and Regulations
Goal: Promote Disaster Resistant Existing and Future Development Develop a
comprehensive
approach to
implement the City’s
General Plan and
zoning codes to
ensure that
development is
limited in hazard
areas.
1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 9
Goal: Reduce the Possibility of Damage and Losses to Existing Assets, Including People and Critical Infrastructure, Due to Geological Hazards
Ensure the City has a
comprehensive
approach to
earthquake impacts,
inclusive of data
driven mitigation and
preparedness efforts,
and response
procedures.
1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 6
Goal: Reduce the Possibility of Damage and Losses to Existing Assets, Including People and Critical Infrastructure, Due to Dam Failure
Coordinate with local
dam operators to
review dam plans
and exercise response
procedures for dam
related emergencies,
1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 8
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
59 Mitigation Action Life Safety Property
Protection Technical Political Legal Environme
ntal Social Administra
tive
Local
Champion
Other
Communit
y
Objectives
Total Score
including
preparedness efforts
to inform the
community of the
dam failure threat.

Goal: Reduce the Possibility of Damage and Losses to Existing Assets, Including People and Critical Infrastructure, Due to Flooding
Reduce the
possibility of damage
and losses to existing
assets, including
people and critical
infrastructure due to
flooding / Flood
Plain Management
Ordinance
1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 8
Reduce the
possibility of damage
and losses to existing
assets, including
people and critical
infrastructure due to
flooding / General
Plan Update
1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 8
Reduce the
possibility of damage
and losses to existing
assets, including
people and critical
infrastructure due to
flooding /
Maintenance
1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 8
Goal: Reduce the Possibility of Damage and Losses to Existing Assets, Including People and Critical Infrastructure, Due to Climate Change Risks
Promote adaptation
to climate change
impacts
1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 9
Goal: Reduce the Possibility of Damage and Losses to Existing Assets, Including People and Critical Infrastructure, Due to Tsunami
Update and socialize
tsunami response
plans among City
officials and
responders.
1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 8
Structure and Infrastructure Projects
Goal: Reduce the Possibility of Damage and Losses to Existing Assets, Including People and Critical Infrastructure, Due to Structure Fire/Wildland Fire
Reduce the fire risk
in the wildland urban
interface through
improved annual
vegetation
management and
appropriate code
enforcement
1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 9
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
60 Mitigation Action Life Safety Property
Protection Technical Political Legal Environme
ntal Social Administra
tive
Local
Champion
Other
Communit
y
Objectives
Total Score
Goal: Reduce the Possibility of Damage and Losses to Existing Assets, Including People and Critical Infrastructure, Due to Flooding
Reduce the
possibility of damage
and losses to existing
assets, including
people and critical
infrastructure due to
flooding / Land
Development
1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 8
Reduce the
possibility of damage
and losses to existing
assets, including
people and critical
infrastructure due to
flooding / Telegraph
Canyon Channel
Improvement Project
0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 7
Natural Systems Protection
Goal: Reduce the Possibility of Damage and Losses to Existing Assets, Including People and Critical Infrastructure, Due to Flooding
Reduce Emissions 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 7
Education and Awareness Programs
Goal: Promote Public Understanding, Support, and Demand for Hazard Mitigation Improve public
knowledge of natural
and non-natural
hazards and
protective measures
so individuals
appropriately prepare
for and respond to
such hazards.
1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 9
Goal: Build and Sustain a Local Commitment to Become Less Vulnerable to Hazards Establish public and
private relationships
and partnerships to
build an increased
(resource) capacity
for preparing for and
responding to
emergencies
1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 7
Goal: Reduce the Possibility of Damage and Losses to Existing Assets, Including People and Critical Infrastructure, Due to Structure Fire/Wildland Fire
Conduct a fuels study
to better understand
the wildfire risk is all
areas of the city.
1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 8
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
61 Mitigation Action Life Safety Property
Protection Technical Political Legal Environme
ntal Social Administra
tive
Local
Champion
Other
Communit
y
Objectives
Total Score
Goal: Reduce the Possibility of Damage and Losses to Existing Assets, Including People and Critical Infrastructure, Due to Flooding
Reduce the
possibility of damage
and losses to existing
assets, including
people and critical
infrastructure due to
flooding by
maintaining clear &
improving risk prone
areas / Education
1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 8

SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
62 6.2. Mitigation Action Implementation
A mitigation action is a specific action, project, activity, or process taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from hazards and their impacts. Implementing mitigation actions helps achieve the plan’s mission and goals. The actions to reduce vulnerability to threats and hazards form the core of the plan and are a key outcome of the planning process.

Mitigation actions will be reviewed on an annual basis to track progress and effectiveness.

Mitigation actions will be completed, revised, or removed with every five-year update of the Hazard Mitigation Plan.

The mitigation actions listed below include information on the hazard identified, the primary issue, ideas for implementing the mitigation action and the lead and supporting agencies for ensuring its implementation. Additionally, potential funding sources are including for each mitigation action. For more information on potential funding sources and grants, please see the County of San Diego Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Base Plan, Section 6.2 This annex details the following mitigation action implementations:

6.2.1. Goal: Promote Public Understanding, Support, and Demand for Hazard Mitigation

Hazard: All-hazards
Background/Issue:

Although natural disasters do not occur as frequently in Chula Vista, the threat and risk of significant impact exists. As a result, there is a false sense of security and negligence surrounding personal disaster preparedness and mitigation efforts. The community should have a thorough understanding of the existing hazards and their risk. More information should be provided to residents and be made available through City sponsored channels so that residents can educate and protect themselves.

Mitigation Action/Project:

Public Education Program - Improve public knowledge of natural and non-natural hazards and protective measures so individuals appropriately prepare for and respond to such hazards, accomplished by:
• Developing educational videos identifying the various threats within the City of Chula Vista
• Participate in national preparedness month through promoting awareness to introduce new hazard information or reeducate the community of all hazards Ideas for Integration:
• Produce educational videos of the threats that exist within the city and publicize withing the community
• Utilize national disaster preparedness and awareness campaigns to introduce or reeducate the community about risks/hazards within the city.

