061626 FD Local Hazard Mitigation Plan — City Council - Successor Agency - Housing Authority, June 16, 2026 (part 1 of 2)

CITY OF
2026

LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN

ii
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE .................................... 1-2

1.1 PLAN PURPOSE ................................................................................................. 1-3

1.2 PLAN AUTHORITY ............................................................................................. 1-3

1.3 PLAN ADOPTION ............................................................................................... 1-4

1.4 PLAN ORGANIZATION ........................................................................................ 1-4

1.5 MITIGATION GOALS ........................................................................................... 1-5

1.6 CHANGES IN HAZARD MITIGATION PRIORITIES .................................................. 1-5 SECTION 2: PLANNING PROCESS ................................................. 2-2

2.1 ORGANIZING RESOURCES ................................................................................ 2-3

2.1.1 LHMP PROJECT MANAGEMENT TEAM ............................................................................. 2-3

2.1.2 LHMP PLANNING TEAM .................................................................................................. 2-3

2.1.3 PUBLIC OUTREACH ....................................................................................................... 2-12

2.1.4 REVIEW AND INCORPORATE EXISTING INFORMATION .................................................... 2-17

2.2 ASSESS RISKS ............................................................................................. 2-17

2.2.1 IDENTIFY /PROFILE HAZARDS ........................................................................................ 2-17

2.2.2 ASSESS VULNERABILITIES ............................................................................................. 2-18

2.3 DEVELOP MITIGATION PLAN ........................................................................ 2-18

2.3.1 IDENTIFY GOALS ........................................................................................................... 2-18

2.3.2 DEVELOP CAPABILITIES ASSESSMENT ........................................................................... 2-18

2.3.3 IDENTIFY MITIGATION ACTIONS ..................................................................................... 2-18

2.3.4 PLAN ADOPTION AND SUBMITTAL ................................................................................. 2-18

2.3.5 PLAN MAINTENANCE ..................................................................................................... 2-18 SECTION 3: COMMUNITY PROFILE ............................................... 3-2

3.1 PHYSICAL SETTING .......................................................................................... 3-2

3.2 HISTORY ...................................................................................................... 3-2

3.3 DEMOGRAPHICS AND SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS ......................................... 3-3

3.3.1 POPULATION .................................................................................................................. 3-3

3.3.2 EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT............................................................................................ 3-6

3.3.3 ECONOMIC AND EMPLOYMENT TRENDS .......................................................................... 3-7

iii

3.3.4 HOUSING ....................................................................................................................... 3-8

3.4 LAND USES AND EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ................................................... 3-9

3.5 DEVELOPMENT TRENDS AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT .................................. 3-12

3.5.1 CHANGES IN LAND USE, POPULATION PATTERNS AND DEVELOPMENT TRENDS FROM PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS ................................................................................................................. 3-12

3.5.2 CHANGES IN LAND USE, POPULATION PATTERNS AND DEVELOPMENT TRENDS FOR FUTURE FIVE YEARS .................................................................................................................................. 3-13

3.6 INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS ........................................................................ 3-16

3.6.1 TRANSPORTATION ......................................................................................................... 3-16

3.6.2 WATER AND WASTEWATER ............................................................................................. 3-16

3.6.3 SANITATION AND SOLID WASTE ..................................................................................... 3-17

3.6.4 ELECTRICITY ................................................................................................................. 3-17

3.6.5 NATURAL GAS ............................................................................................................... 3-17

3.7 CRITICAL FACILITIES ................................................................................... 3-17

3.8 WHOLE COMMUNITY AND ACCESS AND FUNCTIONAL NEEDS ...................... 3-26

3.8.1 RESEARCH AND METHODOLOGY ................................................................................... 3-26

3.8.2 VULNERABILITY DETERMINATION ................................................................................ 3-39 SECTION 4: HAZARDS ASSESSMENT ............................................. 4-2

4.1 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND PRIORITIZATION ............................................... 4-2

4.1.1 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION ............................................................................................... 4-2

4.1.2 HAZARD PRIORITIZATION ............................................................................................... 4-4

4.2 CLIMATE CHANGE CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................ 4-8

4.3 VULNERABILITY /RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ..................................... 4-8

4.4 HAZARD PROFILES STRUCTURE AND DESCRIPTION ..................................... 4-10

4.5 DAM FAILURE ............................................................................................... 4-11

4.5.1 DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................. 4-11

4.5.2 LOCATION/EXTENT ........................................................................................................ 4-14

4.5.3 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES ............................................................................................. 4-17

4.5.4 PROBABILITY OF FUTURE OCCURRENCES ..................................................................... 4-18

4.5.5 CLIMATE CHANGE ......................................................................................................... 4-19

4.5.6 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................... 4-19

4.5.7 CHANGES IN VULNERABILITY (PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS/NEXT FIVE YEARS) .................... 4-19

4.5.8 LIMITED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY AND AFN POPULATIONS ................................................. 4-20

4.6 FLOOD ........................................................................................................ 4-21

4.6.1 DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................ 4-21

4.6.2 LOCATION/EXTENT ....................................................................................................... 4-22

4.6.3 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES ............................................................................................ 4-25

4.6.4 PROBABILITY OF FUTURE OCCURRENCES .................................................................... 4-27

4.6.5 CLIMATE CHANGE ......................................................................................................... 4-27

4.6.6 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................... 4-27

4.6.7 CHANGES IN VULNERABILITY (PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS/NEXT FIVE YEARS) .................... 4-31

4.6.8 LIMITED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY AND AFN POPULATIONS ................................................. 4-32

4.7 EXTREME WEATHER (DROUGHT, EXTREME HEAT, SEVERE WINDS/SANTA ANA WINDS, HEAVY RAIN, POWER OUTAGE/UTILITY FAILURE) ........................................ 4-33

4.7.1 DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................... 4-33

4.7.2 LOCATION/EXTENT ....................................................................................................... 4-36

4.7.3 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES ............................................................................................ 4-44

4.7.4 PROBABILITY OF FUTURE OCCURRENCES .................................................................... 4-49

4.7.5 CLIMATE CHANGE ......................................................................................................... 4-52

4.7.6 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................... 4-54

4.7.7 CHANGES IN VULNERABILITY (PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS/NEXT FIVE YEARS) ................... 4-55

4.7.8 LIMITED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY AND AFN POPULATIONS ................................................. 4-56

4.8 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS (LANDSLIDE, SUBSIDENCE) ....................................... 4-57

4.8.1 DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................... 4-57

4.8.2 LOCATION/EXTENT ....................................................................................................... 4-58

4.8.3 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES ............................................................................................ 4-63

4.8.4 PROBABILITY OF FUTURE OCCURRENCES .................................................................... 4-64

4.8.5 CLIMATE CHANGE ......................................................................................................... 4-65

4.8.6 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................... 4-65

4.8.7 CHANGES IN VULNERABILITY (PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS/NEXT FIVE YEARS) ................... 4-68

4.8.8 LIMITED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY AND AFN POPULATIONS ................................................. 4-68

4.9 SEISMIC HAZARDS (FAULT RUPTURE, GROUND SHAKING, LIQUEFACTION) .. 4-69

4.9.1 DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................... 4-69

4.9.2 LOCATION/EXTENT ........................................................................................................ 4-71

4.9.3 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES ............................................................................................ 4-79

4.9.4 PROBABILITY OF FUTURE OCCURRENCES ..................................................................... 4-81

4.9.5 CLIMATE CHANGE ........................................................................................................ 4-83

4.9.6 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................... 4-83

4.9.7 CHANGES IN VULNERABILITY (PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS/NEXT FIVE YEARS) ................... 4-87

4.9.8 LIMITED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY AND AFN POPULATIONS ................................................. 4-88

4.10 WILDFIRE AND URBAN FIRE ....................................................................... 4-89

4.10.1 DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................... 4-89

4.10.2 LOCATION/EXTENT ....................................................................................................... 4-90

4.10.3 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES ............................................................................................ 4-93

4.10.4 PROBABILITY OF FUTURE OCCURRENCES .................................................................... 4-97

4.10.5 CLIMATE CHANGE ........................................................................................................ 4-98

4.10.6 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................... 4-98

4.10.7 CHANGES IN VULNERABILITY (PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS/NEXT FIVE YEARS) .................. 4-102

4.10.8 LIMITED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY AND AFN POPULATIONS ................................................ 4-102

4.11 HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS (AIRCRAFT/TRANSPORTATION/TRAIN INCIDENTS,

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RELEASE/SPILL, TERRORISM/CYBERSECURITY /ACTIVE SHOOTER, CIVIL UNREST, VECTOR-BORNE DISEASE, PANDEMIC) ............................ 4-103

4.11.1 DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................. 4-103

4.11.2 LOCATION/EXTENT ...................................................................................................... 4-108

4.11.3 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES ............................................................................................ 4-115

4.11.4 PROBABILITY OF FUTURE OCCURRENCES ................................................................... 4-120

4.11.5 CLIMATE CHANGE ....................................................................................................... 4-123

4.11.6 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT .................................................................................... 4-125

4.11.7 CHANGES IN VULNERABILITY (PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS/NEXT FIVE YEARS) .................. 4-126

4.11.8 LIMITED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY AND AFN POPULATIONS ................................................ 4-127

4.12 SUMMARY OF DECLARED DISASTERS AFFECTING THE PLANNING AREA ..... 4-128

4.13 SUMMARY OF VULNERABILITY .................................................................. 4-130

vi
SECTION 5: MITIGATION STRATEGY ............................................. 5-2

5.1 HAZARD MITIGATION OVERVIEW ....................................................................... 5-2

5.1.1 FEMA’S NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM ........................................................... 5-2

5.1.2 HAZARD MITIGATION PRIORITIZATION ............................................................................ 5-3

5.1.3 HAZARD MITIGATION BENEFIT-COST REVIEW .................................................................. 5-6

5.1.4 STATUS OF PREVIOUS PLAN ACTIONS ............................................................................. 5-6

5.2 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTIONS ..................................................................... 5-7

5.3 CAPABILITIES ASSESSMENT ....................................................................... 5-25

5.3.1 Key Resources ............................................................................................................. 5-25 SECTION 6: PLAN MAINTENANCE ................................................ 6-2

6.1 PURPOSE OF THE LHMP AND AUTHORITY ......................................................... 6-2

6.1.1 Evaluation ..................................................................................................................... 6-3

6.2 METHOD AND SCHEDULE FOR UPDATING THE PLAN WITHIN FIVE YEARS ...... 6-4

6.2.1 Process ......................................................................................................................... 6-4

6.3 LOCAL ADOPTION ......................................................................................... 6-5

6.4 IMPLEMENTATION THROUGH EXISTING PROGRAMS AND PLANNING MECHANISMS ........................................................................................................... 6-6

6.5 2020 LHMP PAST INTEGRATION EFFORTS ..................................................... 6-7

6.6 CONTINUED PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT .............................................................. 6-7

6.7 POINT OF CONTACT ...................................................................................... 6-8 SECTION 7: REFERENCES ............................................................. 7-2 APPENDIX ..................................................................... Confidential

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Community Survey Flyer .................................................................................................. 2-15 Figure 3-1: Critical Facilities in Fullerton........................................................................................... 3-17 Figure 3-2: Vulnerability Index Themes ............................................................................................ 3-27 Figure 3-3: CDC Vulnerability Index by Census Tract ..................................................................... 3-28 Figure 3-4: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Pollution Burden by Census Tract ............................................ 3-33 Figure 3-5: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Population Characteristics by Census Tract ........................... 3-35 Figure 3-6: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Composite Scores by Census Tract .......................................... 3-35

vii
Figure 3-7: Areas with Access and Functional Needs in Fullerton ................................................ 3-39 Figure 4-1: Dam Inundation Map ......................................................................................................... 4-15 Figure 4-2: FEMA Flood Zones .......................................................................................................... 4-26 Figure 4-3: Drought Monitor Map ....................................................................................................... 4-41 Figure 4-4: Heat Index ....................................................................................................................... 4-42 Figure 4-5: CPUC Fire Threat Map ................................................................................................... 4-45 Figure 4-6: Historical Drought Conditions in Orange County ........................................................ 4-47 Figure 4-7: United States Seasonal Drought Outlook ..................................................................... 4-53 Figure 4-8: Landslide Hazard Zone .................................................................................................. 4-62 Figure 4-9: Deep-Seated Landslide Zones ....................................................................................... 4-65 Figure 4-10: Earthquake Epicenters and Fault Zones ..................................................................... 4-75 Figure 4-11: Traversing Faults in Fullerton ....................................................................................... 4-75 Figure 4-12: Liquefaction Hazard Zone ............................................................................................. 4-81 Figure 4-13: Fire Hazard Severity Zones .......................................................................................... 4-95

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: DMA 2000 CFR Crosswalk ................................................................................................. 2-2

