City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards of Interest 16-28
Active Shooter Incident
The Concord Police Department, Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Office, and numerous local agencies train and exercise for active shooter incidents together in the county, and this will continue in the future. Citizen engagement and proactive community preparedness will need to continue to help prevent incidents by reporting things that look unusual to authorities. To increase survivability in active shooter incidents, the City of Concord will need to teach and empower non-professional first care providers (i.e., citizen bystanders) to initiate basic care of the wounded.
16.1.6 Scenario
Terrorism
A scenario that could have a significant impact on the planning area would be a terrorist event at a large gathering place such as a mall or event center. Terrorist events happen with little or no warning. With a population in excess of 125,000 people, the City of Concord does possess potential targets for terrorist activities.
Civil Disturbance
A civil unrest scenario that could have significant impact would be an event that caused multiple fatalities and millions of dollars of property damage and the police were unable to manage the unrest for several days.
Cyber Security Threat
A cyber-ransom against all City departments would leave City employees locked out of all files and computer systems until the issue is resolved, which could be hours, days, or weeks.
Hazardous Material Incident
An incident involving hazardous materials being transported via Interstate 680 could have a significant impact on the City. A release of hazardous materials could impact large population centers within the planning area. Advance knowledge of shipments and their contents would play a role in preparedness for this scenario, thus reducing its potential impact. The biggest issue in response to hazardous materials is material identification and containment.
Utility Interruption
A worst-case scenario is when an entire region’s electrical grid is out. This would leave residences without power, cause stores to be closed, cell service to fail and broadband internet to stop working, require hospitals to operate on generators, eliminate travel by train or air, and prevent automobile fueling at gas stations.
Active Shooter Incident
A worst-case scenario may involve a gunman who gets access to a local school and fires at random students, facility, and staff. The death toll could be high before the gunman is apprehended and the police arrive.
16.1.7 Issues
The following are important needs to address issues associated with human-caused hazards in the planning area:
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards of Interest 16-29
• Participate in regional, state and federal efforts to gather terrorism information at all levels and keep public safety officials briefed at all times regarding local threats. Further develop response capabilities based on emerging threats.
• Encourage local businesses to adopt information technology and telecommunications recovery plans. • Prepare and present a human-caused hazard risk and preparedness program to the public through meetings, town hall gatherings, and preparedness fairs and outreach. • Maintain any and all citizen advisory groups and periodically e-mail emergency preparedness information including human-caused hazard preparedness instructions and reminders. • Continue all facets of emergency preparedness training for police, fire, public works, and public information staff in order to respond quickly in the event of a human-caused disaster. • Work proactively with hazardous materials facilities to follow best management practices:
➢ Placards and labeling of containers
➢ Emergency plans and coordination
➢ Standardized response procedures
➢ Notification of the types of materials being transported through the planning area at least annually ➢ Random inspections of transporters as allowed by each company ➢ Installation of mitigating techniques along critical locations ➢ Routine hazard communication initiatives
➢ Consideration of using alternative products that are safer. • Continue all facets of the hazardous materials team training and response through commitment of resources from the Health Services budget.
• Work with the private sector to enhance and create business continuity plans in the event of an emergency. • Coordinate with planning area school districts to ensure that their emergency preparedness plans include preparation for human-caused incidents.
16.2 INFECTIOUS DISEASE
16.2.1 General Background
Widespread public health emergencies, including pandemics, occur when a disease emerges to which the population has little immunity. Public health experts worry about infection caused by a disease that spreads among species. This level of disease activity disrupts all aspects of society and severely affects the economy. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is well known, and the 20th century saw three significant pandemics, the most notable of which was the 1918 Spanish influenza pandemic that was responsible for 20 to 40 million deaths around the world.
Although vaccines, antibiotics, and improved living conditions resulted in dramatic declines in communicable diseases in the latter part of the 20th century, infectious diseases remain a threat due to a variety of factors:
• Population growth—Overcrowding, aging, migration
• Methods of food production—Large scale, wide distribution, importation • Environmental changes—Drought, encroachment of humans on wild areas, global warming • Microbial adaptation—Resistance to antibiotics, re-assortment of genetic material • Changes in health care—Drugs causing immunosuppression, widespread use of antibiotics • Human behavior—Travel, diet, sexual behavior, compromised immune systems
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards of Interest 16-30
Contra Costa Health Services (CCHS) is responsible for public health in Contra Costa County. CCHS will coordinate with local clinics within the City of Concord during a public health emergency. Contra Costa County CCHS will serve as the lead agency for a infectious disease response in Concord and would work closely with local healthcare services to ensure the following:
• Planning efforts are consistent throughout the county. • Official information is provided to cities in a timely manner. • Pharmaceutical distribution is conducted across the county.
Known Risks
COVID-19
The impacts from the COVID-19 global pandemic will be long term and change the way society as a whole views, prepares for and responds to infectious diseases. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, various mitigation methods have been implemented by local, national, and global agencies. Mask mandates for the public and vaccination mandates for various employment sectors were issued, with mixed results. In early 2022, the National COVID-19 Preparedness Plan was released with focuses on four key goals (The White House 2022):
• Protect against and treat COVID-19
• Prepare for new variants
• Prevent economic and educational shutdowns
• Continue to lead efforts to vaccinate the world and save lives Vector-Borne Diseases
A vector-borne disease results from an infection transmitted to humans and other animals by blood-feeding arthropods, such as mosquitoes, ticks, and fleas. The following are recently prevalent vector-borne diseases in the United States:
• West Nile Virus—West Nile virus (WNV) is a disease caused by the bites of infected mosquitoes. The virus survives in nature in several types of birds and is transmitted by the bites of mosquitoes that feed on infected birds. WNV spreads during warm weather months when mosquitoes are most active. While not all mosquitoes carry this virus, the type of mosquito that spreads this virus is found throughout Contra Costa County. According to the CDC, approximately 80 percent of people who are infected with West Nile virus will show no symptoms. Up to 20 percent have symptoms such as fever, headache, and body aches, nausea, vomiting, and sometimes swollen lymph glands or a skin rash on the chest, stomach and back. About 1 percent of people infected with WNV will develop severe illness, with symptoms that can include high fever, headache, neck stiffness, stupor, disorientation, coma, tremors, convulsions, muscle weakness, vision loss, numbness and paralysis.
• Zika Virus—Zika is a mosquito-borne disease. The most common symptoms are fever, rash, joint pain, and conjunctivitis (red eyes). The illness is usually mild, with symptoms lasting for several days to a week.
However, Zika virus infection during pregnancy can cause serious birth defects. Zika virus is not spread through casual contact but can be spread by infected men to their sexual partners. • Lyme Disease—Lyme disease is a tick-borne disease caused by a bacterium that normally lives in mice, squirrels and other small animals. It is transmitted among these animals and to humans through the bites of
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards of Interest 16-31
certain species of ticks. In the Pacific coastal United States, the disease is spread by the western black-legged tick (Ixodes pacificus). Typical symptoms include fever, headache, fatigue, and a skin rash. If left untreated, infection can spread to joints, the heart, and the nervous system. Most cases can be treated with a few weeks of antibiotics. Steps to prevent Lyme disease include using insect repellent, removing ticks promptly, landscaping, and integrated pest management.
Zoonotic Diseases
A zoonotic disease is a disease that normally exists in animals but can be transmitted from animals to people. The following are past or present prevalent zoonotic diseases:
• Viral Hemorrhagic Fevers—Viral hemorrhagic fevers are caused by several families of viruses that affect multiple systems in the body. Characteristically, the overall vascular system is damaged and the body’s ability to regulate itself is impaired. These symptoms are often accompanied by hemorrhage (bleeding). • Anthrax—Anthrax is a disease caused by a naturally occurring bacterium. Humans can become infected by handling products from infected animals or by breathing in anthrax spores from infected animal products (such as wool). Anthrax can be treated successfully with antibiotics. Anthrax can be used as a weapon, as happened in the United States in 2001, when it was spread through the postal system by sending letters with powder containing anthrax spores.
• Ebola—Ebola is a virus common in Central African countries. A 2014 outbreak was the largest and deadliest Ebola outbreak ever recorded, impacting health care systems across the globe time. It was also the first time Ebola made it to the United States and Europe. Prior to 2014, only 2,200 cases of Ebola had been recorded.
Of these, 68 percent were fatal. Twenty percent of new Ebola infections were linked to burial traditions in which family and community members wash and touch dead bodies before burial. • Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome—Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) is a is a zoonotic viral respiratory disease caused by the SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV). The virus is thought to be transmitted most readily by respiratory droplets produced when an infected person coughs or sneezes. SARS symptoms include a high fever, headache, and an overall feeling of discomfort and body aches. Some people also have mild respiratory symptoms at the outset. About 10 to 20 percent of patients have diarrhea and may develop a dry cough. Most patients develop pneumonia. SARS was first reported in Asia in February 2003. Within several months, the illness spread to more than two dozen countries in Asia, Europe, South America, and North America. In the United States, only eight people had laboratory evidence of SARS-CoV infection. As of May 2005, the CDC reported there was no remaining sustained SARS transmission anywhere in the world.
Foodborne Diseases
Foodborne disease infections come from bacterial and parasitic pathogens in food sources. In 2020, the CDC’s “FoodNet” identified 18,587 laboratory-confirmed infections, as well as 4,900 hospitalizations and 130 deaths related to these infections (CDC 2022).
Waterborne Diseases
Waterborne diseases are caused by drinking dirty or contaminated water. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1 in 44 people gets sick from waterborne diseases each year in the United States (CDC 2023).
The following are prevalent waterborne diseases:
• Cholera—Cholera is an acute, diarrheal illness caused by infection of the intestine with the toxigenic bacterium Vibrio cholerae. An estimated 2.9 million cases and 95,000 deaths occur each year around the world.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards of Interest 16-32
The infection is often mild or without symptoms but can sometimes be severe. Approximately 10 percent of infected persons will have severe disease characterized by profuse watery diarrhea, vomiting, and leg cramps.
In these people, rapid loss of body fluids leads to dehydration and shock. Without treatment, death can occur within hours.
• Hepatitis A—Hepatitis A is a vaccine-preventable, communicable disease of the liver caused by the hepatitis A virus. It is usually transmitted person-to-person through the fecal-oral route or consumption of contaminated food or water.
• Dysentery—Dysentery is any episode in which the loose or watery stools contain visible red blood. It is most often caused by Shigella species or Entamoeba histolytica. Other symptoms of dysentery can include painful stomach cramps, nausea or vomiting, and fever. Dysentery is highly infectious and can be passed on if precautions are not taken, such as properly and regularly washing your hands.
Influenza
Influenza (flu) is a contagious respiratory illness caused by influenza viruses. Symptoms can include fever, headache, extreme tiredness, dry cough, sore throat, and muscle aches. Depending on the season, age, and prior health conditions, flu can be serious and even life-threatening. Flu season in the planning area is typically the first week of October through the end of March but flu can circulate throughout the year.
Secondary Impacts
Infectious diseases are not like natural hazards that have measurable secondary impacts, such as earthquakes, floods or wildfires. This is primarily due to the fact that infectious diseases do not generally impact buildings and critical infrastructure as natural hazards do. The largest secondary impact caused by infectious diseases would be economic.
Large outbreaks of any infectious disease could reduce the workforce significantly, causing businesses and agencies to close or be greatly impacted.
Another secondary impact could be stigmatization. The fear of the infectious disease and fear of the unknown could lead to isolation, violence and self-inflicted injury. Hospitals and healthcare providers could be overwhelmed with the “worried well” seeking care and comfort. Education and providing key and critical information can reduce and mitigate this secondary risk.
16.2.2 Hazard Profile
The severity of infectious diseases is dependent upon the hazard and the population exposed to it. As the population increases, so does the risk of exposure to hazards. The key to reducing the disease hazard is isolation so that the exposed population does not continue to spread the hazard to the uninfected population. Promoting education and personal preparedness will help to mitigate and reduce the severity of the hazard.
Past Events
The following recent public health events occurred within Contra Costa County and have affected the Concord planning area (Contra Costa County 2022a) (Contra Costa Health Services 2022):
• September 6, 2022—Contra Costa County extends MPX vaccine eligibility to all gay and bisexual men • June 23, 2022—Bay Area Health officials urge awareness about Monkeypox (MPX)
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards of Interest 16-33
• August 23, 2022—First responder and non-medical EMT vaccine and testing requirement lifted for COVID- 19 • February 4, 2022—80% of Contra Costa residents vaccinated against COVID-19 • December 17-20, 2021—Health Services Advisory: Get Boosted for protection against Omicron variant; First Omicron case detected within Contra Costa County
• September 27, 2021—COVID-19 Booster vaccine rollout begins • August 13, 2021—First responder vaccine requirement enacted for COVID-19 • July 22, 2021—Bay Area health officials urge employers to require COVID-19 vaccine to promote “COVID- Safe Workplaces”
• April 26, 2021—Health Services Advisory: Contra Costa County administers 1 million COVID-19 vaccines • March 16, 2021—First U.K. COVID-19 variant detected in Contra Costa County • December 22, 2020—COVID-19 vaccine distribution phases revealed • December 16, 2020—Health Services Advisory: Bay Area low on ICU beds, Stay at Home order enacted due to COVID-19 infections
• August 26, 2020—Health Services Advisory: Data suggests leveling in Contra Costa of COVID-19 transmission rates
• July 11, 2020—More than 8% of Contra Costa COVID-19 tests show positive • June 29, 2020—Health Services Advisory: Contra Costa to postpone reopening timeline for COVID-19 • June 17, 2020—“The Road Ahead for Our Community” – Contra Costa begins to reopen many businesses due to decline in infections of COVID-19
• May 14, 2020—Contra Costa County increases required isolation period for COVID-19 infection • April 17, 2020—Contra Costa Health Services Advisory: “Cover Your Face” order for COVID-19 response • April 2, 2020—Bay Area Health Recommendation to wear face coverings/masks; Craneway Pavilion in Richmond converted into Federal Medical Station for COVID-19 patients • March 31, 2020—Updated Stay At Home guidance released with new restrictions for COVID-19 response • March 16, 2020—Shelter in Place order issued by Contra Costa and other Bay Area health officials for COVID-19
• March 10, 2020—Contra Costa County issues emergency proclamation due to COVID-19 • March 6, 2020—Contra Costa Health Services (CCHS) releases first community guidelines to help slow the spread of COVID-19
In Contra Costa County, as of February 7, 2023, there have been 1,522 COVID-19 deaths and 291,000 reported cases of COVID-19 (The New York Times 2023). In the United States during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic, there were 12,271 deaths, 59,979,608 confirmed cases of the disease and 270,435 people hospitalized due to the illness. In California, there were 4,134 people hospitalized due to the illness and 596 deaths. There were two confirmed cases of SARS in California during the worldwide outbreak in 2002-2003, neither of them in Concord.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards of Interest 16-34
Location
All of the planning area is susceptible to the infectious diseases discussed in this chapter. While some hazards, such as the West Nile Virus and Lyme disease, can have a geographic presence within the planning area, other diseases can cause exposure to the planning area from outside the local region. Local residents who travel can become exposed to diseases while abroad and bring the diseases back with them, potentially placing the region at risk for exposure. It is difficult to map the extent of human-health hazards compared to others, such as floods, wildfires and dam failures.
Frequency
Due to increased air travel, the growing population and the country’s aging population, the probability of a communicable disease epidemic or pandemic is a growing threat. Certain infectious diseases, such as influenza, can be expected seasonably, with variations on specific strains year to year. Additionally, tick-borne diseases are likely to increase during spring and fall, when people participate in outdoor activities such as hiking. The frequency of other health hazards is difficult to establish and depends largely on the unique circumstances surrounding a localized outbreak and its subsequent expansion into epidemics and eventually pandemics.
Severity
The severity of infectious disease varies from individual to individual. Typically, young children and older adults are more susceptible to acquiring communicable diseases due to developing or diminishing immune systems or experiencing adverse effects to extreme weather conditions. These populations often experience the most severe of symptoms, as their immune systems are not capable of fighting off infection or efficiently regulating temperature. In general, severity varies depending on the pathology of the disease, the health of the infected, and the availability of treatments for alleviating symptoms or curing the disease.
Warning Time
Warning time for public health risks varies from a few hours or days to a few months, depending on the illness and outbreak to the population.
16.2.3 Exposure and Vulnerability
Population
All residents and visitors in the planning area could be susceptible to the infectious diseases discussed in this chapter.
A large outbreak or epidemic, a pandemic could have devastating effects on the population. The young and the elderly, those with compromised immune systems, and those with functional and access needs are considered the most vulnerable. The introduction of a disease such as the plague or influenza could rapidly impact those at risk.
Property
None of the health hazards discussed in this chapter would have significant measurable impact on structures or property in the planning area.
Critical Facilities
None of the health hazards discussed in this chapter would have significant measurable impact on critical facilities in the planning area. However, health care facilities (including long-term care and clinics and even veterinary offices)
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards of Interest 16-35
have adopted the recommended “all-hazards” approach to preparedness and have prepared for the health hazards addressed in this chapter.
Emergency management and preparedness planning incorporates all response disciplines: fire, law, first responder ground and air ambulance agencies, public health, and mental and spiritual health. Planning includes identifying shelters, alternate treatment facilities, isolation capacity and methods to immediately maintain and expand physical and human resources. Planning also incorporates adequate staffing that accounts for responders who may also become ill.
Environment
None of the health hazards discussed in this chapter would have significant measurable impact on the environment of the planning area. While many of the vectors of the health hazards discussed in this chapter (mosquitoes, rodents, fleas, ticks and deer flies) rely on local or regional environments for their survival, the infectious disease that they carry or potentially transmit would have no significant measurable impact on the environment.
16.2.4 Future Trends in Development
The potential for the infectious diseases is not likely to slow expected growth in the planning area.
16.2.5 Scenario
A human health worst-case scenario for the planning area would be a pandemic or large-scale incident of any of the infectious diseases discussed in this chapter. Medical treatment facilities in the planning area would be overwhelmed and taxed beyond their capabilities as the number of patients begins to escalate. Impacts on the workforce could have acute and long-term economic impacts on primary employers in the planning area. First responders would be exposed to the infectious diseases, which could deplete the medical workforce and could have profound impact on the potential escalation of the scenario.
16.2.6 Issues
Important issues associated with the infectious diseases include the following:
• Prevention through vaccination and personal emergency and disaster preparation will help to reduce the impacts of infectious disease.
• Medical and response personnel need to be integrated in a unified command to provide care when needed in response to infectious disease.
• Medical and response personnel must be adequately trained and supplied. • Up-to-date and functional all-hazard contingency planning should be carried out. • A system needs to be in place for informing the public with a unified message about the infectious disease. • Health agencies and facilities require surge capacity management and adaptation to the rising number and needs of the region.
17-1
17. RISK RANKING
FEMA requires all hazard mitigation plans to include mitigation actions based on local risk, vulnerability and community priorities. For this plan, risk was calculated by multiplying probability by impact on people, property and the economy. The risk estimates were generated using methodologies promoted by FEMA. The Steering Committee reviewed, discussed and approved the methodology and results.
Numerical ratings of probability and impact were based on the hazard profiles and exposure and vulnerability evaluations presented in Chapters 8 through 15. Using that data, the City ranked the risk of all the natural hazards of concern described in this plan. Non-natural hazards (except dam failure, which can be assessed like flood) were not ranked for the following reasons:
• Federal hazard mitigation planning regulations do not require the assessment of non-natural hazards (44 CFR, 201.6).
• A key component of risk for the planning effort is probability of occurrence. The hazards of interest lack historical precedent for establishing recurrence intervals.
When available, estimates of risk were generated with data from Hazus or GIS. For hazards of concern with less specific data available, qualitative assessments were used. As appropriate, results were adjusted based on local knowledge and other information not captured in the quantitative assessments.
17.1 PROBABILITY OF OCCURRENCE
The probability of occurrence of a hazard is indicated by a factor based on likelihood of annual occurrence:
• High—Hazard event is likely to occur within 25 years (Probability Factor = 3) • Medium—Hazard event is likely to occur within 100 years (Probability Factor =2) • Low—Hazard event is not likely to occur within 100 years (Probability Factor =1) • No exposure—There is no probability of occurrence (Probability Factor = 0) The assessment of hazard frequency is generally based on past natural hazard events in the area. Figure 17-1 summarizes the probability assessment for each hazard of concern for this plan.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Risk Ranking
17-2
Figure 17-1. Probability Factors for Hazards of Concern
17.2 IMPACT
Hazard impacts were assessed in three categories: impacts on people, impacts on property and impacts on the local economy. Numerical impact factors were assigned as follows:
• People—Values were assigned based on the percentage of the total population exposed to the hazard event. The degree of impact on individuals will vary and is not measurable, so the calculation assumes for simplicity and consistency that all people exposed to a hazard because they live in a hazard zone will be equally impacted when a hazard event occurs. It should be noted that planners can use an element of subjectivity when assigning values for impacts on people. Impact factors were assigned as follows:
➢ High—50 percent or more of the population is exposed to a hazard (Impact Factor = 3) ➢ Medium—25 percent to 49 percent of the population is exposed to a hazard (Impact Factor = 2) ➢ Low—25 percent or less of the population is exposed to the hazard (Impact Factor = 1) ➢ No impact—None of the population is exposed to a hazard (Impact Factor = 0) • Property—Values were assigned based on the percentage of the total property value exposed to the hazard event:
➢ High—30 percent or more of the total assessed property value is exposed to a hazard (Impact Factor = 3)
➢ Medium—15 percent to 29 percent of the total assessed property value is exposed to a hazard (Impact Factor = 2)
➢ Low—14 percent or less of the total assessed property value is exposed to the hazard (Impact Factor = 1)
➢ No impact—None of the total assessed property value is exposed to a hazard (Impact Factor = 0) • Economy—Values were assigned based on the percentage of the total property value vulnerable to the hazard event. Values represent estimates of the loss from a major event of each hazard in comparison to the 2 3
3 3
3 3
3 0 1 2 3
Dam/Levee Failure
Drought
Earthquake
Flood
Landslide
Severe Weather
Wildfire
Probability Factor
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Risk Ranking
17-3
total replacement value of the property exposed to the hazard. For some hazards, such as wildland/urban interface fire, landslide and severe weather, vulnerability was considered to be the same as exposure due to the lack of loss estimation tools specific to those hazards. Loss estimates separate from the exposure estimates were generated for the earthquake and flood hazards using Hazus. ➢ High—Estimated loss from the hazard is 20 percent or more of the total exposed property value (Impact Factor = 3)
➢ Medium—Estimated loss from the hazard is 10 percent to 19 percent of the total exposed property value (Impact Factor = 2)
➢ Low—Estimated loss from the hazard is 9 percent or less of the total exposed property value (Impact Factor = 1)
➢ No impact—No loss is estimated from the hazard (Impact Factor = 0) The impacts of each hazard category were assigned a weighting factor to reflect the significance of the impact. These weighting factors are consistent with those typically used for measuring the benefits of hazard mitigation actions:
impact on people was given a weighting factor of 3; impact on property was given a weighting factor of 2; and impact on the economy was given a weighting factor of 1. Figure 17-2 summarizes the unweighted and weighted impact factors, respectively, for each hazard.
Figure 17-2. Impact Factors for Hazards of Concern
0 0 0 0
3 9
1 3
1 3
2 6
0 0
1 2
0 0
3 6
1 2
1 2
1 2
0 0
1 1
3 3
1 1
1 1
1 1
2 2
2 2
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 14
16 18
Unweighted
Weighted
Unweighted
Weighted
Unweighted
Weighted
Unweighted
Weighted
Unweighted
Weighted
Unweighted
Weighted
Unweighted
Weighted
Dam/Levee Failure Drought Earthquake Flood Landslide Severe Weather Wildfire Weighted Impact Factor
Impact Factor (People) Impact Factor (Property) Impact Factor (Economy)
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Risk Ranking
17-4
17.3 RISK RATING AND RANKING
The risk rating for each hazard was determined by multiplying the probability factor by the sum of the weighted impact factors for people, property, and operations, as summarized in Figure 17-3. Based on these ratings, a priority of high, medium, or low was assigned to each hazard. Figure 17-4 shows the hazard risk ranking.
Figure 17-3. Total Risk Rating for Hazards of Concern
Figure 17-4. Hazard Risk Ranking
6 9
48 18
18 30
6 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Dam/Levee Failure
Drought
Earthquake
Flood
Landslide
Severe Weather
Wildfire
Hazard Risk Rating
Earthquake
48 Severe Weather
30 Flood
18 Landslide
18 Dam/Levee Failure
6 Drought
9 Wildfire
6 0
2 4
6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Values shown are risk ratings. Larger circles indicate higher rating.
High Risk
Medium
Risk
Low Risk
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan
PART 3—MITIGATION STRATEGY
18-1
18. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Hazard mitigation plans must identify goals for reducing long-term vulnerabilities to identified hazards (44 CFR Section 201.6(c)(3)(i)). The Steering Committee established a mission statement, a set of goals and measurable objectives for this plan, based on data from the preliminary risk assessment and the results of the public involvement strategy. The mission statement, goals, objectives and actions in this plan all support each other. Goals were selected to support the mission statement. Objectives were selected that meet multiple goals. Actions were prioritized based on ability to accomplish multiple objectives.
18.1 MISSION STATEMENT
The Steering Committee developed the following new mission statement for this update:
To join with our community to maintain and enhance a disaster-resistant City by reducing the potential for loss of life, property, and environmental damage from natural and human-caused disasters, while supporting economic recovery from those disasters.
18.2 GOALS
The following are the goals for this plan:
1. Minimize life loss and injuries
2. Minimize damage to structures, property, equipment, the environment, and natural and cultural resources from hazards and climate change
3. Improve emergency management effectiveness
4. Ensure continuity of government operations
5. Embed equity in emergency management plans
18.3 OBJECTIVES
Objectives serve as stand-alone measurements of the effectiveness of a mitigation action. Objectives from the 2018 Contra Costa County HMP were reviewed and revised as follows to meet the needs of the City of Concord:
1. Increase resilience of infrastructure and critical facilities.
2. Sustain reliable local emergency operations and facilities during and after a disaster.
3. Inform the public, in particular socially vulnerable communities, on the risk from hazards of concern, and increase awareness, preparation, mitigation, response, and recovery activities to promote public safety.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Goals and Objectives 18-2
4. Minimize the impacts of known hazards on current land uses by providing incentives for hazard mitigation.
5. Prevent or discourage new development in hazardous areas or ensure that, if building occurs in high-risk areas, it is done in a way to minimize risk.
6. At the local government level, continually improve understanding of the location and potential impacts of hazards, using the best available data and science.
7. Encourage all development to meet applicable standards for life safety.
8. Monitor plan progress annually to integrate the local hazard mitigation plan with the results of disaster- and hazard-specific planning efforts.
9. Promote development and use of floodplain management best practices through programs such as FEMA’s Community Rating System.
10. Provide or improve flood protection with flood control structures and drainage maintenance plans.
11. Enhance codes and their enforcement where feasible, so that new construction can withstand the impacts of known hazards and to lessen the impact of development on the environment’s ability to absorb the impact of natural hazards.
12. Consider the impacts of known hazards in planning mechanisms that address current and future land uses within the planning area.
13. Eliminate or minimize disruption of local government operations caused by known hazards.
14. Consider open space land uses within identified high-hazard risk zones.
15. Retrofit, acquire, or relocate identified high-risk structures, including those known to experience repetitive losses.
16. Establish a partnership among appropriate levels of government and the business community to improve and implement methods to protect property.
17. Encourage hazard mitigation measures that promote and enhance natural processes and minimize adverse impacts on the ecosystem.
18. Promote and implement hazard mitigation plans and projects that are consistent with state, regional, and local climate action and adaptation goals, policies, and programs.
19-1
19. MITIGATION BEST PRACTICES AND ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
19.1 MITIGATION BEST PRACTICES
Catalogs of hazard mitigation alternatives were developed that present a broad range of alternatives to be considered for use in the planning area, in compliance with 44 CFR (Section 201.6(c)(3)(ii)). One catalog was developed for each natural hazard of concern evaluated in this plan. The catalogs present alternatives that are categorized in two ways:
• By whom would have responsibility for implementation:
➢ Individuals (personal scale)
➢ Businesses (corporate scale)
➢ Government (government scale).
• By what the alternative would do:
➢ Manipulate the hazard
➢ Reduce exposure to the hazard
➢ Reduce vulnerability to the hazard
➢ Increase the ability to respond to or be prepared for the hazard.
The catalogs are lists of what could be considered to reduce risk from natural hazards in the planning area. They include practices that will mitigate current risk from hazards or help reduce new risk resulting from climate change.