Responsible Agency: Fire Department, Emergency Management Partners: Office of Communications
County of San Diego Office of Emergency Services
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
63 Potential Funding: State Homeland Security Grant Program Cost Estimate: Unknown
Benefits: (Losses
Avoided) Protection of life and property
Timeline: 2022-2027 and ongoing
Priority: Low
Worksheet Completed by: Marlon King, Fire Department

6.2.2. Goal: Build and Sustain a Local Commitment to Become Less Vulnerable to Hazards
Hazard: All-hazards
Background/Issue:

Disaster mitigation must involve investment and participation from the entire community. Local governments have a limit to the resources available and could benefit from having private sector partners who can support mitigation efforts. Public private partnerships are mutually beneficial and maximize resources that help protect the community.

Mitigation Action/Project:

Public/Private Partnership Initiative - Establish public and private relationships and partnerships to build an increased (resource) capacity for preparing for and responding to emergencies.

Ideas for Integration:
• Begin discussions with the Chamber of Commerce to identify strategies to integrate with the business community on disaster mitigation efforts • Attend local Chamber of Commerce meetings to promote disaster preparedness and mitigation efforts
• Establish a community incentive program that promotes preparedness and mitigation
Responsible Agency: Chula Vista Fire Department, Emergency Management Partners: Chamber of Commerce
Economic Development Department
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
64 Potential Funding:

General Fund
Public-Private Partnership Grants
Economic Development Funding
Cost Estimate: Unknown
Benefits: (Losses
Avoided) Protection of life and property, including lifeline infrastructure of local businesses.

Timeline: 2022-2027
Priority: Low
Worksheet Completed by: Marlon King, Fire Department

6.2.3. Goal: Promote Disaster Resistant Existing and Future Development

Hazard: All-hazards
Mitigation Action/Project:

Comprehensive and Inclusive Planning Procedures - Develop a comprehensive approach to implementing the City’s General Plan and zoning codes to ensure that development is limited in hazard areas.

Background/Issue:

Existing and Future development need to ensure the safety of the residents in their homes. Existing homes would be assisted by any retrofitting needs or additions to the structure to ensure the safety of the homeowner. Future development needs to be placed in areas that are outside of areas identified as hazard areas. If a future development is adjacent to a hazard area, technical studies, defensible space between the development and hazard area would be applied, and any additional measure s identified through technical analysis of the specific hazard area.

Ideas for Integration:
• Update the City’s Safety Element of the General Plan. • Update the City’s zoning ordinance to ensure new development is prohibited in extreme hazard areas that cannot be mitigated and set aside as open space.
• Amend the Fire Code and Building Code, as necessary, to be consistent with the appropriate policies of the General Plan.
• Establish and enforce buffer zones for development near hazard prone areas.
• Identify land uses appropriate to specific hazard areas. • Continue to provide hazmat compliance review any time a permit is obtained for any improvement on new and existing hazardous occupancies. • Use hazard overlays, including updating databases/GIS to identify hazard SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
65 prone new development.

Responsible Agency: Development Services Department
Partners: Engineering Department, Fire Department, IT Department Potential Funding: Development Impact Fees from development projects and possible Grant Funding (Federal/State)
Cost Estimate: Unknown
Benefits: (Losses
Avoided)
This will allow the City to reduce/eliminate potential hazards with existing and future development that will ensure safety to our residents.

Timeline: 2022-2027
Priority: High
Worksheet Completed by: Laura C. Black, Assistant Director of Development Services, Development Services

6.2.4. Goal: Reduce the Possibility of Damage and Losses to Existing Assets, Including People and Critical Infrastructure, Due to Structure Fire/Wildland Fire

Hazard: Wildfire
Background/Issue:

The City of Chula Vista has more than 30 wildland urban interface (WUI) areas throughout the city. More than 2,000 homes directly border these open space areas, and more than 350,000 structures are within "ember spotting zones". The City does not have an adequate budget to properly maintain the recommended separation of wild land vegetation and adjacent structures. Fire modeling has identified many of the canyons within the city of Chula Vista as “High” and “Very High” Fire Hazard areas.

The homes that line the canyon rim and homes within the ember zones are at highest risk of fires, such as those experienced during the 2003, 2007, and 2014 wildfire events in San Diego County. Since the last fires, several years have gone by without adequate vegetation management, which has led to increased fuel loading within the open space areas, allowing both native and invasive species to grow uncontrolled. In some cases, species have grown up to 20 feet tall. Additionally, much of the adjacent SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
66 construction was completed prior to fuel modification requirements and subsequent establishment of open-space areas within the canyons, which has allowed for the accumulation of vegetative biomass in close proximity to residential structures that do not include the latest structural code improvements.

These open space areas are also occupied by the city's transient population, which has previously resulted in accidental vegetation fires. These vegetation fires occur several times per month. Since 2005, Chula Vista has averaged 38+ wildland responses per year. With limited funds to establish a vegetation management program, homes within the ember zone will continue to remain at high risk. As it stands, the city's wildland urban interface protection is inadequate and does not provide a defensible space for the Fire Department to defend these homes
Mitigation Action/Project:

Vegetation Management Program - Reduce the fire risk in the wildland urban interface through improved annual vegetation management and appropriate code enforcement
Ideas for Integration:
• Continually seek mitigation funding from several funding sources, including the State Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program, Cal Fire Wildfire Prevention Grants Program, etc. • Adopt local ordinances allowing residences in wildfire threat areas to assist with vegetation management adjacent to their property
• Coordinate with the State to identify additional vegetation management options
Responsible Agency: Chula Vista Fire Department
Partners:

Chula Vista Public Works Department
Chula Vista Development Services Department
State of California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services Potential Funding:

Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program
Cal Fire Wildfire Prevention Grants Program
Cost Estimate: TBD
Benefits: (Losses
Avoided) Protect life and property within several communities in Chula Vista Timeline: 2022-2027 and ongoing
Priority: High
Worksheet Completed by: Marlon King, Fire Department

SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
67 Hazard: Wildfire/Structure Fire
Background/Issue:

The wildfire risk that exists in Chula Vista is based on several factors, including fuel type, fuel density, topography, etc. To better understand the risk that the city faces, a risk assessment should be conducted, inclusive of a fuels study that can help the Fire Department understand how fires will behave in various locations throughout the city.