Table 2-2: LHMP Planning Team And Community Lifelines ............................................................. 2-5 Table 2-3: LHMP Planning Team ........................................................................................................... 2-7 Table 2-4: LHMP Planning Team And Focus Group Meeting Summary ......................................... 2-13 Table 2-5: Existing Plans, Studies, Reports, And Other Technical Data/Information ................. 2-17 Table 3-1: City Of Fullerton And Orange County Population And Housing Data .............................3-3 Table 3-2: City Of Fullerton And Orange County Racial And Ethnic Composition ........................ 3-6 Table 3-3: City Of Fullerton And Orange County Educational Attainment ...................................... 3-7 Table 3-4: City Of Fullerton Employment And Income ..................................................................... 3-8 Table 3-5: Fullerton Community Development Types ....................................................................... 3-9 Table 3-6: Community Development Type Intensity/Density Standards ....................................... 3-11 Table 3-7: City Of Fullerton 2021-2029 RHNA Allocation .............................................................. 3-13 Table 3-8: Community Development Projects .................................................................................. 3-14 Table 3-9: City Of Fullerton Critical Facilities .................................................................................. 3-19 Table 3-10: Facilities Of Concern ....................................................................................................... 3-23 Table 3-11: Fullerton Overall Vulnerability Index Scores ................................................................. 3-29 Table 3-12: Calenviroscreen 4.0 Indicators ...................................................................................... 3-33 Table 3-13: Overall CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentiles ...................................................................... 3-37 Table 3-14: Vulnerable Populations And Potential Vulnerability ................................................... 3-39 Table 4-1: Fullerton Hazard Identification .......................................................................................... 4-2 Table 4-2: Hazard Ranking Methodology ............................................................................................ 4-6 Table 4-3: Hazard Rankings ................................................................................................................. 4-7 Table 4-4: DSOD Downstream Hazard Potential Classification Levels ......................................... 4-12 Table 4-5: DSOD Condition Assessment Rating Levels .................................................................. 4-13 Table 4-6: USACE Dam Safety Action Classification System ........................................................ 4-14 Table 4-7: Dams And Reservoirs Within Or Affecting The City Of Fullerton................................. 4-15 Table 4-8: Critical Facilities And Facilities Of Concern Vulnerable To Dam Failure ..................... 4-19 Table 4-9: Flood Zone Definitions ..................................................................................................... 4-26 Table 4-10: Critical Facilities And Facilities Of Concern Vulnerable To Flood ............................... 4-31 Table 4-11: Populations At Risk For Flood ........................................................................................ 4-34 Table 4-12: Drought Severity Classification ................................................................................... 4-40 Table 4-13: Beaufort Wind Scale ........................................................................................................ 4-43 Table 4-14: Orange County Extreme Heat Events .......................................................................... 4-48 Table 4-15: Critical Facilities And Facilities Of Concern Vulnerable To Landslide ....................... 4-70 Table 4-16: Populations At Risk For Landslide ................................................................................. 4-71

viii
Table 4-17: Local Earthquake Faults .................................................................................................. 4-77 Table 4-18: Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale .................................................................................. 4-80 Table 4-19: Approximate Comparison Of Moment Magnitude And Mercalli Intensity Scale ...... 4-81 Table 4-20: Major Earthquake Faults Of Particular Concern ........................................................ 4-83 Table 4-21: Significant Historical Earthquakes In Southern California........................................ 4-84 Table 4-22: Likelihood Of One Or More Earthquakes Occurring In The Next 30 Years In Orange County Region By Fault ..................................................................................................................... 4-86 Table 4-23: Critical Facilities And Facilities Of Concern Vulnerable To Liquefaction ................ 4-88 Table 4-24: Populations At Risk For Liquefaction ........................................................................... 4-91 Table 4-25: Recent Regional Fires ................................................................................................... 4-98 Table 4-26: Major Wildfires In Orange County ................................................................................ 4-98 Table 4-27: Critical Facilities And Facilities Of Concern Vulnerable To Wildfire ........................ 4-103 Table 4-28: Populations At Risk For LRA Fire Hazard Severity Zone ........................................ 4-105 Table 4-29: Active Cleanup Sites ..................................................................................................... 4-114 Table 4-30: Summary Of Declared Disasters Affecting The Planning Area ............................... 4-132 Table 4-31: Risk Assessment Summary Table ............................................................................... 4-135 Table 5-1: Staple/E Review And Selection Criteria ............................................................................ 5-5 Table 5-2: Completed 2020 LHMP Mitigation Actions ..................................................................... 5-7 Table 5-3: Mitigation Action Table ....................................................................................................... 5-9 Table 5-4: City Of Fullerton Capabilities Assessment .................................................................... 5-25

1-2
WHAT’S DIFFERENT ABOUT THE 2026 PLAN?
• Alignment with updated guidance from the 2025 FEMA Local MiƟgaƟon Planning Policy Guide, eﬀecƟve April 2025.
• AddiƟonal consideraƟons included for climate change,
changes in vulnerability due to changes in populaƟon and development, and limited adapƟve capacity and access and funcƟonal needs populaƟons.
• Document organizaƟon and structure updates: outlining the Planning Process as its own chapter, and combining the
previous Hazard Assessment and Threat Assessment
chapters into Chapter 4: Hazards Assessment.
• Review and conﬁrmaƟon of previously idenƟﬁed miƟgaƟon goals.

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The City of Fullerton (City) strives to reduce hazards and improve resilience through capital improvement projects, innovaƟve planning, and emergency management prac Ɵces. The City has developed this 2026 City of Fullerton Hazard Mi ƟgaƟon Plan (LHMP) update in an eﬀort to reduce future loss of life and property damage, resulƟng from natural or human-caused hazards.

Natural and human-caused hazards can cause signi ﬁcant damage to communiƟes, businesses, public infrastructure, and the environment.

The impacts to residents and businesses within communi Ɵes can be immense, and infrastructure damage can result in regional, economic, and public health consequences. Municipal buildings and cri Ɵcal infrastructure are vulnerable to a variety of hazards that can result in damaged structures, loss of power, disrup Ɵon to opera Ɵons and services, contaminated natural resources, and revenue losses. By planning for natural and human-caused hazards, and implemen Ɵng projects that mi Ɵgate risk, ci Ɵes can reduce costly damage and improve reliability of service following a disaster incident.

Previously, the City prepared the 2020 LHMP to implement a hazard miƟgaƟon strategy within the community. This LHMP was acƟve unƟl May 21, 2025. Thus, this 2026 itera Ɵon of the plan serves as a comprehensive hazard miƟgaƟon plan update.

1-3
No community can be protected against all poten Ɵal impacts from natural or human-caused hazards, and hazard events oŌen result in periods of emergency response and recovery before returning to “normal” opera Ɵons. However, communi Ɵes can reduce poten Ɵal impacts by taking acƟons to become more resilient. This LHMP provides a blueprint for the City to reduce threats posed by hazards that may impact people, infrastructure, or opera Ɵons. Proper planning, prior to a natural or human-caused disaster, will allow the City to return to “normal” sooner, with fewer impacts and disrupƟon to the community.

1.1 PLAN PURPOSE
The purpose of this LHMP is to provide City sta ﬀ and City leaders with clear direc Ɵon for hazard miƟgaƟon acƟon planning.

This LHMP iden Ɵﬁes natural and human-caused hazards that threaten City infrastructure, operaƟons and people. This LHMP also provides resources, informa Ɵon, and strategies to reduce these risks.

Hazard miƟgaƟon plays an important role in reducing disaster impacts by idenƟfying eﬀecƟve and feasible acƟons to reduce the risks posed by potenƟal hazards before an occurrence. This plan has been developed and updated to be consistent with current standards and regulaƟons, ensuring the understanding of hazards facing the community re ﬂects the best available informaƟon and present-day condiƟons.

The LHMP does not supersede any internal plans or strategies. Rather, the LHMP enhances the ability of the City to iden Ɵfy, inform, and mi Ɵgate hazard risks unique to Fullerton.

InformaƟon in this LHMP will be used to help guide and coordinate mi ƟgaƟon acƟons and serve as a tool for City decision-makers to speci ﬁcally direct mi ƟgaƟon ac ƟviƟes and resources.

This LHMP incorporates the latest policy guidance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Local MiƟgaƟon Planning Policy Guide, eﬀecƟve April 11, 2025.

1.2 PLAN AUTHORITY

FEDERAL
The federal Robert T. Staﬀord Disaster Relief and Emergency Act (Sta ﬀord Act), as amended by the Disaster Mi ƟgaƟon Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) and supported by various regula Ɵons, directs hazard miƟgaƟon planning ac ƟviƟes, including creaƟon of this plan. The Sta ﬀord Act requires State, local, and tribal governmental enƟƟes that wish to be eligible for federal hazard miƟgaƟon grant funds to submit a hazard mi ƟgaƟon plan, iden Ɵfying the natural and man- made hazards, risks, and vulnerabiliƟes of each jurisdicƟon (United States Code [USC] Title 42, SecƟon 5156[a]). FEMA has promulgated Code of Federal RegulaƟons (CFR) Title 44, Part 201 to carry out the hazard miƟgaƟon planning requirements in the Staﬀord Act. These regulaƟons direct the planning process, plan content, and FEMA approval of hazard miƟgaƟon plans. This LHMP complies with the Sta ﬀord Act and DMA 2000, along with the appropriate sec Ɵons of Title 44 of the CFR, including parts 201, 206 and 322.

1-4
STATE
California Government Code Sec Ɵon 8685.9 (Assembly Bill [AB] 2140) limits the State of California’s share of disaster relief funds paid out to local governments to 75 percent of the funds not paid for by federal disaster relief eﬀorts, unless the jurisdicƟon has adopted a valid hazard mi ƟgaƟon plan consistent with DMA 2000. This LHMP is consistent with current standards and regulaƟons, as outlined by Cal OES. It uses the best available informa Ɵon, and its mi ƟgaƟon ac Ɵons re ﬂect best prac Ɵces and community values. This LHMP meets the requirements of current State and federal guidelines and ensures the City of Fullerton is eligible for all appropriate beneﬁts under State and federal law and pracƟces. This LHMP has been prepared to meet FEMA and Cal OES requirements, thus making the City eligible for funding and technical assistance from State and federal hazard miƟgaƟon programs.

1.3 PLAN ADOPTION
Following FEMA approval of the LHMP , the Fullerton City Council will formally adopt the LHMP .

Copies of the resoluƟon are provided in Appendix A, City of Fullerton AdopƟon ResoluƟon.

1.4 PLAN ORGANIZATION
The LHMP is organized into seven sec Ɵons to re ﬂect the logical progression of ac ƟviƟes undertaken to develop a hazard miƟgaƟon strategy, and includes all relevant documentaƟon required to meet the necessary criteria for FEMA approval. Each sec Ɵon is described brie ﬂy below.

SecƟon 1.0: IntroducƟon and Purpose describes the background and purpose of the LHMP , as well as the authority established for its development.

SecƟon 2.0: Planning Process describes the LHMP planning process, as well as the mee Ɵngs and outreach ac ƟviƟes undertaken to engage City o ﬃcials and sta ﬀ, stakeholders, and members of the public.

SecƟon 3.0: Community Pro ﬁle provides the history, geography, demographics, and socioeconomics of the City of Fullerton, including land use and development trends. This secƟon also evaluates social vulnerability through a variety of environmental jus Ɵce indices and idenƟﬁes applicability to the planning area.

SecƟon 4.0: Hazards Assessment iden Ɵﬁes and pro ﬁles the natural and human-caused hazards aﬀecƟng the City, idenƟﬁes the vulnerability and risk associated with each hazard, and provides a vulnerability assessment to criƟcal faciliƟes in relaƟon to each of those hazards.

SecƟon 5.0: Mi ƟgaƟon Strategy iden Ɵﬁes the mi ƟgaƟon strategy and ac Ɵons to reduce potenƟal risks to the City’s criƟcal faciliƟes, residents, and business owners and assesses the City’s capabiliƟes to implement and achieve the objecƟves of the miƟgaƟon acƟons.

SecƟon 6.0: Plan Maintenance and Capabili Ɵes discusses implementa Ɵon of the Plan, including the process to monitor, evaluate, update, and maintain the LHMP , and iden Ɵﬁes opportuniƟes for conƟnued public involvement.

SecƟon 7.0: References idenƟﬁes the various resources uƟlized throughout the LHMP .

1-5

1.5 MITIGATION GOALS
The City has adopted the following goals for reducing disaster risk:

1. Reduce and isolate threats to public safety and property in Fullerton.

2. Maintain government operaƟons and provisions of essenƟal services to residents and stakeholders during and aŌer a hazard event.

3. Protect the natural environment through responsible stewardship of air, water, and open spaces in Fullerton.

4. Promote resiliency and climate ac Ɵon in Fullerton through resilient infrastructure, responsive governance, and vibrant civic parƟcipaƟon.

5. Partner with surrounding local, regional, state, and federal jurisdic Ɵons in hazard miƟgaƟon eﬀorts.

6. Ensure hazard mi ƟgaƟon planning re ﬂects the needs of the whole community, including individuals with limited adapƟve capacity and access and funcƟonal needs.

1.6 CHANGES IN HAZARD MITIGATION PRIORITIES
The LHMP Planning Team found that the overall hazard mi ƟgaƟon goals from the previous plan remained accurate for current planning purposes, with one addi Ɵonal goal added to address inclusive planning for the whole community and individuals with access and funcƟonal needs.

All hazards from the previous itera Ɵon of the LHMP were con Ɵnued into this LHMP update.