Hazard mitigation actions recommended in this plan were selected from an analysis of the best practices presented in the catalogs. The catalogs provide a baseline of mitigation alternatives that are backed by a planning process and are consistent with the established goals and objectives. Actions were selected out of the catalogs based on an analysis of the City’s ability to implement them. Best practices in the catalog that are not included in the action plan were omitted for one or more of the following reasons:
• The action is not feasible
• The action is already being implemented
• The City does not have the capability to implement the action • There is an apparently more cost-effective alternative • The action does not have public or political support
The catalogs for each hazard are presented in Table 19-1 through Table 19-7.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Best Practices and Adaptive Capacity 19-2
Table 19-1. Alternatives to Mitigate the Dam and Levee Failure Hazard Personal-Scale Corporate-Scale Government-Scale
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ None
Reduce exposure to the
hazard:
❖ Relocate out of dam
failure inundation
areas.
Reduce vulnerability to
the hazard:
❖ Elevate home to
appropriate levels.
Increase the ability to
respond to or be
prepared for the
hazard:
❖ Learn about risk
reduction for the dam
failure hazard.
❖ Learn the evacuation
routes for a dam failure
event.
❖ Educate yourself on
early warning systems
and the dissemination
of warnings.
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ Remove dams.
❖ Remove levees.
❖ Harden dams.
Reduce exposure to the
hazard:
❖ Replace earthen
dams with hardened
structures.
Reduce vulnerability to
the hazard:
❖ Flood-proof facilities
within dam failure
inundation areas.
Increase the ability to
respond to or be
prepared for the
hazard:
❖ Educate employees
on the probable
impacts of a dam
failure.
❖ Develop a continuity
of operations plan.
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ Remove dams.
❖ Remove levees.
❖ Harden dams.
Reduce exposure to the hazard:
❖ Replace earthen dams with hardened structures
❖ Relocate critical facilities out of dam failure inundation areas. ❖ Consider open space land use in designated dam failure inundation areas.
Reduce vulnerability to the hazard:
❖ Adopt higher floodplain standards in mapped dam failure inundation areas.
❖ Retrofit critical facilities within dam failure inundation areas.
Increase the ability to respond to or be prepared for the hazard:
❖ Map dam failure inundation areas.
❖ Enhance emergency operations plan to include a dam failure component.
❖ Institute monthly communications checks with dam operators. ❖ Inform the public on risk reduction techniques
❖ Adopt real-estate disclosure requirements for the re-sale of property located within dam failure inundation areas.
❖ Consider the probable impacts of climate in assessing the risk associated with the dam failure hazard.
❖ Establish early warning capability downstream of listed high hazard dams.
❖ Consider the residual risk associated with protection provided by dams in future land use decisions.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Best Practices and Adaptive Capacity 19-3
Table 19-2. Alternatives to Mitigate the Drought Hazard Personal-Scale Corporate-Scale Government-Scale
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ None
Reduce exposure to the
hazard:
❖ None
Reduce vulnerability to the
hazard:
❖ Drought-resistant landscapes
❖ Reduce water system losses
❖ Modify plumbing systems
(through water saving kits)
Increase the ability to respond
to or be prepared for the
hazard:
❖ Practice active water
conservation
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ None
Reduce exposure to the
hazard:
❖ None
Reduce vulnerability to
the hazard:
❖ Drought-resistant
landscapes
❖ Reduce private water
system losses
Increase the ability to
respond to or be
prepared for the
hazard:
❖ Practice active water
conservation
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ Groundwater recharge through stormwater management
Reduce exposure to the hazard:
❖ Identify and create groundwater backup sources
Reduce vulnerability to the hazard:
❖ Water use conflict regulations
❖ Reduce water system losses
❖ Distribute water saving kits
Increase the ability to respond to or be prepared for the hazard:
❖ Public education on drought resistance
❖ Encourage recycling
❖ Identify alternative water supplies for times of drought; mutual aid agreements with alternative suppliers
❖ Develop drought contingency plan
❖ Develop criteria “triggers” for drought-related actions ❖ Improve accuracy of water supply forecasts
❖ Modify rate structure to influence active water conservation techniques
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Best Practices and Adaptive Capacity 19-4
Table 19-3. Alternatives to Mitigate the Earthquake Hazard Personal-Scale Corporate-Scale Government-Scale
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ None
Reduce exposure to the hazard:
❖ Locate outside of hazard area (off
soft soils)
Reduce vulnerability to the hazard:
❖ Retrofit structure (anchor house
structure to foundation)
❖ Secure household items that can
cause injury or damage (such as
water heaters, bookcases, and
other appliances)
❖ Build to higher design
Increase the ability to respond to or
be prepared for the hazard:
❖ Practice “drop, cover, and hold”
❖ Develop household mitigation plan,
such as creating a retrofit savings
account, communication capability
with outside, 72-hour self-
sufficiency during an event
❖ Keep cash reserves for
reconstruction
❖ Become informed on the hazard
and risk reduction alternatives
available.
❖ Develop a post-disaster action plan
for your household
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ None
Reduce exposure to the
hazard:
❖ Locate or relocate mission-
critical functions outside
hazard area where possible
Reduce vulnerability to the
hazard:
❖ Build redundancy for critical
functions and facilities
❖ Retrofit critical buildings and
areas housing mission-
critical functions
Increase the ability to respond
to or be prepared for the
hazard:
❖ Adopt higher standard for
new construction; consider
“performance-based design”
when building new structures
❖ Keep cash reserves for
reconstruction
❖ Inform your employees on
the possible impacts of
earthquake and how to deal
with them at your work
facility.
❖ Develop a continuity of
operations plan
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ None
Reduce exposure to the hazard:
❖ Locate critical facilities or functions outside hazard area where possible
Reduce vulnerability to the hazard:
❖ Harden infrastructure
❖ Provide redundancy for critical functions
❖ Adopt higher regulatory standards
Increase the ability to respond to or be prepared
for the hazard:
❖ Provide better hazard maps
❖ Provide technical information and guidance
❖ Enact tools to help manage development in hazard
areas (e.g., tax incentives, information)
❖ Include retrofitting and replacement of critical
system elements in capital improvement plan
❖ Develop strategy to take advantage of post-disaster
opportunities
❖ Warehouse critical infrastructure components such
as pipe, power line, and road repair materials
❖ Develop and adopt a continuity of operations plan
❖ Initiate triggers guiding improvements (such as
<50% substantial damage or improvements)
❖ Further enhance seismic risk assessment to target
high hazard buildings for mitigation opportunities.
❖ Develop a post-disaster action plan that includes
grant funding and debris removal components.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Best Practices and Adaptive Capacity 19-5
Table 19-4. Alternatives to Mitigate the Flood Hazard
Personal-Scale Corporate-Scale Government-Scale
Manipulate the
hazard:
❖ Clear storm
drains and
culverts
❖ Use low-impact
development
techniques
Reduce exposure to
the hazard:
❖ Locate outside of
hazard area
❖ Elevate utilities
above base flood
elevation
❖ Use low-impact
development
techniques
Reduce vulnerability
to the hazard:
❖ Raise structures
above base flood
elevation
❖ Elevate items
within house
above base flood
elevation
❖ Build new homes
above base flood
elevation
❖ Flood-proof
structures
Increase the ability
to respond to or
be prepared for
the hazard:
❖ Buy flood
insurance
❖ Develop
household plan,
such as retrofit
savings,
communication
with outside, 72-
hour self-
sufficiency during
and after an
event
Manipulate the
hazard:
❖ Clear storm drains
and culverts
❖ Use low-impact
development
techniques
Reduce exposure to
the hazard:
❖ Locate critical
facilities or
functions outside
hazard area
❖ Use low-impact
development
techniques
Reduce vulnerability
to the hazard:
❖ Build redundancy
for critical
functions or retrofit
critical buildings
❖ Provide flood-
proofing when new
critical
infrastructure must
be located in
floodplains
Increase the ability to
respond to or be
prepared for the
hazard:
❖ Keep cash
reserves for
reconstruction
❖ Support and
implement hazard
disclosure for sale
of property in risk
zones.
❖ Solicit cost-sharing
through
partnerships with
others on projects
with multiple
benefits.
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ Maintain drainage system
❖ Institute low-impact development techniques on property ❖ Dredging, levee construction, and providing regional retention areas ❖ Structural flood control, levees, channelization, or revetments. ❖ Stormwater management regulations and master planning ❖ Acquire vacant land or promote open space uses in developing watersheds to control increases in runoff
Reduce exposure to the hazard:
❖ Locate or relocate critical facilities outside of hazard area ❖ Acquire or relocate identified repetitive loss properties ❖ Promote open space uses in identified high hazard areas via techniques such as: planned unit developments, easements, setbacks, greenways, sensitive area tracks.
❖ Adopt land development criteria such as planned unit developments, density transfers, clustering
❖ Institute low impact development techniques on property ❖ Acquire vacant land or promote open space uses in developing watersheds to control increases in runoff
Reduce vulnerability to the hazard:
❖ Harden infrastructure, bridge replacement program
❖ Provide redundancy for critical functions and infrastructure ❖ Adopt regulatory standards such as freeboard standards, cumulative substantial improvement or damage, lower substantial damage threshold; compensatory storage, non-conversion deed restrictions.
❖ Stormwater management regulations and master planning. ❖ Adopt “no-adverse impact” floodplain management policies that strive to not increase the flood risk on downstream communities.
Increase the ability to respond to or be prepared for the hazard:
❖ Produce better hazard maps
❖ Provide technical information and guidance
❖ Enact tools to help manage development in hazard areas (stronger controls, tax incentives, and information)
❖ Incorporate retrofitting or replacement of critical system elements in capital improvement plan
❖ Develop strategy to take advantage of post-disaster opportunities ❖ Warehouse critical infrastructure components
❖ Develop and adopt a continuity of operations plan
❖ Consider participation in the Community Rating System ❖ Maintain and collect data to define risks and vulnerability ❖ Train emergency responders
❖ Create an elevation inventory of structures in the floodplain ❖ Develop and implement a public information strategy
❖ Charge a hazard mitigation fee
❖ Integrate floodplain management policies into other planning mechanisms within the planning area.
❖ Consider the probable impacts of climate change on the risk associated with the flood hazard
❖ Consider the residual risk associated with structural flood control in future land use decisions
❖ Enforce National Flood Insurance Program
❖ Adopt a Stormwater Management Master Plan
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Best Practices and Adaptive Capacity 19-6
Table 19-5. Alternatives to Mitigate the Landslide Hazard Personal-Scale Corporate-Scale Government-Scale
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ Stabilize slope (dewater,
armor toe)
❖ Reduce weight on top of slope
❖ Minimize vegetation removal
and the addition of impervious
surfaces.
Reduce exposure to the hazard:
❖ Locate structures outside of
hazard area (off unstable land
and away from slide-run out
area)
Reduce vulnerability to the
hazard:
❖ Retrofit home
Increase the ability to respond
to or be prepared for the
hazard:
❖ Institute warning system, and
develop evacuation plan
❖ Keep cash reserves for
reconstruction
❖ Educate yourself on risk
reduction techniques for
landslide hazards
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ Stabilize slope (dewater, armor
toe)
❖ Reduce weight on top of slope
Reduce exposure to the hazard:
❖ Locate structures outside of
hazard area (off unstable land
and away from slide-run out
area)
Reduce vulnerability to the
hazard:
❖ Retrofit at-risk facilities
Increase the ability to respond to
or be prepared for the hazard:
❖ Institute warning system, and
develop evacuation plan
❖ Keep cash reserves for
reconstruction
❖ Develop a continuity of
operations plan
❖ Educate employees on the
potential exposure to landslide
hazards and emergency
response protocol.
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ Stabilize slope (dewater, armor toe)
❖ Reduce weight on top of slope
Reduce exposure to the hazard:
❖ Acquire properties in high-risk landslide areas.
❖ Adopt land use policies that prohibit the placement of habitable structures in high-risk landslide areas.
Reduce vulnerability to the hazard:
❖ Adopt higher regulatory standards for new
development within unstable slope areas.
❖ Armor/retrofit critical infrastructure against the impact of landslides.
Increase the ability to respond to or be prepared for
the hazard:
❖ Produce better hazard maps
❖ Provide technical information and guidance
❖ Enact tools to help manage development in hazard
areas: better land controls, tax incentives, information ❖ Develop strategy to take advantage of post-disaster
opportunities
❖ Warehouse critical infrastructure components
❖ Develop and adopt a continuity of operations plan
❖ Educate the public on the landslide hazard and
appropriate risk reduction alternatives.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Best Practices and Adaptive Capacity 19-7
Table 19-6. Alternatives to Mitigate the Severe Weather Hazard Personal-Scale Corporate-Scale Government-Scale
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ None
Reduce exposure to the hazard:
❖ None
Reduce vulnerability to the hazard:
❖ Insulate house
❖ Provide redundant heat and power
❖ Insulate structure
❖ Plant appropriate trees near home
and power lines (“Right tree, right
place” National Arbor Day
Foundation Program)
Increase the ability to respond to
or be prepared for the hazard:
❖ Trim or remove trees that could
affect power lines
❖ Promote 72-hour self-sufficiency
❖ Obtain a NOAA weather radio.
❖ Obtain an emergency generator.
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ None
Reduce exposure to the
hazard:
❖ None
Reduce vulnerability to the
hazard:
❖ Relocate critical
infrastructure (such as power
lines) underground
❖ Reinforce or relocate critical
infrastructure such as power
lines to meet performance
expectations
❖ Install tree wire
Increase the ability to respond
to or be prepared for the
hazard:
❖ Trim or remove trees that
could affect power lines
❖ Create redundancy
❖ Equip facilities with a NOAA
weather radio
❖ Equip vital facilities with
emergency power sources.
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ None
Reduce exposure to the hazard:
❖ None
Reduce vulnerability to the hazard:
❖ Harden infrastructure such as locating utilities
underground
❖ Trim trees back from power lines
❖ Consider “cool roofs” and “green roofs”
Increase the ability to respond to or be prepared
for the hazard:
❖ Support programs such as “Tree Watch” that
proactively manage problem areas through use of
selective removal of hazardous trees, tree
replacement, etc.
❖ Establish and enforce building codes that require all roofs to withstand snow loads
❖ Increase communication alternatives
❖ Modify land use and environmental regulations to
support vegetation management activities that
improve reliability in utility corridors.
❖ Modify landscape and other ordinances to
encourage appropriate planting near overhead
power, cable, and phone lines
❖ Provide NOAA weather radios to the public
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Best Practices and Adaptive Capacity 19-8
Table 19-7. Alternatives to Mitigate the Wildfire Hazard Personal-Scale Corporate-Scale Government-Scale
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ Clear potential fuels on property
such as dry overgrown
underbrush and diseased trees
Reduce exposure to the hazard:
❖ Create and maintain defensible
space around structures
❖ Locate outside of hazard area
❖ Mow regularly
Reduce vulnerability to the
hazard:
❖ Create and maintain defensible
space around structures and
provide water on site
❖ Use fire-retardant building
materials
❖ Create defensible spaces
around home
Increase the ability to respond to
or be prepared for the hazard:
❖ Employ techniques from the
National Fire Protection
Association’s Firewise
Communities program to
safeguard home
❖ Identify alternative water
supplies for fire fighting
❖ Install/replace roofing material
with non-combustible roofing
materials.
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ Clear potential fuels on
property such as dry
underbrush and
diseased trees
Reduce exposure to the
hazard:
❖ Create and maintain
defensible space around
structures and
infrastructure
❖ Locate outside of hazard
area
Reduce vulnerability to
the hazard:
❖ Create and maintain
defensible space around
structures and
infrastructure and
provide water on site
❖ Use fire-retardant
building materials
❖ Use fire-resistant
plantings in buffer areas
of high wildland/urban
interface fire threat.
Increase the ability to
respond to or be
prepared for the
hazard:
❖ Support Firewise
community initiatives.
❖ Create /establish stored
water supplies to be
utilized for fire fighting.
Manipulate the hazard:
❖ Clear potential fuels on property such as dry underbrush and diseased trees
❖ Implement best management practices on public lands.
Reduce exposure to the hazard:
❖ Create and maintain defensible space around structures and infrastructure
❖ Locate outside of hazard area
❖ Enhance building code to include use of fire resistant materials in high hazard area.
Reduce vulnerability to the hazard:
❖ Create and maintain defensible space around structures and infrastructure
❖ Use fire-retardant building materials
❖ Use fire-resistant plantings in buffer areas of high
wildland/urban interface fire threat.
❖ Consider higher regulatory standards (such as Class A roofing)
❖ Establish biomass reclamation activities
Increase the ability to respond to or be prepared for the hazard:
❖ More public outreach and education efforts, including an active Firewise program
❖ Possible weapons of mass destruction funds available to enhance fire capability in high-risk areas
❖ Identify fire response and alternative evacuation routes ❖ Seek alternative water supplies
❖ Become a Firewise community
❖ Use academia to study impacts/solutions to wildland/urban interface fire risk
❖ Establish/maintain mutual aid agreements between fire service agencies.
❖ Create/implement fire plans
❖ Consider the probable impacts of climate change on the risk associated with the wildland/urban interface fire hazard in future land use decisions
19.2 ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
Adaptive capacity is defined as “the ability of systems, institutions, humans and other organisms to adjust to potential damage, to take advantage of opportunities, or to respond to consequences” (IPCC, 2014). This term is typically used while discussing climate change adaptation; however, it is similar to the alternatives presented in the tables for building local capacity. The following are general alternatives that can be considered to build capacity for adapting to current and future risks:
• Incorporate climate change adaptation into relevant local and regional plans and projects. • Establish a climate change adaptation and hazard mitigation public outreach and education program. • Build collaborative relationships between regional entities and neighboring communities to promote complementary adaptation and mitigation strategy development and regional approaches.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Best Practices and Adaptive Capacity 19-9
• Establish an ongoing monitoring program to track local and regional climate impacts and adaptation strategy effectiveness.
• Increase participation of low-income, immigrant, limited English proficiency racially and ethnically diverse, and special-needs residents in planning and implementation. • Ask local employers and business associations to participate in local efforts to address climate change and natural hazard risk reduction.
• Conduct a communitywide assessment and develop a program to address health, socioeconomic, and equity vulnerabilities.
• Focus planning and intervention programs on neighborhoods that currently experience social or environmental injustice or bear a disproportionate burden of potential public health impacts. • Use performance metrics and data to evaluate and monitor the impacts of climate change and natural hazard risk reduction strategies on public health and social equity. • Develop coordinated plans for mitigating future flood and related impacts through concurrent adoption of updated general plan safety elements and local hazard mitigation plans. • Update safety elements to reflect existing hazards and projected climate change impacts on hazards. • Implement general plan safety elements through zoning and subdivision practices that restrict development in floodplains and other natural hazard areas.
• Identify and protect locations where native species may shift or lose habitat due to climate change impacts (sea level rise, loss of wetlands, warmer temperatures, drought). • Collaborate with agencies managing public lands to identify, develop, or maintain corridors and linkages between undeveloped areas.
• Promote economic diversity.
• Incorporate consideration of climate change impacts as part of infrastructure planning and operations. • Conduct a climate impact assessment on community infrastructure. • Identify gaps in legal and regulatory capabilities and develop ordinances or guidelines to address them. • Identify and pursue new sources of funding for mitigation and adaptation activities. • Hire new staff or provide training to current staff to ensure an adequate level of administrative and technical capability to pursue mitigation and adaptation activities.
20-1
20. ACTION PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATION
20.1 STATUS OF PREVIOUS PLAN ACTIONS
20.1.1 Mitigation Actions
The City of Concord annex to the Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan identified 18 recommended mitigation actions. For the current update, these actions were reviewed by City bureaus and offices and other relevant agencies. For each action, it was determined whether the action had been completed, was in progress or had not been started. Incomplete actions were reviewed to determine if they should be carried over to the 2023 plan or removed from the plan due to a change in priorities, capabilities, or feasibility.
Appendix F summarizes the status of the recommended actions from the 2018 hazard mitigation plan. Six of the identified actions have been completed and one was withdrawn. The remaining 11 were carried over to the 2023 plan.
Each carried over action has a new action number assigned to it for the 2023 plan.
20.1.2 Status of Plan Incorporation Actions
As a demonstration of progress in local hazard mitigation efforts, 44 CFR 201.6(c)(4)(ii) requires plan updates to describe completed steps to incorporate the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms as appropriate. Of the 18 mitigation actions in the 2018 plan, one action relates to incorporation of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms. Action C-2 called for integrating the hazard mitigation plan into other plans, ordinances, and programs that dictate land use decisions in the community, including the Development Code, the General Plan, and other programs. This action was identified as “ongoing” and has been carried over to this plan update. The Planning and Housing Division is a key supporter of the hazard mitigation plan implementation, maintenance and update process, and will continue to coordinate its programs with initiatives identified in this plan.
20.2 ACTION PLAN
The Steering Committee reviewed the catalogs of hazard mitigation alternatives and selected actions to be included in a hazard mitigation action plan. The selection of actions was based on the risk assessment of identified hazards of concern and the defined hazard mitigation goals and objectives. Table 20-1 lists the recommended hazard mitigation actions that make up the action plan.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Plan and Implementation 20-2
Table 20-1. Action Plan
Benefits New
or Existing
Assets Objectives Met Lead Agency Support Agency Estimated Cost Sources of
Funding Timelinea
Action 1— Where appropriate, support retrofitting or relocation of structures in high-hazard areas, prioritizing structures that have experienced repetitive losses.
Hazards Mitigated: Dam and Levee Failure, Earthquake, Flood, Landslide, Severe Weather, Climate Change Existing 1, 4, 7, 9, 12, 14,
15, 17
Office of
Emergency
Services
Planning and
Housing Division,
Public Works
High HMGP, BRIC,
FMA
Long-term
Action 2— Integrate the hazard mitigation plan into other plans, ordinances and programs that dictate land use decisions in the community, including the Development Code, the General Plan, and other programs.
Hazards Mitigated: Dam and Levee Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Flood, Landslide, Severe Weather, Climate Change New and
Existing
5, 6, 11, 12 Community
Development
Planning and
Housing Division
Low Staff Time,
General Funds
Ongoing
Action 3— Actively participate in the plan maintenance protocols outlined in this hazard mitigation plan.
Hazards Mitigated: Dam and Levee Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Flood, Landslide, Severe Weather, Climate Change New and
Existing
3, 8, 16 Office of
Emergency
Services
N/A Low Staff Time,
General Funds
Short-term
Action 4— Continue to maintain good standing and compliance under the NFIP through the implementation of floodplain management programs that, at a minimum, meet the NFIP requirements:
Enforce the flood damage prevention ordinance.
Participate in floodplain identification and mapping updates.
Provide public assistance/information on floodplain requirements and impacts.
Hazards Mitigated: Flood
New and
Existing
3, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 15 Community
Development
N/A Low Staff Time,
General Funds
Ongoing
Action 5— Galindo and Mt. Diablo Creek Drainage Improvements – Detention Basin at Ygnacio Valley Road and Pine Hollow Road.
Hazards Mitigated: Flood
New and
Existing
4, 6, 9, 10, 16, 17 Engineering N/A Medium Stormwater
Funds, Storm
Drain Fees,
Staff Time,
General Funds,
BRIC
Long-term
Action 6— Update and maintain the Floodplain Management Plan Hazards Mitigated: Flood
New and
Existing
2, 3, 6, 9, 10, 13,
14, 16, 17, 18
Public Works N/A Low
$85,000
General Fund Long-term
Action 7— Develop a continuity of operations plan
Hazards Mitigated: Dam and Levee Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Flood, Landslide, Severe Weather, Climate Change New and
Existing
1, 2, 3 Public Works N/A Low
$100,000
General Fund Short-term
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Plan and Implementation 20-3
Benefits New
or Existing
Assets Objectives Met Lead Agency Support Agency Estimated Cost Sources of
Funding Timelinea
Action 8— Work with the Water District to develop inundation mapping for District-owned Water Storage Units and integrate this mapping into locally relevant planning mechanisms, such as the hazard mitigation plan, emergency response plan, and/or general plan, as appropriate.
Hazards Mitigated: Flood
New and
Existing
2, 3, 6, 9, 10, 13,
14, 16, 17, 18
Engineering N/A Medium Staff Time,
General Funds,
FMA, HMGP
Ongoing
Action 9— Develop a City and non-City Critical Infrastructure Map Hazards Mitigated: Dam and Levee Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Flood, Landslide, Severe Weather, Climate Change New and
Existing
1, 4, 6, 9, 12, 15 Engineering Public Works,
Planning and
Housing Division
Medium Staff Time,
General Funds,
BRIC
Short-term
Action 10— Identify an alternate Emergency Operations Center in Concord Hazards Mitigated: Dam and Levee Failure, Earthquake, Flood, Landslide, Severe Weather, Climate Change New and
Existing
2, 3, 13 Office of
Emergency
Services
Low Staff Time,
General Fund
Short-term
Action 11— Adopt the 2022 California Existing Building Code for the design of voluntary or mandatory soft-story building retrofits
Hazards Mitigated: Earthquake
Existing 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 11, 12,
15 Planning and
Housing
Division
N/A Low Staff Time Short-term
Action 12— Develop a City Forest Plan/Climate Action Plan for Downtown and Key Street Corridors. Also include in Street Tree Master Plan, which requires 10 percent of non-residential parking lots to be landscaped.
Hazards Mitigated: Drought, Flood, Landslide, Severe Weather, Climate Change New and
Existing
1, 4, 6, 12, 14, 17,
18 Public Works Planning and
Housing Division
Medium Staff Time,
BRIC, General
Fund
Ongoing
Action 13— Commission new or use existing local data to identify language access disparities that may impact emergency communication with limited English proficiency community members. Use the data to improve communication plans, identify gaps in preparedness, and develop a comprehensive strategy for incorporating language access considerations into all steps of the City’s emergency management plans.
Hazards Mitigated: Dam and Levee Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Flood, Landslide, Severe Weather, Climate Change New and
Existing
2, 3, 7 Office of
Emergency
Services
Public
Information
Office,
Community
NGOs
Low Staff Time,
General Fund
Ongoing
Action 14— Market Street Utility Undergrounding to reduce risk to utility lines from severe weather events (Capital Improvement Project #2628)
Hazards Mitigated: Severe Weather
New and
Existing
1, 7, 12, 15 Engineering Public Works Medium Staff Time,
BRIC, FMA
Short-term
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Plan and Implementation 20-4
Benefits New
or Existing
Assets Objectives Met Lead Agency Support Agency Estimated Cost Sources of
Funding Timelinea
Action 15— Stormwater Green Infrastructure Pilot Project to install bio-retention facilities to mitigate drought impacts (Capital Improvement Project #2442)
Hazards Mitigated: Drought, Flood
New and
Existing
1, 4, 9, 10, 13, 17,
18 Engineering Public Works Medium Staff Time,
BRIC, FMA
Short-term
Action 16— Emergency Operations Center updates to current emergency activation requirements (Capital Improvement Project #2473)
Hazards Mitigated: Dam and Levee Failure, Earthquake, Flood, Landslide, Severe Weather Existing 2, 3, 7, 13, 16 Engineering Public Works Medium Staff Time, EOC Grant
Short-term
Action 17— Commercial Circle Storm Drain: Install new storm drain infrastructure to mitigate localized flooding from Mount Diablo Creek. (Capital Improvement Project #2494) Hazards Mitigated: Flood
Existing 1, 4, 7, 9, 10 Engineering Public Works Medium Staff Time,
FMA, BRIC
Short-term
Action 18—Stormwater green infrastructure: Install bioretention and capture devices to capture and reuse stormwater at the following locations:
• Hillcrest Park – Regional (Capital Improvement Project #2512) • Iron Horse Park (Capital Improvement Project #2515)
• BART Cooperative (between Oak Grove Road and the BART Maintenance Yard) (Capital Improvement Project #2629) • Concord Logo/Caltrans (intersection of Market Street and Clayton Road) (Capital Improvement Project #2631) CSU Campus (Capital Improvement Project #2636)
Hazards Mitigated: Drought, Flood
Existing 1, 4, 7, 9, 10, 12,
14, 17, 18
Engineering Public Works Medium Staff Time,
FMA, BRIC
Short-term
Action 19— Police Department generator and transfer switch replacement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (Capital Improvement Project #2653)
Hazards Mitigated: Dam and Levee Failure, Earthquake, Flood, Landslide, Severe Weather, Climate Change Existing 1, 2, 13, 16, 18 Public Works Office of
Emergency
Services
Medium Staff Time,
BRIC
Short-term
Action 20— Blenheim Way: increase capacity of storm drain (Capital Improvement Project #2664) Hazards Mitigated: Flood
Existing 1, 4, 7, 9, 10 Engineering Public Works High Staff Time,
BRIC, FMA
Short-term
Action 21— Citywide battery backup installation (Capital Improvement Project #2665) Hazards Mitigated: Dam and Levee Failure, Earthquake, Flood, Landslide, Severe Weather New and
Existing
1, 2, 13, 16, 18 Office of
Emergency
Services
Public Works High Staff Time,
BRIC
Short-term
Action 22— La Vista Avenue/Joan Avenue storm drain design and construction to address localized flooding (Capital Improvement Project #ENG-23-036)
Hazards Mitigated: Flood
Existing 1, 4, 7, 9, 10 Engineering Public Works Medium Staff Time,
BRIC, FMA
Short-term
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Plan and Implementation 20-5
Benefits New
or Existing
Assets Objectives Met Lead Agency Support Agency Estimated Cost Sources of
Funding Timelinea
Action 23— Study available datasets to determine or develop the methodology to define socially vulnerable communities.