All open space areas and canyons are not the same and the risk and fire behavior in each area will also be different. A better understanding of the fire potential and characteristics as well as modeling will help the City be better prepared to respond.

Mitigation Action/Project: Fuels Study Project - Conduct a fuels study to better understand the wildfire risk in all areas of the city.

Ideas for Integration:
• Identify scientific agencies or groups that can perform a study of the fuels in Chula Vista
• Identify scientific agencies or groups that could perform fire behavior modeling for the various fire threats in the city
Responsible Agency: Chula Vista Fire Department
Partners: Development Services Department
Public Works Department
Potential Funding: General Fund
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
Cost Estimate: Unknown
Benefits: (Losses
Avoided) Protect life and property within the city
Timeline: 2022-2027
Priority: Medium
Worksheet Completed by: Marlon King, Fire Department

SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
68 6.2.5. Goal: Reduce the Possibility of Damage and Losses to Existing Assets, Including People and Critical Infrastructure, Due to Geological Hazards

Hazard: Earthquake
Background/Issue:

Due to its relative distance from the closest known active earthquake fault (Rose Canyon Fault), the city of Chula Vista is at low to moderate earthquake shaking potential, with most of the risk confined to the western portion of the city. The landslide threat is focused in the older developed areas around steep canyon slopes of known slide potential. The threat of liquefaction is relatively low; however, the alluvial areas of the Sweetwater and Otay Rivers and the Telegraph Canyon Channel are subject to liquefaction in both developed and undeveloped areas.

Mitigation Action/Project:

Earthquake Mitigation Planning Guidance - Ensure the City has a comprehensive approach to earthquake impacts, inclusive of data driven mitigation and preparedness efforts, and response procedures.

Ideas for Integration:
• Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to geological hazards.
• Protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of geological hazards.
• Coordinate with and support existing efforts to mitigate geological hazards (e.g., California Geological Survey, US Geological Survey).

Responsible Agency: Chula Vista Fire Department, Emergency Management Partners: Development Services Department
Potential Funding: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
Cost Estimate: Unknown
Benefits: (Losses
Avoided) Protection of life and property
Timeline: 2022-2027
Priority: Medium
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
69 Worksheet Completed by: Marlon King, Fire Department

6.2.6. Goal: Reduce the Possibility of Damage and Losses to Existing Assets, Including People and Critical Infrastructure, Due to Dam Failure

Hazard: Dam Failure
Background/Issue:

The threat of dam failure is not widely known within the city of Chula Vista and response exercises and training has not been provided to first responders. Dam Plans should be shared among first responders and response operations should be practiced on a continual basis.

Mitigation Action/Project:

Dam Preparedness and Response Guide - Coordinate with local dam operators to review dam plans and exercise response procedures for dam related emergencies, including preparedness efforts to inform the community of the dam failure threat.

Ideas for Integration:
• Coordinate with local dam operators to review and update plans as necessary • Review and understand the impacts of dam failure within the community • Inform community members of potential threats from dam failure emergencies
• Provide training and exercise for first responders on dam failure emergencies Responsible Agency: Chula Vista Fire Department
Partners:

Otay Water District
Sweetwater Authority
Chula Vista Police Department
Chula Vista Public Works Department
Chula Vista Office of Communications
County of San Diego Office of Emergency Services
Potential Funding: General Fund
Federal Community Preparedness Grants
Cost Estimate: Unknown
Benefits: (Losses
Avoided) Protect loss of life and property
Timeline: 2022-2027 and ongoing
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
70 Priority: Medium
Worksheet Completed by: Marlon King, Fire Department

6.2.7. Goal: Reduce the Possibility of Damage and Losses to Existing Assets, Including People and Critical Infrastructure, Due to Flooding

Hazard: Flooding
Background/Issue:

By having a Floodplain Ordinance & Drainage Master Plan, which is regularly monitored and updated, the city can keep damage and loss to assets, people, and infrastructure to a minimum.

Mitigation Action/Project:

Flooding Education Program - Reduce the possibility of damage and losses to existing assets, including people and critical infrastructure due to flooding by maintaining clear & improving risk prone areas / Education Ideas for Integration:
• Minimize repetitive losses caused by flooding.
• Request assistance from State and Federal governments, as necessary, to enable the City to maintain compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) requirements.
• Maintain strict development standards for any request to develop in risk prone areas.
• Education Program on importance of maintaining drainage system clear of debris.

Responsible Agency: City of Chula Vista
Partners: City of Chula Vista Engineering Department & Public Works Department.

Potential Funding: Floodplain Management, Protection and Risk Awareness (FMPRA) Grant Program Cost Estimate: $100,000
Benefits: (Losses
Avoided) Unknown.

SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
71 Timeline: Complete by end of FY23.

Priority: Low
Worksheet Completed by: Frank Rivera, Engineering & Capital Projects Department.

Hazard: Flooding
Background/Issue:

The City of Chula Vista covers approximately 52-square miles and a population of over 275,000. Chula Vista Municipal Code includes a Flood Plain Ordinance which allows for residents to qualify for the FEMA Flood Insurance Risk Program to enable the City to maintain compliance with the National Flood insurance Program (NFIP) requirements. Thus, residents are allowed to reduce their risk caused by flood events which helps protect their assets and keep personal financial losses to assets, people, and infrastructure to a minimum.

Mitigation Action/Project: Flood Plain Management Ordinance Ideas for Integration:
• Incorporate information on projected sea level rise into the assessment of areas affected by the 100-year flood.
• Provide information on State and Federal funding sources available to flood - proof existing structures/facilities in flood-prone areas. • Periodically review City compliance with NFIP requirements. • Review current dam failure information/data for clarity and accuracy. • Review current evacuation plans for accuracy and practicality and publicize these plans.
• Obtain and review State-mandated annual dam assessment reports. • Identify and prioritize critical facilities within dam inundation zones. • Identify vulnerable populations within dam inundation areas. • Identify Federal and State funding to minimize/mitigate dam inundation hazards to critical facilities and vulnerable populations. • Update plans/data periodically to adequately represent existing conditions/ vulnerable populations.
• Conduct survey of assets within dam inundation areas.