Some hazards were reorganized or combined for clarity and some hazards were expanded or renamed to re ﬂect condiƟons more accurately for the City of Fullerton. The current LHMP incorporates changes and updates in hazard mi ƟgaƟon risk, vulnerability and priori Ɵes to reﬂect current trends and challenges.

Changes to the LHMP planning process were driven largely by the 2025 FEMA policy update.

This LHMP update relied on the input of a cross sec Ɵon of representaƟves who parƟcipated on the LHMP Planning Team, including representa Ɵves from internal City departments and external stakeholders (neighboring jurisdicƟons, nonproﬁts/NGOs, public safety agencies, and others). This diverse representaƟon on the LHMP Planning Team produced miƟgaƟon acƟons that consider a variety of perspecƟves across the planning area.

The LHMP Planning Team incorporated expanded considera Ɵons re ﬂecƟng evolving condiƟons across the planning area. These included the growing impacts of climate change; shiŌs in vulnerability stemming from popula Ɵon growth, land use changes, and urban development; and the recogni Ɵon of limited adap Ɵve capacity among access and func Ɵonal needs populaƟons. These factors informed the priori ƟzaƟon of mi ƟgaƟon acƟons to ensure forward-looking strategies that address emerging risks and resilience.

MiƟgaƟon acƟons from the 2020 LHMP are disc ussed and reviewed in Sec Ɵon 5. Mi ƟgaƟon acƟons from the 2020 LHMP were idenƟﬁed as either completed or no longer relevant to the LHMP update. New mi ƟgaƟon ac Ɵons are also highlighted in Sec Ɵon 5 and are generally organized by hazard type.

1-6

2-2
WHAT’S DIFFERENT ABOUT THE 2026 PLAN?
• Community outreach included a wider range of stakeholders to consider the whole community, including individuals with access and funcƟonal needs.
• Public outreach eﬀorts were increased through pop-up
events, workshops, and engagement during standing City
meeƟngs and events.
• Virtual meeƟngs were added to increase engagement.

SECTION 2: PLANNING PROCESS
This sec Ɵon describes each stage of the planning process used to develop the LHMP . This LHMP follows a prescribed series of planning steps which includes organizing re sources, assessing risk, developing the miƟgaƟon strategy, draŌing the plan, reviewing/revising the plan, and adopƟng and submiƫng the plan for approval. Each step is further described in this secƟon.

Hazard miƟgaƟon planning in the United States is guided by statutory regulaƟons described in the Disaster Mi ƟgaƟon Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) and implemented through Title 44 Code of Federal RegulaƟons (CFR) Parts 201 and 206. FEMA hazard mi ƟgaƟon plan guidelines outline a four-step planning process for the development and approval of hazard miƟgaƟon plans. Table 2-1: DMA 2000 CFR Crosswalk lists the speciﬁc CFR excerpts that contain the requirements for approval and idenƟﬁes the applicable secƟon of this LHMP .

TABLE 2-1: DMA 2000 CFR CROSSWALK
DMA 2000 (44 CFR 201.6) 2026 LHMP PLAN SECTION
(1) Organize Resources SecƟon 2
201.6(c)(1) Organize to prepare the plan
201.6(b)(1) Involve the public
201.6(b)(2) and (3) Coordinate with other agencies
(2) Assess Risks SecƟon 4
201.6(c)(2)(i) Assess the hazard
201.6(c)(2)(ii) and (iii) Assess the problem
(3) Develop the MiƟgaƟon Plan SecƟon 5
201.6(c)(3)(i) Set goals
201.6(c)(3)(ii) Review possible acƟviƟes
(acƟons)
201.6(c)(3)(iii) Dra Ō an acƟon plan
(4) Plan Maintenance SecƟon 6
201.6(c)(5) Adopt the plan
201.6(c)(4) Implement, evaluate, and revise

2-3

2.1 ORGANIZING RESOURCES
The ﬁrst step in the planning process involved organizaƟon of resources, including idenƟfying the LHMP Project Management Team, convening the LHMP Planning Team, and reviewing background materials and documents.

2.1.1 LHMP PROJECT MANAGEMENT TEAM
The LHMP Project Management Team was responsible for day-to-day coordina Ɵon of the LHMP work program, including forming and assembling the LHMP Planning Team; scheduling meeƟngs; preparing, reviewing, and dissemina Ɵng mee Ɵng materials; coordina Ɵng, scheduling, and par ƟcipaƟng in community engagement ac ƟviƟes and mee Ɵngs; and coordinaƟng document reviews. The LHMP Project Management Team was led by Kris Ɵ HofsteƩer BaƟste, Emergency Manager with the Fullerton Fire Department.

The LHMP Project Management Team worked with the LHMP Consultant Team throughout the development of the LHMP . The LHMP Consultant Team consisted of hazard miƟgaƟon and planning professionals from Michael Baker InternaƟonal. The LHMP Consultant Team provided guidance and support to the City through facilitaƟon of the planning process, data collecƟon, community engagement, and meeƟng materials and document development.

2.1.2 LHMP PLANNING TEAM
The LHMP Project Management Team worked with the LHMP Consultant Team to iden Ɵfy stakeholders to parƟcipate in the LHMP . Stakeholders included representaƟves from internal City departments, along with several external en ƟƟes including neighboring jurisdic Ɵons, uƟliƟes, professional organizaƟons, community-based organizaƟons, schools/academia, and other non-proﬁts/NGOs. The LHMP Project Management team carefully selected stakeholders to represent a cross secƟon of relevant community lifelines. Community lifelines are de ﬁned by FEMA as a fundamental service in the community that, when stabilized, enable all other aspects of society. When disrupted, decisive intervenƟon (e.g., rapid service re-establishment or employment of con Ɵngency response solu Ɵons) is required. Community lifelines are categorized as follows:
• Safety and Security: Law Enforcement/Secu rity, Fire Service, Search and Rescue, Government Service, Community Safety.
• Food, HydraƟon, Shelter: Food, HydraƟon, Shelter, Agriculture. • Health and Medical: Medical Care, Public Health, PaƟent Movement, Medical Supply Chain, Fatality Management.
• Energy: Power Grid, Fuel.
• CommunicaƟons: Infrastructure, Responder Communica Ɵo n s , A l e r t s W a r n i n g s a n d Messages, Finance, 911 and Dispatch.
• TransportaƟon: Highway/Roadway/Motor Vehicle, Mass Transit, Railway, Avia Ɵon, MariƟme.
• Hazardous Materials: Facili Ɵes, HAZMAT, Pollutants, Contaminants. Water Systems:

Potable Water Infrastructure, Wastewater Management.

2-4

60 Stakeholders
3 Outreach Events
7 Stakeholder
MeeƟngs
14 Day Public
Comment
Period
280+
Survey Responses
Received
The LHMP public outreach process was speciﬁcally
designed to maximize parƟcipaƟon and input from all
community members, including individuals with access
and funcƟonal needs.

PLANNING PROCESS

AT A GLANCE

2-5
Stakeholders were noƟﬁed via email, advising the City’s eﬀorts to prepare an updated LHMP and requesƟng their involvement in preparaƟon of the Plan, including an invitaƟon to aƩend the LHMP Planning Team meeƟngs. The list of stakeholders included in this noƟﬁcaƟon eﬀort are summarized in Table 2-2: LHMP Planning Team and Community Lifelines below.

TABLE 2-2: LHMP PLANNING TEAM AND COMMUNITY LIFELINES

AGENCY OR UTILITY NAME COMMUNITY LIFELINE
Local and Regional Agencies Involved in Hazard MiƟgaƟon AcƟviƟes City of Fullerton Government Service
Orange County Sheriﬀ’s Department (OCSD) –
Emergency Management Division Government Service
CAL TRANS TransportaƟon
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Communica Ɵons
Fullerton Airport TransportaƟon
Water Emergency Response OrganizaƟon of
Orange County (WEROC)
Government Service; Food, HydraƟon,
Shelter; Water Systems
Orange County SanitaƟon District (OC San) Government Service; Health and Medical Orange County TransportaƟon Authority
(OCTA) TransportaƟon
Orange County Water District (OCWD) Food, HydraƟon, Shelter; Water Systems Agencies with Authority to Regulate Development
City of Fullerton Government Service
Agencies of Neighboring CommuniƟes
City of Anaheim Government Service
City of Brea Government Service
City of Buena Park Government Service
City of PlacenƟa Government Service
City of La Habra Government Service
City of La Mirada Government Service
RepresentaƟves of Business, Academia, and other Private OrganizaƟons Southern California Edison (SoCal Edison) Energy; Communica Ɵons Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas) Energy
California State University, Fullerton Government Service; Safety and Security Fullerton College Government Service; Safety and Security Fullerton Joint Union High School District Government Service; Safety and Security Fullerton School District Government Service; Safety and Security Hope InternaƟonal University Safety and Security
Marshall B. Ketchum University Safety and Security
Rosary Academy Safety and Security
BNSF Railway TransportaƟon
Amtrak Transporta Ɵon
North Orange County Chamber of Commerce CommunicaƟons
St. Jude Medical Center Health and Medical
RepresentaƟves of Nonproﬁt OrganizaƟons/Community Based OrganizaƟons HOPE Center* Safety and Security; Food, HydraƟon,
Shelter
Braille InsƟtute Safety and Security

2-6

AGENCY OR UTILITY NAME COMMUNITY LIFELINE
Dale McIntosh Center* Safety and Security; Food, HydraƟon, Shelter
Stables V & H Food, HydraƟon, Shelter
Tara’s Chance Food, Hydra Ɵon, Shelter
Fullerton Boys and Girls Club* Safety and Security; Food, HydraƟon, Shelter
Solidarity* Safety and Security; Food, HydraƟon,
Shelter
Richman Center for Healthy Neighbors *
(CSUF)
Safety and Security; Food, HydraƟon,
Shelter
Pathways of Hope* Safety and Security; Food, HydraƟon,
Shelter
OC United* Safety and Security; Food, HydraƟon,
Shelter
Olive Community Services* Safety and Security; Food, HydraƟon, Shelter
Fullerton CollaboraƟve* Safety and Security; Food, HydraƟon, Shelter
American Red Cross* Safety and Security; Food, HydraƟon, Shelter; Health and Medical
YMCA* Safety and Security; Food, HydraƟon,
Shelter
*Indicates an LHMP Planning Team member that provides services to those with access and funcƟonal needs or other “high-risk” populaƟons within the planning area.

In addiƟon to external stakeholders, the LHMP Planning Team included City of Fullerton staﬀ members, represenƟng a diverse cross-secƟon of departments and responsibiliƟes. Members of the LHMP Planning Team represented the following City departments and divisions:
• Fire Department
• Police Department
• Public Works Department
• Community and Economic Development Department
• Parks and RecreaƟon Department
• City Manager’s Oﬃce
• City Clerk's Oﬃce
The LHMP Planning Team worked together to ensure the success of the planning process and is responsible for its implementa Ɵon and future maintenance. The commi Ʃee’s key responsibiliƟes included:
• ParƟcipaƟon in LHMP Planning Team meeƟngs
• CollecƟon of valuable local informaƟon and other requested data • Decision on plan process and content
• Development and prioriƟzaƟon of miƟgaƟon acƟons for the LHMP • Review and comment on plan draŌs

2-7
• CoordinaƟon and involvement in the public engagement process Table 2-3: LHMP Planning Team idenƟﬁes both LHMP Project Management Team and LHMP Planning Team members, along with their roles in plan development.

TABLE 2-3: LHMP PLANNING TEAM

NAME TITLE/ROLE ORGANIZATION LHMP PLANNING TEAM ROLE
LHMP Project Management Team
KrisƟ
HofsteƩer
BaƟste
Emergency
Manager
Fullerton Fire
Department
City Project Manager – OrganizaƟon
of LHMP Planning Team and
meeƟngs, development of and
parƟcipaƟon in community
outreach, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon,
capabiliƟes assessment, miƟgaƟon
acƟons and prioriƟzaƟon, plan
coordinaƟon and review.

Adam Loeser Fire Chief Fullerton Fire
Department
City Project Director - OrganizaƟon
of LHMP Planning Team and
meeƟngs, development of and
parƟcipaƟon in community
outreach, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon,
capabiliƟes assessment, miƟgaƟon
acƟons and prioriƟzaƟon, plan
coordinaƟon and review.

LHMP Planning Team
Stephen Bise Director
Fullerton
Public Works
Department
DraŌ LHMP review.

John Miller Division Chief Fullerton Fire
Department
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, draŌ miƟgaƟon
acƟon review, draŌ LHMP review.

Jose Arana
Captain -
OperaƟons
Division
Commander
Fullerton Fire
Department
DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review, draŌ
LHMP review.

Jon FugiƩ Deputy Chief Fullerton Fire
Department
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, draŌ miƟgaƟon
acƟon review.

Michael
Meacham Deputy Chief Fullerton Fire
Department
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, draŌ miƟgaƟon
acƟon review.

Pedram
Gharah
Captain -
Services Division
Commander
Fullerton Police
Department
Risk assessment/ vulnerability
discussion, draŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon
review, draŌ LHMP review.