Hazards Mitigated: Dam and Levee Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Flood, Landslide, Severe Weather, Climate Change New and
Existing
3, 6, 16, 18 Community
Development,
Office of
Emergency
Services
Low Staff Time,
General Fund
Short-term
Action 24—Substantial Damage Response/Management Plan
• Explore feasibility of developing the plan
Develop plan if deemed feasible
Hazards Mitigated: Flood
New and
Existing
5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12,
15, 16, 18
Public Works,
Community
Development
Office of
Emergency
Services
Medium Staff Time,
California
Adaptation
Planning Grant
Program, FMA
Short-term
a. Short-term = Completion within 5 years; Long-term = Completion within 10 years; Ongoing= Continuing new or existing program with no completion date
20.3 ACTION PLAN PRIORITIZATION
The actions recommended in the action plan were prioritized based on the following factors:
• Cost and availability of funding
• Benefit, based on likely risk reduction to be achieved • Number of plan objectives achieved
• Timeframe for project implementation
• Eligibility for grant funding programs
Two priorities were assigned for each action:
• A high, medium, or low priority for implementing the action • A high, medium, or low priority for pursuing grant funding for the action The sections below describe the analysis of benefits and costs and the assignment of the two priority ratings.
20.3.1 Benefit/Cost Review
The action plan must be prioritized according to a benefit/cost analysis of the proposed actions (44 CFR, Section 201.6(c)(3)(iii)). For this hazard mitigation plan, a qualitative benefit-cost review was performed for each action by assigning ratings for benefit and cost as follows:
• Cost:
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Plan and Implementation 20-6
➢ High—Existing funding will not cover the cost of the action; implementation would require new revenue through an alternative source (for example, bonds, grants, and fee increases). ➢ Medium—The action could be implemented with existing funding but would require a re- apportionment of the budget or a budget amendment, or the cost of the action would have to be spread over multiple years.
➢ Low—The action could be funded under the existing budget. The action is part of or can be part of an ongoing existing program.
• Benefit:
➢ High—Action will provide an immediate reduction of risk exposure for life and property. ➢ Medium—Action will have a long-term impact on the reduction of risk exposure for life and property, or action will provide an immediate reduction in the risk exposure for property. ➢ Low—Long-term benefits of the action are difficult to quantify in the short term.
To assign priorities, each action with a benefit rating equal to or higher than its cost rating (such as high benefit/medium cost, medium benefit/medium cost, medium benefit/low cost, etc.) was considered to be cost- beneficial. This is not the detailed level of benefit/cost analysis required for some FEMA hazard-related grant programs. Such analysis would be performed at the time a given action is being submitted for grant funding.
20.3.2 Implementation Priority
The priority for implementing each action was assigned based on the following definitions:
• High Priority—An action that meets multiple objectives, has benefits that exceed costs, and has a secured source of funding. Action can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years). • Medium Priority—An action that meets multiple objectives, has benefits that exceed costs, and is eligible for funding though no funding has yet been secured for it. Action can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years) once funding is secured. Medium-priority actions become high-priority actions once funding is secured. • Low Priority—An action that will mitigate the risk of a hazard, has benefits that do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify, has no secured source of funding, and is not eligible for any known grant funding.
Action can be completed in the long term (1 to 10 years). Low-priority actions are generally “wish-list” actions. They may be eligible for grant funding from programs that have not yet been identified.
20.3.3 Grant Pursuit Priority
The priority for pursuing grant funding for each action was assigned based on the following definitions:
• High Priority—An action that meets identified grant eligibility requirements, has high benefits, and is listed as high or medium implementation priority; local funding options are unavailable or available local funds could be used instead for actions that are not eligible for grant funding. • Medium Priority—An action that meets identified grant eligibility requirements, has medium or low benefits, and is listed as medium or low implementation priority; local funding options are unavailable. • Low Priority—An action that has not been identified as meeting any grant eligibility requirements.
20.3.4 Prioritization Summary for Mitigation Actions
Table 20-2 lists the priority of each recommended action.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Plan and Implementation 20-7
Table 20-2. Mitigation Action Priority
Action
#
# of
Objectives
Met Benefit Cost
Do Benefits
Equal or
Exceed Costs?
Is Project
Grant-
Eligible?
Can Project Be Funded
Under Existing
Programs/ Budgets?
Implementation
Priority
Grant
Priority
1 8 High High Yes Yes No Medium High
2 4 Low Low Yes No Yes High Low
3 3 Low Low Yes No Yes High Low
4 7 High Low Yes No Yes High Low
5 6 High Medium Yes Yes Yes High High
6 9 Low Low Yes No No Low Low
7 3 Low Low Yes No Yes High Low
8 10 Low Medium No Yes Yes Low Medium
9 6 Low Medium No Yes Yes Low Medium
10 3 Low Low Yes No Yes High Low
11 8 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low
12 7 Low Medium No Yes Yes Low Medium
13 3 Low Low Yes No Yes High Low
14 4 High Medium Yes Yes Yes High High
15 7 High Medium Yes Yes Yes High High
16 5 Medium Medium Yes Yes Yes High Medium
17 5 High Medium Yes Yes Yes High High
18 9 High Medium Yes Yes Yes High High
19 5 High Medium Yes Yes Yes High High
20 5 High High Yes Yes Yes High High
21 5 High High Yes Yes Yes High High
22 5 High Medium Yes Yes Yes High High
23 4 Low Low Yes No Yes High Low
24 9 Medium Medium Yes Yes Yes High Medium
20.4 CLASSIFICATION OF ACTIONS
Each recommended action was classified based on the hazard it addresses and the type of mitigation it involves.
Mitigation types used for this classification are as follows:
• Prevention—Government, administrative or regulatory actions that influence the way land and buildings are developed to reduce hazard losses. Includes planning and zoning, floodplain laws, capital improvement programs, open space preservation, and stormwater management regulations. • Property Protection—Modification of buildings or structures to protect them from a hazard or removal of structures from a hazard area. Includes acquisition, elevation, relocation, structural retrofit, storm shutters, and shatter-resistant glass.
• Public Education and Awareness—Actions to inform residents and elected officials about hazards and ways to mitigate them. Includes outreach projects, real estate disclosure, hazard information centers, and school-age and adult education.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Plan and Implementation 20-8
• Natural Resource Protection—Actions that minimize hazard loss and preserve or restore the functions of natural systems. Includes sediment and erosion control, stream corridor restoration, watershed management, forest and vegetation management, wetland restoration and preservation, and green infrastructure. • Emergency Services—Actions that protect people and property during and immediately after a hazard event. Includes warning systems, emergency response services, and the protection of essential facilities. • Structural Projects—Actions that involve the construction of structures to reduce the impact of a hazard.
Includes dams, setback levees, floodwalls, retaining walls, and safe rooms. • Climate Resilience—Actions that incorporate methods to mitigate and/or adapt to the impacts of climate change. Includes aquifer storage and recovery activities, incorporating future conditions projections in project design or planning, or actions that specifically address jurisdiction-specific climate change risks, such as sea level rise or urban heat island effect.
• Community Capacity Building—Actions that increase or enhance local capabilities to adjust to potential damage, to take advantage of opportunities, or to respond to consequences. Includes staff training, memorandums of understanding, development of plans and studies, and monitoring programs.
Table 20-3 shows the classification based on this analysis.
Table 20-3. Classification of Mitigation Actions
Action Addressing Hazard, by Mitigation Type
Hazard Type Prevention
Property
Protection
Public
Education &
Awareness
Natural Resource
Protection Emergency Services
Structural
Projects
Climate
Resilience
Community
Capacity
Building
High-Risk Hazards
Earthquake 2, 11 1, 9 13 10, 16, 19, 21 2, 3, 7, 9, 23 Medium-Risk Hazards
Severe
Weather
2 1, 9, 14 13 10, 16, 19, 21 2, 3, 7, 9, 12,
23 Flood 2, 4, 6 1, 4, 5, 9 4, 13 15, 18 10, 16, 19, 21 5, 17, 20, 22 15, 18 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9,
12, 23, 24
Landslide 2 1, 9 13 10, 16, 19, 21 2, 3, 7, 9, 12,
23 Low-Risk Hazards
Drought 2 9 13 15, 18 15, 18 2, 3, 7, 9, 12,
23 Dam/Levee
Failure
2 1, 9 13 10, 16, 19, 21 2, 3, 7, 9, 23
Wildfirea
a. Action items have not been included for Wildfire due to the lack of historical incidents and risk to the City of Concord.
21-1
21. PLAN ADOPTION, IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE
21.1 PLAN ADOPTION
A hazard mitigation plan must document that it has been formally adopted by the governing body of the jurisdiction requesting federal approval of the plan (44 CFR Section 201.6(c)(5)). DMA compliance and its benefits cannot be achieved until the plan is adopted. This plan will be submitted for a pre-adoption review to Cal OES prior to adoption. Once pre-adoption approval has been provided, the City of Concord will formally adopt the plan. A copy of the resolution is provided in Appendix H.
21.2 PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
The effectiveness of the hazard mitigation plan depends on its implementation and incorporation of its action items into existing local plans, policies and programs. Together, the action items in the Plan provide a framework for activities that the City of Concord can implement over the next 5 years. The planning team and the Steering Committee have established goals and objectives and have prioritized mitigation actions that will be implemented through existing plans, policies, and programs.
The City of Concord Community Development Department and Office of Emergency Services (OES) will have lead co-responsibility for overseeing the Plan implementation and maintenance strategy. Plan implementation and evaluation will be a shared responsibility among all agencies identified as lead agencies in the mitigation action plan.
21.3 PLAN MAINTENANCE
Plan maintenance is the formal process for achieving the following:
• Ensuring that the hazard mitigation plan remains an active and relevant document and that the City maintains its eligibility for applicable funding sources
• Monitoring and evaluating the plan annually and producing an updated plan every five years • Integrating public participation throughout the plan maintenance and implementation process • Incorporating the mitigation strategies outlined in this plan into existing planning mechanisms and programs, such as any relevant comprehensive land-use planning process, capital improvement planning process, and building code enforcement and implementation
To achieve these ends, a hazard mitigation plan must present a plan maintenance process that includes the following (44 CFR Section 201.6(c)(4)):
• A method and schedule for monitoring, evaluating, and updating the mitigation plan within a 5-year cycle
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Plan Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance 21-2
• An approach for how the community will continue public participation in the plan maintenance process • A process by which local governments will incorporate the requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms, such as comprehensive or capital improvement plans, when appropriate Table 21-1 summarizes the plan maintenance strategy. The sections below further describe each element.
Table 21-1. Plan Maintenance Matrix
Approach Timeline Lead Responsibility
Integration into Other Planning Mechanisms
Create a linkage between the hazard mitigation plan and the City’s general plan or similar plans identified in the core capability assessments
Continuous over the 5-year
performance period of the plan
Planning and Housing
Division
Plan Monitoring
Track the implementation of actions over the performance period of the plan
Continuous over the 5-year
performance period of the plan
Office of Emergency
Services – Emergency
Services Manager
Plan Evaluation
Review the status of previous actions; assess changes in risk; evaluate success of integration
Upon initiation of hazard
mitigation plan update,
comprehensive general plan
update, or major disaster
Office of Emergency
Services – Emergency
Services Manager
Progress Report
Evaluate the progress of individual actions Annually Community Development and
Office of Emergency
Services – Emergency
Services Manager
Grant Monitoring and Coordination
As grant opportunities present themselves, the City will consider options to pursue grants to fund actions identified in this plan
As grants become available Office of Emergency
Services – Emergency
Services Manager
Plan Update
Begin the process, at a minimum, every 5 years to develop a comprehensive update of the plan.
Every 5 years or upon
comprehensive update to General
Plan or major disaster; funding and
organizing for plan update will
begin in FY 2026/2027
Office of Emergency
Services – Emergency
Services Manager
Continuing Public Participation
Keep a website maintained, hold public meeting review
once a year (these meetings are also televised and on public notices in community newspaper), and receive comments
through the website. The website and comments will be
maintained over the course of the plan.
Continuous over the 5-year
performance period of the plan
Office of Emergency
Services – Emergency
Services Manager
21.3.1 Integration with Other Planning Mechanisms
It is the intent of the City of Concord to fully integrate the hazard mitigation plan into existing plans and programs, such as comprehensive land-use planning processes, capital improvement planning, and building enforcement
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Plan Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance 21-3
implementation. The hazard mitigation plan’s format allows sections to be reviewed and updated as new data becomes available, resulting in a plan that remains current and relevant.
The City, through adoption of a General Plan and zoning ordinance, has planned for the impact of natural hazards.
The process of updating this hazard mitigation plan provided the opportunity to review and expand on policies in these planning mechanisms. The information on hazard, risk, vulnerability, and mitigation contained in this hazard mitigation plan is based on the best science and technology available at the time this plan was prepared. The General Plan and the hazard mitigation plan are complementary documents that work together to achieve the goal of reducing risk exposure. The General Plan is an integral part of this plan. An update to the General Plan may trigger an update to the hazard mitigation plan.
The City of Concord will create a linkage between the hazard mitigation plan and the General Plan by identifying a mitigation action as such and giving that action a high priority. Other planning processes and programs to be coordinated with the recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan include the following:
• City of Concord General Plan
• Climate Action Plans
• Resilience Plans
• Recovery Plan
• Emergency response plans
• Capital improvement programs
• Municipal codes
• Community design guidelines
• Water-efficient landscape design guidelines
• Stormwater management programs
• Water system vulnerability assessments
• Master fire protection plans.
Some action items do not need to be implemented through regulation. Instead, these items can be implemented through the creation of new educational programs, continued interagency coordination, or improved public participation. As information becomes available from other planning mechanisms that can enhance this plan, that information will be integrated via the update process. The following City plans and programs currently integrate components of the hazard mitigation strategy:
• City of Concord Emergency Operations Plan—The Emergency Operations Plan addresses the City’s responsibilities in emergencies associated with natural disaster, human-caused emergencies and technological incidents. It provides a framework for coordination of response and recovery efforts within the City and with local, state, and federal agencies. The plan establishes an emergency organization to direct and control operations during a period of emergency by assigning responsibilities to specific personnel. Information from the hazard mitigation plan is incorporated as appropriate. • General Plan Safety Element—Safety Element in the City of Concord General Plan includes a discussion of fire, earthquake, flooding, and landslide hazards. The hazard mitigation plan was adopted as an implementation appendix to the Safety Element.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Plan Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance 21-4
• Capital Improvements Plan—The capital improvement plan includes projects to help mitigate potential hazards. The City will ensure consistency between the hazard mitigation plan and the current and future capital improvement plans. The hazard mitigation plan may identify new possible funding sources for capital improvement projects and may result in modifications to proposed projects based on results of the risk assessment.
• Green Infrastructure Plan—As a compliance measure included under the previous Municipal Regional Permit, the City of Concord developed a Plan for Stormwater Green Infrastructure. which was approved by City Council prior to June 30, 2019. The plan proposes disconnecting stormwater runoff from existing City infrastructure, preventing untreated direct discharge into the municipal storm drain system and downstream receiving waters.
• Local Emergency Volunteer Management Plan—This plan establishes a framework by which the City of Concord can coordinate unaffiliated spontaneous and affiliated volunteer resources for community-wide response, relief, and recovery following a disaster.
• Citywide Climate Action Plan—The City’s Climate Action Plan includes projects for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to likely impacts of climate change. These projects were reviewed to identify cross-planning initiatives that serve both adaptation and mitigation objectives. • Care and Shelter for People with Disabilities and Functional Needs—The City addresses the needs of individuals with disabilities and the elderly during an emergency or disaster situation, and provides safe, sanitary, secure shelter and care for all residents, including those with functional needs. • CEQA—The City enforces the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, which, since 1988, requires mitigation for identified natural hazards.
21.3.2 Plan Monitoring
The Community Development Department will be the lead agency responsible for monitoring the plan by tracking the status of all recommended mitigation actions in the action plan.
21.3.3 Plan Evaluation
The plan will be evaluated by how successfully the implementation of identified actions has helped to achieve the goals and objectives identified of the plan. This will be assessed by a review of the changes in risk that occur over the performance period and by the degree to which mitigation goals and objectives are incorporated into existing plans, policies and programs. Plan evaluation will be the co-responsibility of the City’s Community Development Department and Office of Emergency Services. The mayor and City Council may recommend changes to the hazard mitigation plan based on evaluation findings.
21.3.4 Progress Report
An annual progress report is an effective tool to position the City for future updates. This report will provide the City with a streamlined approach for fulfilling update requirements delineated in 44 CFR 201.6(d)(3) during the next plan update initiative. Any trigger of a comprehensive update to the City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan as described in Section 21.3.6 will require completion of a performance period progress report.
The objective of the progress report will be to evaluate the progress of individual actions annually during the performance period of this plan. The progress report will be completed annually in coordination with the annual reporting under the CRS program. The review will include the following:
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Plan Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance 21-5
• Summary of any hazard events that occurred during the performance period and the impact these events had on the planning area
• Review of mitigation success stories
• Review of continuing public involvement
• Brief discussion about why targeted strategies were not completed • Reevaluation of the action plan to determine if the timeline for identified projects needs to be amended (such as changing a long-term project to a short-term one because of new funding) • Recommendations for new projects
• Changes in or potential for new funding options (grant opportunities) • Impact of any other planning programs or initiatives that involve hazard mitigation The City has created a template to guide its departments in preparing a progress report (see Appendix G). This report will be used as follows:
• Posted on a website dedicated to the hazard mitigation plan • Provided to the local media through a press release
• Presented to City Council to inform council members of the progress of actions implemented during the reporting period
Progress reporting is not a requirement specified under 44 CFR. However, it may enhance the City’s opportunities for funding. While failure to implement this component of the plan maintenance strategy will not jeopardize the City’s compliance under the DMA, it may jeopardize its opportunity to partner and leverage funding opportunities with other stakeholders within the planning area.
21.3.5 Grant Monitoring and Evaluation
The City’s Community Development Department and Office of Emergency Services will identify grant funding opportunities. Once these opportunities are identified, City agency stakeholders will convene in a short meeting to review the hazard mitigation plan and pursue a strategy to capture that grant funding. The City’s Community Development Department and Office of Emergency Services will assume co-lead responsibility for planning and facilitating grant opportunity meetings. Review of the hazard mitigation plan at these meetings can include the following:
• Discussion of any hazard events that occurred during the prior year and their impact on the planning area • Impact of potential grant opportunities on the implementation of mitigation actions • Re-evaluation of the action plans to determine if the timeline for identified actions needs to be amended (such as changing a long-term action to a short-term action because of funding availability) • Recommendations for new actions
• Impact of any other planning programs or initiatives that involve hazard mitigation
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Plan Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance 21-6
21.3.6 Plan Update
FEMA requires the hazard mitigation plan to be revised and resubmitted for review and approval by Cal OES and FEMA prior to the five-year anniversary date of the plan’s adoption in order to remain eligible for benefits under the DMA (44 CFR, Section 201.6(d)(3)). To meet this timeline, the City’s Community Development Department together with the Office of Emergency Services will implement the Steering Committee’s plan revision process at least one year prior to the anniversary date of the adoption. This cycle may be accelerated to less than five years based on the following triggers:
• A federal disaster declaration that impacts the City of Concord • A hazard event that causes loss of life
• A comprehensive update of the City of Concord general plan The hazard mitigation plan five-year revision will, at a minimum, include the following elements:
• The revision process will be convened through a new steering committee • The hazard risk assessment will be reviewed and, if necessary, revised using best available information and technologies
• The action plan will be reviewed for any actions completed, ongoing, or withdrawn, and will be reconciled to account for changes in the risk assessment or new policies identified under other plans (such as the general plan)
• The draft plan revision will be sent to appropriate departments and divisions for comment • The public will be given an opportunity to comment on the revised plan prior to adoption • The Concord City Council will adopt the updated plan once the reviews by Cal OES and FEMA have been conducted
21.3.7 Continuing Public Involvement
The public will continue to be apprised of the plan’s progress through a City website and by providing copies of annual progress reports on the City website and through posting them in locations throughout the City for the public to review. The website will house the final plan and provide information regarding the plan, plan implementation, and the beginning of the revision process. Copies of the plan will be distributed to local libraries. Upon initiation of future update processes, a new public involvement strategy will be initiated based on guidance from a new steering committee. This strategy will be based on the needs and capabilities of the City of Concord at the time of the update.
At a minimum, this strategy will include the use of local media outlets within the planning area.
References-1
22. REFERENCES
Abadi, Mark, James Pasley, and Taylor Ardrey. 2022. The 30 deadliest mass shootings in modern US history include Buffalo and Uvalde. May 26. Accessed October 11, 2022. https://www.businessinsider.com/deadliest-mass-shootings-in-us-history-2017-10.
ABC 7 News. 2015. Pipe bomb found at home of man who threatened Richmond mosque. December 23. Accessed September 26, 2022. https://abc7news.com/richmond-police-hate-crime-mosque-pipe-bomb- found/1133210/.
Bjerke, Guy. 2023. "Personal Communication." City Profile - Naval Weapons Station. February 1.
Brown, William M. III, David M. Perkins, Edgar V. Leyendecker, Arthur D. Frankel, James W. II Hendley, and Peter H. Stauffer. 2001. Hazard Maps Help Save Lives and Property. July. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/1996/fs183-96/fs183-96.pdf.
Cal OES. 2023. Dam Safety Planning Division. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://www.caloes.ca.gov/office-of- the-director/operations/planning-preparedness-prevention/dam-safety-planning/. —. 2023a. Warning Center. Accessed January 30, 2023. https://www.caloes.ca.gov/office-of-the- director/operations/response-operations/warning-center/.
Cal-Adapt. 2022. Local Climate Change Snapshot for Concord California. Accessed January 20, 2023. https://cal-adapt.org/tools/local-climate-change-snapshot.
California Air Resources Board. 2022. Current California GHG Emission Inventory Data. Accessed January 20, 2023. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-inventory-data.
California Climate Adaptation Strategy. 2023. Region San Francisco Bay Area. Accessed January 20, 2023. https://climateresilience.ca.gov/regions/sf-bay-area.html.
California Department of Conservation. 2022. Earthquakes . Accessed January 8, 2023. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/earthquakes.
California Department of Finance. 2021. Report E-4. Population Dstimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2020, with 2010 Benchmark. Demographic Research Unit. May 7. Accessed February 2023. https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fdof.ca.gov%2Fwp- content%2Fuploads%2FForecasting%2FDemographics%2FDocuments%2FE-4_2010-2020-Internet- Version.xlsx&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK.
—. 2022. Report E-4. Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2021-2022, with 2020 Benchmark.
Demographic Research Unit. May 2. Accessed February 2023. https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fdof.ca.gov%2Fwp-
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan References
Reference-2
content%2Fuploads%2FForecasting%2FDemographics%2FDocuments%2FE- 4_2022_InternetVersion.xlsx&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK.
California Department of Water Resources. 2018. California Water Plan Update 2018. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://drought.unl.edu/archive/plans/Water/state/CA_2018.pdf. —. 2022. Climate Change and Water. Accessed April 8, 2022. https://water.ca.gov/Programs/All- Programs/Climate-Change-Program/Climate-Change-and-Water.
California Governor's Office of Emergency Services. 2018. "California State Hazard Mitigation Plan." California Governor's Office of Emergency Services. Accessed October 7, 2022. https://www.caloes.ca.gov/wp- content/uploads/002-2018-SHMP_FINAL_ENTIRE-PLAN.pdf.
California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 2018. Indicators of Climate Change in California.
California Environmental Protection Agency.
CBS San Francisco. 2019. Concord Man Allegedly Threatens Mass Shooting At Synagogue In Online Chat Room.
June 15. Accessed October 11, 2022. https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/concord-arrest-threat- mass-shooting-synagogue-weapons-internet-chat-room/.
—. 2020. Contra Costa, Napa, San Mateo, Solano Counties Enact Curfews Over Civil Unrest. June 2. Accessed September 27, 2022. https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/contra-costa-solano-counties-enact- curfews-over-civil-unrest/.
CDC. 2020. Health Implications of Drought. January 16. Accessed January 8, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/drought/implications.htm.
—. 2022. Pathogen Surveillance. October 12. Accessed October 12, 2022. https://wwwn.cdc.gov/FoodNetFast/PathogenSurveillance/AnnualSummary. —. 2023. Waterborne Disease & Outbreak Surveillance Reporting. January 4. Accessed January 30, 2023. https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/surveillance/burden/findings.html.
City of Concord. 2012. "2030 General Plan." Chapter 3 - Land Use. July. Accessed October 2022. https://www.cityofconcord.org/DocumentCenter/View/1078/Chapter-3-Land-Use-PDF. —. 2014. "City of Concord Sewer System Management Plan." City of Concord. June. Accessed October 17, 2022. https://www.cityofconcord.org/460/Sanitary-Sewer-Information. —. 2018. "Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element." Accessed November 2022. /https://concordhousingelement.org/wp- content/uploads/2022/08/City-of-Concord-Draft-6th-Cycle-Draft-Housing-Element_Goals-Policies- Programs.pdf.
—. 2022. Accessed October 2022. https://concordgis.ci.concord.ca.us/DevViewer/. —. 2022a. "City of Concord Key Facts and Figures." October. Accessed October 28, 2022. https://concordfirst.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Key-Facts-Figures.pdf. —. n.d. "Land Use Element." Concord 2030 General Plan. Accessed October 2022. https://www.cityofconcord.org/DocumentCenter/View/1078/Chapter-3-Land-Use-PDF.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan References
References-3
—. n.d.-a. "Meet Our Major Employers." Accessed October 2022. https://concordfirst.com/doing-business/major- employers/.
—. n.d.-b. "Parks, Open Space, and Conservation." Accessed January 6, 2023. https://www.cityofconcord.org/DocumentCenter/View/1081/Chapter-6-Parks-Open-Space-and- Conservation-PDF.
—. n.d.-c. Sanitary Sewer Information. Accessed October 17, 2022. https://www.cityofconcord.org/460/Sanitary- Sewer-Information.
Contra Costa County. 2022. "Contra Costa County Provides Notice of Data Breach." April 15. Accessed October 21, 2022. https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/74911/County-Notice-of-Privacy- Cyber-Incident-News-Release-4152022?bidId=.
—. 2022a. COVID-19 Timeline. August 23. Accessed October 12, 2022. https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/7793/COVID-19-Timeline.
Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development. 2010. "Contra Costa County General Plan." Contra Costa Conservation & Development. July. Accessed October 13, 2022. https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/4732/General-Plan.
Contra Costa Health Services. 2018. Hazmat Incidents in Contra Costa County . Accessed January 30, 2023. https://cchealth.org/hazmat/accident-history.php.
—. 2022. Press Releases. October 7. Accessed October 12, 2022. https://cchealth.org/press-releases/.
Contra Costa Public Works. 2022. Flood Control District. Accessed October 17, 2022. https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/5586/Flood-Control-District. —. 2022a. Flood Forecast Information. Accessed October 18, 2022. https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/1578/Flood- Forecast-Information.
Contra Costa Special Districts Association. n.d. East Bay Municipal Utility District. Accessed October 13, 2022. https://contracostasda.specialdistrict.org/east-bay-municipal-utility-district.
Contra Costa Water District. 2021. "2020 Urban Water Management Plan." June. Accessed January 2023. https://www.ccwater.com/DocumentCenter/View/9851/2020-Urban-Water-Management-Plan-PDF. —. n.d. The Source of Your Water. Accessed October 13, 2022. https://www.ccwater.com/365/The-Source-of- Your-Water.
Division of Safety of Dams. 2021. Downstream Hazard. September. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://water.ca.gov/-/media/DWR-Website/Web-Pages/Programs/All-Programs/Division-of-Safety-of- Dams/Files/Publications/Division-of-Safety-of-Dams-Definitions-for-Downstream-Hazard-and- Condition-Assessment.pdf.