Responsible Agency: City of Chula Vista Engineering & Capital Projects Department Partners: City of Chula Vista Development Services Department, Public Works, GIS.

Potential Funding: Development Impact Fees, Master Fee Schedule, General Fund.

SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
72 Cost Estimate: Partial Full Cost Recovery
Benefits: (Losses
Avoided) Unknown.

Timeline: Ongoing program.

Priority: Medium
Worksheet Completed by: Frank Rivera/Engineering & Capital Projects Department

Hazard: Flooding
Background/Issue:

The General Plan identifies land uses and features such as drainage basins within our jurisdiction and sphere of influence. Clearly defined areas for development and open spaces help protect assets and keeps losses to assets, people and infrastructure to a minimum.

Mitigation Action/Project: General Plan Update
Ideas for Integration:
• Encourage the establishment of adequate open space in flood zones as indicated on FEMA flood maps.
• Update Drainage Element of the General Plan based upon actual developed conditions (General Plan, GMOC Section).
• Discourage the disruption of natural flowage patterns and encourage the maximum use of natural and naturalized drainage ways in new development (General Plan drainage and flood control policies).
• Update plans/data periodically to adequately represent existing conditions/ vulnerable populations.

Responsible Agency: City of Chula Vista
Partners: City of Chula Vista. Public via outreach and workshop events.

Potential Funding: General Fund.

Cost Estimate: $1,000,000
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
73 Benefits: (Losses
Avoided) Unknown.

Timeline: Three years.

Priority: High
Worksheet Completed by: Frank Rivera/Engineering & Capital Projects Department

Hazard: Flooding
Background/Issue:

The City of Chula Vista covers approximately 52-square miles and a population of over 275,000. Due to land use regulations at the local, state & federal level, all land development applications must be carefully evaluated on a case-by-case basis for conformance to these regulations in order to help protect assets and keep losses to assets, people and infrastructure to a minimum.

Mitigation Action/Project: Review, Update and Enforce Land Development Policies and Procedures Ideas for Integration:
• Continue to review applications for new development within the City in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provisions set forth by the State of California, thereby requiring individualized studies for flood hazards on an as-needed basis and establishing mitigation measures for the development project before construction begins.
• Monitor and enforce compliance with CEQA-mandated mitigation measures and FEMA requirements during development and construction, as the project requires.
• Continue to require flood control improvements of new development where flooding is already a problem (existing ordinances).
• Where possible, implement drainage improvements with an emphasis on improving downstream facilities before improving upstream facilities, unless upstream mitigation (such as detention or retention basins) is provided. • Require the submittal of Letters of Map Revision (LOMRs)/ Letters of Map Amendment (LOMAs) as required by FEMA.
• Continue to review applications for new development within the City in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provisions set forth by the State of California, thereby requiring individualized studies for flood hazards on an as-needed basis and establishing mitigation measures for the development project before construction begins.
• Monitor and enforce compliance with CEQA mandated mitigation measures during development and construction, as the development project requires.

SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
74 Responsible Agency: City of Chula Vista Development Services Department Partners: City of Chula Vista Engineering Department, Public Works, GIS.

Potential Funding: Development Impact Fees, Master Fee Schedule.

Cost Estimate: Full Cost Recovery
Benefits: (Losses
Avoided) Unknown.

Timeline: Ongoing program.

Priority: Medium
Worksheet Completed by: Frank Rivera/Engineering & Capital Projects Department

Hazard: Flooding
Background/Issue:

The City of Chula Vista covers approximately 52-square miles. Due to the development, there are many natural and manmade drainage facilities that must be maintained clear of debris and functional to help protect assets and keeps losses t o assets, people and infrastructure to a minimum.

Mitigation Action/Project: Maintenance Program
Ideas for Integration:
• Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to floods by maintaining an annual maintenance program & capital program.
• Protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of floods within the 100-year floodplain.
• Prevent deposit of fill or construction within any floodway. • Identify and define local hazard areas and to monitor floodplain management.
• Update Flood layers in GIS upon FEMA approval of LOMRs/LOMAs. • Obtain and review State-mandated annual dam assessment reports. • Identify and prioritize critical facilities within dam inundation zones. • Conduct survey of assets within dam inundation areas.

SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
75 Responsible Agency: City of Chula Vista Public Works Department Partners: City of Chula Vista Public Works, GIS.

Potential Funding: General Fund, Storm Drain Fund
Cost Estimate: $2.0 million
Benefits: (Losses
Avoided) Unknown.

Timeline: Annual maintenance program.

Priority: High
Worksheet Completed by: Frank Rivera/Engineering & Capital Projects Department

Hazard: Flooding
Background/Issue:

By having a Drainage Master Plan that identifies assets and needs in all drainage basins within our jurisdiction, the city can stay aware of drainage system maintenance needs and improvement needs to keep damage and loss to assets, people, and infrastructure to a minimum.

Mitigation Action/Project: Telegraph Canyon Channel Improvement Project Ideas for Integration:
• Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to floods.
• Protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of floods within the 100-year floodplain.

Responsible Agency: City of Chula Vista
Partners: City of Chula Vista, adjacent property owners, resource agencies.

SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
76 Potential Funding: Local sales tax, developer impact fees and Federal ARPA funds.

Cost Estimate: $13,000,000
Benefits: (Losses
Avoided) Unknown.

Timeline: Preliminary studies & design have started. Construction to be completed by FY25.