2-8

NAME TITLE/ROLE ORGANIZATION LHMP PLANNING TEAM ROLE
Chris Schafer Planning
Manager
Fullerton
Community
and Economic
Development
Department
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, draŌ miƟgaƟon
acƟon review, draŌ LHMP review.

Jared
Brekenfeld
Building
Inspector
Fullerton
Community
and Economic
Development
Department
Risk assessment/ vulnerability
discussion, draŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon
review.

Richard
Armendariz
Assistant
Director
Fullerton
Public Works
Department
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, risk assessment/
vulnerability discussion, draŌ
miƟgaƟon acƟon review, draŌ LHMP
review.

ChrisƟan
Hernandez
Parks and
RecreaƟon
Manager
Fullerton Parks
and RecreaƟon
Department
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, risk assessment/
vulnerability discussion, draŌ
miƟgaƟon acƟon review, draŌ LHMP
review.

Eddie
Manfro
Interim City
Manager/Human
Resources
Director
Fullerton City
Manager's
Oﬃce
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, draŌ miƟgaƟon
acƟon review.

Daisy Perez Assistant City
Manager
Fullerton City
Manager's
Oﬃce
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon
Veronica
Schilling
Emergency
Preparedness
Coordinator
St. Jude
Medical Center
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, risk assessment/
vulnerability discussion, draŌ
miƟgaƟon acƟon review, draŌ LHMP
review.

Jordan
Garcia
ExecuƟve
Director YMCA
Risk assessment/ vulnerability
discussion, draŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon
review, draŌ LHMP review.

Andrew W.

Gregson
President and
CEO
North Orange
County
Chamber of
Commerce
DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

BreƩ
Ackerman
ExecuƟve
Director
Fullerton Boys
and Girls Club
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, risk assessment/
vulnerability discussion, draŌ
miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

2-9

NAME TITLE/ROLE ORGANIZATION LHMP PLANNING TEAM ROLE
Bethany
Anderson
ExecuƟve
Director Solidarity Dra Ō miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Iris Aguilar Director
Richman
Center for
Healthy
Neighbors
(CSUF)
DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review, draŌ
LHMP Review.

James
Kennedy
Community
Program
Manager
Pathways of
Hope DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Jay Williams ExecuƟve
Director OC United DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Zainab
Hussaini
Program
Manager
Olive
Community
Services
DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Debra Stout ExecuƟve
Director
Fullerton
CollaboraƟve DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Janine
Wilmoth
Emergency
Manager
City of
Anaheim
Risk assessment/ vulnerability
discussion, draŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon
review, draŌ LHMP review.

Lisa
Keyworth
Emergency
Preparedness
Coordinator
City of Brea
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, risk assessment/
vulnerability discussion, draŌ
miƟgaƟon acƟon review, draŌ LHMP
review.

Lance
Charnes
Emergency
Services
Coordinator
City of Buena
Park
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, draŌ miƟgaƟon
acƟon review, draŌ LHMP review.

Patrick
Powers
Emergency and
Health Services
Manager
City of
PlacenƟa
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, draŌ LHMP
review.

Jennifer
Duong
Emergency
Services
Coordinator
City of La
Habra
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, draŌ miƟgaƟon
acƟon review, draŌ LHMP review.

Eric
Villagracia Project Manager City of La
Mirada
Risk assessment/ vulnerability
discussion, draŌ LHMP review.

Eric Dalton
Emergency
Management &
ConƟnuity
Coordinator
California State
University,
Fullerton
DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review, draŌ
LHMP review.

Margie
Jimenez
Admin Support
Assistant – CSUF
PD
California State
University,
Fullerton
DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review, draŌ
LHMP review.

2-10

NAME TITLE/ROLE ORGANIZATION LHMP PLANNING TEAM ROLE
John Krok Director of
Campus Safety
Fullerton
College
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, draŌ LHMP
review.

Karl Zener
Assistant
Superintendent,
AdministraƟve
Services
Fullerton Joint
Union High
School District
DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Helene
Morris
Director of
AdministraƟve
Services
Fullerton
School District DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

JusƟn Tune Director of
Campus Safety
Hope
InternaƟonal
University
DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Jason
Houston
Director of
Campus Safety
Marshall B.

Ketchum
University
DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Amanda
Hurtado
ExecuƟve
AdministraƟve
Assistant & HR
Coordinator
Rosary
Academy DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Michelle
Anderson
Director of
Emergency
Management
Orange County
Emergency
Management
Division (within
OCSD)
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, risk assessment/
vulnerability discussion, draŌ LHMP
review.

Gina Ayala Public Aﬀairs
Director
Orange County
Water District DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Nick
Boonmag
Security and
Emergency
Preparedness
Orange County
TransportaƟon
Authority
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, risk assessment/
vulnerability discussion, draŌ LHMP
review.

MaƩ Ankley
Dept. Manager
Sec. and
Emergency
Preparedness
Orange County
TransportaƟon
Authority
DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Krystal
Aleman
Security &
Emergency
Planning
Specialist
Orange County
SanitaƟon
District
Risk assessment/ vulnerability
discussion, draŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon
review, draŌ LHMP review.

Tony
Cardenas
Government
RelaƟons
Manager
Southern
California
Edison (SoCal
Edison)
DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Blake Perez Public Aﬀairs
Manager
Southern
California Gas
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon

2-11

NAME TITLE/ROLE ORGANIZATION LHMP PLANNING TEAM ROLE
Company
(SoCal Gas)
and prioriƟzaƟon, risk assessment/
vulnerability discussion, draŌ
miƟgaƟon acƟon review, draŌ LHMP
review.

Gabriela
Landeros
WEROC
Specialist WEROC
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, risk assessment/
vulnerability discussion, draŌ
miƟgaƟon acƟon review, draŌ LHMP
review.

Vicki Osborn
Director of
Emergency
Management
WEROC Risk assessment/ vulnerability
discussion, draŌ LHMP review.

Bill Maines
California
Division Signal
Manager
BNSF DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Shawn Steele
Amtrak
Emergency
Manager
Amtrak/BNSF
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, draŌ LHMP
review.

Brendan
O'Reilly Airport Manager Fullerton
Airport
DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review, draŌ
LHMP review.

Jeremy
Buraglia
Realty Specialist,
Civil Works
Branch
US Army Corps
of Engineers
(USACE)
DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Carlos
Camacho
ConstrucƟon
Engineer
US Army Corps
of Engineers
(USACE)
DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

John Bybee Supervisor, EOC
Coordinator CAL TRANS Risk assessment/ vulnerability
discussion, draŌ LHMP review.

Rex
McConnell
Area
Superintendent CAL TRANS DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Arturo
Herrera
District
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
CAL TRANS Dra Ō miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Sarah Bernal OperaƟons
Manager HOPE Center DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

Ana Downs Interim Regional
Director Braille InsƟtute Dra Ō miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

BreeAnna
Adner
Systems Change
Advocate
Dale McIntosh
Center
Project goals and objecƟves
idenƟﬁcaƟon, hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon
and prioriƟzaƟon, risk assessment/
vulnerability discussion, draŌ
miƟgaƟon acƟon review, draŌ LHMP
review.

2-12

NAME TITLE/ROLE ORGANIZATION LHMP PLANNING TEAM ROLE
Versa Harris Owner &
Caretaker Stables V & H Dra Ō miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

MaƩ Howell ExecuƟve
Director Tara's Chance DraŌ miƟgaƟon acƟon review.

A s e r i e s o f LH M P P l a n n i n g T e am m e eƟngs and smaller focus group mee Ɵngs were hosted during the LHMP update process. The LHMP Planning Team Mee Ɵng #1 was hosted during August 2025 to introduce the LHMP , outline the planning process, and discuss priority natural hazards for the plan. Stakeholders on the LHMP Planning Team were then invited to parƟcipate in focus group meeƟngs, hosted from September 2025 to November 2025. Focus groups were either held with a single stakeh older or a group of stakeholders with similar responsibiliƟes or interests. The meeƟng series was concluded with the LHMP Planning Team MeeƟng #2, hosted on December 2, 2025. The purpose of the conclusion mee Ɵng was to present vulnerability/risk assessment ﬁndings and present mi ƟgaƟon ac Ɵons. The mee Ɵng series is summarized below in Table 2-4: LHMP Planning Team and Focus Group Meeting Summary.

MeeƟngs were held both in-person and virtually via Microso Ō Teams, to accommodate stakeholders near the City, distributed throughout the region, and remote staﬀ serving on the LHMP Consultant team. Mee Ɵng materials, including PowerPoint presenta Ɵons, sign-in sheets, agendas, notes, and other relevant handouts, are provided in Appendix B, LHMP Planning Team DocumentaƟon.

2.1.3 PUBLIC OUTREACH
A public outreach and engagement strategy was developed to maximize public involvement in the LHMP planning process. The LHMP public outreach strategy included a dedicated webpage, community survey, community outreach events and public review draŌ distribuƟon, as described below; refer to Appendix B, LHMP Planning Team Documenta Ɵon. The LHMP public outreach process was speciﬁcally designed to maximize parƟcipaƟon and input from all community members, including underserved groups and individuals with access and funcƟonal needs.

WEBPAGE
A dedicated webpage was developed on the City’s website for the LHMP planning process.

The webpage provided informaƟon on the LHMP , and how the public can get involved in the planning process. Contact informa Ɵon was included for comments or ques Ɵons via email. A link to complete the community survey was posted to encourage par ƟcipaƟon. The website was updated throughout the planning process and provided noƟﬁcaƟons and access to LHMP materials. The dra Ō LHMP was also made available for public review on this webpage, available here: hƩps://www.cityoﬀullerton.com/government/departments/ﬁre.

2-13
TABLE 2-4: LHMP PLANNING TEAM AND FOCUS GROUP MEETING SUMMARY

DATE/TIME MEETING ATTENDEES DISCUSSION ITEMS
July 15, 2025
1:00pm –
2:00pm
LHMP
Kickoﬀ
MeeƟng
LHMP Planning
Team (All)
• IntroducƟon and
Roles/ResponsibiliƟes
• Project Overview, ObjecƟves, and
Schedule
• LHMP Stakeholder CommiƩee
• Proposed Hazard List
• Community Outreach
• Data CollecƟon and Background
InformaƟon
August 27,
2025
2:00pm –
4:00pm
LHMP
Stakeholder
MeeƟng #1
LHMP
Stakeholder
CommiƩee (All)
• Purpose and Requirements of the
LHMP
• LHMP Stakeholder ExpectaƟons
• LHMP Planning Process
• Planning for the Whole Community
• Hazard IdenƟﬁcaƟon and
PrioriƟzaƟon
• Data Needs and CapabiliƟes
September 3,
2025
10:30am –
12:00am
LHMP
Focus
Group
MeeƟng #1
Internal Staﬀ
Members
• Risk/Vulnerability Discussion
• MiƟgaƟon AcƟon Discussion
November 3,
2025
2:00pm –
3:00pm
LHMP
Focus
Group
MeeƟng #2
RepresentaƟves
From Nonproﬁt
OrganizaƟons,
Non-
Governmental
OrganizaƟons
(NGOs), And
Academia
• Risk/Vulnerability Discussion
• MiƟgaƟon AcƟon Discussion
November 4,
2025
1:00pm –
2:00pm
LHMP
Focus
Group
MeeƟng #3
RepresentaƟves
From Emergency
Management
And Public
Safety Agencies
• Risk/Vulnerability Discussion
• MiƟgaƟon AcƟon Discussion
November 4,
2025
2:00pm –
3:00pm
LHMP
Focus
Group
MeeƟng #4
RepresentaƟves
From UƟlity And
TransportaƟon
Sectors, And
Orange County
Departments
• Risk/Vulnerability Discussion
• MiƟgaƟon AcƟon Discussion
December 2,
2025
3:00pm –
4:00pm
LHMP
Stakeholder
MeeƟng #2
LHMP
Stakeholder
CommiƩee (All)
• DraŌ MiƟgaƟon AcƟon Review
• DraŌ LHMP Review
• Community Outreach Summary

2-14
Virtual outreach on the City’s website posted for the en Ɵrety of the LHMP development process allowed for maximum audience reach, including individuals with access and funcƟonal needs. TradiƟonally, virtual outreach has the abilit y to reach community members who may be unable to aƩend in-person meeƟngs or hearings. Individuals can access all informa Ɵon at their own convenience and have the ability to communicate directly with City staﬀ regarding quesƟons or comments.

COMMUNITY SURVEY
A community survey was developed to obtain input from the community about various hazard miƟgaƟon topics. In addi Ɵon to basic demographic informa Ɵon (e.g., zip code and age), the survey asked residents to idenƟfy speciﬁc safety concerns, including idenƟfying what hazards they felt were most likely to impact their neighborhood or property. Par Ɵcipants were also asked what acƟons they had taken to be more resistant to hazards, and preferences for future communicaƟon methods from the City. A survey link was posted on the LHMP webpage and sent to all City sta ﬀ, the City’s local newspaper, Fullerton Buzz, and numerous social media outlets. A promo Ɵonal video was posted to social media outlets promo Ɵng the LHMP community survey. A QR code was also distributed on a printed handout at the Boots Bash, Puptoberfest, OktoBOOfest, and Senior Dance outreach events (below). Members of the LHMP Planning Team also distributed the survey link to colleagues and cons Ɵtuents within their jurisdicƟon.