Environmental Protection Agency. 2022. Climate Change Indicators: Heavy Precipitation. August. Accessed January 19, 2023. https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-heavy- precipitation#:~:text=%22Heavy%20precipitation%22%20refers%20to%20instances,intensity%20and%2 0frequency%20of%20precipitation.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan References
Reference-4
FEMA. 2003. "INTEGRATING MANMADE HAZARDS." FEMA.gov. June 12. Accessed January 27, 2023. file:///C:/Users/jake.poland/Downloads/446675.pdf.
—. 2017. Flood Insurance Study Contra Costa County, California. March 21. Accessed January 29, 2023. https://map1.msc.fema.gov/data/06/S/PDF/06013CV001C.pdf?LOC=eac7405faf99ee8f4ccf7b72581874d
5. —. 2020. Shallow Flooding Analyses and Mapping. December. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_shallow-flooding-guidance.pdf. —. 2021. NFIP and Levees: An Overview. May. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_nfip-levees.pdf. —. 2022. Dam Safety. May 16. Accessed December 29, 2022. https://www.fema.gov/emergency-managers/risk- management/dam-safety.
—. n.d. Chapter 2 Types of Floods and Floodplains. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://training.fema.gov/hiedu/docs/fmc/chapter%202%20- %20types%20of%20floods%20and%20floodplains.pdf.
—. n.d.-a. What is a Levee? Accessed Janurary 8, 2023. https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020- 08/fema_what-is-a-levee_fact-sheet_0512.pdf.
Fortinet. 2022. Cybersecurity Statistics. Accessed October 15, 2022. https://www.fortinet.com/resources/cyberglossary/cybersecurity- statistics#:~:text=Cost%20of%20Cyber%20Crime%201%20Cyber%20crime%20costs,the%20average%2 0attack%20costs%20%243.86%20million.%20More%20items.
Hurd, Cheryl. 2019. Concord Massacre Plot Foiled. June 14. Accessed September 26, 2022. https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/concord-massacre-plot-foiled/173810/.
Kelley, George. 2022. Concord: Sunvalley mall reopens after gun threat leads to man’s arrest. October 5.
Accessed October 11, 2022. https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2022/10/05/concord-police-activity-closes- sunvalley-mall/.
Kostadinov, Dimitar. 2012. Cyberterrorism Defined (as distinct from “Cybercrime”). December 21. Accessed January 27, 2023. https://resources.infosecinstitute.com/topic/cyberterrorism-distinct-from-cybercrime/.
Marstall, Kevin. 2022. Annual Report on Floodplain Management Components Regarding Repetitive Loss Properties Within the City of Concord. July 21. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://ca- concord.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/4792/2022-Annual-Report-for-Repetitive-Loss- Properties?bidId=.
NASA. 2022. Carbon Dioxide. February. Accessed April 7, 2022. https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon- dioxide/.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 2019. Can Climate Affect Earthquakes, Or Are the Connections Shaky? October 29. Accessed April 8, 2022. https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2926/can-climate-affect- earthquakes-or-are-the-connections-shaky/.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan References
References-5
—. 2023. Climate Change: How Do We Know? January 12. Accessed January 20, 2023. https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/.
National Drought Mitigation Center. 2023. Drought Basics. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://drought.unl.edu/Education/DroughtBasics.aspx.
—. 2023a. Drought Impact Reporter. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://droughtreporter.unl.edu/map/.
National Integrated Drought Information System. 2022. Current U.S. Drought Monitor Conditions for California.
October. Accessed October 13, 2022. https://www.drought.gov/states/california. —. 2022a. Drought Conditions for Contra Costa County. October. Accessed October 13, 2022. https://www.drought.gov/states/california/county/contra%20costa. —. 2022b. Historical Data and Conditions. Accessed October 13, 2022. https://www.drought.gov/historical- information?state=california&countyFips=06013&dataset=1&selectedDateUSDM=20110524&selectedD ateSpi=19610501&selectedDatePaleo=1009&dateRangeUSDM=2000-2023&dateRangeSpi=1900-2022.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2022. Carbon dioxide now more than 50% higher than pre- industrial levels. June 3. Accessed October 19, 2022. https://www.noaa.gov/news-release/carbon-dioxide- now-more-than-50-higher-than-pre-industrial-levels.
National Weather Service. 2022. Flood Safety Awareness Week - Flood Hazards. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://www.weather.gov/ilx/flood_safety_awareness_week_3. —. 2022a. Weather Related Fatality and Injury Statistics. Accessed January 19, 2023. https://www.weather.gov/hazstat/.
NOAA. n.d. Severe Weather 101 - Floods. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://www.nssl.noaa.gov/education/svrwx101/floods/.
NWS. n.d. Beaufort Wind Scale. Accessed April 7, 2022. https://www.weather.gov/mfl/beaufort.
San Francisco Chronicle. 2022. California heat wave: Bay Area records its highest-ever temperature. September
5. Accessed February 2023. https://www.sfchronicle.com/weather/article/California-heat-wave-Live- updates-17416492.php.
Sarkar, Subharthi, and Rajib Maity. 2020. "Estimation of Probable Maximum Precipitation in the context of climate change." Methods X.
Science. 2021. California's fire-fanning Santa Ana winds may not get any better with climate change. June 18.
Accessed April 8, 2022. https://www.science.org/content/article/california-s-fire-fanning-santa-ana- winds-may-not-get-any-better-climate-change.
Scientific American. 2022. California Presents Plan to Prevent Extreme Heat Deaths. January 13. Accessed January 19, 2023. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/california-presents-plan-to-prevent- extreme-heat-deaths/.
SFGATE. 2019. Mudslide on Bailey Road in Concord closes road in both directions. February 14. Accessed January 19, 2023. https://www.sfgate.com/weather/article/Mudslide-Bailey-Road-Concord-Pittsburg- closed-13617790.php.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan References
Reference-6
Stanford University. 2018. Dam Failures in the U.S. September. Accessed January 8, 2023. http://npdp.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/reports/npdp_dam_failure_summary_compilation_v1_2018.pdf .
State of California. 2022. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Accessed January 20, 2023. https://www.climateassessment.ca.gov/state/overview/.
State of California Department of Finance. 2023. Projections. Accessed January 6, 2023. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/projections/.
The New York Times. 2023. Tracking Coronavirus in California: Latest Map and Case Count. February 7.
Accessed February 2023. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/california-covid-cases.html.
The White House. 2022. National COVID-19 Preparedness Plan. Accessed May 18, 2022. https://www.whitehouse.gov/covidplan/.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2014. Using HEC-RAS for Dam Break Studies. August. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://www.hec.usace.army.mil/publications/TrainingDocuments/TD-39.pdf. —. 2020. National Inventory of Dams. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://nid.usace.army.mil/#/. —. n.d. National Levee Database. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://levees.sec.usace.army.mil/#/.
U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit. 2021. Drought. September 28. Accessed April 8, 2022. https://toolkit.climate.gov/topics/water/drought.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2022. Disaster Designation Information. Accessed 2022. https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-and-services/disaster-assistance-program/disaster-designation- information/index.
U.S. Drought Monitor. 20223. What is the USDM. . Accessed January 8, 2023. https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/About/WhatistheUSDM.aspx.
U.S. Geological Survey. 2006. "Landslide Types and Processes." USGS Maps, Products & Publications. January.
Accessed 2021. https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2004/3072/pdf/fs2004-3072.pdf. —. 2011. ShakeMap Scientific Background. March 9. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://web.archive.org/web/20110623092131/http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/shakemap/backgro und.php#intmaps.
—. 2016. Earthquake Outlook for the San Francisco Bay Region 2014–2043. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2016/3020/fs20163020.pdf.
—. 2021. Earthquake Magnitude, Energy Release, and Shaking Intensity. Accessed April 6, 2022. https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/earthquake-hazards/science/earthquake-magnitude-energy-release- and-shaking-intensity?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects. —. n.d. Landslides 101. Accessed June 26, 2022. https://www.usgs.gov/programs/landslide-hazards/landslides- 101.
—. n.d.-a. ShakeMap. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/data/shakemap/.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan References
References-7
—. n.d.-b. The Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://www.usgs.gov/natural- hazards/earthquake-hazards/science/modified-mercalli-intensity-scale?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt- science_center_objects.
University of California, San Francisco Police Department. 2021. Terrorism. Accessed September 26, 2022. https://police.ucsf.edu/emergency-management/preparing-disasters/terrorism.
USGS. 2018. 2018 Long-term National Seismic Hazard Map. Accessed January 8, 2023. https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/2018-long-term-national-seismic-hazard-map.
Western Regional Climate Center. 2023. Cooperative Climatological Data Summaries. Accessed January 6, 2023. https://wrcc.dri.edu/Climate/west_coop_summaries.php.
Wilson, Elizabeth K. 2008. Bombings Target UC Santa Cruz Biomedical Researchers. August 11. Accessed September 26, 2022. https://cen.acs.org/content/cen/articles/86/i32/Bombings-Target-UC-Santa- Cruz.html.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix A. Outreach Survey & Results
STEERING COMMITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
City of Concord
Meeting Summary
1 Purpose of Meeting: City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering Committee Meeting #1 Location of Meeting: Virtual: Teams
Date of Meeting: 10.11.2022
Steering Committee Members:
☒ Trish Beirne, Emergency and Volunteer Services Manager, City of Concord Police ☒ Jesse Crawford, Maintenance Superintendent, City of Concord Public Works ☒ Bruce Davis, Senior Civil Engineer, City of Concord Engineering Division ☒ Stephanie Gronlund, Engineering, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ☒ Rick Kovar, Emergency Services Manager, Contra Costa County OES (Vice-chair 1) ☒ Mateika Martin, Manager, Threat and Emergency Management, John Muir Health ☒ Kathryn Monroy, Program Manager, City of Concord Parks and Recreation ☐ Jill Mosley, Principal Engineer, Contra Costa Water District ☒ Jennifer Nylander, Administrative Coordinator, City of Concord Community Development ☒ Jennifer Ortega, Community Relations Manager, City of Concord Manager’s Office ☒ Bea Portillo, Emergency Planning Coordinator, Contra Costa County OES (Vice-chair 2) ☐ Ryan Pursley, Chief Building Official, City of Concord Building Division (Chair) ☐ Les Putnam, Senior Public Safety Specialist, PG&E
☐ Jenny Schaeffer, Program Director, Food Bank of Contra Costa & Solano ☒ Danny Scherer, Program Manager, Monument Crisis Center ☒ Brian Snead, Damage Prevention Right of Way Specialist, Kinder Morgan ☐ Briana Taylor, Regional Disaster Chair, Northern California Coastal Region, American Red Cross ☒ Natalie Manier, Disaster Program Manager, American Red Cross (Alternate) ☒ Norman Wong, Principal Engineer, BART
Other Attendees:
Bart Spencer, Lead Project Planner, Tetra Tech
Megan Brotherton, Planner, Tetra Tech
Marcelle Indelicato, Emergency Services Manager, Danville Kevin Marstall, City of Concord
Melvin Lee
Irving Lee
Jo Morrison
Jody
Katy Hornbeck, East Bay Regional Parks District
Meeting Summary: Introduce Steering Committee to the HMP update process, discuss project coordination, roles and responsibilities, hazards of concern/hazards of interest, public outreach and engagement.
Item No. Description Action/Decision item(s):
1 Welcome & Introductions
1:04 pm
• Concord – Trish Beirne
• Tetra Tech
– Bart Spencer
• Steering Committee members
None
2a Project Overview (Bart Spencer)
• What is hazard mitigation
o Mitigation is part of the emergency management wheel.
None
City of Concord
Meeting Summary
2 o Natural hazards are analyzed in the plan so projects can be developed to open grant funding opportunities.
• Updated FEMA guidance
o This plan will include the new guidance. Tetra Tech
already includes many of these requirements for:
Climate Change
Social Vulnerability (defined by the
local plan)
• Plan update
o Hazus will be used to run analysis on hazards to reflect changes in the hazards and development.
o Critical facilities/Lifelines will be analyzed in seven categories
o All SC requests are in line with FEMA guidance
o Political will and local requirements will also be factored in
o SC meetings will be open to the public in compliance of Community Rating System (CRS) requirements
2b Public Comment
None
None
3a Project Coordination (Bart)
• Core Planning Team
o A Core Planning Team (CPT)
drives the plan development.
The CPT meets biweekly and is made up of representation from the City of Concord. Decisions made by the CPT are affirmed by the Steering Committee.
• Steering Committee
o Organization and purpose
The Steering Committee (SC) is an advisory board
made up of representatives from government and
non-government organizations (NGOs) in the
planning area. Members represent different parts of
the community.
Due to accelerated process, some decisions will be
made via email.
o Selection of a chair and vice chair
Chair selected by the CPT in advance. Rick Kovar and
Bea Portillo volunteered to share as vice-
chairs
o Quorum
Minimum attendance is needed to make decisions
Alternate members can represent the primary SC
member
50% plus 1
o Meetings and meeting times (open meetings for CRS
compliance)
Decisions:
Steering Committee Chair—Ryan Pursley
Steering Committee Vice-Chairs—Rick
Kovar (1), Bea Portillo (2)
Quorum is 10
Mission Statement and Goals as revised
Consensus achieved
Action Items:
• Tetra Tech
o Send Draft Ground Rules for
acceptance via email
• CPT
o Draft objectives and send to SC for
input and acceptance
via email
City of Concord
Meeting Summary
3 Meetings will be held once every other month as
needed (October, December, February) . Scheduled
for two hours, but the duration may be less.
o Ground rules (need acceptance via email)
o Mission Statement, Goals, and Objectives
Committee agreed to add human-caused to the
Mission Statement
Committee agreed to remove natural from Goal 2
Objectives will be presented to the SC after they are drafted by the CPT
Mission Statement:
To join with our community to maintain and enhance a disaster- resistant City by reducing the potential for loss of life, property, and environmental damage from natural and human-caused
disasters, while supporting economic recovery from those disasters.
Goals:
Goal 1 Minimize Life Loss and Injuries
Goal 2 Minimize Damage to Structures, Property,
Equipment, the Environment, and Natural and
Cultural Resources from Natural Hazards and
Climate Change
Goal 3 Improve Emergency Management Effectiveness
Goal 4 Ensure Continuity of Government Operations
Goal 5 Embed Equity in Emergency Management Plans
3b Public Comment
None
None
4a Hazards Assessment & Risk Assessment (Bart)
• Previous Natural Hazards (risk-based hazards):
o Earthquake
o Wildfire
Will include secondary effects (PSPS)
o Mass movement/landslide
o Flood
o Drought
o Climate change
(now required)
o Severe weather
o Dam and Levee Failure
Will include any impacts to the planning area from
dams located outside the city
• Hazards of Interest (consequence-based hazard s not
reviewed by FEMA):
o Hazardous materials incidents
o Infectious disease (outbreak, epidemic, pandemic)
o Pipeline incidents
Decision:
Include Natural Hazards and Hazards of
Interest as listed.
Consensus achieved
City of Concord
Meeting Summary
4 o Supply chain disruptions (will be included as a secondary impact to select natural hazards)
o Terrorism, civil disturbance, cyber security threats, active shooter
o Transportation incidents
o Utility interruptions
o Rick Kovar: Include these other hazards, even if FEMA does not distribute grant money for them. The hazards
are of interest to the community and elected officials. 4b Public Comment
None
None
5a Outreach and Engagement (Megan)
• Requirements
o Public must be allowed to participate in the planning process
• Public Awareness Survey
o Survey link distributed in advance to SC members for
review
o Survey will gauge public awareness and preparedness
o Survey will be translated into additional languages by the city and members of the SC
o Survey link and QR code will be sent to SC members for distribution
• The draft plan released for public comment
near the end of
the planning process will not be translated, but the city may choose the translate just the Executive Summary for comment in additional languages
• Website
Concord maintains a hazard mitigation page which
includes meeting agendas, summaries, and
announcements about progress of the planning process
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) | Concord, CA
(cityofconcord.org)
• StoryMap
o Currently being developed on the city’s GIS account. A link will be distributed later. Residents will be able to locate their home in relation to mapped natural hazards.
• Social Media
• SC members should use their social media accounts to
promote the public awareness survey and other outreach
efforts, including these SC meetings.
• Screenshot social media posts or take pictures of in -person outreach events and send them to Megan for inclusion in the plan.
Action Items:
• Steering Committee
o Provide translations of the survey
to Tetra Tech by October 25 for
initial release to the public on
October 26.
• Tetra Tech
o Send Public Survey link and QR
code to SC members for
distribution starting in late
October
City of Concord
Meeting Summary
5 5b Public Comment
None
None
6a Requests from Committee Members
• None
None
6b Public comments
None
None
7 Closing Comments
• Trish expressed appreciation for the time spent by the SC at the meeting today and for making decisions that will allow the planning process to move forward.
None
8 Adjourned at 2:26 pm
City of Concord
Meeting Summary
1 Purpose of Meeting: City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering Committee Meeting #2 Location of Meeting: Virtual: Teams
Date of Meeting: 12.13.2022
Steering Committee Members:
☒ Trish Beirne, Emergency and Volunteer Services Manager, City of Concord Police ☒ Jesse Crawford, Maintenance Superintendent, City of Concord Public Works ☒ Bruce Davis, Senior Civil Engineer, City of Concord Engineering Division ☒ Stephanie Gronlund, Engineering, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ☐ Rick Kovar, Emergency Services Manager, Contra Costa County OES (Vice-chair 1) ☐ Mateika Martin, Manager, Threat and Emergency Management, John Muir Health ☒ Kathryn Monroy, Program Manager, City of Concord Parks and Recreation ☒ Jill Mosley, Principal Engineer, Contra Costa Water District ☐ Jennifer Nylander, Administrative Coordinator, City of Concord Community Development ☐ Jennifer Ortega, Community Relations Manager, City of Concord Manager’s Office ☒ Bea Portillo, Emergency Planning Coordinator, Contra Costa County OES (Vice-chair 2) ☒ Ryan Pursley, Chief Building Official, City of Concord Building Division (Chair) ☐ Les Putnam, Senior Public Safety Specialist, PG&E
☐ Jenny Schaeffer, Program Director, Food Bank of Contra Costa & Solano ☒ Danny Scherer, Program Manager, Monument Crisis Center ☒ Brian Snead, Damage Prevention Right of Way Specialist, Kinder Morgan ☒ Briana Taylor, Regional Disaster Chair, Northern California Coastal Region, American Red Cross ☐ Natalie Manier, Disaster Program Manager, American Red Cross (Alternate) ☐ Norman Wong, Principal Engineer, BART
Other Attendees:
Bart Spencer, Lead Project Planner, Tetra Tech
Des Alexander, Planner, Tetra Tech
Megan Brotherton, Planner, Tetra Tech
Kevin Marstall, City of Concord
Katy Hornbeck, East Bay Regional Parks District
Larry Loomer
Maggie Dutton
Meeting Summary: Planning process update
Item No. Description Action/Decision item(s):
1 Welcome & Announcements
1:02 pm
• Concord – Trish Beirne
o Summary of the previous SC meeting and overview of
the hazard mitigation website
• Tetra Tech – Bart Spencer
o This HMP is being prepared by an expedited process to allow the City to be eligible for continued grant funding None
City of Concord
Meeting Summary
2 o New guidance from FEMA requires incorporation
climate change and social equity considerations in the
plan
2a Project Overview (Des Alexander)
• Plan update
o All hazard profiles are completed
, and QA/QC is being
done
o Draft plan is expected by early January
o Public comment period is scheduled for February 6-20
o Draft will be available for SC review during the public comment period
o Risk results will be available before the February
meeting
• Plan objectives
o Sent to SC last week for
review
• Action items
o Action items are being developed for the plan
o One action item will be developed for each high hazard o Some action items are carried over from the previous
plan
• Plan Maintenance
o Will be performed on a bi-annual basis to keep the plan current
Decision:
Plan Objectives approved as written
Motion to accept: Ryan Pursley
Seconded by: Trish Beirne
Consensus achieved
2b Public Comment
None
None
3a Hazards Assessment & Risk Assessment
• Risk Assessment Update (Bart Spencer)
o FEMA requires natural hazards (e.g., flood, drought) to be included in the plan
o Threats (e.g., active shooter)
can be included if desired,
but are not eligible for mitigation funding
o Risk ranking of natural hazards is developed based on the risk assessment. Risk ranking can be changed by
the city if there is a justifiable reason to change it. o The risk assessment is also useful for the CRS
(Community Rating System) program
• City Critical Infrastructure Map (Trish Beirne)
o The CI map is dynamic and updated as needed
o City-
owned facilities are currently on the map
o Any additional critical infrastructure information from the other agencies on the SC can be sent to Trish for
inclusion on the map
Action Items:
• Steering Committee
o Share critical infrastructure
location information with Trish
Beirne
• Tetra Tech
o None
City of Concord
Meeting Summary
3 o If the location information is sensitive, it will not be shared publicly
3b Public Comment
None
None
4a Outreach and Engagement (Megan Brotherton)
• Website is being kept current
• StoryMap is being built out and will be updated when risk assessment results are done
• Public Awareness Survey Updates
o Nearly 150 responses to date
o 7 responses from languages other than English
o Outreach has been done virtually and at in -
person events
with paper surveys for community members to fill out
o Foreign-language responses merged into the results
presented in English, so no additional translation is needed o More than 30 respondents would like to be informed about hazard preparedness events in the city
o Additional summary information will be used to inform mitigation action plan development
Action Items:
• Steering Committee
o Continue to promote the public
survey until it closes
on January
27, 2023
• Tetra Tech
o None
4b Public Comment
None
None
5a Requests from Committee Members
• None
None
5b Public comments
None
None
6 Closing Comments
• The next Steering Committee meeting will be in February None
7 Adjourned at 1:45 pm Ryan Pursley
City of Concord
Meeting Summary
1 Purpose of Meeting: City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering Committee Meeting #3 Location of Meeting: Virtual: Teams
Date of Meeting: 02.14.2023
Steering Committee Members:
☒ Trish Beirne, Emergency and Volunteer Services Manager, City of Concord Police ☐ Jesse Crawford, Maintenance Superintendent, City of Concord Public Works ☒ Bruce Davis, Senior Civil Engineer, City of Concord Engineering Division ☒ Stephanie Gronlund, Engineering, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ☒ Rick Kovar, Emergency Services Manager, Contra Costa County OES (Vice-chair 1) ☒ Mateika Martin, Manager, Threat and Emergency Management, John Muir Health ☒ Kathryn Monroy, Program Manager, City of Concord Parks and Recreation ☒ Jill Mosley, Principal Engineer, Contra Costa Water District ☒ Jennifer Nylander, Administrative Coordinator, City of Concord Community Development ☒ Jennifer Ortega, Community Relations Manager, City of Concord Manager’s Office ☐ Bea Portillo, Emergency Planning Coordinator, Contra Costa County OES (Vice-chair 2) ☒ Ryan Pursley, Chief Building Official, City of Concord Building Division (Chair) ☐ Les Putnam, Senior Public Safety Specialist, PG&E
☐ Jenny Schaeffer, Program Director, Food Bank of Contra Costa & Solano ☒ Danny Scherer, Program Manager, Monument Crisis Center ☒ Brian Snead, Damage Prevention Right of Way Specialist, Kinder Morgan ☒ Briana Taylor, Regional Disaster Chair, Northern California Coastal Region, American Red Cross ☐ Natalie Manier, Disaster Program Manager, American Red Cross (Alternate) ☒ Norman Wong, Principal Engineer, BART
Other Attendees:
Bart Spencer, Lead Project Planner, Tetra Tech
Megan Brotherton, Planner, Tetra Tech
Kevin Marstall, City of Concord
Maggie Dutton
Bruce Kimmis
William Gallagher
Meeting Summary: Planning process update
Item No. Description Action/Decision item(s):
1 Welcome & Announcements
1:01 pm
• Concord – Trish Beirne
o None
• Tetra Tech – Bart Spencer
o Recap of the planning effort
None
2a Project Coordination (Bart Spencer)
• Acceptance of Action Items
o Developed to meet FEMA criteria for climate change
and equity
o Coordinates with actions in the CIP
Decision:
Action Items approved as written
Motion to accept: Danny Scherer
Seconded by: Brian Snead
City of Concord
Meeting Summary
2 o Includes actions to help define local social vulnerability o Action 8 focuses on coordinating with other agencies
to identify any additional hazards throughout the life
of the plan concerning water storage units. This will
include working with the water district to create a
mapping effort.
This is a carryover action from the prior plan.
• Release of Public Review Draft
o Open for comment until February 27th
o Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) | Concord, CA
(cityofconcord.org)
Consensus achieved
2b Public Comment
None
None
3a Outreach and Engagement (Megan Brotherton)
• Survey Results
o Combined effort among Steering Committee members
resulted in a robust outreach effort
o 349 responses (42 from those who speak languages other than English)
o More than 100 people indicated that they would like more information on emergency preparedness. The City will
invite those respondents to participate in a local CERT training program.
• StoryMap Demo
o LHMP StoryMap (arcgis.com)
Action Items:
• Steering Committee
o None
• Tetra Tech
o None
3b Public Comment
None
None
4a Requests from Committee Members
• None
None
4b Public comments
None
None
5 Closing Comments
• Thank you for all the efforts the Steering Committee made to partner with the City to make Concord more resilient and dynamic!
None
6 Adjourned at 1:55 pm Ryan Pursley
SUMMARY OF SURVEY
RESULTS
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 1 / 26
1.45% 5
61.27% 212
65.61% 227
26.01% 90
3.76% 13
72.25% 250
53.18% 184
6.07% 21
Q1 Which of the following natural hazards have you experienced in Concord? (Check all that apply)
Answered: 346 Skipped: 3
Total Respondents: 346
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Dam/Levee
Failure
Drought
Earthquake
Flood
Landslide &
Mass Movements
Severe Weather
(e.g., high...
Wildfire (or
wildfire smoke)
None
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Dam/Levee Failure
Drought
Earthquake
Flood
Landslide & Mass Movements
Severe Weather (e.g., high wind, heavy rain, lightning, heat wave) Wildfire (or wildfire smoke)
None
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 2 / 26
Q2 How concerned are you about the following natural hazards in Concord?
Answered: 347 Skipped: 2
Dam Failure
Drought
Earthquake
Flood
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 3 / 26
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Not Concer… Somewhat … Concerned Very Conce…
Extremely …
Landslide &
Mass Movements
Severe Weather
(e.g., high...
Wildfire
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 4 / 26
61.89%
203
21.04%
69 10.98%
36 4.27%
14 1.83%
6 328
1.63 10.09%
34 21.07%
71 24.63%
83 25.52%
86 18.69%
63 337
3.22 7.04%
24 17.89%
61 35.48%
121
26.69%
91 12.90%
44 341
3.21 29.67%
100
27.30%
92 23.74%
80 13.35%
45 5.93%
20 337
2.39 42.81%
140
29.05%
95 17.43%
57 5.81%
19 4.89%
16 327
2.01 9.14%
31 22.42%
76 33.63%
114
23.01%
78 11.80%
40 339
3.06 13.47%
45 21.26%
71 29.94%
100
16.17%
54 19.16%
64 334
3.06 NOT
CONCERNED
SOMEWHAT
CONCERNED
CONCERNED VERY
CONCERNED
EXTREMELY
CONCERNED
TOTAL WEIGHTED
AVERAGE
Dam Failure
Drought
Earthquake
Flood
Landslide & Mass
Movements
Severe Weather
(e.g., high wind,
heavy rain, lightning)
Wildfire
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 5 / 26
Q3 How concerned are you about the following non-natural hazards in Concord?
Answered: 346 Skipped: 3
Active Shooter
Cyber Threats
Epidemics/Pande
mics
Hazardous
Materials...
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 6 / 26
12.24%
42 20.41%
70 24.49%
84 21.57%
74 21.28%
73 343
3.19 18.13%
62 22.51%
77 26.32%
90 20.76%
71 12.28%
42 342
2.87 11.50%
39 16.52%
56 32.74%
111
23.89%
81 15.34%
52 339
3.15 11.70%
40 25.44%
87 31.29%
107
17.84%
61 13.74%
47 342
2.96 22.42%
76 28.02%
95 24.48%
83 11.80%
40 13.27%
45 339
2.65 9.04%
31 20.12%
69 30.61%
105
23.03%
79 17.20%
59 343
3.19 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Not Concer… Somewhat … Concerned Very Conce…
Extremely …
Terrorism
Utility/Power
Failure
NOT
CONCERNED
SOMEWHAT
CONCERNED
CONCERNED VERY
CONCERNED
EXTREMELY
CONCERNED
TOTAL WEIGHTED
AVERAGE
Active Shooter
Cyber Threats
Epidemics/Pandemics
Hazardous Materials
Release
Terrorism
Utility/Power Failure
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 7 / 26
58.02% 199
44.61% 153
21.57% 74
25.07% 86
15.74% 54
33.24% 114
21.87% 75
65.60% 225
84.84% 291
Q4 How would you prefer to be notified about a disaster event?(Check all that apply)
Answered: 343 Skipped: 6
Total Respondents: 343
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Television
Radio
Neighbors
(word of mouth)
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram
Nextdoor
Contra Costa
Community...