Priority: High
Worksheet Completed by: Frank Rivera/Engineering & Capital Projects Department

6.2.8. Goal: Reduce the Possibility of Damage and Losses to Existing Assets, Including People and Critical Infrastructure, Due to Climate Change Risks

Hazard: Climate Change Risks
Background/Issue:

The average San Diego County temperatures have increased 3 degrees F over historical averages and forecasted average summer temperatures will be 5 degrees F to 10 degrees F warmer by the end of the century. Wildfires are expected to incr ease in size and while our region is projected to receive less precipitation, it is expected to come in more high intensity events, which can increase flooding. These known and expected consequences of climate change require us to put in place policies an d programs that reduce the impact to residents and businesses.

Mitigation Action/Project: Promote adaptation to climate change impacts Ideas for Integration:
• Promote Chula Vista Climate Equity Index and Cal EnviroScreen tool to identify populations effected by extreme heat and other climate impacts. • Update Climate Equity Index to identify highest heat island index areas in order to more effectively target mitigation activities such as shade trees, cool roofs and cool pavement.
• Continue to operate cool zones in diverse areas around the City and ensure that critical facilities in the city, such as community services, cool zones and other emergency shelters, are able to provide adequate air-conditioning during loss of grid-supplied power.

SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
77 • Update, as needed, and continue to implement the Healthy Chula Vista Action Plan or any other plans that comprehensively support public health • Update, as needed, and continue to implement the Chula Vista General Plan and Climate Action Plan, including the most recently adopted adaptation plan to incorporate the most recent scientific data and to ensure that public service and infrastructure are resilient to climate change. • Continue promotion of public awareness about extreme heat, drought and related climate change concerns.
• Increase building codes and update city facilities to best prepare buildings for impacts of heat waves, drought and other climate change risks. • Work with regional partners, such as the San Diego Regional Climate Collaborative and the County’s 211 helpline to promote regional action and information distribution.

Responsible Agency: Economic Development
Partners: Development Services, Public Works, Fire, Community Services Departments, SANDAG, The Port of San Diego, County of San Diego, State of California Potential Funding:

City General Fund, SANDAG, State grants (CalRecycle, CEC, CPUC, Natural Resource Agency) and incentives programs, Sweetwater Authority, Otay Water District
Cost Estimate: Unknown
Benefits: (Losses
Avoided)
By adapting and reducing the negative impacts our community is seeing from climate change, such as increased heat waves, wildfire, sea level rise, flooding, and droughts we will reduce the economic and health impacts to community members and city infrastructure.

Timeline: 2022-2027
Priority: High
Worksheet Completed by: Cory Downs, Economic Development

Hazard: Climate Change Risks
Background/Issue:

Rising greenhouse gas emissions increase the impacts of climate change felt in Chula Vista. The City must reduce community wide emissions to net zero by 2045 to be in line with the state of California and the Science Based Reduction targets.

SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
78 Priority Mitigation
Action/Project: Reduce Emissions
Ideas for Integration:
• Implement the Climate Action Plan and work with community stakeholders to updated as necessary, approximately every 5-7 years. • Work with local energy utilities to reach 100% decarbonized energy sources of electricity and natural gas by 2045 at the latest.
• Update building codes to promote water conservation, decarbonized buildings and decarbonized transportation
• Implement the Zero Waste Plan to reduce direct and upstream greenhouse gas emission from the waste sector
• Implement the Active transportation plan to support biking and walking transportation items.
• Continue to implement complete communities, transit focused development and other land use planning efforts called out in Specific Area Plans, Urban Plans and General Plan to reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) • Study to opportunity for carbon sequestration in Chula Vista and implement a pilot project to learn about costs and benefits.

Responsible Agency: Economic Development
Partners:

Development Services, Public Works, Fire, Community Services Departments, SANDAG, The Port of San Diego, County of San Diego, State of California, San Diego Gas & Electric, San Diego Community Power
Potential Funding:

City General Fund, SANDAG, State grants (CalRecycle, CEC, CPUC) and incentives programs, San Diego Gas & Electric, San Diego Community Power, Sweetwater Authority, Otay Water District
Cost Estimate: Unknown
Benefits: (Losses
Avoided)
By reducing greenhouse gas emissions, we will reduce our community’s c ontribution to climate change and minimize our contribution to impacts such as increased heat waves, wildfire, sea level rise, flooding and droughts.

Timeline: 2022-2027
Priority: High
Worksheet Completed by: Cory Downs, Economic Development

SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
79 6.2.9. Goal: Reduce the Possibility of Damage and Losses to Existing Assets, Including People and Critical Infrastructure, Due to Tsunami

Hazard: Tsunami
Background/Issue:

The city of Chula Vista is a coastline community with some level of Tsunami threat.

The most recent State of California tsunami maps for San Diego County were last updated in 2009. Neighboring counties have updated tsunami maps in 2021. Although existing data shows there is low impact from tsunami inundation in Chula Vista, the tsunami threat is not widely known and tsunami response operations have not been shared, exercised, or publicized.

Priority Mitigation
Action/Project: Update and socialize tsunami response plans among City officials and responders.

Ideas for Integration:
• Participate in the Tsunami Playbook update with the County of San Diego • Coordinate with County and the State to update tsunami inundation maps • Provide training to all City responders on tsunami response protocols • Coordinate with the Office of Communications to provide tsunami hazard and threat information to Chula Vista residents
Responsible Agency: Chula Vista Fire Department, Emergency Management Partners:

Office of Communications
County of San Diego Office of Emergency Services
California Geological Survey
California Governor's Office of Emergency Services
National Weather Service
Chula Vista Police Department
Chula Vista Public Works Department
Potential Funding: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) grant program Cost Estimate: Unknown
Benefits: (Losses
Avoided) Will protect loss of life and property
Timeline: 2022-2027
Priority: Medium
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
80 Worksheet Completed by: Marlon King, Chula Vista Fire Department

SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current
81 7. SECTION SEVEN: Keep the Plan
Current
Hazard Mitigation Plan maintenance is the process the planning team establishes to track the plan’s implementation progress and to inform the plan update. The plan must include a description of the method and schedule for monitoring, evaluating, and updating it within a 5- year cycle. These procedures help to:
• Ensure that the mitigation strategy is implemented according to the plan. • Provide the foundation for an ongoing mitigation program in your community. • Standardize long-term monitoring of hazard-related activities. • Integrate mitigation principles into community officials’ daily job responsibilities and department roles.
• Maintain momentum through continued engagement and accountability in the plan’s progress.