In addiƟon to these eﬀorts, the community survey was also adverƟsed at the following events:

Emergency Manager Kris Ɵ HofsteƩer-BaƟste adverƟsed the survey at a City sta ﬀ “Lunch & Learn” session; CERT volunteers distributed the su rvey at a City Farmer’s Market event; City staﬀ leŌ survey handouts at City Hall and the City Community Center.

The survey was opened on August 4, 2025, an d closed on December 18, 2025. A total of 290 responses were received, including 286 in Englis h, three in Spanish and one in Korean. Input received was similar with feedback received in-person during the Boots Bash, Puptoberfest, and Senior Dance pop-up events, as outlin ed below. Survey respondents reported experiencing power outage/uƟlity failure, heavy rain, severe winds and extreme heat with the most frequency within the City of Fullerton. Correspondingly, survey respondents also reported high levels of concern for power outage and extreme heat in the future. Wildﬁre and urban ﬁre reported low incidents of previous occurrences, but survey respondents reported high level of concern for future incidents. Most survey respondents reported themselves to be “somewhat prepared” for future natural hazards or disasters, and reported acƟons such as anchoring furniture, installing smoke detector s, maintaining emergency preparedness kits, and drought/wildﬁre resistant landscaping. RecommendaƟons for miƟgaƟon acƟons included landscaping and open space maintenance, community awareness and educa Ɵon, and infrastructure improvements.

Survey input directly in ﬂuenced the ﬁnal hazard rankings, provided in Sec Ɵon 4.0, Hazard Assessment. Further details received allow the City to be Ʃer target future outreach and engagement ac ƟviƟes regarding the LHMP . The survey speci ﬁcally provides outreach to individuals with access and func Ɵonal needs who may not have the capacity or ability to

2-15
aƩend in-person outreach events or hearings. A detailed community outreach summary is included in Appendix B, LHMP Planning Team DocumentaƟon.

FIGURE 2-1: COMMUNITY SURVEY FL YER

POP-UP COMMUNITY OUTREACH
The City of Fullerton hosted three interactive pop-up booths focused on LHMP outreach and content from September 2025 to December 2025. The intent of these outreach events was to use the “Whole Community” approach and meet stakeholders and constituents at a convenient location during a regularly scheduled and free event. Descriptions and outreach pictures for each community outreach event have been outlined below. In addition to these events, LHMP community survey flyers were also distributed during Fullerton’s OktoBOOfest event, as Michael Baker attended the event to host a booth for the ongoing Open Space and Environmental Justice Element updates.

Fullerton Boots Bash Pop-Up Booth
The first community outreach event was hosted at the City of Fullerton’s Boots Bash event on Saturday, September 20, 2025, from 5:00pm – 7:00pm . In coordination with City staff, the consultant team set up a pop-up booth at the Ci ty’s first annual Boots Bash event to receive community input on the LHMP. Participants had the opportunity to vote on high priority hazards and review informational boards on the LHMP update. Flyers advertising the community survey along with comment cards were also provided. Despite the warm weather, over 70 LHMP survey flyers were distributed and approximately 20-25 individuals stopped by the booth to discuss the LHMP update.

Fullerton Puptoberfest Pop-Up Booth
The second community outreach event was hosted at the City of Fullerton’s Puptoberfest event on Saturday, October 11, 2025, from 12:00pm – 4:00pm. In coordination with City staff, the consultant team set up a pop-up booth at the City’s annual Puptoberfest event to receive

2-16
community input on the LHMP. Participants had
the opportunity to identify areas within the City
that frequently experience flooding, wildfire, or
other natural hazards. Participants also
documented experiences with natural hazards
within the City, along with comments for
consideration on the LHMP. To engage with
children at Puptoberfest, copies of the State
H a z a r d M i t i g a t i o n P l a n ( S H M P ) c o l o r i n g b o o k and coloring supplies were available. The pop-up
booth was strategically located next to the City’s
CERT booth, where participants could receive
further information about emergency
preparedness and pet safety. The Puptoberfest
event was very well attended, allowing the
consultant team to gather input from and
distribute LHMP survey flyers to over 250
members of the community. Participants at the
pop-up booth included those who reside in
Fullerton or frequently visit, and hazard
prioritization voting was accessible for
participants of all ages.

Fullerton Senior Dance Pop-Up Booth
The final community outreach event was hosted at the City of Fullerton’s weekly Senior Dance event on Tuesday, December 2, 2025, from 4:00pm – 7:00pm. In coordination with City staff, the consultant team set-up a pop-up booth at the City’s weekly Senior Dance, hosted at the Community Center to receive input on the LHMP. Participants had the opportunity to provide experience with previous natural disasters within the City, along with comments for consideration in the LHMP. The consultant te am had the opportunity to discuss the LHMP with every attendee at the senior dance, approximately 50 individuals. This also provided an opportunity to engage with individuals who may have access or functional needs, and recognized need additional outreach and support in the case of an emergency.

Results from these outreach events, along with the board illustrations, are documented in Appendix B, LHMP Planning Team Documentation . Feedback was generally consistent with the results from the community survey, with top hazards of concern remaining the same amongst all pop-up events. City staff were ava ilable to answer questions from the public regarding hazard mitigation and resilience related to the City.

In addiƟon to the acƟviƟes and informaƟonal boards, staﬀ passed out informaƟonal postcards describing the LHMP Update process containing the Community Survey QR Code to provide them with the opportunity to give addiƟonal input. An illustraƟon of this handout is included above as Figure 2-1: Community Survey Flyer.

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT LHMP
A draŌ of the LHMP was made available on the LHMP webpage for the public to review and comment for a two-week period No ƟﬁcaƟon of the dra Ō LHMP availability for review and At the Fullerton Puptoberfest
Pop-Up Booth, parƟcipants
idenƟﬁed areas suscepƟble
to natural hazards within the
City and provided feedback
via comment cards.

2-17
comment was distributed via the City’s website and email listservs. No comments were received on the draŌ LHMP . DocumentaƟon of this process is included in Appendix B, LHMP Planning Team DocumentaƟon.

2.1.4 REVIEW AND INCORPORATE EXISTING INFORMATION
The LHMP Planning Team referenced a variety of plans, studies, data, and technical reports available from local, State, and federal sources to prepare the LHMP update. Primary sources were reviewed and incorporated as part of the LHMP planning process, and are listed in Table 2-5: Existing Plans, Studies, Reports, and Other Technical Data/Information. A complete list of references is included in SecƟon 7.0, References.

TABLE 2-5: EXISTING PLANS, STUDIES, REPORTS, AND OTHER TECHNICAL

DATA/INFORMATION

EXISTING PLANS, STUDIES, REPORTS PLANNING PROCESS/AREA OF DOCUMENT

INCLUSION
2020 City of Fullerton Local Hazard
MiƟgaƟon Plan
MulƟple Plan Elements; Hazard Proﬁles
2012 City of Fullerton General Plan MulƟple Plan Elements 2024 City of Fullerton Emergency
OperaƟons Plan
MulƟple Plan Elements
2025 City of Fullerton Capital Improvement
Program
MulƟple Plan Elements; MiƟgaƟon Strategy
2020 City of Fullerton Safety Element Mul Ɵple Plan Elements 2025 City of Fullerton Water Master Plan Hazard Proﬁles 2020 City of Fullerton Urban Water
Management Plan
Hazard Proﬁles
2020 City of Fullerton Water Shortage
ConƟngency Plan
Hazard Proﬁles
2021-2029 City of Fullerton Housing
Element
MulƟple Plan Elements
NFIP Regulatory Flood Mapping Products Hazard Proﬁles

2.2 ASSESS RISKS
In accordance with FEMA requirements, the LHMP Planning Team iden Ɵﬁed and priori Ɵzed the hazards aﬀecƟng the City and assessed vulnerability from those hazards. Results from this phase of the LHMP planning process aided subsequent idenƟﬁcaƟon of appropriate miƟgaƟon acƟons to reduce risk from these hazards; refer to SecƟon 5.0, MiƟgaƟon Strategy.

2.2.1 IDENTIFY /PROFILE HAZARDS
Based on a review of past hazards, as well as a review of exis Ɵng plans, reports, and other technical studies, data, and informaƟon, the LHMP Planning Team determined which speciﬁc hazards could aﬀect the City. Content for each hazard proﬁle is provided in SecƟon 4.0, Hazard Assessment.

2-18

2.2.2 ASSESS VULNERABILITIES
Hazard pro ﬁling exposes the unique characteris Ɵcs of individual hazards and begins the process of determining which areas within the City are vulnerable to speci ﬁc hazards. The vulnerability assessment includes input from th e LHMP Planning Team and a GIS overlaying method to map hazard risk assessments. Using these methodologies, cri Ɵcal facili Ɵes impacted by hazards were iden Ɵﬁed and poten Ɵal loss es Ɵmates were determined, where available. Detailed informaƟon on the vulnerability assessments for each hazard is provided in SecƟon 4.0, Hazard Assessment.

2.3 DEVELOP MITIGATION PLAN

2.3.1 IDENTIFY GOALS
The LHMP Planning Team reviewed miƟgaƟon goals from the previous 2020 LHMP and made minor editorial edits for clariﬁcaƟon. Hazard miƟgaƟon goals were discussed during MeeƟng #1, before ﬁnalizaƟon and incorpora Ɵon into the LHMP . Mi ƟgaƟon Goals are included in SecƟon 1.0, IntroducƟon.

2.3.2 DEVELOP CAPABILITIES ASSESSMENT
A capabiliƟes assessment is a comprehensive review of all mi ƟgaƟon capabiliƟes and tools currently available to the City for mi ƟgaƟon acƟon implementaƟon, prescribed in the LHMP .

The LHMP Planning Team idenƟﬁed the planning and regulatory; administraƟve and technical; ﬁnancial; and educaƟon and outreach capabiliƟes to implement miƟgaƟon acƟons, as detailed in SecƟon 5.0, MiƟgaƟon Strategy.

2.3.3 IDENTIFY MITIGATION ACTIONS
As part of the LHMP planning process, the LHMP Planning Team worked to iden Ɵfy and develop miƟgaƟon acƟons, aŌer which mi ƟgaƟon acƟons were prioriƟzed as high, medium, or low. A detailed discussion of the idenƟﬁcaƟon and prioriƟzaƟon of miƟgaƟon acƟons, and the creaƟon of the implementaƟon strategy is provided in SecƟon 5.0, MiƟgaƟon Strategy.

2.3.4 PLAN ADOPTION AND SUBMITTAL
This plan will be submi Ʃed to Cal OES and FEMA for review. Upon receiving “approvable pending adop Ɵon” no ƟﬁcaƟon from FEMA, this plan will be presented to the City for consideraƟon and approval by the Fullerton City Council. If approved, a copy of the resoluƟon will be provided in Appendix A, City of Fullerton LHMP AdopƟon ResoluƟon.

2.3.5 PLAN MAINTENANCE
Plan maintenance procedures, found in SecƟon 6.0, Plan Maintenance, include the measures the City will take to ensure the LHMP’s conƟnuous long-term implementaƟon. The procedures also include the manner in which the LHMP w ill be regularly monitored, reported upon, evaluated, and updated to remain a current and meaningful planning document.

3-2
WHAT’S DIFFERENT ABOUT THE 2026 PLAN?
• The City experienced a slight increase in populaƟon, and therefore slight increase in vulnerability since the previous LHMP .
• Projected housing growth within the City results in
anƟcipated increases to vulnerability during the ﬁve-year period of this LHMP .
• Integrated addiƟonal vulnerability consideraƟons for the whole community, including individuals with access and
funcƟonal needs.

SECTION 3: COMMUNITY PROFILE

3.1 PHYSICAL SETTING
Fullerton is located in northern Orange County approximately 22 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles. The community is bordered by the ciƟes of PlacenƟa to the east, Anaheim to the south, Buena Park and La Mirada to the west, and La Habra and Brea to the north. The southern porƟon of the City lies on ﬂat land; the northern half rises into sloping hills, known as the West Coyote and East Coyote Hills.

3.2 HISTORY
Human seƩlement in what is now Fullerton dates back to 5,000 BC, or potenƟally earlier. These early residents were largely nomadic, depending primarily on hun Ɵng, ﬁshing, and gathering plants for survival. Eventually the Tongva (Gabrielino) and Acjachemen (Juaneño) Na Ɵve American cultures developed across much of the area encompassing modern-day Greater Los Angeles, including the area where Fullerton is situated today.

The ﬁrst documented European in Orange County was Spanish explorer, Gaspar de Portolá, in 1769; the European presence was made more permanent in 1776 with the establishment of Mission San Juan Capistrano to the south. A Ōer Mexico (including California) became independent from Spain in 1821, the missions were secularized, and large por Ɵons of land were granted to prominent ﬁgures. The area of modern-day Fullerton became part of the Rancho San Juan Cajón de Santa Ana grant given to Juan Paciﬁco OnƟveros in 1837.