SMS/text
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Television
Radio
Neighbors (word of mouth)
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram
Nextdoor
Contra Costa Community Warning System (CWS)
SMS/text
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 8 / 26
Q5 What steps has your household taken to prepare for a disaster? (Check all that apply)
Answered: 345 Skipped: 4
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Received First
Aid/CPR...
Made a fire
escape plan
Designated an
evacuation...
Identified
utility shut...
Maintain an
emergency...
Installed
smoke detect...
Maintain a
fire...
Stored medical
supplies (fi...
Registered to
receive...
Purchased
additional...
None
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 9 / 26
52.17% 180
35.07% 121
26.96% 93
41.16% 142
62.32% 215
71.88% 248
49.28% 170
61.45% 212
44.93% 155
13.04% 45
6.67% 23
Total Respondents: 345
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Received First Aid/CPR training
Made a fire escape plan
Designated an evacuation meeting place
Identified utility shutoff locations
Maintain an emergency supply kit (batteries, flashlights, battery-powered radio, food/water) Installed smoke detectors on each level of the house
Maintain a fire extinguisher at home
Stored medical supplies (first aid kit, medications)
Registered to receive emergency alerts
Purchased additional insurance
None
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 10 / 26
Q6 How prepared is your household to survive without electricity or natural gas for five or more days? Check one:
Answered: 324 Skipped: 25
25.62%
83 63.27%
205
11.11%
36 324
2.08 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Not at all p… Somewhat … Very prepar…
Check one:
NOT AT ALL PREPARED SOMEWHAT PREPARED VERY PREPARED TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Check one:
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 11 / 26
Q7 What is the zip code where you live?
Answered: 342 Skipped: 7
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
94517
94518
94519
94520
94521
94522
94523
94529
94565
94598
Other (Please
specify whic...
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 12 / 26
0.29% 1
8.19% 28
14.91% 51
16.96% 58
23.98% 82
0.58% 2
1.75% 6
2.92% 10
23.98% 82
0.58% 2
5.85% 20
TOTAL 342
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
94517
94518
94519
94520
94521
94522
94523
94529
94565
94598
Other (Please specify which zip code or community you live in.)
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 13 / 26
Q8 Where do you work?
Answered: 344 Skipped: 5
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Bay Point
Berkeley
Clayton
Concord
Contra Costa
County...
Martinez
Oakland
Pittsburg
Pleasant Hill
Pleasanton
San Francisco
Walnut Creek
I am retired
or unemployed.
Other (Please
specify whic...
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 14 / 26
6.69% 23
1.16% 4
0.87% 3
35.47% 122
0.58% 2
2.03% 7
1.16% 4
1.45% 5
2.62% 9
0.87% 3
2.33% 8
1.45% 5
30.23% 104
13.08% 45
TOTAL 344
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Bay Point
Berkeley
Clayton
Concord
Contra Costa County (Unincorporated)
Martinez
Oakland
Pittsburg
Pleasant Hill
Pleasanton
San Francisco
Walnut Creek
I am retired or unemployed.
Other (Please specify which city you work in.)
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 15 / 26
65.40% 223
34.60% 118
Q9 Do you own or rent your home?
Answered: 341 Skipped: 8
TOTAL 341
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Own
Rent
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Own
Rent
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 16 / 26
43.40% 148
56.60% 193
Q10 When you moved into your home, did you consider the impact a disaster could have on your home?
Answered: 341 Skipped: 8
TOTAL 341
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 17 / 26
72.15% 215
27.85% 83
Q11 Would the disclosure of natural hazard information influence your decision to purchase or move into a home today?
Answered: 298 Skipped: 51
TOTAL 298
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 18 / 26
2.60% 8
1.62% 5
1.95% 6
14.61% 45
15.26% 47
2.27% 7
26.30% 81
47.73% 147
3.57% 11
Q12 Is your home located in any of the following hazard areas? (check all that apply):
Answered: 308 Skipped: 41
Total Respondents: 308
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
FEMA
designated...
Dam failure
zone
High
liquefaction...
Near an active
earthquake...
Wildfire prone
area
Landslide area
No
Don't know
Other (please
specify)
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
FEMA designated floodplain
Dam failure zone
High liquefaction zone (an area built on man-made fill) Near an active earthquake fault (within 1 mile)
Wildfire prone area
Landslide area
No
Don't know
Other (please specify)
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 19 / 26
5.30% 16
11.59% 35
4.64% 14
45.70% 138
38.74% 117
2.32% 7
Q13 Do you have hazard-specific insurance (check all that apply)? Answered: 302 Skipped: 47
Total Respondents: 302
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Flood
insurance
Earthquake
insurance
Wildfire
insurance
Not sure
Neither
Other (please
specify)
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Flood insurance
Earthquake insurance
Wildfire insurance
Not sure
Neither
Other (please specify)
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 20 / 26
Q14 What is the primary language spoken or written in your home? Answered: 311 Skipped: 38
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
English
Spanish
Chinese
(Traditional)
Dari
Hindi
Korean
Mandarin
Pashto
Polish
Punjabi
Russian
Tagalog
Vietnamese
Other (please
specify)
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 21 / 26
67.85% 211
23.47% 73
0.00% 0
1.61% 5
0.64% 2
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.32% 1
0.00% 0
0.32% 1
0.00% 0
3.22% 10
0.32% 1
2.25% 7
TOTAL 311
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
English
Spanish
Chinese (Traditional)
Dari
Hindi
Korean
Mandarin
Pashto
Polish
Punjabi
Russian
Tagalog
Vietnamese
Other (please specify)
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 22 / 26
55.02% 170
30.74% 95
32.69% 101
54.37% 168
60.52% 187
45.95% 142
35.60% 110
31.72% 98
6.47% 20
Q15 Which of the following resources do you use to receive news and information about the Concord area?
Answered: 309 Skipped: 40
Total Respondents: 309
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Social Media
(Facebook,...
Nextdoor
Neighbors
(word of mouth)
Email and/or
text messages
Local TV news
Local online
news
Concord's
e-newsletter
Concord's City
News & Activ...
Other (please
specify)
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Social Media (Facebook, Twitter)
Nextdoor
Neighbors (word of mouth)
Email and/or text messages
Local TV news
Local online news
Concord's e-newsletter
Concord's City News & Activity Guide
Other (please specify)
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 23 / 26
31.35% 95
43.89% 133
26.07% 79
26.40% 80
40.92% 124
37.29% 113
17.49% 53
18.48% 56
Q16 Which incentives would encourage you to retrofit your home to protect against natural disasters? (Check all that apply)
Answered: 303 Skipped: 46
Total Respondents: 303
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Building
permit fee...
Insurance
premium...
Mortgage
discount
Low interest
loan
Free local
government...
Grant funding
None of the
above
Not applicable
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Building permit fee waiver
Insurance premium discount
Mortgage discount
Low interest loan
Free local government technical assistance
Grant funding
None of the above
Not applicable
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 24 / 26
46.93% 145
14.56% 45
48.54% 150
24.92% 77
33.33% 103
Q17 If a natural disaster such as a large earthquake were to strike tomorrow... (Check all that apply)
Answered: 309 Skipped: 40
Total Respondents: 309
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
I feel
confident th...
I am unsure
how to prote...
I keep an
emergency ki...
I have
practiced an...
I am unsure
where I woul...
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
I feel confident that I know how to protect myself
I am unsure how to protect myself
I keep an emergency kit with spare food and water for myself and my family I have practiced an evacuation plan and/or know where I and my family would go if we needed to evacuate our home I am unsure where I would go if I needed to evacuate my home
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 25 / 26
Q18 Please indicate how you feel about the following statement: (Check one)"It is the responsibility of government (local, state, and federal) to provide education and programs that promote citizen actions that will reduce exposure to the risks associated with natural hazards." Answered: 309 Skipped: 40
5.83%
18 8.41%
26 21.04%
65 27.83%
86 36.89%
114
309
3.82 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Strongly Di… Somewhat … Neutral Somewhat …
Strongly Ag…
Choose one:
STRONGLY
DISAGREE
SOMEWHAT
DISAGREE
NEUTRAL SOMEWHAT
AGREE
STRONGLY
AGREE
TOTAL WEIGHTED
AVERAGE
Choose
one:
City of Concord Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Survey 26 / 26
Q19 OPTIONAL: If you want to receive information regarding emergency preparedness classes in the Concord area, please provide your email address.
Answered: 107 Skipped: 242
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix B. Summary of Federal and State
Agencies, Programs and Regulation
B-1
B. SUMMARY OF FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES, PROGRAMS AND
REGULATION
Existing laws, ordinances, plans and programs at the federal and state level can support or impact hazard mitigation actions identified in this plan. Hazard mitigation plans are required to include a review and incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information as part of the planning process (44 CFR, Section 201.6(b)(3)). The following federal and state programs have been identified as programs that may interface with the actions identified in this plan. Each program enhances capabilities to implement mitigation actions or has a nexus with a mitigation action in this plan. Information presented in this section can be used to review local capabilities to implement the action plan presented in this hazard mitigation plan.
FEDERAL
Americans with Disabilities Act
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) seeks to prevent discrimination against people with disabilities in employment, transportation, public accommodation, communications, and government activities. Title II of the ADA deals with compliance with the Act in emergency management and disaster-related programs, services, and activities.
It applies to state and local governments as well as third parties, including religious entities and private nonprofit organizations.
The ADA has implications for sheltering requirements and public notifications. During an emergency alert, officials must use a combination of warning methods to ensure that all residents have all necessary information. Those with hearing impairments may not hear radio, television, sirens, or other audible alerts, while those with visual impairments may not see flashing lights or other visual alerts. Two technical documents for shelter operators address physical accessibility needs of people with disabilities, as well as medical needs and service animals.
The ADA intersects with disaster preparedness programs in regard to transportation, social services, temporary housing, and rebuilding. Persons with disabilities may require additional assistance in evacuation and transit (e.g., vehicles with wheelchair lifts or paratransit buses). Evacuation and other response plans should address the unique needs of residents. Local governments may be interested in implementing a special-needs registry to identify the home addresses, contact information, and needs for residents who may require more assistance.
FEMA hazard mitigation project grant applications require full compliance with applicable federal acts. Any action identified in this plan that falls within the scope of this act will need to meet its requirements.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Summary of Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulation B-2
Civil Rights Act of 1964
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or nation origin and requires equal access to public places and employment. The Act is relevant to emergency management and hazard mitigation in that it prohibits local governments from favoring the needs of one population group over another. Local government and emergency response must ensure the continued safety and well-being of all residents equally, to the extent possible. FEMA hazard mitigation project grant applications require full compliance with applicable federal acts. Any action identified in this plan that falls within the scope of this act will need to meet its requirements.
Clean Water Act
The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) employs regulatory and non-regulatory tools to reduce direct pollutant discharges into waterways, finance municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and manage polluted runoff. These tools are employed to achieve the broader goal of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s surface waters so that they can support “the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water.”
Evolution of CWA programs over the last decade has included a shift from a program-by-program, source-by-source, and pollutant-by-pollutant approach to more holistic watershed-based strategies. Under the watershed approach, equal emphasis is placed on protecting healthy waters and restoring impaired ones. Numerous issues are addressed, not just those subject to CWA regulatory authority. Involvement of stakeholder groups in the development and implementation of strategies for achieving and maintaining water quality and other environmental goals is a hallmark of this approach.
The CWA is important to hazard mitigation in several ways. There are often permitting requirements for any construction within 200 feet of water of the United States, which may have implications for mitigation projects identified by a local jurisdiction. Additionally, CWA requirements apply to wetlands, which serve important functions related to preserving and protecting the natural and beneficial functions of floodplains and are linked with a community’s floodplain management program. Finally, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System is part of the CWA and addresses local stormwater management programs. Stormwater management plays a critical role in hazard mitigation by addressing urban drainage or localized flooding issues within jurisdictions.
FEMA hazard mitigation project grant applications require full compliance with applicable federal acts. Any action identified in this plan that falls within the scope of this act will need to meet its requirements.
Community Development Block Grant Disaster Resilience Program In response to disasters, Congress may appropriate additional funding for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Development Block Grant programs to be distributed as Disaster Recovery grants (CDBG-DR). These grants can be used to rebuild affected areas and provide seed money to start the recovery process. CDBG-DR assistance may fund a broad range of recovery activities, helping communities and neighborhoods that otherwise might not recover due to limited resources. CDBG-DR grants often supplement disaster programs of FEMA, the Small Business Administration, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Housing and Urban Development generally awards noncompetitive, nonrecurring CDBG-DR grants by a formula that considers disaster recovery needs unmet by other federal disaster assistance programs. To be eligible for CDBG-DR funds, projects must meet the following criteria:
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Summary of Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulation B-3
• Address a disaster-related impact (direct or indirect) in a presidentially declared county for the covered disaster
• Be a CDBG-eligible activity (according to regulations and waivers) • Meet a national objective.
Incorporating preparedness and mitigation into these actions is encouraged, as the goal is to rebuild in ways that are safer and stronger. CDBG-DR funding is a potential alternative source of funding for actions identified in this plan.
Community Rating System
The CRS is a voluntary program within the NFIP that encourages floodplain management activities that exceed the minimum NFIP requirements. Flood insurance premiums are discounted to reflect the reduced flood risk resulting from community actions meeting the following three goals of the CRS:
• Reduce flood losses.
• Facilitate accurate insurance rating.
• Promote awareness of flood insurance.
For participating communities, flood insurance premium rates are discounted in increments of 5 percent. For example, a Class 1 community would receive a 45 percent premium discount, and a Class 9 community would receive a 5 percent discount. (Class 10 communities are those that do not participate in the CRS; they receive no discount.) The discount partially depends on location of the property. Properties outside the special flood hazard area receive smaller discounts: a 10-percent discount if the community is at Class 1 to 6 and a 5-percent discount if the community is at Class 7 to 9. The CRS classes for local communities are based on 18 creditable activities in the following categories:
• Public information
• Mapping and regulations
• Flood damage reduction
• Flood preparedness.
CRS activities can help to save lives and reduce property damage. Communities participating in the CRS represent a significant portion of the nation’s flood risk; over 66 percent of the NFIP’s policy base is located in these communities. Communities receiving premium discounts through the CRS range from small to large and represent a broad mixture of flood risks, including both coastal and riverine flood risks.
Disaster Mitigation Act
The DMA is the current federal legislation addressing hazard mitigation planning. It emphasizes planning for disasters before they occur. It specifically addresses planning at the local level, requiring plans to be in place before Hazard Mitigation Assistance grant funds are available to communities. This plan is designed to meet the requirements of DMA, improving eligibility for future hazard mitigation funds.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Summary of Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulation B-4
Emergency Relief for Federally Owned Roads Program
The U.S. Forest Service’s Emergency Relief for Federally Owned Roads Program was established to assist federal agencies with repair or reconstruction of tribal transportation facilities, federal lands transportation facilities, and other federally owned roads that are open to public travel and have suffered serious damage by a natural disaster over a wide area or by a catastrophic failure. The program funds both emergency and permanent repairs (Office of Federal Lands Highway, 2016). Eligible activities under this program meet some of the goals and objectives for this plan and the program is a possible funding source for actions identified in this plan.
Emergency Watershed Program
The U. S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service administers the Emergency Watershed Protection Program, which responds to emergencies created by natural disasters. Eligibility for assistance is not dependent on a national emergency declaration. The program is designed to help people and conserve natural resources by relieving imminent hazards to life and property caused by floods, fires, windstorms, and other natural occurrences. Emergency Watershed Protection is an emergency recovery program. Financial and technical assistance are available for the following activities (Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2016):
• Remove debris from stream channels, road culverts, and bridges • Reshape and protect eroded banks
• Correct damaged drainage facilities
• Establish cover on critically eroding lands
• Repair levees and structures
• Repair conservation practices.
This federal program could be a possible funding source for actions identified in this plan.
Endangered Species Act
The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) was enacted in 1973 to conserve species facing depletion or extinction and the ecosystems that support them. The act sets forth a process for determining which species are threatened and endangered and requires the conservation of the critical habitat in which those species live. The ESA provides broad protection for species of fish, wildlife and plants that are listed as threatened or endangered. Provisions are made for listing species, as well as for recovery plans and the designation of critical habitat for listed species. The ESA outlines procedures for federal agencies to follow when taking actions that may jeopardize listed species and contains exceptions and exemptions. It is the enabling legislation for the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. Criminal and civil penalties are provided for violations of the ESA and the Convention.
Federal agencies must seek to conserve endangered and threatened species and use their authorities in furtherance of the ESA’s purposes. The ESA defines three fundamental terms:
• Endangered means that a species of fish, animal or plant is “in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.” (For salmon and other vertebrate species, this may include subspecies and distinct population segments.)
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Summary of Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulation B-5
• Threatened means that a species “is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future.” Regulations may be less restrictive for threatened species than for endangered species. • Critical habitat means “specific geographical areas that are…essential for the conservation and management of a listed species, whether occupied by the species or not.” Five sections of the ESA are of critical importance to understanding it:
• Section 4: Listing of a Species—The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) is responsible for listing marine species; the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is responsible for listing terrestrial and freshwater aquatic species. The agencies may initiate reviews for listings, or citizens may petition for them. A listing must be made “solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.” After a listing has been proposed, agencies receive comment and conduct further scientific reviews for 12 to 18 months, after which they must decide if the listing is warranted. Economic impacts cannot be considered in this decision, but it may include an evaluation of the adequacy of local and state protections.
Critical habitat for the species may be designated at the time of listing. • Section 7: Consultation—Federal agencies must ensure that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed or proposed species or adversely modify its critical habitat. This includes private and public actions that require a federal permit. Once a final listing is made, non-federal actions are subject to the same review, termed a “consultation.” If the listing agency finds that an action will “take” a species, it must propose mitigations or “reasonable and prudent” alternatives to the action; if the proponent rejects these, the action cannot proceed. • Section 9: Prohibition of Take—It is unlawful to “take” an endangered species, including killing or injuring it or modifying its habitat in a way that interferes with essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering.
• Section 10: Permitted Take—Through voluntary agreements with the federal government that provide protections to an endangered species, a non-federal applicant may commit a take that would otherwise be prohibited as long as it is incidental to an otherwise lawful activity (such as developing land or building a road). These agreements often take the form of a “Habitat Conservation Plan.” • Section 11: Citizen Lawsuits—Civil actions initiated by any citizen can require the listing agency to enforce the ESA’s prohibition of taking or to meet the requirements of the consultation process.
FEMA hazard mitigation project grant applications require full compliance with applicable federal acts. Any action identified in this plan that falls within the scope of this act will need to meet its requirements.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Dam Safety Program The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) cooperates with a large number of federal and state agencies to ensure and promote dam safety. More than 3,000 dams are part of regulated hydroelectric projects in the FERC program. Two-thirds of these are more than 50 years old. As dams age, concern about their safety and integrity grows, so oversight and regular inspection are important. FERC inspects hydroelectric projects on an unscheduled basis to investigate the following:
• Potential dam safety problems
• Complaints about constructing and operating a project • Safety concerns related to natural disasters
• Issues concerning compliance with the terms and conditions of a license.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Summary of Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulation B-6
Every five years, an independent engineer approved by the FERC must inspect and evaluate projects with dams higher than 32.8 feet (10 meters), or with a total storage capacity of more than 2,000 acre-feet.
FERC monitors seismic research and applies it in performing structural analyses of hydroelectric projects. FERC also evaluates the effects of potential and actual large floods on the safety of dams. During and following floods, FERC visits dams and licensed projects, determines the extent of damage, if any, and directs any necessary studies or remedial measures the licensee must undertake. The FERC publication Engineering Guidelines for the Evaluation of Hydropower Projects guides the FERC engineering staff and licensees in evaluating dam safety. The publication is frequently revised to reflect current information and methodologies.
FERC requires licensees to prepare emergency action plans and conducts training sessions on how to develop and test these plans. The plans outline an early warning system if there is an actual or potential sudden release of water from a dam due to failure. The plans include operational procedures that may be used, such as reducing reservoir levels and reducing downstream flows, as well as procedures for notifying affected residents and agencies responsible for emergency management. These plans are frequently updated and tested to ensure that everyone knows what to do in emergency situations.
National Dam Safety Act
Potential for catastrophic flooding due to dam failures led to passage of the National Dam Inspection Act in 1972, creation of the National Dam Safety Program in 1996, and reauthorization of the program through the Dam Safety Act in 2006. National Dam Safety Program, administered by FEMA requires a periodic engineering analysis of the majority of dams in the country; exceptions include the following:
• Dams under jurisdiction of the Bureau of Reclamation, Tennessee Valley Authority, or International Boundary and Water Commission
• Dams constructed pursuant to licenses issued under the Federal Power Act • Dams that the Secretary of the Army determines do not pose any threat to human life or property.
The goal of this FEMA-monitored effort is to identify and mitigate the risk of dam failure so as to protect lives and property of the public. The National Dam Safety Program is a partnership among the states, federal agencies, and other stakeholders that encourages individual and community responsibility for dam safety. Under FEMA’s leadership, state assistance funds have allowed all participating states to improve their programs through increased inspections, emergency action planning, and purchases of needed equipment. FEMA has also expanded existing and initiated new training programs. Grant assistance from FEMA provides support for improvement of dam safety programs that regulate most of the dams in the United States.
National Environmental Policy Act
The National Environmental Policy Act requires federal agencies to consider the environmental impacts of proposed actions and reasonable alternatives to those actions, alongside technical and economic considerations. The National Environmental Policy Act established the Council on Environmental Quality, whose regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500- 1508) set standards for compliance. Consideration and decision-making regarding environmental impacts must be documented in an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment. Environmental impact assessment requires the evaluation of reasonable alternatives to a proposed action, solicitation of input from organizations and individuals that could be affected, and an unbiased presentation of direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Summary of Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulation B-7
impacts. FEMA hazard mitigation project grant applications require full compliance with applicable federal acts. Any action identified in this plan that falls within the scope of this act will need to meet its requirements.
National Flood Insurance Program
The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) makes federally backed flood insurance available to homeowners, renters, and business owners in participating communities that enact floodplain regulations. Participation and good standing under NFIP are prerequisites to grant funding eligibility under the Robert T. Stafford Act. NFIP participation is limited to local governments that possess permit authority and have the ability to adopt and enforce regulations that govern land use.
For most participating communities, FEMA has prepared a detailed Flood Insurance Study. The study presents water surface elevations for floods of various magnitudes, including the 1-percent-annual-chance flood and the 0.2-percent- annual-chance flood. Base flood elevations and the boundaries of the flood hazard areas are shown on Flood Insurance Rate Maps, which are the principle tool for identifying the extent and location of the flood hazard. Flood Insurance Rate Maps are the most detailed and consistent data source available, and for many communities they represent the minimum area of oversight under the local floodplain management program. In recent years, Flood Insurance Rate Maps have been digitized as Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps, which are more accessible to residents, local governments and stakeholders.
NFIP participants must, at a minimum, regulate development in floodplain areas in accordance with NFIP criteria.
Before issuing a permit to build in a floodplain, participating jurisdictions must ensure that three criteria are met:
• New buildings and those undergoing substantial improvements must, at a minimum, be elevated to protect against damage by the 1-percent-annual-chance flood.
• New floodplain development must not aggravate existing flood problems or increase damage to other properties.
• New floodplain development must exercise a reasonable and prudent effort to reduce its adverse impacts on threatened salmonid species.
In California, the Department of Water Resources (DWR) is the coordinating agency for floodplain management.
DWR works with FEMA and local governments by providing grants and technical assistance, evaluating community floodplain management programs, reviewing local floodplain ordinances, participating in statewide flood hazard mitigation planning, and facilitating annual statewide workshops. Compliance is monitored by FEMA regional staff and by DWR.
National Incident Management System
The National Incident Management System (NIMS) is a systematic approach for government, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector to work together to manage incidents involving hazards. The NIMS provides a flexible but standardized set of incident management practices. Incidents typically begin and end locally, and they are managed at the lowest possible geographical, organizational, and jurisdictional level. In some cases, success depends on the involvement of multiple jurisdictions, levels of government, functional agencies, and emergency responder disciplines. These cases necessitate coordination across a spectrum of organizations. Communities using NIMS follow a comprehensive national approach that improves the effectiveness of emergency management and response personnel across the full spectrum of potential hazards (including natural hazards, technological hazards, and human- caused hazards) regardless of size or complexity.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Summary of Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulation B-8
Although participation is voluntary, federal departments and agencies are required to make adoption of NIMS by local and state jurisdictions a condition to receive federal preparedness grants and awards. The content of this plan is considered to be a viable support tool for any phase of emergency management. The NIMS program is considered as a response function, and information in this hazard mitigation plan can support the implementation and update of all NIMS-compliant plans within the planning area.
Presidential Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management Executive Order 11988 requires federal agencies to avoid to the extent possible the long and short-term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of floodplains and to avoid direct and indirect support of floodplain development wherever there is a practicable alternative. It requires federal agencies to provide leadership and take action to reduce the risk of flood loss, minimize the impact of floods on human safety, health, and welfare, and restore and preserve the natural and beneficial values of floodplains. The requirements apply to the following activities (FEMA, 2015a):
• Acquiring, managing, and disposing of federal lands and facilities • Providing federally undertaken, financed, or assisted construction and improvements • Conducting federal activities and programs affecting land use, including but not limited to water and related land resources planning, regulation, and licensing.
Presidential Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands Executive Order 11990 requires federal agencies to provide leadership and take action to minimize the destruction, loss or degradation of wetlands, and to preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values of wetlands. The requirements apply to the following activities (National Archives, 2016):
• Acquiring, managing, and disposing of federal lands and facilities • Providing federally undertaken, financed, or assisted construction and improvements • Conducting federal activities and programs affecting land use, including but not limited to water and related land resources planning, regulation, and licensing.
All actions identified in this plan will seek full compliance with all applicable presidential executive orders.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Dam Safety Program
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers operates and maintains approximately 700 dams nationwide. It is also responsible for safety inspections of some federal and non-federal dams in the United States that meet the size and storage limitations specified in the National Dam Safety Act. The Corps has inventoried dams; surveyed each state and federal agency’s capabilities, practices and regulations regarding design, construction, operation and maintenance of the dams; and developed guidelines for inspection and evaluation of dam safety. The Corps maintains the National Inventory of Dams, which contains information about a dam’s location, size, purpose, type, last inspection and regulatory status (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2017).
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Flood Hazard Management
The following U.S. Army Corps of Engineers authorities and programs related to flood hazard management:
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Summary of Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulation B-9
• The Floodplain Management Services program offers 100-percent federally funded technical services such as development and interpretation of site-specific data related to the extent, duration and frequency of flooding.
Special studies may be conducted to help a community understand and respond to flood risk. These may include flood hazard evaluation, flood warning and preparedness, or flood modeling. • For more extensive studies, the Corps of Engineers offers a cost-shared program called Planning Assistance to States and Tribes. Studies under this program generally range from $25,000 to $100,000 with the local jurisdiction providing 50 percent of the cost.
• The Corps of Engineers has several cost-shared programs (typically 65 percent federal and 35 percent non- federal) aimed at developing, evaluating and implementing structural and non-structural capital projects to address flood risks at specific locations or within a specific watershed:
➢ The Continuing Authorities Program for smaller-scale projects includes Section 205 for Flood Control, with a $7 million federal limit and Section 14 for Emergency Streambank Protection with a $1.5 million federal limit. These can be implemented without specific authorization from Congress. ➢ Larger scale studies, referred to as General Investigations, and projects for flood risk management, for ecosystem restoration or to address other water resource issues, can be pursued through a specific authorization from Congress and are cost-shared, typically at 65 percent federal and 35 percent non- federal.
➢ Watershed management planning studies can be specifically authorized and are cost-shared at 50 percent federal and 50 percent non-federal.
• The Corps of Engineers provides emergency response assistance during and following natural disasters.
Public Law 84-99 enables the Corps to assist state and local authorities in flood fight activities and cost share in the repair of flood protective structures. Assistance is provided in the flowing categories:
➢ Preparedness—The Flood Control and Coastal Emergency Act establishes an emergency fund for preparedness for emergency response to natural disasters; for flood fighting and rescue operations; for rehabilitation of flood control and hurricane protection structures. Funding for Corps of Engineers emergency response under this authority is provided by Congress through the annual Energy and Water Development Appropriation Act. Disaster preparedness activities include coordination, planning, training and conduct of response exercises with local, state and federal agencies. ➢ Response Activities—Public Law 84-99 allows the Corps of Engineers to supplement state and local entities in flood fighting urban and other non-agricultural areas under certain conditions (Engineering Regulation 500-1-1 provides specific details). All flood fight efforts require a project cooperation agreement signed by the public sponsor and the sponsor must remove all flood fight material after the flood has receded. Public Law 84-99 also authorizes emergency water support and drought assistance in certain situations and allows for “advance measures” assistance to prevent or reduce flood damage conditions of imminent threat of unusual flooding.