Hazard Mitigation Plan updates provide the opportunity to consider how well the procedures established in the previously approved plan worked and revise them as needed. This annex is part of the most recent San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan update. The plan was last updated in 2018. See the San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan for more information.

7.1. Mitigation Action Progress
Plan monitoring means tracking the implementation of the plan over time. Below is a review of the progress of mitigation actions listed in the 2018 Hazard Mitigation Plan. 2018 Priority Action #1
Progress Report
Period From Date: 2017 To Date: 2022
Action/Project Title
Provide and maintain adequate training for City emergency personnel to carry out local responsibilities during various types of emergencies.

Responsible
Department
Fire
Contact Name Marlon King
Contact Phone/Email
619-409-5482
[email protected]
Project Status
• Ongoing
Project
Accomplishments
• The Chula Vista Emergency Management Program hosted
several drills and trainings for Emergency Operations Center staff and first responder personnel during this period. Trainings SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current
82 2018 Priority Action #1
are designed to increase the education and understanding of roles and responsibilities during emergencies.
• The City also activated the EOC multiple times for real world emergencies during this time and allowed staff to implement the skills and knowledge developed during trainings. Real world responses were successful.

Obstacles, Problems,
or Delays
• Emergency response trainings often compete with day-to-day duties of City employees who are tasked with emergency roles as ancillary duties. Additionally, with the movement of employees throughout the City to various departments and new roles, and the constant turnover of employees in and out of the city, maintaining a cache of trained employees is difficult.

Relevancy and
Anticipated Project
Changes
• This project will always be relevant because being prepared is a staple of effective emergency management. Preparedness is imperative to the success of mitigation.

Other Comments • None

2018 Priority Action #2
Progress Report
Period From Date: 2017 To Date: 2022
Action/Project Title Update the City’s zoning ordinance periodically and address development in hazard areas and minimize zoning ambiguities.

Responsible
Department
Development Services Department
Contact Name Todd Philips
Contact Phone/Email 619.409.5465 – [email protected] Project Status • Project delayed
Project
Accomplishments
• Fee program was put in place to fund staff to support the proactive zoning ordinance update.

Obstacles, Problems,
or Delays
• A dedicated staff member was hired and began work but left City employment after 1 year. City recruiting to fill the position.

Relevancy and
Anticipated Project
Changes
• This effort is still relevant and will continue to move forward.

SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current
83 2018 Priority Action #2
Other Comments • None

2018 Priority Action #3
Progress Report
Period From Date: 2017 To Date: 2022
Action/Project Title Finalize and adopt a Community Wildfire Protection Plan.

Responsible
Department
Fire Department
Contact Name Justin Gipson – Division Chief of Fire Prevention/Fire Marshal Contact Phone/Email (619) 409-5841 - [email protected] Project Status • Project completed
Project
Accomplishments
• Although the development of the CWPP was completed in 2011, many of the objectives and activities within the plan are on-going. During this time, grant funding has been secured to perform vegetation management in the City’s highest risk open space areas.
• Additionally, a mitigation project was completed in partnership with the Urban Corp to perform vegetation management
activities in several other open space areas around the list.

Obstacles, Problems,
or Delays • None
Relevancy and
Anticipated Project
Changes
• None
Other Comments • None

2018 Priority Action #4
Progress Report
Period From Date: 2017 To Date: 2022
Action/Project Title Develop, implement, and maintain, when necessary, mutual aid agreements.

Responsible
Department
All City Departments
Contact Name Marlon King
Contact (619) 409-5482 [email protected]
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current
84 2018 Priority Action #4
Phone/Email
Project Status • Project On-going
Project
Accomplishments
• The City continuously engages in partnerships that will enhance the City’s capabilities as it relates to disaster management. The City has established several MOUs with County partners, neighboring jurisdictions, non-profit agencies, and non- governmental organizations.

Obstacles,
Problems, or
Delays
• None
Relevancy and
Anticipated Project
Changes
• On-going. This project will always be relevant as new threats emerge and the need for cooperation among agencies will always exist.

Other Comments • None

2018 Priority Action #5
Progress Report
Period From Date: 2017 To Date: 2022
Action/Project
Title
Require Flood Hazards Studies for New Developments
Responsible
Department
Development Services Department
Contact Name Laura C. Black, AICP, Assistant Director of Development Services Contact
Phone/Email
619.691.5002 [email protected]
Project Status
• Project on schedule
o This project is an ongoing effort that occurs as part of the new development review process. Projects are evaluated for potential flood hazards and studies are required as part of that review process.

Project
Accomplishments
• All new development projects were/are evaluated for potential flood hazards.

Obstacles,
Problems, or
Delays
• None
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current
85 2018 Priority Action #5
Anticipated
Project Changes • This project remains on-going
Other Comments • None

2018 Priority Action #6
Progress Report
Period From Date: 2017 To Date: 2022
Action/Project Title Provide citizens with Community Emergency Response Team training opportunities to increase public awareness of hazards and response to hazards, as resources are available.

Responsible
Department
Fire Department
Contact Name Marlon King
Contact
Phone/Email
619-409-5482
[email protected]
Project Status On-going
Project
Accomplishments
• The Chula Vista Fire Depart CERT continued to operate during this time and hosted several public trainings, CERT Academies, and real- world deployments for CERT members.
o Public Trainings included CPR certification, wildland urban interface education, fire extinguisher, first-aid, and gas meters, active shooter + stop the bleed.
o CERT Academy was offered in both English and Spanish.

Multiple academies were conducted in both languages during this time. A Teen CERT Academy was also conducted for the youth.
o Deployments included smoke alarm installation, food
distribution during COVID-19, and participation in full scale emergency response exercises.

Obstacles,
Problems, or
Delays
• None
Relevancy and
Anticipated Project
Changes
• None
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current
86 2018 Priority Action #6
Other Comments
• Funding continues to be a challenge. Additionally, keeping members engaged with new training opportunities and activations areas for improvement.