3-3
AŌer Mexico ceded California to the United States, the state began to connect to the rest of the country via the railroad. Land speculaƟon opportuniƟes in the burgeoning state aƩracted people from the eastern United States, like George and Edward Amerige. They bought land to the north of the town of Anaheim with the goal of founding a se Ʃlement and alloca Ɵng a porƟon of the land to the California Central Railroad. In 1887, the Amerige brothers established their se Ʃlement, naming it a Ōer the President of the Paci ﬁc Land and Improvement Co., George H. Fullerton. Agriculture, especially orange growing, became the most prominent industry in Fullerton soon aŌer the City’s founding. Oil producƟon became a leading industry in Fullerton in the late nineteenth and early twenƟeth centuries, driving much of the early growth of the community. In the mid-twen Ɵeth century, the City set aside the southern por Ɵon of Fullerton nearest the railway as an industrial-only area, leading to the mass consolidaƟon of manufacturing in the area.

3.3 DEMOGRAPHICS AND SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS
PopulaƟon, educa Ɵon, employment, and housing data for Fullerton is described in the following secƟons.

3.3.1 POPULATION
Table 3-1: City of Fullerton and Orange County Population and Housing Data provides an overview of City and county demographics and socioeconomic characterisƟcs.

TABLE 3-1: CITY OF FULLERTON AND ORANGE COUNTY POPULATION AND HOUSING DATA

CATEGORY CITY OF

FULLERTON
ORANGE
COUNTY
Total PopulaƟon 141,278 3,164,063
Percent of residents that are children (under 18
years)

22.6% 21.3%
Percent of Residents that are senior ciƟzens (65
and over)

14.5% 15.8%
Median Age (years) 36.1 39.1
Median Household Income $104,219 $113,702
Median House Value (Owner-occupied housing
units)
859,600 915,500
Occupied Housing Units 47,484 1,074,654
Percent of Renter-Occupied Housing Units 48.5% 43.6%
Percent of Owner-Occupied Housing Units 51.5% 56.4%
Average Household Size 2.91 2.90
Sources: US Census Bureau, 2023: American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, DP05 Demographic and Housing Estimates, DP04 Selected Housing Characteristics, S1101 Households and Families, S2503 Financial Characteristics.

3-4

COMMUNITY PROFILE

AT A GLANCE
Access and funcƟonal needs are temporary or
permanent condiƟons that require assistance
for individuals in emergency situaƟons. The
LHMP Stakeholders idenƟﬁed those with
access or funcƟonal needs
LinguisƟc
IsolaƟon
Elderly
Persons
MulƟ-Unit and
Crowded Households
Persons in group
quarters
Vulnerable PopulaƟons
in Fullerton Include:
141,278
City PopulaƟon

2.91 Average
Household Size

36.1 Median Age
3-4

3-5
The City of Fullerton has an es Ɵmated populaƟon of 141,278 as reported by the US Census Bureau 2023 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year es Ɵmates. Fullerton residents under the age of 18 account for 22.6 percent of the City’s populaƟon, while residents 65 and older make up 14.5 percent of the popula Ɵon. The remaining 62.9 percent of the popula Ɵon is between the ages of 18 and 65, with a median age of 36.1 years. Compara Ɵvely, the populaƟon of Orange County includes 21.3 percent of residents under the age of 18 and 15.8 percent of residents aged 65 and older with a median age of 39.1 years. The age demographics for Fullerton are like those of Orange County; however, the populaƟon of Fullerton is slightly younger.

The City has a lower median household income and median house value compared to Orange County. The median household income in Fulle rton is $104,219, which is approximately 8.3 percent lower than county median income of $113,702. Similarly, the median home value in Fullerton is approximately 6.1 percent lower than that of Orange County. The City has an average household size of 2.91 persons per household, and the average household size across the county is 2.91 persons per household. The percentages of owner-occupied and renter- occupied housing units between the City and the county are as follows: the percent of renter- occupied housing units is 43.6 percent and owner-occupied housing units is 56.4 percent in the county compared to renter-occupied housing units of 48.5 percent and owner-occupied housing units of 51.5 percent in Fullerton. To summarize, income and housing values are lower on average in Fullerton, there is a larger por Ɵon of renters in the City, and the average household size is e ﬀecƟvely equal between the City and Orange County.

Table 3-2: City of
Fullerton and Orange County Racial and Ethnic Composition provides an overview of the City and county racial and ethnic demographics below.

The largest ethnic group in Fullerton is the White popula Ɵon, accounƟng for 43.0 percent of the populaƟon. The remaining ethnic makeup consists of Hispanic or La Ɵno at 39.6 percent, Asian at 24.5 percent, Black or African American at 2.1 percent, American Indian and Alaska NaƟv e a t 0 . 6 p e r c e n t , N aƟve Hawaiian and other Paci ﬁc Islander at 0.2 percent. Persons idenƟfying as some other race account for 14.6 percent of the popula Ɵon and those idenƟfying as two or more races make up 14.9 percent of the populaƟon.

The ethnic makeup of Orange County is also predominantly White, which cons Ɵtutes 46.4 percent of the popula Ɵon. This is followed by 34.1 percent Hispanic or La Ɵno, 21.9 percent Asian, 1.6 percent Black or African American, 0.8 American Indian and Alaska Na Ɵve, and 0.3 percent NaƟve Hawaiian and other Paci ﬁc Islander. Persons iden Ɵfying as some other race alone account for 14.1 percent of the popula Ɵon, while those iden Ɵfying with two or more races making up 14.9 percent of the populaƟon.

The populaƟons of Fullerton and Orange County are both diverse to a similar extent with no one race/ethnicity accoun Ɵng for more than half of the popula Ɵon. Each race/ethnicity account for a similar percentage of the populaƟon between the City and county, showing that Fullerton is representa Ɵve of the popula Ɵon of Orange County. In fact, Fullerton is slightly more racially/ethnically diverse than the county. MiƟgaƟon eﬀorts are designed with this high level of diversity in mind which will promote eﬀecƟve miƟgaƟon strategies.

3-6
TABLE 3-2: CITY OF FULLERTON AND ORANGE COUNTY RACIAL AND ETHNIC COMPOSITION

RACE OR

ETHNICITY

CITY OF FULLERTON ORANGE COUNTY

POPULATION PERCENTAGE POPULATION PERCENTAGE
Hispanic or LaƟno
(of any race)*
55,900 39.6% 1,080,480 34.1%
White 60,760 43.0% 1,468,454 46.4%
Black or African
American
2,950 2.1% 51,952 1.6%
American Indian
and Alaska NaƟve
912 0.6% 23,889 0.8%
Asian 34,644 24.5% 694,189 21.9%
NaƟve Hawaiian
and other Paciﬁc
Islander
332 0.2% 9,954 0.3%
Some Other Race
alone
20,636 14.6% 444,982 14.1%
Two or More Races 21,044 14.9% 470,643 14.9%
Total PopulaƟon 141,278 100% 3,164,063 100%
*Note: The “Hispanic or LaƟno (of any race)” category encompasses a wide range of racial backgrounds. People who idenƟfy with this ethnic category may be of any race, in cluding White, Black, Indigenous, Asian, or other backgrounds of Middle Eastern descent. For this reason , the sum of the race or ethnicity percentages may exceed 100%.

Source: US Census Bureau, 2023: American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, DP05 Demographic and Housing Estimates.

3.3.2 EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
EducaƟonal aƩainment is analyzed based on the populaƟon of individuals aged 25 and older.

Table 3-3: City of Fullerton and Or ange County Educational Attainment iden Ɵﬁes the level of educaƟonal a Ʃainment within the City and county. Of the Fullerton residents aged 25 and over, 16.2 percent a Ʃained a graduate or professional degree, 27.4 percent a Ʃained a bachelor’s degree, and 8.2 percent a Ʃained an associate degree. Altogether, about 51.8 percent of the City’s populaƟon has completed a higher educa Ɵon degree indica Ɵng a high level of educaƟonal aƩainment.

In comparison, educa Ɵonal a Ʃainment in Orange County includes 16.1 percent of the populaƟon who aƩained a graduate or professional degree, 27.3 percent aƩained a bachelor’s degree, and 7.7 percent a Ʃained an associate degree. A total of approximately 51.1 percent of the Orange County populaƟon aƩained a higher educaƟon degree.

The level of educaƟonal aƩainment in the City of Fullerton is very similar to the rest of Orange County, indicaƟng that Fullerton is representaƟve of the county in terms of higher educa Ɵon outcomes. The high level of educaƟonal aƩainment within the City may correlate with higher income and economic stability which may improve resilience to hazards at the individual or household level.

3-7
TABLE 3-3: CITY OF FULLERTON AND ORANGE COUNTY EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

EDUCATIONAL
ATTAINMENT (AGE 25 AND
OVER)

CITY OF FULLERTON ORANGE COUNTY

POPULATION PERCENTAGE POPULATION PERCENTAGE
Less than 9th Grade 6,130 6.4% 160,449 7.3%
9th to 12th Grade, no
diploma
5,020 5.3% 127,451 5.8%
High School Graduate 14,964 15.7% 379,386 17.2%
Some College, No Degree 19,652 20.7% 411,837 18.7%
Associate degree 7,826 8.2% 168,956 7.7%
Bachelor’s Degree 26,087 27.4% 601,466 27.3%
Graduate or Professional
Degree
15,391 16.2% 355,582 16.1%
Total 95,070 100% 2,205,127 100%
Source: US Census Bureau, 2023: American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, S1501 Educational Attainment.

3.3.3 ECONOMIC AND EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
Economic and employment trends are based on the popula Ɵon of individuals aged 16 and over. AddiƟonally, the labor force consists of individuals aged 16 and over who are either employed or unemployed and ac Ɵvely seeking work. Table 3-4: City of Fullerton Employment and Income provides an overview of economic and employment trends for the City.

Fullerton has 112,664 residents aged 16 years and older and 73,779 individuals within the labor force.1 Of the individuals in the labor force, 68,935 (93.4 percent) are employed and 4,802 (6.5 percent) are unemployed. The majority of employed residents in Fullerton are employed in the following industries: educaƟonal services, health care, and social assistance (23.7 percent); professional, scien Ɵﬁc, and management, and administra Ɵve and waste management services (13.4 percent); manufa cturing (12.6 percent); retail trade (10.3 percent); and arts, entertainment, and recreaƟon, and accommodaƟon and food services (9.8 percent). The remainder of employed residents are employed in the construc Ɵon (7.1 percent); ﬁnance, insurance, and real estate (6.6 percent); other services (4.4 percent); transportaƟon, warehousing, and u ƟliƟes (4.0 percent); public administra Ɵon (3.8 percent); wholesale trade (2.8 percent); informa Ɵon (1.0 percent); and agriculture, forestry, ﬁshing, hunƟng and mining (0.5 percent) industries.

The median household income for Fullerton is $104,219 per year. Most workers commute to work alone via car, truck or van (70.6 percent) or carpool via car, truck or van (10.3 percent).

Less common modes of transporta Ɵon to work include public transporta Ɵon (2.2 percent), walking (2.3 percent) or other means (1.8 percent). The average travel Ɵme for workers in Fullerton is 30 minutes. An es Ɵmated 12.6 percent of the working popula Ɵon work from

1 US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year EsƟmates Data Proﬁles, Table DP03 Selected Economic CharacterisƟcs, 2023,
hƩps://data.census.gov/table/ACSDP5Y2023.DP03?q=DP03:+Selected+Economic+CharacterisƟcs&g=0 50XX00US06059_160XX00US0628000, accessed August 26, 2025.

3-8
home. US Census inﬂow and ouƞlow analysis for 2022 shows a net inﬂow of workers into the City Fullerton. An esƟmated 61,507 people work in Fullerton but live outside of the City, which consƟtutes an in ﬂow during the workday. Addi Ɵonally, an es Ɵmated 59,372 people live in Fullerton but work outside of the City, which consƟtutes an ouƞlow during the workday. This indicates a net inﬂow of 2,135 individuals into the City on workdays.

TABLE 3-4: CITY OF FULLERTON EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME

CATEGORY POPULATION PERCENTAGE
Aged 16 years and older 112,664 —
Labor Force 73,779 100%
Employed 68,935 93.4%
Unemployed 4,802 6.5%
Median Household Income $104,219 —
Employment by Industry
EducaƟonal services, and health care and social assistance 16,342 23.7% Professional, scienƟﬁc, and management, and
administraƟve and waste management services
9,237 13.4%
Manufacturing 8,700 12.6%
Retail trade 7,094 10.3%
Arts, entertainment, and recreaƟon, and accommodaƟon
and food services
6,775 9.8%
Source: US Census Bureau, 2023: American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, DP03 Selected Economic Characteristics.

3.3.4 HOUSING
According to the 2023 ACS 5-year es Ɵmates, there are 49,707 housing units in Fullerton.

Occupied housing units (47,484 units) account for 95.5 percent and there is a vacancy rate of

4.5 percent of housing units. Of the occupied housing units, 51.5 percent are owner-occupied, and 48.5 percent are renter-occupied. The median home value is $859,600 for owner- occupied units in the City and most housi ng units in Fullerton were built from 1950 to 1979 (63.7 percent).2 Housing occupancy, value, and age of the building are important factors in determining potenƟal vulnerability and potenƟal loss associated with certain hazards.