➢ Rehabilitation—Under Public Law 84-99, an eligible flood protection system can be rehabilitated if damaged by a flood event. The flood system would be restored to its pre-disaster status at no cost to the federal system owner, and at 20-percent cost to the eligible non-federal system owner. All systems considered eligible for Public Law 84-99 rehabilitation assistance have to be in the Rehabilitation and Inspection Program prior to the flood event. Acceptable operation and maintenance by the public levee sponsor are verified by levee inspections conducted by the Corps on a regular basis. The Corps has the responsibility to coordinate levee repair issues with interested federal, state, and local agencies following natural disaster events where flood control works are damaged.
These authorities and programs are all available to support any related mitigation actions.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Summary of Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulation B-10
STATE
AB 32: The California Global Warming Solutions Act
This bill identifies the following potential adverse impacts of global warming:
“… the exacerbation of air quality problems, a reduction in the quality and supply of water to the state from the Sierra snowpack, a rise in sea levels resulting in the displacement of thousands of coastal businesses and residences, damage to marine ecosystems and the natural environment, and an increase in the incidences of infectious diseases, asthma, and other human health-related problems.” AB 32 establishes a state goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 (a reduction of approximately 25 percent from forecast emission levels), with further reductions to follow. The law requires the state Air Resources Board to do the following:
• Establish a program to track and report greenhouse gas emissions. • Approve a scoping plan for achieving the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective reductions from sources of greenhouse gas emissions.
• Adopt early reduction measures to begin moving forward. • Adopt, implement and enforce regulations—including market mechanisms such as “cap and-trade” programs—to ensure that the required reductions occur.
The Air Resources Board has adopted a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit and an emissions inventory, along with requirements to measure, track, and report greenhouse gas emissions by the industries it determined to be significant sources of greenhouse gas emissions.
AB 70: Flood Liability
This bill provides that a city or county may be required to contribute a fair and reasonable share to compensate for property damage caused by a flood to the extent that it has increased the state’s exposure to liability for property damage by unreasonably approving new development in a previously undeveloped area that is protected by a state flood control project, unless the city or county meets specified requirements.
AB 162: Flood Planning
This California State Assembly Bill passed in 2007 requires cities and counties to address flood-related matters in the land use, conservation, and safety and housing elements of their general plans. The land use element must identify and annually review the areas covered by the general plan that are subject to flooding as identified in floodplain mapping by either FEMA or the state Department of Water Resources (DWR). During the next revision of the housing element on or after January 1, 2009, the conservation element of the general plan must identify rivers, creeks, streams, flood corridors, riparian habitat, and land that may accommodate floodwater for the purpose of groundwater recharge and stormwater management. The safety element must identify information regarding flood hazards, including:
• Flood hazard zones
• Maps published by FEMA, DWR, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Central Valley Flood Protection Board, and the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) • Historical data on flooding
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Summary of Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulation B-11
• Existing and planned development in flood hazard zones.
The general plan must establish goals, policies and objectives related to flooding risks, including:
• Avoiding or minimizing the risks of flooding new development • Evaluating whether new development should be located in flood hazard zones • Identifying construction methods to minimize damage.
AB 162 establishes goals, policies and objectives related to flooding risks. It establishes procedures for the determination of available land suitable for urban development, which may exclude lands where FEMA or DWR has concluded that the flood management infrastructure is not adequate to avoid the risk of flooding.
AB 747: Required Information for General Plan Safety Elements This bill requires California communities with general plans to address evacuation routes in the safety element of the general plan. Information on the evacuation routes and their capacity, safety and viability under a range of emergency scenarios must be provided. For communities that have not adopted a local hazard mitigation plan, the safety element must be updated with this information by January 1, 2022. For those with a local hazard mitigation plan, the requirement applies upon the next revision of the hazard mitigation plan on or after January 1, 2022. Communities that have adopted a local hazard mitigation plan, emergency operations plan, or other document that fulfills the goals and objectives of this law may comply with this requirement by summarizing and incorporating by reference the other plan or document in the safety element.
In subsequent revisions to the safety element, communities also will be required to identify new information relating to flood and fire hazards and climate adaptation and resiliency strategies applicable to the city or county that was not available during the previous revision of the safety element. These subsequent updates must occur upon each revision of the general plan housing element or local hazard mitigation plan and not less than once every eight years.
AB 2140: General Plans—Safety Element
This bill provides that the state may allow for more than 75 percent of public assistance funding under the California Disaster Assistance Act only if the local agency is in a jurisdiction that has adopted a local hazard mitigation plan as part of the safety element of its general plan. The local hazard mitigation plan needs to include elements specified in this legislation. In addition, this bill requires Cal OES to give preference for federal mitigation funding to cities and counties that have adopted local hazard mitigation plans. The intent of the bill is to encourage cities and counties to create and adopt hazard mitigation plans.
AB 2800: Climate Change—Infrastructure Planning
This California State Assembly bill passed in 2016 and until July 1, 2020, requires state agencies to take into account the current and future impacts of climate change when planning, designing, building, operating, maintaining, and investing in state infrastructure. The bill, by July 1, 2017, and until July 1, 2020, requires an agency to establish a Climate-Safe Infrastructure Working Group to examine how to integrate scientific data concerning projected climate change impacts into state infrastructure engineering.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Summary of Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulation B-12
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act was enacted in 1972 to mitigate the hazard of surface faulting to structures for human occupancy. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act’s main purpose is to prevent construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults. Before a new project is permitted, cities and counties require a geologic investigation to demonstrate that proposed buildings will not be constructed on active faults. The act addresses only the hazard of surface fault rupture and is not directed toward other earthquake hazards, such as liquefaction or seismically induced landslides. The law requires the State of California Geologist to establish regulatory zones around the surface traces of active faults and to issue appropriate maps. The maps are distributed to all affected cities, counties, and state agencies for their use in planning and controlling new or renewed construction. Local agencies must regulate most development projects within the zones.
Projects include all land divisions and most structures for human occupancy. All seismic hazard mitigation actions identified in this plan will seek full compliance with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act.
California Department of Water Resources
In California, the DWR is the coordinating agency for floodplain management. The DWR works with FEMA and local governments by providing grants and technical assistance, evaluating community floodplain management programs, reviewing local floodplain ordinances, participating in statewide flood hazard mitigation planning, and facilitating annual statewide workshops. Compliance is monitored by FEMA regional staff and by the DWR.
California Division of Safety of Dams
California’s Division of Safety of Dams (a division of the DWR) monitors the dam safety program at the state level and maintains a working list of dams in the state. When a new dam is proposed, Division engineers and geologists inspect the site and the subsurface. Upon submittal of an application, the Division reviews the plans and specifications prepared by the owner to ensure that the dam is designed to meet minimum requirements and that the design is appropriate for the known geologic conditions. After approval of the application, the Division inspects all aspects of the construction to ensure that the work is done in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. After construction, the Division inspects each dam to ensure that it is performing as intended and is not developing problems. The Division periodically reviews the stability of dams and their major appurtenances in light of improved design approaches and requirements, as well as new findings regarding earthquake hazards and hydrologic estimates in California. Over 1,200 dams are inspected by Division engineers on a yearly schedule to ensure performance and maintenance of dams (California Division of Safety of Dams, 2017).
California Environmental Quality Act
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was passed in 1970, shortly after the federal government enacted the National Environmental Policy Act, to institute a statewide policy of environmental protection. CEQA requires state and local agencies in California to follow a protocol of analysis and public disclosure of the potential environmental impacts of development projects. CEQA makes environmental protection a mandatory part of every California state and local agency’s decision-making process.
CEQA establishes a statewide environmental policy and mandates actions all state and local agencies must take to advance the policy. Jurisdictions conduct analysis of the project to determine if there are potentially significant environmental impacts, identify mitigation measures, and possible project alternatives by preparing environmental reports for projects that requires CEQA review. This environmental review is required before an agency takes action
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Summary of Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulation B-13
on any policy, program, or project. Any project action identified in this plan will seek full CEQA compliance upon implementation.
California General Planning Law
California state law requires that every county and city prepare and adopt a comprehensive long-range plan to serve as a guide for community development. The general plan expresses the community’s goals, visions, and policies relative to future land uses, both public and private. The general plan is mandated and prescribed by state law (Cal. Gov. Code §65300 et seq.), and forms the basis for most local government land use decision-making.
The plan must consist of an integrated, internally consistent set of goals, policies, and implementation measures. In addition, the plan must focus on issues of the greatest concern to the community and be written in a clear and concise manner. City and county actions, such as those relating to land use allocations, annexations, zoning, subdivision and design review, redevelopment, and capital improvements, must be consistent with the plan.
California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Under the DMA, California must adopt a federally approved state multi-hazard mitigation plan to be eligible for certain disaster assistance and mitigation funding. The intent of the State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan is to reduce or prevent injury and damage from hazards in the state through the following:
• Documenting statewide hazard mitigation planning in California • Describing strategies and priorities for future mitigation activities • Facilitating the integration of local and tribal hazard mitigation planning activities into statewide efforts • Meeting state and federal statutory and regulatory requirements The plan is an annex to the State Emergency Plan, and it identifies past and present mitigation activities, current policies and programs, and mitigation strategies for the future. It also establishes hazard mitigation goals and objectives. The plan will be reviewed and updated annually to reflect changing conditions and new information, especially information on local planning activities.
Under 44 CFR Section 201.6, local hazard mitigation plans must be consistent with their state’s hazard mitigation plan. In updating this plan, the Steering Committee reviewed the California State Hazard Mitigation Plan to identify key relevant state plan elements (see Section 3.7).
California Residential Mitigation Program
The California Residential Mitigation Program was established in 2011 to help Californians strengthen their homes against damage from earthquakes. The program is a joint powers authority created by Cal OES and the California Earthquake Authority, which is a not-for-profit, publicly managed, privately funded provider of home earthquake insurance to California homeowners and renters.
Earthquake Brace + Bolt was developed to help homeowners lessen the potential for damage to their houses during an earthquake. A residential seismic retrofit strengthens an existing older house, making it more resistant to earthquake activity such as ground shaking and soil failure. The seismic retrofitting involves bolting the house to its foundation and adding bracing around the perimeter of the crawl space. Most homeowners hire a contractor to do the retrofit work, and owners of houses in ZIP Codes with house characteristics suitable for this type of retrofit are
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Summary of Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulation B-14
eligible for up to $3,000 toward the cost. A typical retrofit by a contractor may cost between $3,000 and $7,000, depending on the location and size of the house, contractor fees, and the amount of materials and work involved. If the homeowner is an experienced do-it-yourselfer, a retrofit can cost less than $3,000.
California State Building Code
California Code of Regulations Title 24 (CCR Title 24), also known as the California Building Standards Code, is a compilation of building standards from three sources:
• Building standards that have been adopted by state agencies without change from building standards contained in national model codes
• Building standards that have been adopted and adapted from the national model code standards to meet California conditions
• Building standards authorized by the California legislature that constitute extensive additions not covered by the model codes adopted to address particular California concerns The state Building Standards Commission is authorized by California Building Standards Law (Health and Safety Code Sections 18901 through 18949.6) to administer the processes related to the adoption, approval, publication, and implementation of California’s building codes. These building codes serve as the basis for the design and construction of buildings in California. The national model code standards adopted into Title 24 apply to all occupancies in California, except for modifications adopted by state agencies and local governing bodies. Since 1989, the Building Standards Commission has published new editions of Title 24 every three years.
On January 1, 2014, California Building Code Accessibility Standards found in Chapter 11B incorporated the 2010 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Standards as the model accessibility code for California. The purpose was to ensure consistency with federal guidelines. As a result of this incorporation, the California standards will fully implement and include 2010 ADA Standards within the California Building Code while maintaining enhanced levels of accessibility already provided by existing California accessibility regulations.
Disadvantaged and Low-income Communities Investments
Senate Bill (SB) 535 directs state and local agencies to make investments that benefit California’s disadvantaged communities. It also directs the California Environmental Protection Agency to identify disadvantaged communities for the purposes of these investments based on geographic, socio-economic, public health, and environmental hazard criteria. Assembly Bill (AB) 1550 increased the percent of funds for projects located in disadvantaged communities from 10 to 25 percent and added a focus on investments in low-income communities and households. This program is a potential alternative source of funding for actions identified in this plan.
Division of the State Architect’s AB 300 List of Seismically At-Risk Schools In 2002, California’s Division of the State Architect completed an inventory of public school buildings built before 1978 that identifies buildings with characteristics that might make them unsafe in future earthquakes. This inventory provides a list of potentially at‐risk schools known as the AB 300 list (the inventory was authorized by Assembly Bill 300 in 1999). Using available information on school buildings’ dates of construction, seismic retrofits, and structural systems (wood‐frame, concrete shear wall, or steel moment frame, etc.), the inventory categorized California public school buildings into one of two categories: those expected to perform well in future earthquakes; and those that are not expected to perform well and require more detailed seismic evaluation.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Summary of Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulation B-15
The Division of the State Architect recommends that public schools on this list undergo detailed seismic evaluations to determine if they pose life safety risks, but the state has neither required nor funded school districts to do this.
Governor’s Executive Order S-13-08
Governor’s Executive Order S-13-08 enhances the state’s management of climate impacts from sea level rise, increased temperatures, shifting precipitation and extreme weather events. There are four key actions in the executive order:
• Initiate California’s first statewide climate change adaptation strategy to assess expected climate change impacts, identify where California is most vulnerable, and recommend adaptation policies. This effort will improve coordination within state government so that better planning can more effectively address climate impacts on human health, the environment, the state’s water supply and the economy. • Request that the National Academy of Science establish an expert panel to report on sea level rise impacts in California, to inform state planning and development efforts. • Issue interim guidance to state agencies for how to plan for sea level rise in designated coastal and floodplain areas for new projects.
• Initiate a report on critical infrastructure projects vulnerable to sea level rise.
Senate Bill 92: Public Resources Portion of Biennial Budget Bill The State of California updated its requirements regarding emergency action plans (EAPs) via Senate Bill 92, which became effective in June 2017 as part of the state Legislature’s biennial budget process. The bill required dam owners to submit EAPs to Cal OES and the Department of Water Resources for approval by January 1, 2018 (for extremely high hazard dams), January 1, 2019 (for high-hazard dams), and January 1, 2021 (for significant hazard dams). The EAPs were to include the following (California Government Code Section 8589.5; Cal OES, 2018):
• Emergency notification flow charts
• Information on a four-step response process
• Description of agencies’ roles and actions in response to an emergency incident • Description of actions to be taken in advance of an emergency • Inundation maps
• Additional information such as revision records and distribution lists After the EAPs are approved by the state, the law requires dam owners to send the approved EAPs to relevant stakeholders. Local public agencies can then adopt emergency procedures that incorporate the information in the EAP in a manner that conforms to local needs and includes methods and procedures for alerting and warning the public and other response and preparedness related items (State of California, 2018).
SB 92 also requires dams other than low-risk dams to have current inundation mapping, which must be updated every 10 years, or sooner if specific circumstances change. EAPs also must be updated every 10 years. It provides DWR with enforcement tools, including fines and operational restrictions for failure to comply. Cal OES is required by the law to work with state and federal agencies, dam owners, planners, and the public to make dam inundation maps available to citizens interested in learning their dam failure inundation risk.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Summary of Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulation B-16
Senate Bill 97: Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Senate Bill 97, enacted in 2007, amends CEQA to clearly establish that greenhouse gas emissions and the effects of greenhouse gas emissions are appropriate subjects for CEQA analysis. It directs the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research to develop draft CEQA guidelines for the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions or their effects by July 1, 2009 and directs the California Natural Resources Agency to certify and adopt the CEQA Guidelines by January 1, 2010.
Senate Bill 99: Evacuation Route Planning
Senate Bill 99, enacted in 2019, requires that cities’ and counties’ general plans address evacuation routes from any hazard area identified in the safety element. Under this law, the safety element must include information to identify residential developments in hazard areas that do not have at least two emergency evacuation routes. Each city or county must update its safety element with the new information upon the next revision of its housing element on or after January 1, 2020.
Senate Bill 379: General Plans: Safety Element—Climate Adaptation Senate Bill 379 builds upon the flood planning inclusions into the safety and housing elements and the hazard mitigation planning safety element inclusions in general plans outlined in AB 162 and AB 2140, respectively. SB 379 focuses on a new requirement that cities and counties include climate adaptation and resiliency strategies in the safety element of their general plans beginning January 1, 2017. In addition, this bill requires general plans to include a set of goals, policies and objectives, and specified implementation measures based on the conclusions drawn from climate adaptation research and recommendations.
Senate Bill 1000: General Plan Amendments—Safety and Environmental Justice Elements
In 2016, Senate Bill 1000 amended California’s Planning and Zoning Law in two ways:
• The original law established requirements for initial revisions of general plan safety elements to address flooding, fire, and climate adaptation and resilience. It also required subsequent review and revision as necessary based on new information. Senate Bill 1000 specifies that the subsequent reviews and revision based on new information are required to address only flooding and fires (not climate adaptation and resilience).
• Senate Bill 1000 adds a requirement that, upon adoption or revision of any two other general plan elements on or after January 1, 2018, an environmental justice element be adopted for the general plan or environmental justice goals, policies and objectives be incorporated into other elements of the plan.
Senate Bill 1035: Fire, Flood, and Adaptation Safety Element Updates Senate Bill 1035 clarifies that revisions to a community’s General Plan Safety Element—to address fire hazards, flood hazards, and climate adaptation and resilience strategies—must occur upon each revision to a Housing Element or Local Hazard Mitigation Program.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Summary of Federal and State Agencies, Programs and Regulation B-17
Standardized Emergency Management System
CCR Title 19 establishes the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) to standardize the response to emergencies involving multiple jurisdictions. SEMS is intended to be flexible and adaptable to the needs of all emergency responders in California. It requires emergency response agencies to use basic principles and components of emergency management. Local governments must use SEMS by December 1, 1996, to be eligible for state funding of response-related personnel costs under CCR Title 19 (Sections 2920, 2925 and 2930). The roles and responsibilities of Individual agencies contained in existing laws or the state emergency plan are not superseded by these regulations.
This hazard mitigation plan is considered to be a support document for all phases of emergency management, including those associated with SEMS.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix C. Data Sources and Methods Used
for Mapping
C‐1
C. DATA SOURCES AND METHODS USED FOR MAPPING
DAM FAILURE INUNDATION MAPPING
Dam breach inundation maps, including inundation boundaries and depth grids, were downloaded from the California Department of Water Resources’ (DWR) website - https://fmds.water.ca.gov/maps/damim/. As required by California Water Code Section 6161, the Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD) at DWR reviews and approves inundation maps prepared by licensed civil engineers and submitted by dam owners for extremely high, high, and significant hazard dams and their critical appurtenant structures. Inundation maps are based on a hypothetical failure of a dam or critical appurtenant structure and the information depicted on the maps is approximate. The dams and failure scenarios are as follows:
Lafayette (National Dam ID CA00163)—Scenario shows in undation extents for sunny day failure of Main Dam. Files downloaded from DSOD website generated on 12/18/2019. Mallard Reservoir (National Dam ID CA00838)—Scenarios show inund ation extents for sunny day failures of Main Dam – East, North, and West Embankments. Files downloaded from DSOD website generated on 6/18/2021.
Pine Creek Detention (National Dam ID CA01252)—Scenario shows inundati on extent for sunny day failure of Main Dam. Files downloaded from DSOD website generated on 4/18/2019.
EARTHQUAKE MAPPING
Liquefaction Susceptibility
Liquefaction dataset created by the U.S. Geological Survey and provided by the City of Concord.
National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) Soils NEHRP soils information is derived from a shear wave velocity (Vs30) data produced by the California Geological Survey in 2015. The Vs30 data represents simplified geologic units that have been correlated to the time-averaged shear-wave velocity in the upper 30 meters of the earth’s surface. The geologic units were compiled from published maps that range in scale from 1:250,000 to 1:24,000 (Wills, et. al., 2015).
Probabilistic Peak Ground Acceleration Maps
Probabilistic peak ground acceleration data, by Census tract, are generated by Hazus v5.1. In Hazus’ probabilistic analysis procedure, the ground shaking demand is characterized by spectral contour maps developed by the U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) as part of a 2018 update of the National Seismic Hazard Maps. USGS probabilistic seismic
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Data Sources and Methods Used for Mapping C‐2
hazard maps are revised about every six years to reflect newly published or thoroughly reviewed earthquake science and to keep pace with regular updates of the building code. Hazus includes maps for eight probabilistic hazard levels:
ranging from ground shaking with a 39 percent probability of being exceeded in 50 years (100-year return period) to the ground shaking with a 2 percent probability of being exceeded in 50 years (2,500-year return period).
Shake Maps
A shake map is designed as a rapid response tool to portray the extent and variation of ground shaking throughout the affected region immediately following significant earthquakes. Ground motion and intensity maps are derived from peak ground motion amplitudes recorded on seismic sensors (accelerometers), with interpolation based on estimated amplitudes where data are lacking, and site amplification corrections. Color-coded instrumental intensity maps are derived from empirical relations between peak ground motions and Modified Mercalli intensity. For this plan, shake maps were prepared by the USGS for three earthquake scenarios:
An earthquake on the Concord-Green Valley fault with the following characteristics:
Magnitude: 6.8
Epicenter: N 38.31 W 122.16
Depth: 9.3 km
An earthquake on the Hayward fault with the following characteristics:
Magnitude: 7.05
Epicenter: N 37.80 W 122.18
Depth: 8.0 km
An earthquake on the Mount Diablo fault with the following characteristics:
Magnitude: 6.7
Epicenter: N 37.85 W 121.89
Depth: 13.1 km
FLOOD MAPPING
Flood hazard areas are from the Contra Costa County countywide effective FEMA Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) dated March 21, 2017. No Letters of Map Revision (LOMR) in the City of Concord have been incorporated since the effective date.
LANDSLIDE MAPPING
Susceptibility to Deep-Seated Landslides data provided by the California Geological Survey. The map and associated data show the relative likelihood of deep-seated landsliding based on regional estimates of rock strength and steepness of slopes. On the most basic level, weak rocks and steep slopes are most likely to generate landslides. The map uses detailed information on the location of past landslides, the location and relative strength of rock units, and steepness of slope to estimate susceptibility to deep-seated landsliding (0 to X, low to high). The USGS 2009 National Elevation Dataset (NED) with 10-meter grid size was used as the base map. This landslide susceptibility map is intended to provide infrastructure owners, emergency planners and the public with a general overview of where landslides are more likely to occur (Wills, et. al., 2011).
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Data Sources and Methods Used for Mapping C‐3
REFERENCES
Wills, C.J., Gutierrez, C.I., Perez, F.G., and Branum, D.B., 2015, A next-generation Vs30 map for California based on geology and topography: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.