2018 Priority Action #7
Progress Report
Period From Date: 2017 To Date: 2022
Action/Project Title Require structural flood control improvements of new development where flooding is already a problem (existing ordinances).

Responsible
Department
Engineering Department
Contact Name William Valle; Frank Rivera
Contact
Phone/Email
[email protected]; [email protected]
Project Status On-going
Project
Accomplishments
• The project we completed in this period has been the Willow Street Bridge which the new design is at a higher elevation than the old bridge as it crosses the Sweetwater River. The construction transfer memo is dated February 2017 and we finished it in December 2020.

Obstacles, Problems,
or Delays • None
Relevancy and
Anticipated Project
Changes
• None
Other Comments
• In our Floodplain Ordinance from 2019, there is language in it regarding the requirements for new development and also for any existing development that may have been approved prior. Note that there are many requirements in Chula Vista Municipal Code

14.18.270 through 290 on variances and appeals to allow for building in a Special Flood Hazard Area. We have a good system of checks & balances:
o CVMC 14.18.010 - Our requirements to continue to participate in the Federal NFIP.
o CVMC 14.18.050 – No structure will be allowed to be allowed in special flood areas without compliance to the ordinance. o CVMC 14.18.110 – Permits required for any development within the Special Flood Hazard Area
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current
87 2018 Priority Action #7
o CVMC 14.18.230 – Duties of the City Engineer
o CVMC 14.18.240 – Duties of the Building Official
o CVMC 14.18.250 – Duties of the Planning Director
o CVMC 14.18.270/280/290 – Floodplain Variances/Findings Necessary/Appeals
• We have adopted the most recent model template ordinance that FEMA sent us and are in full compliance with their requirements.

SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current
88 7.2. Plan Update Evaluation

Plan Section Considerations Explanation

Planning
Process
Should new jurisdictions and/or
districts be invited to participate in
future plan updates?
Future plan updates should include any agencies, or
districts that have or support critical infrastructure.

Have any internal or external agencies
been invaluable to the mitigation
strategy?
All City Departments have been invaluable to the
development of the City’s mitigation strategy. Moving
forward, the Sustainability division within the City will be increasingly important because of the rapidly evolving
climate change.

The County of San Diego and State of California have been integral in the development of the mitigation plan and the securing of mitigation funding to support the goals and objectives identified within the plan.

Can any procedures (e.g., meeting
announcements, plan updates) be done
differently or more efficiently?
The new format of the hazard mitigation plan will
streamline future plan updates and progress reporting.

Has the Planning Team undertaken
any public outreach activities?
Yes, various departments have engaged with community
groups and community members to understand concerns
and identify areas for increased education and hazard
mitigation improvement.

How can public participation be
improved?
Public participation during this plan update was difficult and limited because of the COVID-19 pandemic. In the
future, multiple community forums will be beneficial to the plan update.

Have there been any changes in public
support and/or decision- maker
priorities related to hazard mitigation?
Unknown. City leadership and public support remain
aligned that hazard mitigation projects are necessary. The main point of contention is agreement on where the
funding should come from.

Capability
Assessment
Have jurisdictions adopted new
policies, plans, regulations, or reports
that could be incorporated into this
plan?
New ordinances (with a nexus to hazard mitigation) are
developed as necessary, and as they are adopted, they will be incorporated into the hazard mitigation plan.

Are there different or additional
administrative, human, technical, and
financial resources available for
mitigation planning?
Not at this time.

Are there different or new education
and outreach programs and resources
available for mitigation activities?
Unknown, but City staff will continue to explore
educational and outreach options.

SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current
89 Has NFIP participation changed in the
participating jurisdictions? No

Risk
Assessment
Has a natural and/or technical or
human-caused disaster occurred? Yes
Should the list of hazards addressed in
the plan be modified?
Yes, only relevant hazards should be listed in the plan.

Hazards vary by geographic location.

Are there new data sources and/or
additional maps and studies available?
If so, what are they and what have they
revealed? Should the information be
incorporated into future plan updates?
It is unknown if there are new mapping products and/or
data sources available, however, new maps and data would be extremely helpful to portray how the disaster risk has changed from previous years.

Do any new critical facilities or
infrastructure need to be added to the
asset lists?
All new critical infrastructure should be included in the plan upon every plan update.

Have any changes in development
trends occurred that could create
additional risks?
The City is unaware of any development trends that have created more risk.

Are there repetitive losses and/or
severe repetitive losses to document?
According to the 2022 FEMA Repetitive Loss Summary
Report, the City of Chula Vista has 1 Repetitive Loss
property, but no Severe Repetitive Loss properties.

TABLE 12: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 7.2 DATA.

Plan Section Considerations Explanation

Mitigation
Strategy
Is the mitigation strategy being
implemented as anticipated? Were the
cost and timeline estimates accurate?
Mitigation strategies are implemented as anticipated and within planned budgets.

Should new mitigation actions be
added to the Action Plan? Should
existing mitigation actions be revised
or eliminated from the plan?
At this time no new action should be added or eliminated but will be reviewed and evaluated for future updates of the plan.

Are there new obstacles that were not
anticipated in the plan that will need to
be considered in the next plan update?
Not at this time
Are there new funding sources to
consider?
The City constantly reviews grant opportunities to
maximize hazard mitigation funding.

Have elements of the plan been
incorporated into other planning
mechanisms?
Yes
Was the plan monitored and evaluated
as anticipated? Yes
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current
90 Plan
Maintenance
Procedures
What are needed improvements to the
procedures? None at this time.

TABLE 13: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 7.2 DATA CONTINUE

SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current
91 7.3. Plan Maintenance, Monitoring, Evaluation and Updates Hazard Mitigation Plan maintenance is the process the Planning Team establishes to track the plan’s implementation progress and to inform the plan update. The plan must include a description of the method and schedule for monitoring, evaluating, and updating it within a 5- year cycle. These procedures help to:
• Ensure that the mitigation strategy is implemented according to the plan. • Provide the foundation for an ongoing mitigation program in your community. • Standardize long-term monitoring of hazard-related activities. • Integrate mitigation principles into community officials’ daily job responsibilities and department roles.
• Maintain momentum through continued engagement and accountability in the plan’s progress.