There are 47,484 total households within Fullerton and the average household size is 2.91 persons per household. The most common household sizes are the 2-person household and the 4-or-more-person household which account for 29.8 percent and 29.7 percent respecƟvely. Approximately 21.4 percent of households are 1-person households and 19.2 percent are 3-person households. Average household size is used to determine the populaƟon of residents that may be impacted by certain hazards.

2 US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year EsƟmates Data Proﬁles, Table DP04 Selected Housing CharacterisƟcs, 2023,
hƩps://data.census.gov/table/ACSDP5Y2023.DP04?q=dp04&g=050XX00US06059_160XX00US062800 0, accessed August 26, 2025.

3-9
Single-family housing units make up the majority of the housing units in Fullerton, accounƟng for 75.8 percent of units. MulƟ-unit housing accounts for 22.1 percent and mobile homes and all other housing types account for only 2.1 percent of houses in Fullerton. Household types are divided into family households (70.2 percent) and nonfamily households (29.8 percent).

Family households are predominantly made up of married-couple families (75.3 percent) but also include other family households where no spouse is present. Nonfamily households consist of householders that may or may not live alone.

3.4 LAND USES AND EXISTING DEVELOPMENT
The Fullerton Plan, which serves as the General Plan for the City, regulates land uses in the City. Table 3-5: Fullerton Community Development Types describes the community development types and land uses that exist throughout the City and Table 3-6: Community Development Type Intensity/Density Standards iden Ɵﬁes the residen Ɵal density and non-residen Ɵal intensity standards for each community development type.

TABLE 3-5: FULLERTON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TYPES

COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT
TYPE

DESCRIPTION ALLOWABLE LAND USES
ResidenƟal
Low Density
ResidenƟal
Low density and
suburban living
Detached dwellings; Accessory second
units; Limited neighborhood-serving
commercial; CompaƟble public, quasi-
public, and special uses.

Low/Medium
Density
ResidenƟal
Suburban living with a
range of housing opƟons
Small-lot detached dwellings; Detached
dwellings; AƩached dwellings; Accessory
second units; Limited neighborhood-
serving commercial; CompaƟble public,
quasi-public, and special uses.

Medium Density
ResidenƟal
Urban living within a
compact and walkable
neighborhood
Small-lot detached dwellings; AƩached
dwellings; Live-work units; Limited
neighborhood-serving commercial;
CompaƟble public, quasi-public, and
special uses
High Density
ResidenƟal
Dense urban living within
a compact, walkable
neighborhood that is
well served by transit
AƩached dwellings; Live-work units;
Limited neighborhood-serving
commercial; CompaƟble public, quasi-
public, and special uses
Greenbelt
Concept
Natural topography
while creaƟng a living
environment which best
serves the needs of its
residents.

Detached dwellings; AƩached dwellings
Limited neighborhood-serving
commercial; CompaƟble public, quasi-
public, and special uses
Commercial
Commercial OpportuniƟes for
convenient commerce
Retail, service, and/or oﬃce; Gathering
places such as plazas or parks;

3-10

COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT
TYPE

DESCRIPTION ALLOWABLE LAND USES
within both
neighborhood and
regional shopping
centers.

CompaƟble public, quasi-public, and
special uses
Oﬃce Professional o ﬃce
businesses and
supporƟng uses and
ameniƟes.

Business and professional; Oﬃce ﬂex-
space; Retail and service uses that
provide support to employees; Gathering
places such as plazas, courtyards, or
parks; CompaƟble public, quasi-public,
and special uses
Mixed Use
Downtown
Mixed-Use
A mix of commercial,
civic, and mixed-use
buildings that promote
pedestrian acƟvity and
are compaƟble with the
Downtown’s historic
character.

Oﬃce, retail and service uses; AƩached
dwellings; Gathering places such as
plazas, courtyards, or parks; CompaƟble
public, quasi-public and special uses
Neighborhood
Center Mixed-Use
Neighborhood centers
that provide nearby
residents with
opportuniƟes to walk to
retail and service
businesses, oﬃce uses,
and civic gathering
spaces.

Retail, service, oﬃce, and/or residenƟal
uses; Gathering places such as plazas,
courtyards, or parks; CompaƟble public,
quasi-public, and special uses
Urban Center
Mixed-Use
Urban centers that serve
the local and regional
populaƟons by oﬀering
major commercial,
oﬃce, and mixed-use
developments
Retail, service, oﬃce, and/or residenƟal
uses; Gathering places such as plazas,
courtyards, or parks; CompaƟble public,
quasi-public, and special uses
Industrial
Industrial Manufacturing,
product assembly,
research and
development,
warehousing, and
supporƟng uses and
ameniƟes
Industrial or manufacturing; Oﬃce, retail
and service uses that provide support to
employees; CompaƟble public, quasi-
public and special uses.

This designaƟon should not be located
adjacent to a residenƟal neighborhood or
center without substanƟal buﬀers
Public Land
School FaciliƟes Sites for local school
districts to develop and
maintain educaƟonal
insƟtuƟons for local and
Elementary school; Middle/junior high
school; High school; Community college;
College/university; ConƟnuaƟon schools

3-11

COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT
TYPE

DESCRIPTION ALLOWABLE LAND USES
surrounding
communiƟes
Government
FaciliƟes
Government faciliƟes
that are necessary or
desired for public health,
safety, and welfare.

Government buildings; Airports;
TransportaƟon and uƟlity faciliƟes;
CompaƟble public and quasi-public uses
Parks and
RecreaƟon
Sites for informal and
formal recreaƟon and
play and to encourage
physical acƟvity and
exercise.

Parks (community and regional/passive
and acƟve); Greenways and trails; Golf
courses and commercial recreaƟon
faciliƟes with an emphasis on outdoor;
Habitat; Agriculture; Floodplains; Areas
with permanent open space easements;
Buﬀers between urban areas; CompaƟble
public, quasi-public, and selected special
uses
Other
Religious
InsƟtuƟons
OpportuniƟes for
religious gatherings,
worship, and related
educaƟonal and
community service
acƟviƟes.

Religious assembly; Religious worship;
Religious educaƟon; CompaƟble public,
quasi-public, and selected special uses
Speciﬁc Plan Developments with a
unique character that
would not be achieved
under the City’s exisƟng
Community
Development Types
Mix of uses as speciﬁed by the Speciﬁc
Plan
Source: The Fullerton Plan, Part II: The Fullerton Plan Elements, E: Tables and Exhibits.

TABLE 3-6: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TYPE INTENSITY /DENSITY STANDARDS

DESIGNATION RESIDENTIAL

DENSITY

NON-RESIDENTIAL

INTENSITY
ResidenƟal
Low Density ResidenƟal Up to 6 du/ac Up to 0.35 FAR
Low/Medium Density
ResidenƟal

6.1 to 15 du/ac Up to 0.35 FAR
Medium Density ResidenƟal 15.1 to 28 du/ac Up to 0.50 FAR High Density ResidenƟal Over 28 du/ac Up to 0.65 FAR
Greenbelt Concept Up to 3 du/ac N/A
Commercial
Commercial N/A 0.30 to 0.35 FAR
Oﬃce N/A 0.30 to 0.35 FAR
Mixed Use
Downtown Mixed-Use 30 to 60 du/ac 0.9 to 2.0 FAR

3-12

DESIGNATION RESIDENTIAL

DENSITY

NON-RESIDENTIAL

INTENSITY
Neighborhood Center Mixed-
Use
16 to 60 du/ac 0.5 to 3.0 FAR
Urban Center Mixed-Use 30 to 80 du/ac 0.75 to 3.0 FAR
Industrial
Industrial N/A 0.35 to 0.50 FAR
Public Land
School FaciliƟes N/A N/A
Government FaciliƟes N/A N/A
Parks and RecreaƟon N/A N/A
Other
Religious InsƟtuƟons N/A Up to 0.35 FAR
Speciﬁc Plan Based on Speciﬁc Plan
Source: The Fullerton Plan, Part II: The Fullerton Plan Elements, E: Tables and Exhibits.

Most of the land is designated for residen Ɵal use, primarily low density residen Ɵal. Other major uses designated throughout the City include greenbelt concept and parks and recreaƟon, which contain large areas of acƟve and passive open space. Greenbelt concept and parks and recreaƟon land uses are generally located throughout the northern porƟons of the City. AddiƟonally, there are various industrial uses throughout the City which are generally concentrated in certain areas. Concentrated industrial uses are located in: the southeast, south of the Metrolink 91-Perris Valley Line and east of the Metrolink Orange County Line; the west, between Malvern Avenue and Commonwealth Avenue; and the north, north of Imperial Highway. Commercial land uses are located throughout the City and generally concentrated along Orangethorpe Avenue and Commonwealth Avenue. Other uses of signi ﬁcance include School, Government, and Religious InsƟtuƟon.

3.5 DEVELOPMENT TRENDS AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

3.5.1 CHANGES IN LAND USE, POPULA TION PATTERNS AND DEVELOPM ENT TRENDS FROM PREVIOUS

FIVE YEARS
Since the previous iteraƟon of the 2020 LHMP , populaƟon paƩerns have remained the same, while development and land use in the planning area has not substan Ɵally changed. The City populaƟon increased nominally, from approximately 141,061 individuals in 2020 to 141,278 – represenƟng a gain less than one percent increase of the City populaƟon.3 The City of Fullerton Housing Element idenƟﬁed populaƟon growth trends from 2000 to 2020 and noted that the annual growth rate over that period was about 0.6 percent. This indicates a minimal increase in risk and vulnerability since the previous LHMP due to increased populaƟon within Fullerton.

As noted, the Fullerton Plan serves as the General Plan and regulates land uses in the City.

Development since the previous iteraƟon of the LHMP primarily included residenƟal or mixed-

3 US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year EsƟmates Data Proﬁles, Table DP05 Demographic and Housing CharacterisƟcs, 2020,
hƩps://data.census.gov/table?q=DP05&g=160XX00US0628000, accessed August 27, 2025.

3-13
use in ﬁll development, usually on low-density commercial centers or parking lots, or rehabilitaƟon of exisƟng structures. During the previous housing cycle, the City made progress towards housing objec Ɵves. Progress in achieving quan Ɵﬁed housing objec Ɵves from 2013 through 2020 included new construcƟon of 1,653 units and rehabilitaƟon of 96 units. Housing programs from the previous housing cycle were generally e ﬀecƟve at addressing housing needs for special needs groups; however, despite this progress, not all housing goals for new construcƟon and rehabilitaƟon of housing units was met. The total number of housing units in Fullerton, as reported by the 2020 ACS 5-year es Ɵmates, was 47,722 units.4 Currently, the ACS 5-year esƟmates the total number of housing units in Fullerton at 49,707 units – indicaƟng about a 4.2 percent increase in the number of housing units since 2020.

3.5.2 CHANGES IN LAND USE, POPULATION PATTERNS AND DEVELOPMENT TRENDS FOR FUTURE FIVE YEARS
This LHMP assumes future popula Ɵon growth in Fullerton over the next ﬁve years from changes in land use and development trends, and therefore overall vulnerability is assumed to increase accordingly. A key indicator of projected growth is the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) Regional Housing Need Alloca Ɵon (RHNA). The RHNA represents the minimum number of housing units the City is required to provide adequate sites via zoning regula Ɵons. For the 2021-2029 Housing Element cycle, the City of Fullerton is required to accommodate 13,209 residen Ɵal units by 2029.5 A breakdown of the required housing units by income group, as presented in the Fullerton Housing Element (2025), is included in Table 3-7: City of Fullerton 2021-2029 RHNA Allocation, below.

TABLE 3-7: CITY OF FULLERTON 2021-2029 RHNA ALLOCATION

INCOME GROUP TOTAL HOUSING UNITS

ALLOCATED

PERCENTAGE OF UNITS
Extremely/Very Low* 3,198 24.2%
Low 1,989 15.1%
Moderate 2,271 17.2%
Above Moderate 5,751 43.5%
Total 13,209 100%
*Note: The City has a RHNA allocaƟon of 3,198 very low-income units (inclusive of extremely low-income units.

Pursuant to State law (AB 2634), the City must projec t the number of extremely low-income housing needs based on Census income distribu Ɵo n o r assu me 5 0 per c en t o f t he v ery l o w i nc o me uni t s as e xt r emel y l o w .

Assuming an even split, the City’s RHNA alloca Ɵon of 3,198 very low-income units may be divided into 1,599 very low and 1,599 extremely low income units. However, for purposes of iden Ɵfying adequate sites for the RHNA allocaƟon, State law does not mandate separate accounƟng for the extremely low income category.

Source: Southern California Association of Governments, SCAG 6th Cycle Final RHNA Allocation Plan, https://scag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024-
05/6th_cycle_final_rhna_allocation_plan_070121.pdf, accessed August 25, 2025.

4 US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year EsƟmates Data Proﬁles, Table DP05 Demographic and Housing CharacterisƟcs, 2020,
hƩps://data.census.gov/table?q=DP05&g=160XX00US0628000, accessed August 27, 2025. 5 Southern California Associa Ɵon of Governments, SCAG 6th Cycle Final RHNA Alloca Ɵon Plan , hƩps://scag.ca.gov/sites/default/ﬁles/2024-05/6th_cycle_ﬁnal_rhna_allocaƟon_plan_070121.pdf, accessed August 25, 2025.