Wills C.J., Perez, F., Gutierrez, C. 2011. Susceptibility to deep-seated landslides in California: California Geological Survey Map Sheet 58.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix D. Detailed Risk Assessment Results
C-1
D. DETAILED RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS
PLANNING AREA TOTAL POPULATION AND STRUCTURES
Estimated Population Total Number of Buildings
Total Number of
Residential Buildings
Total Replacement Cost
Value (Structure and
Contents)
District 1 25,372 8,398 8,253 $5,415,713,571
District 2 25,152 8,452 7,807 $10,956,762,964
District 3 23,995 4,185 3,825 $7,044,155,900
District 4 25,237 8,042 7,763 $6,622,862,722
District 5 25,894 8,479 8,304 $5,247,239,991
Total 125,650 37,556 35,952 $35,286,735,149
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Detailed Risk Assessment Results C-2
HAZARD-SPECIFIC EXPOSURE AND LOSS ESTIMATES
Dam Failure
Exposed Area, Population and Buildings
Population Replacement Cost Value of Exposed Buildings
Buildings
Exposed
Population
Exposed
% of Total
Population
Structure
Only Contents Only
Structure +
Contents
% of Total
Value
District 1 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
District 2 8 0 0.0% $81,911,497 $109,744,243 $191,655,740 1.7% District 3 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
District 4 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
District 5 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
Total 8 0 0.0% $81,911,497 $109,744,243 $191,655,740 0.5% Exposed Buildings by Occupancy Class
Residential Commercial Industrial Agriculture Religion Government Education Total District 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
District 2 0 2 6 0 0 0 0 8
District 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
District 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
District 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 0 2 6 0 0 0 0 8
100-Year Probabilistic Earthquake
Estimated Economic Impact
People Estimated Damage to Buildings
Structure
Debris
(1,000 tons)
Displaced
Households
Requiring
Short-Term
Shelter Structure Only Contents Only
Structure +
Contents
% of Total
Replacement Cost
Value
District 1 12.75 41 25 $42,746,569 $47,840,038 $90,586,607 1.7% District 2 96.38 96 54 $122,911,402 $151,116,181 $274,027,583 2.5% District 3 21.93 156 148 $66,573,688 $68,027,213 $134,600,901 1.9% District 4 48.75 115 69 $67,896,334 $78,958,553 $146,854,887 2.2% District 5 20.64 86 49 $44,228,947 $49,654,673 $93,883,620 1.8% Total 200.44 494 344 $344,356,941 $395,596,658 $739,953,599 2.1%
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Detailed Risk Assessment Results C-3
Concord/Green Valley Earthquake
Estimated Economic Impact
People Estimated Damage to Buildings
Structure
Debris
(1,000 tons)
Displaced
Households
Requiring
Short-Term
Shelter Structure Only Contents Only
Structure +
Contents
% of Total
Replacement Cost
Value
District 1 16.06 55 33 $53,392,755 $60,828,691 $114,221,446 2.1% District 2 180.58 222 124 $187,784,999 $233,768,532 $421,553,531 3.8% District 3 36.18 302 290 $111,641,121 $118,103,441 $229,744,562 3.3% District 4 90.72 263 155 $114,892,865 $139,904,484 $254,797,349 3.8% District 5 27.74 109 61 $51,325,875 $58,078,638 $109,404,513 2.1% Total 351.29 951 663 $519,037,616 $610,683,786 $1,129,721,401 3.2% Hayward Earthquake
Estimated Economic Impact
People Estimated Damage to Buildings
Structure
Debris
(1,000 tons)
Displaced
Households
Requiring
Short-Term
Shelter Structure Only Contents Only
Structure +
Contents
% of Total
Replacement Cost
Value
District 1 9.59 26 16 $28,344,179 $30,511,073 $58,855,252 1.1% District 2 57.74 58 33 $82,048,438 $99,029,084 $181,077,522 1.7% District 3 12.37 84 79 $40,714,298 $39,250,628 $79,964,926 1.1% District 4 32.91 76 45 $45,124,056 $50,472,636 $95,596,692 1.4% District 5 16.83 57 32 $30,482,361 $33,816,042 $64,298,404 1.2% Total 129.45 301 204 $226,713,333 $253,079,463 $479,792,796 1.4% Mount Diablo Earthquake
Estimated Economic Impact
People Estimated Damage to Buildings
Structure
Debris
(1,000 tons)
Displaced
Households
Requiring
Short-Term
Shelter Structure Only Contents Only
Structure +
Contents
% of Total
Replacement Cost
Value
District 1 28.69 117 71 $71,239,923 $82,986,984 $154,226,908 2.8% District 2 140.76 182 101 $132,464,986 $161,785,240 $294,250,227 2.7% District 3 35.48 270 253 $76,577,383 $77,395,006 $153,972,389 2.2% District 4 102.42 290 170 $96,456,050 $113,960,373 $210,416,423 3.2% District 5 57.86 286 162 $74,213,290 $85,174,454 $159,387,744 3.0% Total 365.21 1,146 757 $450,951,632 $521,302,058 $972,253,691 2.8%
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Detailed Risk Assessment Results C-4
10% Annual Chance Flood
Exposed Area, Population and Buildings
Floodplain Population Replacement Cost Value of Exposed Buildings
Area
(acres)
Buildings
Exposed
Population
Exposed
% of Total
Population
Structure
Only
Contents
Only
Structure +
Contents
% of Total
Value
District 1 79 29 68 0.3% $21,689,639 $18,677,067 $40,366,705 0.7% District 2 318 56 77 0.3% $204,540,972 $267,317,981 $471,858,953 4.3% District 3 0 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
District 4 54 94 283 1.1% $36,398,903 $23,025,131 $59,424,034 0.9% District 5 59 70 187 0.7% $39,432,552 $30,905,201 $70,337,754 1.3% Total 509 249 615 0.5% $302,062,067 $339,925,380 $641,987,446 1.8% Exposed Buildings by Occupancy Class
Residential Commercial Industrial Agriculture Religion Government Education Total District 1 22 0 0 0 0 7 0 29
District 2 24 7 17 0 0 8 0 56
District 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
District 4 87 0 0 0 0 7 0 94
District 5 60 0 0 0 0 10 0 70
Total 193 7 17 0 0 32 0 249
Estimated Economic Impact
People Estimated Damage to Buildings
Structure
Debris
(tons)
Displaced
Population
Requiring
Short-Term
Shelter
Buildings
Impacted
Structure
Only
Contents
Only
Structure +
Contents
% of Total
Replacement
Cost Value
District 1 367 1 0 16 $2,142,025 $9,064,228 $11,206,253 0.2% District 2 278 1 0 23 $17,389,649 $37,538,713 $54,928,362 0.5% District 3 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 0.0%
District 4 135 4 1 14 $939,102 $4,663,685 $5,602,787 0.1% District 5 299 3 1 19 $1,996,914 $8,524,456 $10,521,371 0.2% Total 1,079 10 2 72 $22,467,690 $59,791,082 $82,258,772 0.2%
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Detailed Risk Assessment Results C-5
1% Annual Chance Flood
Exposed Area, Population and Buildings
Floodplain Population Replacement Cost Value of Exposed Buildings
Area
(acres)
Buildings
Exposed
Population
Exposed
% of Total
Population
Structure
Only
Contents
Only
Structure +
Contents
% of Total
Value
District 1 91 73 203 0.8% $30,795,826 $23,230,160 $54,025,986 1.0% District 2 460 148 329 1.3% $315,183,434 $358,982,188 $674,165,622 6.2% District 3 74 4 13 0.1% $20,691,947 $20,538,366 $41,230,312 0.6% District 4 164 286 865 3.4% $245,682,282 $213,237,928 $458,920,210 6.9% District 5 59 72 193 0.7% $40,272,826 $31,325,338 $71,598,165 1.4% Total 848 583 1,602 1.3% $652,626,315 $647,313,980 $1,299,940,296 3.7% Exposed Buildings by Occupancy Class
Residential Commercial Industrial Agriculture Religion Government Education Total District 1 66 0 0 0 0 7 0 73
District 2 102 13 18 0 3 11 1 148
District 3 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 4
District 4 266 10 0 0 1 9 0 286
District 5 62 0 0 0 0 10 0 72
Total 498 24 18 0 4 38 1 583
Estimated Economic Impact
People Estimated Damage to Buildings
Structure
Debris
(tons)
Displaced
Population
Requiring
Short-Term
Shelter
Buildings
Impacted
Structure
Only
Contents
Only
Structure +
Contents
% of Total
Replacement
Cost Value
District 1 635 1 0 66 $2,479,631 $10,137,767 $12,617,398 0.2% District 2 696 2 0 110 $22,606,067 $51,453,038 $74,059,105 0.7% District 3 1,281 0 0 1 $4,131,375 $6,536,830 $10,668,204 0.2% District 4 2,251 11 2 139 $47,571,020 $67,732,850 $115,303,870 1.7% District 5 521 3 1 44 $2,482,592 $11,219,537 $13,702,129 0.3% Total 5,385 18 4 360 $79,270,684 $147,080,022 $226,350,706 0.6%
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Detailed Risk Assessment Results C-6
0.2% Annual Chance Flood
Exposed Area, Population and Buildings
Floodplain Population Replacement Cost Value of Exposed Buildings
Area
(acres)
Buildings
Exposed
Population
Exposed
% of Total
Population Structure Only Contents Only
Structure +
Contents
% of
Total
Value
District 1 868 580 1,719 6.8% $164,356,174 $103,786,726 $268,142,899 5.0% District 2 498 269 706 2.8% $375,769,329 $419,652,375 $795,421,704 7.3% District 3 295 54 56 0.2% $658,380,699 $610,484,917 $1,268,865,616 18.0% District 4 257 711 2,214 8.8% $376,397,989 $307,938,936 $684,336,925 10.3% District 5 64 90 249 1.0% $43,872,529 $33,125,189 $76,997,718 1.5% Total 1,982 1,704 4,944 3.9% $1,618,776,719 $1,474,988,144 $3,093,764,863 8.8% Exposed Buildings by Occupancy Class
Residential Commercial Industrial Agriculture Religion Government Education Total District 1 559 11 0 0 0 9 1 580
District 2 219 17 18 0 3 11 1 269
District 3 9 0 41 0 0 4 0 54
District 4 681 13 0 0 1 12 4 711
District 5 80 0 0 0 0 10 0 90
Total 1,548 41 59 0 4 46 6 1,704
Estimated Economic Impact
People Estimated Damage to Buildings
Structure
Debris
(tons)
Displaced
Population
Requiring
Short-Term
Shelter
Buildings
Impacted
Structure
Only
Contents
Only
Structure +
Contents
% of Total
Replacement
Cost Value
District 1 881 6 1 159 $2,809,067 $9,997,545 $12,806,612 0.2% District 2 764 3 1 172 $26,312,550 $63,328,477 $89,641,028 0.8% District 3 1,280 0 0 13 $19,256,407 $31,416,833 $50,673,240 0.7% District 4 2,606 25 3 335 $47,690,194 $67,108,778 $114,798,972 1.7% District 5 628 4 1 66 $2,820,799 $12,321,923 $15,142,722 0.3% Total 6,159 38 6 745 $98,889,018 $184,173,556 $283,062,574 0.8%
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Detailed Risk Assessment Results C-7
Landslide, Very High Susceptibility
Exposed Area, Population and Buildings
Population Replacement Cost Value of Exposed Buildings
Buildings
Exposed
Population
Exposed
% of Total
Population
Structure
Only Contents Only
Structure +
Contents
% of Total
Value
District 1 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
District 2 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
District 3 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
District 4 5 16 0.1% $2,270,217 $1,135,108 $3,405,325 0.1% District 5 4 12 0.0% $894,887 $447,444 $1,342,331 0.0%
Total 9 29 0.0% $3,165,104 $1,582,552 $4,747,656 0.0%
Exposed Buildings by Occupancy Class
Residential Commercial Industrial Agriculture Religion Government Education Total District 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
District 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
District 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
District 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
District 5 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Total 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
Landslide, High Susceptibility
Exposed Area, Population and Buildings
Population Replacement Cost Value of Exposed Buildings
Buildings
Exposed
Population
Exposed
% of Total
Population
Structure
Only Contents Only
Structure +
Contents
% of Total
Value
District 1 4 12 0.0% $1,840,080 $920,040 $2,760,120 0.1% District 2 177 538 2.1% $110,346,981 $93,169,944 $203,516,924 1.9% District 3 29 144 0.6% $65,253,856 $42,478,645 $107,732,502 1.5% District 4 226 699 2.8% $172,764,549 $138,272,914 $311,037,463 4.7% District 5 501 1,512 5.8% $233,458,952 $173,486,092 $406,945,044 7.8% Total 937 2,906 2.3% $583,664,418 $448,327,635 $1,031,992,053 2.9% Exposed Buildings by Occupancy Class
Residential Commercial Industrial Agriculture Religion Government Education Total District 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
District 2 167 4 2 0 2 2 0 177
District 3 23 3 1 0 2 0 0 29
District 4 215 5 0 0 0 5 1 226
District 5 485 6 0 0 0 10 0 501
Total 894 18 3 0 4 17 1 937
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Detailed Risk Assessment Results C-8
Landslide, Moderate Susceptibility
Exposed Area, Population and Buildings
Population Replacement Cost Value of Exposed Buildings
Buildings
Exposed
Population
Exposed
% of Total
Population
Structure
Only Contents Only
Structure +
Contents
% of Total
Value
District 1 6 18 0.1% $1,306,409 $653,205 $1,959,614 0.0% District 2 961 2,945 11.7% $603,963,402 $565,929,412 $1,169,892,814 10.7% District 3 0 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
District 4 161 510 2.0% $89,238,339 $50,577,522 $139,815,862 2.1% District 5 475 1,428 5.5% $238,984,913 $165,238,253 $404,223,166 7.7% Total 1,603 4,902 3.9% $933,493,064 $782,398,391 $1,715,891,455 4.9% Exposed Buildings by Occupancy Class
Residential Commercial Industrial Agriculture Religion Government Education Total District 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
District 2 914 8 29 0 0 9 1 961
District 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
District 4 157 0 0 0 0 3 1 161
District 5 458 2 0 0 0 13 2 475
Total 1,535 10 29 0 0 25 4 1,603
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Detailed Risk Assessment Results C-9
RISK RANKING
Dam Failure
District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 Total Probability
Probability (High, Medium, Low, None) Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Probability Factor (3,2,1,0) 2 2 2 2 2 2
Impact on People
% Population Exposed 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) None None None None None None Impact Factor 0 0 0 0 0 0
Weighted Impact Factor 0 0 0 0 0 0
Impact on Property
% of Total Value Exposed 0.00% 1.75% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.54% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) None Low None None None Low Impact Factor 0 1 0 0 0 1
Weighted Impact Factor 0 2 0 0 0 2
Impact on Economy
% of Total Value Damaged 0.00% 0.44% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.14% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) None Low None None None Low Impact Factor 0 1 0 0 0 1
Weighted Impact Factor 0 1 0 0 0 1
Overall Score and Risk
Risk Ranking Score 0 6 0 0 0 6
Hazard Risk Rating Low Low Low Low Low Low
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Detailed Risk Assessment Results C-10
100-Year Probabilistic Earthquake
District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 Total Probability
Probability (High, Medium, Low, None) High High High High High High Probability Factor (3,2,1,0) 3 3 3 3 3 3
Impact on People
% Population Exposed 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) High High High High High High Impact Factor 3 3 3 3 3 3
Weighted Impact Factor 9 9 9 9 9 9
Impact on Property
% of Total Value Exposed 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) High High High High High High Impact Factor 3 3 3 3 3 3
Weighted Impact Factor 6 6 6 6 6 6
Impact on Economy
% of Total Value Damaged 1.67% 2.50% 1.91% 2.22% 1.79% 2.10% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low Low Low Low Low Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Weighted Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Overall Score and Risk
Risk Ranking Score 48 48 48 48 48 48
Hazard Risk Rating High High High High High High
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Detailed Risk Assessment Results C-11
Concord/Green Valley Earthquake
District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 Total Probability
Probability (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low Low Low Low Low Probability Factor (3,2,1,0) 1 1 1 1 1 1
Impact on People
% Population Exposed 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) High High High High High High Impact Factor 3 3 3 3 3 3
Weighted Impact Factor 9 9 9 9 9 9
Impact on Property
% of Total Value Exposed 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) High High High High High High Impact Factor 3 3 3 3 3 3
Weighted Impact Factor 6 6 6 6 6 6
Impact on Economy
% of Total Value Damaged 2.11% 3.85% 3.26% 3.85% 2.08% 3.20% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low Low Low Low Low Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Weighted Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Overall Score and Risk
Risk Ranking Score 16 16 16 16 16 16
Hazard Risk Rating Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Detailed Risk Assessment Results C-12
Hayward Earthquake
District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 Total Probability
Probability (High, Medium, Low, None) High High High High High High Probability Factor (3,2,1,0) 3 3 3 3 3 3
Impact on People
% Population Exposed 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) High High High High High High Impact Factor 3 3 3 3 3 3
Weighted Impact Factor 9 9 9 9 9 9
Impact on Property
% of Total Value Exposed 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) High High High High High High Impact Factor 3 3 3 3 3 3
Weighted Impact Factor 6 6 6 6 6 6
Impact on Economy
% of Total Value Damaged 1.09% 1.65% 1.14% 1.44% 1.23% 1.36% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low Low Low Low Low Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Weighted Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Overall Score and Risk
Risk Ranking Score 48 48 48 48 48 48
Hazard Risk Rating High High High High High High
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Detailed Risk Assessment Results C-13
Mount Diablo Earthquake
District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 Total Probability
Probability (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low Low Low Low Low Probability Factor (3,2,1,0) 1 1 1 1 1 1
Impact on People
% Population Exposed 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) High High High High High High Impact Factor 3 3 3 3 3 3
Weighted Impact Factor 9 9 9 9 9 9
Impact on Property
% of Total Value Exposed 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) High High High High High High Impact Factor 3 3 3 3 3 3
Weighted Impact Factor 6 6 6 6 6 6
Impact on Economy
% of Total Value Damaged 2.85% 2.69% 2.19% 3.18% 3.04% 2.76% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low Low Low Low Low Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Weighted Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Overall Score and Risk
Risk Ranking Score 16 16 16 16 16 16
Hazard Risk Rating Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Detailed Risk Assessment Results C-14
10% Annual Chance Flood
District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 Total Probability
Probability (High, Medium, Low, None) High High High High High High Probability Factor (3,2,1,0) 3 3 3 3 3 3
Impact on People
% Population Exposed 0.27% 0.31% 0.00% 1.12% 0.72% 0.49% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low None Low Low Low Impact Factor 1 1 0 1 1 1
Weighted Impact Factor 3 3 0 3 3 3
Impact on Property
% of Total Value Exposed 0.75% 4.31% 0.00% 0.90% 1.34% 1.82% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low None Low Low Low Impact Factor 1 1 0 1 1 1
Weighted Impact Factor 2 2 0 2 2 2
Impact on Economy
% of Total Value Damaged 0.21% 0.50% 0.00% 0.08% 0.23% 0.23% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low None Low Low Low Impact Factor 1 1 0 1 1 1
Weighted Impact Factor 1 1 0 1 1 1
Overall Score and Risk
Risk Ranking Score 18 18 0 18 18 18
Hazard Risk Rating Medium Medium Low Medium Medium Medium
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Detailed Risk Assessment Results C-15
1% Annual Chance Flood
District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 Total Probability
Probability (High, Medium, Low, None) High High High High High High Probability Factor (3,2,1,0) 3 3 3 3 3 3
Impact on People
% Population Exposed 0.80% 1.31% 0.05% 3.43% 0.75% 1.28% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low Low Low Low Low Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Weighted Impact Factor 3 3 3 3 3 3
Impact on Property
% of Total Value Exposed 1.00% 6.15% 0.59% 6.93% 1.36% 3.68% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low Low Low Low Low Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Weighted Impact Factor 2 2 2 2 2 2
Impact on Economy
% of Total Value Damaged 0.23% 0.68% 0.15% 1.74% 0.26% 0.64% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low Low Low Low Low Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Weighted Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Overall Score and Risk
Risk Ranking Score 18 18 18 18 18 18
Hazard Risk Rating Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Detailed Risk Assessment Results C-16
0.2% Annual Chance Flood
District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 Total Probability
Probability (High, Medium, Low, None) Medium medium medium medium medium medium Probability Factor (3,2,1,0) 2 2 2 2 2 2
Impact on People
% Population Exposed 6.77% 2.81% 0.24% 8.77% 0.96% 3.93% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low Low Low Low Low Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Weighted Impact Factor 3 3 3 3 3 3
Impact on Property
% of Total Value Exposed 4.95% 7.26% 18.01% 10.33% 1.47% 8.77% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low Medium Medium Low Low Impact Factor 1 1 2 2 1 1
Weighted Impact Factor 2 2 4 4 2 2
Impact on Economy
% of Total Value Damaged 0.24% 0.82% 0.72% 1.73% 0.29% 0.80% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low Low Low Low Low Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Weighted Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Overall Score and Risk
Risk Ranking Score 12 12 16 16 12 12
Hazard Risk Rating Low Low Medium Medium Low Low
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Detailed Risk Assessment Results C-17
Landslide, High and Very High Susceptibility
District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 Total Probability
Probability (High, Medium, Low, None) High High High High High High Probability Factor (3,2,1,0) 3 3 3 3 3 3
Impact on People
% Population Exposed 0.05% 2.14% 0.60% 2.83% 5.89% 2.34% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low Low Low Low Low Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Weighted Impact Factor 3 3 3 3 3 3
Impact on Property
% of Total Value Exposed 0.05 1.86% 1.53% 4.75% 7.78% 2.94% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low Low Low Low Low Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Weighted Impact Factor 2 2 2 2 2 2
Impact on Economy
% of Total Value Damaged 0.01% 0.46% 0.38% 1.19% 1.95% 0.73% Impact (High, Medium, Low, None) Low Low Low Low Low Low Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Weighted Impact Factor 1 1 1 1 1 1
Overall Score and Risk
Risk Ranking Score 18 18 18 18 18 18
Hazard Risk Rating Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix E. Cal-Adapt Climate Projection
Snapshot Report for the City of Concord
Local Climate Change Snapshot
Concord
California
Cal-Adapt 1/31/2023 Page 1
Temperature
Overall temperatures are projected to rise in California during the 21st century. While the entire state will experience temperature increases, the local impacts will vary greatly with many communities and ecosystems already experiencing the effects of rising temperatures.
Cal-Adapt 1/31/2023 Page 2
Annual Average Maximum Temperature
Average of all the hottest daily temperatures in a year.
Observed Medium Emissions (RCP 4.5) High Emissions (RCP 8.5)
1. Data derived from 32 LOCA downscaled climate projections generated to support California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Details are described in Pierce et al., 2018.
2. Observed historical data derived from Gridded Observed Meteorological Data. Details are described in Livneh et al., 2015.
3. Data presented are aggregated over all LOCA grid cells that intersect Concord boundary.
Cal-Adapt 1/31/2023 Page 3
Extreme Heat Days
Number of days in a year when daily maximum temperature is above a threshold temperature Observed Medium Emissions (RCP 4.5) High Emissions (RCP 8.5)
1. Data derived from 32 LOCA downscaled climate projections generated to support California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Details are described in Pierce et al., 2018.
2. Observed historical data derived from Gridded Observed Meteorological Data. Details are described in Livneh et al., 2015.
3. Data presented are aggregated over all LOCA grid cells that intersect Concord boundary.
4. Threshold temperature for a location is defined as the 98th percentile value of historical daily maximum/minimum temperatures (from 1961–1990, between April and October) observed at that location.
Cal-Adapt 1/31/2023 Page 4
Annual Average Minimum Temperature
Average of all coldest daily temperatures in a year.
Observed Medium Emissions (RCP 4.5) High Emissions (RCP 8.5)
1. Data derived from 32 LOCA downscaled climate projections generated to support California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Details are described in Pierce et al., 2018.
2. Observed historical data derived from Gridded Observed Meteorological Data. Details are described in Livneh et al., 2015.
3. Data presented are aggregated over all LOCA grid cells that intersect Concord boundary.
Cal-Adapt 1/31/2023 Page 5
Warm Nights
Number of days in a year when daily minimum temperature is above a threshold temperature Observed Medium Emissions (RCP 4.5) High Emissions (RCP 8.5)
1. Data derived from 32 LOCA downscaled climate projections generated to support California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Details are described in Pierce et al., 2018.
2. Observed historical data derived from Gridded Observed Meteorological Data. Details are described in Livneh et al., 2015.
3. Data presented are aggregated over all LOCA grid cells that intersect Concord boundary.
Cal-Adapt 1/31/2023 Page 6
Precipitation
California's climate varies between wet and dry years. Research suggests that for much of the state, wet years will become wetter and the dry years will become drier. Dry years are also likely to be followed by dry years, increasing the risk of drought. While California does not see the average annual precipitation changing significantly in the next 50-75 years, precipitation will likely be delivered in more intense storms and within a shorter wet season. We are already seeing some of the impacts from a shift towards larger year to year fluctuations.
Cal-Adapt 1/31/2023 Page 7
Maximum 1-day Precipitation
The maximum daily precipitation amount for each year. In other words, the greatest amount of daily rain or snow (over a 24 hour period) for each year. of 64.1 °F Observed Medium Emissions (RCP 4.5) High Emissions (RCP 8.5)
1. Data derived from 32 LOCA downscaled climate projections generated to support California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Details are described in Pierce et al., 2018.
2. Observed historical data derived from Gridded Observed Meteorological Data. Details are described in Livneh et al., 2015.
3. Data presented are aggregated over all LOCA grid cells that intersect Concord boundary.
Cal-Adapt 1/31/2023 Page 8
Maximum Length of Dry Spell
The maximum length of dry spell for each year. In other words, the maximum number of consecutive days with precipitation < 1mm for each year.
Observed Medium Emissions (RCP 4.5) High Emissions (RCP 8.5)
1. Data derived from 32 LOCA downscaled climate projections generated to support California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Details are described in Pierce et al., 2018.
2. Observed historical data derived from Gridded Observed Meteorological Data. Details are described in Livneh et al., 2015.
3. Data presented are aggregated over all LOCA grid cells that intersect Concord boundary.
Cal-Adapt 1/31/2023 Page 9
SPEI 1-month
Number of months in a year with a Standardised Precipitation-Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI) <= -1.
SPEI is a multi-scalar drought index and can be used to detect, monitor and analyze droughts.
The standardized precipitation-evaporation index (SPEI) depicts the combined impacts of precipitation deficits and potential evapotranspiration on soil moisture. SPEI does not include impacts from effects like wind speed, relative humidity or solar radiation impacts (typically short-term forcing) – making it more reflective of long-term hydrological and ecological drought conditions. Here we present SPEI calculated for a 9-month period, attempting to reflect a length slightly longer than California’s typical wet period. A value less than -1 implies the drought is at least moderate in intensity, with more negative values representing more severe droughts.
Observed Medium Emissions (RCP 4.5) High Emissions (RCP 8.5)
1. Data derived from 32 LOCA downscaled climate projections generated to support California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Details are described in Pierce et al., 2018.
2. Observed historical data derived from Gridded Observed Meteorological Data. Details are described in Livneh et al., 2015.
3. Data presented are aggregated over all LOCA grid cells that intersect Concord boundary.
Cal-Adapt 1/31/2023 Page 10
April SWE
Snow Water Equivalent (SWE), is a commonly used measurement used by hydrologists and water managers to gage the amount of liquid water contained within the snowpack.
Observed Medium Emissions (RCP 4.5) High Emissions (RCP 8.5)
1. Data derived from 32 LOCA downscaled climate projections generated to support California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Details are described in Pierce et al., 2018.
2. Observed historical data derived from Gridded Observed Meteorological Data. Details are described in Livneh et al., 2015.
3. Data presented are aggregated over all LOCA grid cells that intersect Concord boundary.
Cal-Adapt 1/31/2023 Page 11
Annual Precipitation
Total precipitation projected for a year
Observed Medium Emissions (RCP 4.5) High Emissions (RCP 8.5)
1. Data derived from 32 LOCA downscaled climate projections generated to support California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Details are described in Pierce et al., 2018.
2. Observed historical data derived from Gridded Observed Meteorological Data. Details are described in Livneh et al., 2015.
3. Data presented are aggregated over all LOCA grid cells that intersect Concord boundary.
Cal-Adapt 1/31/2023 Page 12
Wildfire
The frequency, severity and impacts of wildfire are sensitive to climate change as well as many other factors, including development patterns, temperature increases, wind patterns, precipitation change and pest infestations. Therefore, it is more difficult to project exactly where and how fires will burn. Instead, climate models estimate increased risk to wildfires.
The Annual Average Area Burned can help inform at a high level if wildfire activity is likely to increase. However, this information is not complete - many regions across the state have no projections (such as regions outside combined fire state and federal protection responsibility areas), and more detailed analyses and projections are needed for local decision-making. These projections are most robust for the Sierra Nevada given model inputs. However, as we have seen in recent years, much of California can expect an increased risk of wildfire, with a wildfire season that starts earlier, runs longer, and features more extreme fire events. Fire danger is complex. It is impacted by human activity, vegetation, wind, temperature, relative humidity, atmospheric stability, etc. The Keetch-Byram Drought Index (KBDI) represents a simplified proxy for favorability of occurrence and spread of wildfire but is not itself a predictor of fire.
Cal-Adapt 1/31/2023 Page 13
Annual Average Area Burned
Average of the area projected to be at risk to burning in a year.
Medium Emissions (RCP 4.5)High Emissions (RCP 8.5)
1. Data derived from 32 LOCA downscaled climate projections generated to support California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Details are described in Pierce et al., 2018.
2. Observed historical data derived from Gridded Observed Meteorological Data. Details are described in Livneh et al., 2015.
3. Data presented are aggregated over all LOCA grid cells that intersect Concord boundary.
4. Concord boundary may contain locations outside the combined fire state and federal protection responsibility areas. These locations were excluded from wildfire simulations and have no climate projections.
Cal-Adapt 1/31/2023 Page 14
KBDI > 600
Number of days in a year where Keetch-Byram Drought Index (KBDI) > 600. KBDI provides an estimate for how dry the soil and vegetative detritus is.
KBDI is cumulative. The KBDI values increase on dry and warm days and decrease during rainy periods. In California we would expect KBDI to increase from the end of the wet season (spring) into the dry season (summer & fall). The list below explains what values of KBDI represent:
0–200
200–400
400–600
600–800Observed Medium Emissions (RCP 4.5) High Emissions (RCP 8.5)
1. Data derived from 32 LOCA downscaled climate projections generated to support California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Details are described in Pierce et al., 2018.
2. Observed historical data derived from Gridded Observed Meteorological Data. Details are described in Livneh et al., 2015.
3. Data presented are aggregated over all LOCA grid cells that intersect Concord boundary.
Cal-Adapt 1/31/2023 Page 15
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix F. Review of Previous Plan Actions
F-1
F. REVIEW OF PREVIOUS PLAN ACTIONS
The City of Concord Annex to the Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan identified 18 mitigation actions for implementation. For the current update, these actions were reviewed by City bureaus and offices and other relevant agencies. For each action, it was determined whether the action had been completed, was in progress or had not been started. Incomplete actions were reviewed to determine if they should be carried over to the 2023 plan or removed from the plan due to a change in priorities, capabilities, or feasibility. In total, 6 (33 percent) of the identified actions have been completed. Of the 18 identified actions 12 (67 percent) were carried over to the 2023 plan. No actions were withdrawn from the plan based on a review by the planning team. Each carried over has a new action number assigned to it for the 2023 plan. The table below summarizes the status of the 2018 recommended actions.
Removed;
Carried Over to
Plan Update
Action Item Completed
No Longer
Feasible
Check if
Yes
Enter
Action #
C-1— Where appropriate, support retrofitting or relocation of structures in high hazard areas, prioritizing structures that have experienced repetitive losses.
✓ 1
Comment: Through active participation in the Community Rating System (CRS), the City of Concord promotes efforts to address existing structures in both high hazard and repetitive loss areas.
C-2— Integrate the hazard mitigation plan into other plans, ordinances and programs that dictate land use decisions in the community, including the Development Code, the General Plan, and other programs. ✓ 2
Comment: This is an ongoing effort as plans, ordinances, and programs are updated. The next planned effort to integrate the hazard mitigation plan will be the sixth cycle update to the City’s Housing Element, which is currently in the final stages of review.
C-3— Actively participate in the plan maintenance protocols outlined in Volume 1 of this hazard mitigation plan.
✓ 3
Comment: Through regular reviews of existing processes, development of new projects related to the LHMP, and formally as part of this Annual Progress Report, the City of Concord continues to actively participate in the outlined plan maintenance protocols.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Review of Previous Plan Actions F-2
Removed;
Carried Over to
Plan Update
Action Item Completed
No Longer
Feasible
Check if
Yes
Enter
Action #
C-4—Continue to maintain good standing and compliance under the NFIP through implementation of floodplain management programs that, at a minimum, meet the NFIP requirements:
Enforce the flood damage prevention ordinance.
Participate in floodplain identification and mapping updates.
Provide public assistance/information on floodplain requirements and impacts.
✓ 4
Comment: The City of Concord actively maintains these services through activities under the Community Rating System (CRS).
C-5—Seismic review of critical buildings: Review of construction plans for Police Department Headquarters and Civic Center
Finance/Information Technology building to assess their ability to withstand an earthquake. These are critical buildings for city operations ✓
Comment: Review is ongoing. Expanded to include identification of non-City critical buildings. City core capability and not needed in the hazard mitigation plan.
C-6—Implement disaster recovery plan equipment for information technology for core application: This project will allow the City to place the necessary equipment at the Rocklin co-location facility to run the City’s critical application in a disaster
✓
Comment: Implemented Rubrik, a state of the art backup and recovery system to ensure continuity of operations for City Information Technology operations. This action item has now been completed.
C-7—Restoration of Holbrook Channel Slope Failure at 2260 Holbrook Drive
✓
Comment: The slope failure repair was completed on October 12, 2018. Public Works has a requirement from CA Department of Fish & Wildlife to have a biologist inspect it each year for invasive plant material and clear such species, as directed, for a duration of five (5) years, for which we are in year four (4).