7.3.1. Plan Monitoring
Plan monitoring means tracking the implementation of the plan over time. The plan must identify how, when, and by whom the plan will be monitored.

The planning team participants will be responsible for monitoring the plan annually for updates to goals, objectives, and action items. The Emergency Management Program will be responsible for monitoring the plan and incorporating necessary updates on an annual basis.

At the end of the five-year cycle for hazard mitigation plans, planning participants will report on the status of mitigation projects, the success of various implementation processes, difficulties encountered, success of coordination efforts, and strategies that should be revised.

7.3.2. Plan Evaluation
The Plan is evaluated by the planning team annually to determine the effectiveness of programs, and to reflect changes in land development, policies, or programs that may affect mitigation priorities. This includes re-evaluation by project leads based upon the initial STAPPLEE criteria used to draft goals, objectives, and action items. Planning team members also review the goals and action items to determine their relevance to changing situations in the city, as well as changes in State or Federal regulations and policy.

Planning team members also review the risk assessment portion of the plan to determine if this information should be updated or modified, given any new available data. The departments responsible for the various action items will report on the status of their projects, the success of various implementation processes, difficulties encountered, success of coordination efforts, and which strategies should be revised.

SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current
92 Any updates or changes necessary will be forwarded to the Emergency Management Program for inclusion in further updates to the Plan.

7.3.3. Plan Updates
Since this Plan’s original adoption in 2005 the hazard mitigation planning team has participated in an annual review. This process was continued after the adoption of the 2010 plan. The review details all mitigation actions that were deferred, begun, continued, or completed during that calendar year. In the past five years, there has been progress made with the successful completion several action items developed in 2018. Section 7.1 details the status of the action items from the 2018 plan.

This review process has been effective in identifying gaps and shortfalls in funding, support, and other resources. It has also allowed for the re-prioritization of specific actions as circumstances change. It allows the hazard mitigation plan to be a living document. This review process has enabled the planning team to improve the document by eliminating actions that have been completed, adding new actions that have been identified since the plan’s adoption and reprioritizing other actions to reflect new priorities and/or limitations.

The planning team will evaluate to progress of the goals, objectives, and actions on a annual basis, update them as necessary, and participate in a complete plan review and update process again in five years.

7.3.4. Implementation Through Existing Programs and Other Planning Mechanisms
Chula Vista has implemented all of the identified priority actions from the 2018 Multi- Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP).

Planning participants used (and will continue to use) this plan as a baseline of information related to priority hazards impacting their jurisdictions, to identify vulnerable communities and critical assets, and plan for their protection. The planning participants have also been able to refer to existing institutions, integrations, plans, policies, and ordinances defined for each jurisdiction, which was outlined in Section 2 of this plan (e.g., General Plan).

After regional adoption of this MJHMP update, the planning team will work to incorporate this plan into the General Plans and/or other comprehensive plans and procedures as those plans require review and revisions. The hazard mitigation plan can influence other City plans to focus on hazard mitigation activities and/or policies that support hazard mitigation. City plans that can be influenced by the hazard mitigation plan include but are not limited to:

SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current
93 EXISTING PLANS/EFFORTS INTEGRATION WITH HAZARD MITIGATION

GENERAL PLAN
The City of Chula Vista General Plan includes a safety element. Upon the next revision of the city’s General Plan, the following section should be reviewed to ensure they account for existing hazards and new hazards within the various Chula Vista communities:
• Land Use and Transportation Element
• Public Facilities and Services Element
• Environmental Element
• Growth Element.

Land use, land development, and transportation corridors must not exacerbate existing hazards or impinge on hazard areas. As the City continues to grow, the general plan will guide the City’s growth and must consider hazard impact on the community.

EMERGENCY

OPERATIONS PLAN
The Emergency Operations Plan guides the city’s coordination of resources during emergency response. This plan should be reviewed annually along with the Hazard Mitigation Plan to ensure the EOP is preparing for and addressing responses to all identified hazards.

BAYFRONT MASTER PLAN
In cooperation with the Port of San Diego, the Bayfront Master Plan should be reviewed to ensure the threats of tsunami and coastal erosion are being planned for and addressed.

REGIONAL PLANNING

EFFORTS
The city takes part in several San Diego County Operational Area planning efforts. The city should continue bringing the content and goals of the Hazard Mitigation Plan into future regional planning efforts, to include the OA Emergency Operations Plan, Recovery plans, Debris removal plans, and the next iteration of the Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan.

RESPONSE PLANS
Several operational or functional response plans are influenced by information contained in the
Hazard Mitigation Plan. These plans should be cross referenced with the Hazard Mitigation Plan, and they include but are not limited to:
• Damage Assessment Plan: A review of the vulnerability and estimated losses detailed in the hazard profiles can help identify what areas to initially prioritize following a hazard event. Section 5 table can inform this plan.
• Debris Management Plan: HAZUS runs conducted for earthquake scenarios include an estimate of how many tons of debris would likely be generated by those scenarios. These estimates can be used as bounding limits for how much and what type of debris generation is likely to be required, as well as what areas are most likely to see heavy debris generations. Moreover, assessments done by the GIS personnel within Chula Vista can inform specific considerations for a Debris plan.

SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current
94 PUBLIC INFORMATION

AND OUTREACHING
PLANS
The jurisdictions’ ongoing public education and outreach efforts should reflect the hazards and vulnerabilities described in this Plan. In addition to preparing for disasters, public education should include ways in which the public can reduce their vulnerability to natural and human caused hazards. Furthermore, mitigation activities and success stories should be communicated to the public to show the benefits of effective mitigation planning.

CAPITAL

IMPOROVEMENT PLANS
All capital improvement projects should undergo a hazard mitigation review to ensure these projects either improve and existing hazard, avoid an existing hazard, or do not exacerbate an existing hazard.

Chula Vista City CouncilOctober 24, 2023

Chula Vista City Council
October 24, 2023