C-8— Galindo and Mt. Diablo Creek Drainage Improvements – Detention Basin at Ygnacio Valley Rd & Pine Hollow Rd.
✓
Comment: Concord is continuing to research funding opportunities. Project review completed and included in the 5-year Capital Improvement Plan as a Project to be newly studied.
C-9—Marsh Drive Bridge Seismic Retrofit ✓
Comment: The Marsh Drive Bridge Replacement project is being managed by Contra Costa County Public Works (County).
Permits from regulatory agencies such as CDFW, USACE, RWQCB have been issued, funding has been secured, and construction began in June of 2021. The County completed coordination with various utilities impacted by the project, including PG&E, CCWD, AT&T, Kinder Morgan, and Phillips 66, for relocating infrastructure to accommodate the project. Bridge construction nearing completion, with substantial completion anticipated for January 2023.
C-10— Civic Center Generator Replacement to maintain critical functions of Finance and Information Technology departments during power outage of any sort.
✓
Comment: Civic Center Generator Replacement was completed in December 2018.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Review of Previous Plan Actions F-3
Removed;
Carried Over to
Plan Update
Action Item Completed
No Longer
Feasible
Check if
Yes
Enter
Action #
C-11— Uninterruptible power service supply replacement at the PD:
replaces end of life Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) for the Police Department’s Dispatch and Emergency Operations Center (EOC) activities.
✓
Comment: The UPS replacement was deemed complete on June 30, 2019.
C-12—Update and Maintain the Floodplain Management Plan ✓ 6 Comment: Originally due to reduced staffing, and subsequently as a result of response to the COVID-19 Pandemic and fiscal impacts, the efforts to develop a comprehensive and proactive Flood Plain Management Plan have been delayed. Currently the City maintains flood plain management efforts through Development and Storm Water Services under Engineering, and through the City’s existing Flood Plain Ordinance. This action item remains a long term goal and initial planning is scheduled to resume as staffing and funding become available.
C-13— Develop a continuity of operations plan ✓ 7
Comment: The Continuity of Operations Plan for the City’s IT Department was updated in 2022 and will be the subject of ongoing review especially as systems and staff change.
C-14— Work with the Water District to develop inundation mapping for District owned Water Storage Units and integrate this mapping into locally relevant planning mechanisms, such as the hazard mitigation plan, emergency response plan, and/or general plan, as appropriate. ✓ 8
Comment: Initial conversations with CCWD have been started, but reduced staffing, and impacts due to the COVID-19 pandemic at both agencies (City of Concord and CCWD) have resulted in only minor progress. Discussions are ongoing.
C-15— Develop a City Critical Infrastructure Map ✓ 9 Comment: Critical infrastructure are those structures and facilities that provide essential life safety services to the community, support public safety, disaster response, and recovery activities. Concord PD and Civic Center are included in this list and their construction plans will be reviewed as part of that process. The list is being developed with the goal of the City’s GIS department to create a Critical Infrastructure Map, which will be kept up to date with regular reviews.
C-16—Identify an alternate EOC in Concord ✓ 10
Comment: In 2016, the Cal State East Bay campus in Concord, CA signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Concord Police Department as its alternate EOC. Cal State East Bay campus was closed due to COVID-19.
Progress on this Goal has been halted; however, the City is now reviewing the possibility of designating a City- owned site as an alternate EOC.
C-17— Adopt the 2009 International Existing Building Code for the design of voluntary or mandatory soft-story building retrofits ✓ 11
Comment: The 2019 California Existing Building Code (CEBC) has been adopted which incorporates the model language from the 2018 International Existing Building Code (IEBC). However, while the 2018 IEBC Appendix A4 provides design requirements for voluntary soft-story building retrofits, this appendix is not adopted by the State of California and therefore not adopted as part of the 2019 CEBC. The City of Concord has not adopted Appendix A4 as a local amendment. Pending the California State Adoption of Appendix A4 of the CEBC 2022, the City will consider adoption effective January 1, 2023.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Review of Previous Plan Actions F-4
Removed;
Carried Over to
Plan Update
Action Item Completed
No Longer
Feasible
Check if
Yes
Enter
Action #
C-18— Climate Action Plan, City Forest Plan TL-9. Develop a City Forrest Plan for Downtown and Key Street Corridors. Also include in Street Tree Master Plan, which requires 10% of non-residential parking lots to be landscaped.
✓ 12
Comment: The City Forest Plan is called out in the Climate Action Plan and further development of elements for Downtown and Key Street Corridors remains ongoing for the Planning Division, awaiting input from the City Arborist, since it is a City tree issue, to define next steps.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix G. Progress Report Template
G-1
G. PROGRESS REPORT TEMPLATE
Reporting Period: (Insert reporting period)
Background: The City of Concord developed a hazard mitigation plan to reduce risk from hazards by identifying resources, information, and strategies for risk reduction. The federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires state and local governments to develop hazard mitigation plans as a condition for federal disaster grant assistance. To prepare the plan, the City organized resources, assessed risks from hazards, developed planning goals and objectives, reviewed mitigation alternatives, and developed an action plan to address probable impacts from natural hazards. By completing this process, the City maintained compliance with the Disaster Mitigation Act, achieving eligibility for mitigation grant funding opportunities afforded under the Robert T. Stafford Act. The plan can be viewed on-line at:
INSERT LINK
Summary Overview of the Plan’s Progress: The performance period for the Hazard Mitigation Plan became effective on __[date]__, with the final approval of the plan by FEMA. The performance period for this plan will be 5 years, with an anticipated update to the plan to occur before __[date]__. As of this reporting period, the performance period for this plan is considered to be __% complete. The Hazard Mitigation Plan has targeted 23 hazard mitigation actions to be pursued during the 5-year performance period. As of the reporting period, the following overall progress can be reported:
• __ out of __ actions (__%) reported ongoing action toward completion. • __ out of __ actions (__%) were reported as being complete. • __ out of __ actions (___%) reported no action taken.
Purpose: The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the implementation of the action plan identified in the Hazard Mitigation Plan. The objective is to ensure that there is a continuing and responsive planning process that will keep the Hazard Mitigation Plan dynamic and responsive to the needs and capabilities of the City of Concord.
This report discusses the following:
• Hazard events that have occurred over the reporting period. • Changes in risk exposure within the planning area.
• Mitigation success stories.
• Review of the action plan.
• Changes in capabilities that could impact plan implementation. • Recommendations for changes/enhancement.
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Progress Report Template G-2
The Plan Maintenance Steering Committee: It was determined through the plan’s development process that a plan maintenance steering committee would remain in service to oversee maintenance of the plan. The plan maintenance steering committee, made up of City staff and other stakeholders from the planning area, reviewed and approved this progress report at its annual meeting held on __[date]__. At a minimum, the plan maintenance steering committee is to provide technical review and oversight on the development of the annual progress report.
It is anticipated that there will be turnover in the membership annually, which will be documented in the progress reports. For this reporting period, the plan maintenance steering committee membership is as indicated in Table 1.
Table 1. Plan Maintenance Steering Committee Members
Name Title Department/Agency
Hazard Events within the Planning Area: During the reporting period, there were __ hazard events in the planning area that had a measurable impact on people or property. A summary of these events is as follows:
• __________________________
• __________________________
Changes in Risk Exposure in the Planning Area: (Insert brief overview of any natural hazard event in the planning area that changed the probability of occurrence or ranking of risk for the hazards addressed in the hazard mitigation plan) Mitigation Success Stories: (Insert brief overview of mitigation accomplishments during the reporting period) Review of the Action Plan: Table 2 reviews the action plan, reporting the status of each action. Reviewers of this report should refer to the Hazard Mitigation Plan for more detailed descriptions of each action and the prioritization process.
Address the following in the “status” column of the following table:
• Was any element of the action carried out during the reporting period?
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Progress Report Template G-3
• If no action was completed, why?
• Is the timeline for implementation for the action still appropriate? • If the action was completed, does it need to be changed or removed from the action plan? Table 2. Action Plan Matrix
Action Taken?
(Yes or No) Time Line Priority Status Status (X,
O,✓)
Action #__—______________________[description]
Action #__—______________________[description]
Action #__—______________________[description]
Action #__—______________________[description]
Action #__—______________________[description]
Action #__—______________________[description]
Action #__—______________________[description]
Action #__—______________________[description]
Action #__—______________________[description]
Action #__—______________________[description]
Action #__—______________________[description]
Action #__—______________________[description]
Action #__—______________________[description]
Action #__—______________________[description]
Action #__—______________________[description]
Action #__—______________________[description]
Completion status legend:
✓= Project Completed
O = Action ongoing toward completion
X = No progress at this time
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan Progress Report Template G-4
Changes That May Impact Implementation of the Plan: (Insert brief overview of any significant changes in the planning area that would have a profound impact on the implementation of the plan. Specify any changes in technical, regulatory and financial capabilities identified during the plan’s development) Recommendations for Changes or Enhancements: Based on the review of this report by the plan maintenance steering committee, the following recommendations will be noted for future updates or revisions to the plan:
• __________________________
• __________________________
• __________________________
• __________________________
• __________________________
• __________________________
Public review notice: The contents of this report are considered to be public knowledge and have been prepared for total public disclosure. Copies of the report have been provided to the City of Concord Council and to local media outlets. The report is posted on the City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan website. Any questions or comments regarding the contents of this report should be directed to:
Insert Contact Info Here
City of Concord Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix H. City Adoption Resolution and
FEMA Approval
H-1
H. CITY ADOPTION RESOLUTION AND FEMA APPROVAL
To Be Provided With Final Draft
Staff Report
Date: March 10, 2026
To: City Council
From: Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Reviewed by: Mindy Gentry, Director of Community Development Aaron Sage, Planning Manager
Prepared by: Ben Ulrey, Associate Planner
[email protected]
(925) 671-3058
Subject: Considering acceptance of the 2025 General Plan Annual Progress Report, which includes an Annual Progress Report on the 2023-2031 Housing Element, authorizing submittal of the General Plan Annual Progress Report to the Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation and submittal of the Housing Element Annual Progress Report to the California Department of Housing and Community Development, and
authorizing the City Manager to make minor edits prior to said submittals.
CEQA: Not a project/exempt pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21065; CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c),
15061(b)(3),15306, and/or 15378.
Report in Brief
The City Council (“Council”) is requested to review and accept the 2025 Annual Progress Report (“APR”) on the Concord 2030 General Plan (“General Plan”), including the attached APR on the 2023-2031 Housing Element (“Housing Element”). The General Plan sets the City’s vision, goals and policies for its long-range growth and development. The Housing Element is a required element of the General Plan that addresses the housing needs of the entire community, as well as the City’s share of the regional housing need.
6.a6.a6.a6.a6.a6.a6.a6.a6.a
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
March 10, 2026
State law requires local jurisdictions to submit APRs on their general plans and housing elements to the state by April 1 of each year. This agenda item also provides an “annual housing forum” to receive community input on housing needs, resources and ideas, as stated in Housing Element Program 4.
Recommended Action
Accept the 2025 General Plan Annual Progress Report, including the Housing Element APR (Attachment 1), authorize its submittal to the Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (“LCI”) and submittal of the Housing Element APR to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”), authorize the City Manager to make minor edits prior to said submittals, and make the CEQA determinations as provided in this staff report.
Background
The City Council adopted the last comprehensive update to the General Plan in 2007.
The General Plan is organized into eight elements, or chapters, each of which addresses a different topic related to the City’s long-range development. Since 2007, Council has periodically amended the General Plan, including amendments to implement the 2012 Concord Reuse Project Area Plan (for the former Concord Naval Weapons Station, or “CNWS”), the 2014 Downtown Concord Specific Plan, Housing Element updates in 2015 and 2023, and various amendments to accommodate specific development projects.
State law requires each local jurisdiction to adopt a general plan for its physical development and provide an APR on the general plan to the legislative body.1 Further, under Program 4 of the Housing Element, staff is to present the Housing Element APR to Council through an “annual housing forum” before submitting to HCD.
The main purposes of the APR and this agenda item are to:
• Update Council on implementation of the General Plan; • Document the City’s progress toward meeting its “fair share” of the Bay Area’s housing need, or Regional Housing Needs Allocation (“RHNA”), and removing governmental constraints to the provision of housing;
• Hold an “annual housing forum” as stated in Housing Element Program 4; and • Provide the state with data on local land use planning and development.
The APR covers the previous calendar year (2025 for this APR) and includes:
• An overview of the status of each General Plan element; • The current status of all Housing Element programs;
1 California Government Code Sections 65300 and 65400(a)(2).
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
March 10, 2026
• Status of the City’s actions to implement its Climate Action Plan; • A list of major development projects and capital projects; and • A summary of recently completed and active General Plan and Development Code amendments.
Analysis
The following discussion summarizes major implementation actions for the various elements of the General Plan during calendar year 2025. The sections on Land Use and Transportation and Circulation also summarize major actions related to the former CNWS and Downtown Concord.
Land Use Element
This Element provides the overall policy framework for land use planning and development in Concord. No amendments to this Element occurred in 2025. Major activities related to this Element during 2025 included:
Major Development Projects Approved
• Bird Subdivision, a 40-unit, small-lot, single-family subdivision on an approximately five-acre lot (5291 Concord Boulevard)
• Foskett Building, reconstruction of a fire-damaged warehouse (2454 Vista del Monte)
• Starbucks with drive-through (4691 Clayton Road)
• Clayton Road Retail project, a drive-through restaurant and retail building (4390 Clayton Rd.)
Major Development Projects Amended or Extended
• Two-year extension for the John Muir Health Campus Seismic Replacement and Modernization Project (2425 and 2540 East Street, 2700 and 2740 Grant Street, 2299 Bacon Street)
Former Concord Naval Weapons Station
The Concord Reuse Project Area Plan envisions 12,200 housing units over the 30- year life of this project, of which 25 percent are to be affordable. Since adoption of the Plan, the City has been working to secure a master developer and obtain property transfer from the United States Navy.
On September 19, 2023, the City Council, sitting as the Local Reuse Authority (“LRA”) approved an Exclusive Agreement to Negotiate between the City and Brookfield Properties (“Brookfield”) as the project’s master developer. On March 19, 2024, the LRA accepted Brookfield’s Term Sheet for the project. Throughout 2025,
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
March 10, 2026
in its role as master developer, Brookfield and the LRA have been negotiating the property transfer with the Navy and preparing technical studies ahead of drafting a Specific Plan and environmental studies.
Growth Management Element
This Element addresses demands for public facilities generated by new development with performance standards, plans, capital improvement programs, and mitigation programs. No amendments or major activities occurred for this Element in 2025.
Economic Vitality Element
This Element provides policies to better link economic development, land use, and zoning, support downtown development and retail, and affirm existing economic development programs. No amendments were made to this Element in 2025.
Throughout the year, the City supported a number of businesses and initiatives in the downtown, and on December 2, 2025, the Council adopted a new Economic Development Strategic Plan (see below for further details).
Downtown Activities:
• New businesses which opened in 2025 include: Wasabi Sushi (2118 Willow Pass Road), Indi Root (1701 Willow Pass Road), Chai & Co (2115 Pacheco Street), Esse (1806 Colfax Street), Nick’s Sandwiches (2300 Clayton Road) and Aura (2305 Concord Boulevard).
• The Music & Market concert series brought thousands of visitors to downtown from June to September, connecting the City to thousands of attendees each week. The City brought in new performers, including a K-Pop band from South Korea, which brought in new attendees to experience downtown. • The City processed 52 special event permit applications, produced 18 City events, and hosted 52 Farmer’s Markets to provide access to healthy, affordable food for the community. This resulted in 122 total events in 2025. • The City launched a new sustainability-themed youth art competition featuring artwork from local artists on Big Belly trash and recycling bins surrounding Todos Santos Plaza. Council recognized the eighteen selected youth artists at a Council meeting on October 14, 2025. The art pieces were posted in November and will remain posted for approximately one year. • The City launched the Todos Santos Snowy Scenes Showdown, a winter window display competition between downtown businesses. This event connected participating businesses with 933 residents and visitors through the community voting process.
• In 2025, the City received a California Association for Local Economic Development (CALED) Award for Creative Concord, and Music & Market was
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
March 10, 2026
recognized by Diablo Magazine as “Best of the East Bay” for Best Outdoor Concert Series.
• Council awarded $286,000 to the Todos Santos Business Association to extend the Downtown Concord Pilot Program until June 30, 2027. The program also received $12,000 per year over the next two years from the Brenden Mann Foundation. This program provides day porter service, security, and pressure washing seven days a week. Between the start of the program in June 2023 to February 2026, there has been a decrease in “negative encounters” with individuals by 85 percent.
Economic Development Strategic Plan:
• On December 2, 2025, City Council adopted the new Economic Development Strategic Plan (“EDSP”), which prioritizes and guides the City’s economic development activities for the next five to ten years. The EDSP incorporates technical analysis findings, results of stakeholder engagement, and input from the Housing and Economic Development Committee and staff. In 2026, priorities of the EDSP are:
o Analyzing the feasibility of creating a Property-Based Business Improvement District in downtown Concord;
o Creating a Planning-Economic Development Working Group to create business-friendly policies; and
o Working with other departments to improve the appearance of gateways utilized by travelers into the City.
Transportation and Circulation Element
This Element provides policies and actions to ensure safe and efficient operation of the City's circulation system. No amendments were made to this Element in 2025. Major transportation projects that were completed or made substantial progress during 2025 are as follows:
• Residential Pavement Maintenance, Phases B: This project performed pavement maintenance activities in two areas of the City: (1) between Clayton Road and Cowell Road, east of the BART station; and (2) in the Sun Terrace and Northwood Drive neighborhoods of north Concord. Work included hot mix asphalt paving as well as construction and modification of concrete sidewalk, curb, gutter, curb ramps, driveways, and valley gutters. Work also included new signage and painted traffic striping pavement markings and curb markings. The project was completed in winter 2025.
• Monument Boulevard Pavement Rehabilitation: This project involved pavement rehabilitation on Monument Boulevard from the City limits to Detroit
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
March 10, 2026
Avenue, and road widening at 1650 Monument. Construction was fully completed in February 2025.
• Willow Pass Road Projects: Replacement of a sewer main from Landana Drive to Market Street was completed in May 2025, followed by repaving from Landana Drive to Galindo Street, which was completed in January 2026. This project also closed sidewalk gaps along the corridor and installed pedestrian beacons at San Vincente Drive and Ashdale Drive, and bioretention facilities at Civic Center.
• Treat Boulevard Pavement Rehabilitation: This project restored pavement along Treat Boulevard from the Walnut Creek city limits to Clayton Road, along with curb ramp upgrades and bike lanes, where feasible. Phase 1 (Walnut Creek city limits to San Miguel Road) was completed in October 2023, and Phase 2 (San Miguel Road to Clayton Road) was completed in winter 2025.
• Citywide Traffic System Upgrade: This project included a phased approach to upgrade traffic signal equipment citywide, including traffic cabinets, controllers, pedestrian push buttons. Phase 1 was completed in spring 2024 and Phase 2 began in fall 2024 and completed construction in September 2025. The phases were determined based on collision data, so locations were prioritized based on safety.
• Sun Terrace Elementary School Crossing Enhancements: This Transportation Development Act (“TDA”) funded project enhanced crossings and provided traffic calming in proximity to Sun Terrace Elementary and was completed in winter 2025.
• Village Road/Cowell Road Crossing Improvements: This project installed pedestrian crossing beacons and curb ramp upgrades at Village Road/Silverwood Drive, and pedestrian crossing beacons at Cowell Road/Quail Court. Construction was completed in January 2026. • Joan Avenue and Court Lane Bicycle Improvements: This project received TDA funding in 2025 to install Class II and III bicycle facilities and is currently in the design phase.
• Street Maintenance No. 1: This project repaved a number of streets throughout Concord, including one and a half miles of Bailey Road that was repaved from Myrtle Drive to the city limits to improve a busy route to East Contra Costa County. Work progressed in 2025 and construction was completed in January 2026.
• Residential Paving Projects, Phases C and D: These projects included pavement maintenance and light rehabilitation work in the Colony Park, Lime Ridge, Olive, and Ayers neighborhoods. Construction was completed in October 2025.
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
March 10, 2026
• Residential Paving Project, Phase E: This project included pavement maintenance and light rehabilitation work in the Holbrook Heights and Ridge Park neighborhoods, as well as resurfacing Port Chicago Highway from downtown to Olivera Road. Construction was substantially complete in February 2026.
• Clayton Road Paving Project: Road repaving work on Clayton Road from Babel Lane to the Clayton city limits. Work started in 2025 and is ongoing.
Completion estimated for March 2026.
• Concord Boulevard Paving Project: Road repaving work on Concord Boulevard from Bailey Road to the Clayton city limits. The project was completed in February 2026.
Parks, Open Space, and Conservation Element
This Element provides policies for acquisition, management, and preservation of the City’s open spaces and natural resources. No amendments were made to this Element and no major implementation activities occurred in 2025.
Safety and Noise Element
This Element identifies the City’s natural and human-induced hazards, including air quality, noise, earthquakes, flooding, hazardous materials, and wildland fires, and provides both preventative and responsive mitigations to address these hazards. No amendments were made to this Element in 2025.
Public Facilities and Utilities Element
This Element addresses the City’s current and future service and infrastructure needs, including wastewater collection, law enforcement, childcare programs, and cultural arts and education programs. No amendments were made to this Element in 2025.
Housing Element
As noted above, this Element addresses the housing needs of the entire community, as well as the City’s contribution toward meeting the RHNA. Following a two-year process with extensive community engagement, the Council adopted the Housing Element on August 22, 2023, and on October 23, 2023, HCD found the Housing Element to be in substantial compliance with state law. This report focuses on the third year of the eight- year housing element cycle which ends on January 31, 2031.
Housing Element Annual Progress Report
The Housing Element Annual Progress Report was prepared in accordance with guidelines issued by HCD and includes the following (Attachment 1):
• Table A – Housing Development Applications Submitted
• Table A2 – Annual Building Activity Report Summary – New Construction, Entitled, Permits and Completed Units
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
March 10, 2026
• Table B – Regional Housing Needs Allocation Progress, Permitted Units Issued by Affordability
• Table C – Sites Identified or Rezoned to Accommodate Shortfall Housing Need • Table D – Housing Element Program Implementation Status • Table E – Commercial Development Bonus Approved
• Table F – Units Rehabilitated, Preserved, & Acquired for Alternative Adequate Sites
• Table F2 – Above Moderate-Income Units Converted to Moderate Income • Table G – Locally Owned Lands Included in the Housing Element Sites Inventory that have been sold, leased, or otherwise disposed of
• Table H – Locally Owned Surplus Sites
• Table I – Units Constructed Pursuant to Government Code 65852.21 and Applications for Lot Splits
• Table J – Student Housing Development for Lower Income Students for Which Was Granted a Density Bonus
• LEAP Reporting – Local Early Action Planning (LEAP) Reporting Progress in Meeting the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation Table 1 shows Concord's progress toward meeting its RHNA for the 2023-2031 planning period. The RHNA was determined by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and requires the City to plan for 5,073 residential units within four income categories, as shown in the “Total RHNA Goal” column.
Table 1: Progress in Meeting Regional Housing Needs Allocation Income
Category
Total RHNA
Goal (2023-
2031)
Net Housing
Units Created
2023-2025
Balance
Remaining
Percent of
RHNA Goal
Achieved
Very Low* 1,292 155 1,082 16%
Low 744 337 398 47%
Moderate 847 51 796 6%
Above
Moderate 2,190 129 2,025 8%
TOTAL 5,073 772** 4,301 15%
*Includes 23 Extremely Low-Income Units for 2025. No Acutely Low-Income Units were issued in 2025 **Also includes units from the Projection Period 6/30/2022-1/30/2023
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
March 10, 2026
HCD collects housing project data throughout the state including proposed projects, projects with planning approval (also known as an entitlement), and projects that have been issued a building permit. Only projects with an issued building permit are counted towards meeting the City’s RHNA.
In 2025, the City granted approvals for the following key stages of the development review process:
Table 2: Summary of Housing Projects in 2025
Project Entitled
Units*
Building
Permits
Issued
Certificates of
Occupancy
Granted
Single-Family Homes - 5 26
ADUs - 64 51
Multifamily
The Ashbury
1650 Ashbury Drive - 183 -
Rick Judd Commons
1350 Galindo Street - - 62
Bird Subdivision
5291 Concord Blvd 40 - -
Total 40 252 139
*Per HCD instructions, only includes projects that have separate entitlement Although no affordable units were issued a certificate of occupancy, 236 affordable units were issued building permits. Thus, based on the City’s RHNA and its previous performance during past years, there is a remaining housing need of 4,301 housing units, as shown in Table 2 below.
Further, not included in these numbers are the 13 rehabilitation projects completed in 2025 through the City’s Housing Rehabilitation Loan and Grant Program. Although this Program helps preserve Concord’s aging housing stock and provide residents with quality housing, state law does not allow these units to be counted toward the City’s RHNA numbers. This is primarily because no affordability deed restrictions are placed on the rehabilitated units, and/or because the rehabilitation is not considered to be “substantial” as defined by state law.
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
March 10, 2026
Accessory Dwelling Unit Update
The following table summarizes the number of Accessory Dwelling Units (“ADUs”) that have received building permits during the previous and current Housing Element cycles (2015-2025).
Table 3: Accessory Dwelling Units by Year
Year Building Permits Issued
2014-2022 Housing Element
2015 5
2016 4
2017 10
2018 23
2019 18
2020 24
2021 40
2022 42
2023-2031 Housing Element
2023 50
2024 59
2025 64
In 2025, building permits were issued for 64 ADUs located throughout the city (see Attachment 3 for map), continuing the City’s trend of increasing ADU production. This trend demonstrates that the City’s Development Code amendments, reduced fees, adoption of pre-approved ADU plans, the ADU rebate program, and changes to state law have reduced barriers to constructing ADUs, thereby adding to the City's housing inventory. Using guidance2 from HCD and ABAG, the City can assume for reporting purposes the ADUs permitted in 2025 were rented at the following levels of affordability:
19 very low, 19 low-, 19 moderate-, and seven above moderate-income.
Program Implementation
The Housing Element contains 26 programs with over 100 objectives to address the housing needs of all current and future residents at all income levels. Below is a status update of major programs that had a deadline in 2025, or that staff has made progress on in 2025 for implementation within 2026. Table D in the APR contains the status of all programs (Attachment 1).
Objective 8.6 (Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rezoning): Rezone sites to increase multifamily residential options in moderate- and high-resource 2 Association of Bay Area Governments. (n.d.). Using ADUs to satisfy RHNA. In Technical Memo. https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2022-03/ADUs-Projections-Memo-final.pdf
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
March 10, 2026
areas (as shown in the most recent CTCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps) with a majority white population. Begin the rezone process by December 2023 by conducting outreach, analyzing opportunities, and completing a CEQA analysis to finalize the rezone by December 2024. [Complete program information can be found on the City’s website.3]
Status: On February 24, 2026, the Council introduced an ordinance to rezone the following sites: Site 1 (5100 Clayton Road, the former Kmart site), Site 2 (5280- 88 and 5350-58 Clayton Road, the Clayton Faire Shopping Center site), Site 8 (780 Oak Grove Road, Palm Lake Apartments), Site 16 (1539 Kirker Pass Road), and Site 18 (5390 Myrtle Drive) for a total capacity of 1,000 housing units.
Adoption of the ordinance is scheduled for March 10, 2026.
Objective 16.2 (Group Housing Parking Reduction): Amend the Development Code by December 2024 to reduce parking requirements for group housing … by calculating parking based on the number of beds, bedrooms, or dwelling units, whichever is fewer, rather than whichever is greater. Additionally, guest parking requirements will be removed.
Status: On May 27, 2025, the Council adopted an Ordinance making these amendments.
Objective 2.6 (Increased Building Heights): Within one year of certification of the Housing Element, the City will increase the maximum permitted heights in the RH, CO, and CMX zones to achieve maximum densities and remove any potential constraints. As part of implementing this action, the City will conduct outreach with the development community and revise these heights based on the feedback received, up to a maximum of 12 feet of height for every 10 dwelling units per acre permitted by the zone.
Status: On February 10, 2026, the Council approved Development Code amendments to increase maximum heights for residential and mixed-use buildings heights from 30 to 37 feet in the Community Office (CO) and Commercial Mixed Use (CMX) districts, and from 60 to 67 feet in the Residential High Density (RH) zoning district.
Objective 15.3 (Objective Design Standards): Develop and adopt objective design standards by July 2024.
Status: The City’s Objective Design Standards (“ODS”) document was adopted in 2023; however, staff continues to evaluate the effectiveness of the ODS and bring forward amendments as necessary. In 2025, the City made progress toward 3 https://www.cityofconcord.org/1205/Affirmatively-Furthering-Fair-Housing-Re