3-14
The Fullerton 2021-2029 Housing Element iden Ɵﬁes various resources for housing developments to meet the RHNA alloca Ɵon of 13,209 units. The City’s Housing Element acknowledges that its current land inventory is insu ﬃcient to meet RHNA targets under exisƟng zoning, par Ɵcularly for very-low and low-income housing. The City’s strategy for accommodaƟng new housing relies on in ﬁll development, adap Ɵve reuse, and zoning ﬂexibility. A central tool in this strategy is the Housing Incen Ɵve Overlay Zone (HIOZ), which enables residenƟal development on parcels currently zoned for commercial or industrial use.

The HIOZ provides op Ɵonal incenƟves for housing projects, and a requirement that 20% of units be a ﬀordable to moderate-income households or below. A total of 759 parcels are included in the overlay zone, with concentra Ɵons along Commonwealth Avenue, South Harbor Boulevard, East Valencia Drive, and other parcels throughout the city. These areas are likely to see increased residen Ɵal density and redevelopment ac Ɵvity, which may in ﬂuence future exposure to natural and human-caused hazards. Exis Ɵng uses that could be redeveloped included exisƟng commercial, retail, o ﬃce, and industrial uses. These sites are generally concentrated around Commonwealth Avenue, Walnut Avenue, Valencia Drive and others.

The Fullerton Community and Economic Develo pment Department also oversees various development projects to be completed in the next ﬁve years. Table 3-8: Community Development Projects iden Ɵﬁes ongoing and upcoming development projects in the community that may lead to increased capacity for growth and populaƟon increase within the City.

TABLE 3-8: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

PROJECT
TYPE

PROJECT DESCRIPTION CURRENT
STATUS
ResidenƟal Request for Builders Remedy: MulƟ-Family ResidenƟal project, 28 Units with 20% of Units Deed-Restricted
Aﬀordable.

Development
Review
CommiƩee
ResidenƟal Pointe Common: 62 Unit MulƟ-Family ResidenƟal Units, All Units Slated to Be Aﬀordable.

ConstrucƟon
ResidenƟal 245 N State College Blvd: Request to Construct 25 ResidenƟal Town Homes with Subterranean Parking.

Approved by
City Council
ResidenƟal The Pines at Sunrise Village: 49 Detached Single-Family Residences, 64 Townhomes, 19,000 SF of New Retail
Currently Under
ConstrucƟon.

ResidenƟal East Amerige Avenue Project: Request to construct 8 mulƟ-family residenƟal units.

Development
Review
CommiƩee
ResidenƟal Highland Tract Map: TentaƟve Tract Map for 13 parcels and one leƩer lot (for private street) and a Major Site Plan Review for 13 single-family residences.

Plan Check
ResidenƟal Hub Fullerton: Student oriented housing - 420 units AddiƟonal Retail on 1st Floor.

ConstrucƟon
ResidenƟal

West Coyote Hills: Major ResidenƟal Development. Final Tract Map Approved.

Mixed-Use Atlas Fullerton: MulƟ-Family ResidenƟal - 329 units Plan Check

3-15

PROJECT
TYPE

PROJECT DESCRIPTION CURRENT
STATUS
Mixed Use

Parkwest Project: Proposed 124 room hotel, 140
residenƟal units and minor commercial.

Approved by
Planning
Commission
Mixed- Use Brookhurst/Orangethorpe Project: Mixed-use project consisƟng of 4 parcels with exisƟng uses. The Gas
staƟon will remain. Structures on the remainder of the
parcels will be demolished and a new building
consisƟng of commercial retail/oﬃce (6808 S.F.) on the
street level. 63 residenƟal units above the garage level.

Plan Check
Mixed-Use

Casa Bella - Highland & Valencia: 20 residenƟal
apartment units of with 1,152 sq. Ō. commercial space.

ConstrucƟon
Industrial Rexford Industrial Fullerton: DemoliƟon of hotel and construcƟon of industrial building (6,000 sq. Ō.) and
oﬃce pod (6,000 sq. Ō.)
ConstrucƟon
Industrial Rexford Via Burton Fullerton: Major Site Plan to demolish an exisƟng industrial building and develop
the site with a new 139,449-square-foot industrial
warehouse building.

ConstrucƟon
Industrial Acacia and Ki mberly Industrial Project: Request for a Major Site Plan to construct a 186,632-square-foot Ɵlt- up speculaƟve warehouse on property zoned M-P-80ES
Plan Check
Review
Industrial Goodman LogisƟcs: approximately 1.5 million sq. Ō.

LogisƟcs Center.

ConstrucƟon
Commercial The Fox Block: Proposed Public Parking Structure and Commercial development adjacent to Historic Fox
Theatre on RDA surplus land.

Plan Check
Review
Commercial Shoe City Billboard: Request to construct and operate an electronic billboard facing the 91 Freeway.

ConstrucƟon
Commercial Truck Yard Project: Major Site Plan Review applicaƟon proposed demoliƟon of exisƟng buildings and
development of truck trailer and automobile parking
On Hold
Commercial 76 Gas StaƟon: Request for a CUP and MSP to
construct a new service staƟon.

Planning
Commission
Approved
Commercial Fullerton Crossings: Request for a CUP modiﬁcaƟon to add an addiƟonal drive-through restaurant to the
exisƟng master plan.

Zoning
Administrator
Hearing
Commercial Raymond St. Project: Request for a Minor Site Plan, for an industrial development on property zoned M-G,
Manufacturing General.

Director
Approval
Commercial Freeway Oriented Billboard – Nutwood: Request for a CondiƟonal Use Permit for a freeway - oriented
billboard
Design Review
CommiƩee
Source: City of Fullerton, Current Development Projects, https://www.cityoffullerton.com/government/departments/community-and-economic- development/planning-zoning/development-activity, accessed August 28, 2025.

3-16
Over the next ﬁve years, the City of Fullerton is taking on diverse development projects, including residen Ɵal, mixed-use, industrial, commercial, and student-oriented housing.

Notably, there is a strong emphasis on mulƟ-family residenƟal developments, many of which include a ﬀordable housing components. Mixed-use projects combine housing with commercial space, oŌen replacing older structures or underuƟlized lots. Industrial expansion is also signi ﬁcant, with large-scale logis Ɵcs centers and warehouse developments transforming former hotel and industrial sites. Commercial projects include new service staƟons, billboards, and retail expansions, while student housing near educaƟonal insƟtuƟons is rapidly growing. These developments are dispersed throughout the city, o Ōen in areas transiƟoning from older commercial or industrial uses. The scale and density of these projects may increase vulnerability to hazards.

In addi Ɵon to the current development projects listed above. The City of Fullerton Public Works Department is advancing several capital improvement projects that align with broader land use and development goals, par Ɵcularly those relevant to hazard mi ƟgaƟon and sustainable growth. Key iniƟaƟves include substanƟal investments in sewer and water system upgrades, street rehabilita Ɵon, and park improvements, all of which enhance the City's infrastructure resilience and support future development capacity.

3.6 INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS

3.6.1 TRANSPORTATION
A system of major and primary arterial highways provides vehicular circulaƟon throughout the city. The east-west highways providing access to/from and through the city are Imperial Highway (State Route 90), Bastanchury Road, Malvern/Chapman Avenue, Commonwealth Avenue, and Orangethorpe Avenue. Similarly, Beach Boulevard (State Route 39), Euclid Street, Harbor/Brea Boulevard, State College Boulevard, and Placen Ɵa Avenue provide the north- south highways. The Orange Freeway (State Route 57) runs along Fullerton’s eastern border and the Riverside Freeway (State Route 91) runs along the southern border of Fullerton, and the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) runs nearby the southwest city limits. The Orange County TransportaƟon Authority runs bus lines that connect Fullerton with ci Ɵes in Los Angeles and Orange Coun Ɵes. Fullerton’s rail sta Ɵo n i n t h e d o w n t o w n a r e a i s s e r v e d b y M e t r o l i n k commuter trains, Amtrak’s Paci ﬁc Sur ﬂiner route, and the long-distance Southwest Chief Amtrak train. Freight rail service is provided by BNSF Railroad and Union Paciﬁc Railroad. The nearest airports with commercial service are John Wayne Interna Ɵonal Airport and Long Beach Airport. Fullerton Municipal Airport serves general aviaƟon aircraŌ.

3.6.2 WATER AND WASTEWATER
The City of Fullerton operates a comprehensive water system established in 1906, serving over 141,000 residents across a 22.3-square-mile area. Its water supply is sourced primarily from groundwater (77%) via the Orange County Basin, supplemented by imported water (23%) from the Metropolitan Water District, includin g the Colorado River and State Water Project.

The system includes 424 miles of distribuƟon pipes, 15 reservoirs, 12 booster staƟons, and 10 wells. Fullerton’s wastewater system maintains over 320 miles of sewer pipelines and includes programs for rouƟne cleaning, emergency response, and Fats, Oils, and Grease (F.O.G.) control

3-17
to prevent blockages. Both systems are managed by the City’s Public Works Department, which oversees infrastructure maintenance and long-term planning to ensure reliability and sustainability.

3.6.3 SANITATION AND SOLID WASTE
The City of Fullerton provides sanita Ɵon and solid waste services through an exclusive franchise agreement with Republic Services, a naƟonal waste management company. Republic Services handles all aspects of trash, recycling, and organic waste collecƟon for residenƟal and commercial customers within the city.

3.6.4 ELECTRICITY
Fullerton receives its electricity from Southern California Edison, which is one of California’s four major investor-owned u Ɵlity companies and the largest electrical supplier in the state.

Southern California Edison sources electricity from power plants throughout California and neighboring states and delivers it through a network of large-scale power lines and substaƟons.

3.6.5 NATURAL GAS
Natural gas services in Fullerton is provided by the Southern California Gas Company. There is one major transmission line running along S Placen Ɵa Avenue as well as a high-pressure distribuƟon line with branches running along Brookhurst Street, W Valencia Drive, S PlacenƟa Avenue, and Nutwood Avenue. No other large pipelines are present. Various facili Ɵes in neighboring communiƟes help to keep the natural gas ﬂowing safely and reliably. Damage to transmission lines in Fullerton or to facili Ɵes in surrounding communi Ɵes could impact services in Fullerton. Because natural gas is highly ﬂammable and potenƟally combusƟble, any rupture in a natural gas pipeline or an accident that causes a spark around natural gas could lead to a ﬁre or explosion.

3.7 CRITICAL FACILITIES
The LHMP Planning Team iden Ɵﬁed 167 cri Ɵcal facili Ɵes and 69 facili Ɵes of concern in Fullerton for incorporaƟon into the vulnerability assessment and associated hazard analysis.

For the purposes of this plan, cri Ɵcal faciliƟes meet the FEMA de ﬁniƟon of those facili Ɵes essenƟals for the delivery of vital services or protecƟon of a community, especially during and aŌer a disaster. CriƟcal faciliƟes listed tend to be owned and operated by the City of Fullerton, though there are some assets owned by other stakeholders.

FaciliƟes of concern include those faciliƟes that may not reach the formal deﬁniƟon of criƟcal faciliƟes, but are nonetheless signi ﬁcant for purposes of emergency response. Facili Ɵes of concern listed in this plan tend to include assets that are not owned or operated by the City.

CriƟcal facili Ɵes and facili Ɵes of concern are iden Ɵﬁed in Figure 3-1: Critical Facilities in Fullerton, Table 3-9 and Table 3-10 below. Speciﬁc addresses and locaƟon data for some criƟcal faciliƟes are withheld for safety and security purposes.

3-18

3-19
TABLE 3-9: CITY OF FULLERTON CRITICAL FACILITIES

ID NAME CRITICAL FACILITY
TYPE

COMMUNITY LIFELINE
1 City Hall Municipal
Government
Safety and Security
2 City Yard Municipal
Government
Safety and Security
3 Fire Sta Ɵon 1 Fire Sta Ɵon Safety and Security
4 Fire StaƟon 2 Fire StaƟon Safety and Security
5 Fire Sta Ɵon 3 Fire Sta Ɵon Safety and Security
6 Fire StaƟon 4 Fire StaƟon Safety and Security
7 Fire Sta Ɵon 5 Fire Sta Ɵon Safety and Security
8 Fire StaƟon 6 Fire StaƟon Safety and Security
9 Police Sta Ɵon Police Sta Ɵon Safety and Security
10 Garnet Community Center Community Center Safety and Security 11 Maple Community Center Community Center Safety and Security 12 Richman Community Center Community Center Safety and Security 13 Main Library Library Safety and Security
14 Gilbert Community Center Community Center Safety and Security 15 Amerige Park Park Safety and Security
16 Brea Dam Park Park Safety and Security
17 Fullerton Museum Center Mu seum Safety and Security
18 St Jude Medical Center Hospital Health and Medical
19 Fullerton Community Center Community Center Safety and Security 20 Fullerton Tennis Center Sports Center Safety and Security 21 Independence Park Park Safety and Security
22 Laguna Lake Park Park Safety and Security
23 Fullerton Airport Airport Transporta Ɵon
24 TransportaƟon Center TransportaƟon
Center
TransportaƟon
25 Bridge 55C0147 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
26 Bridge 55C0290 Bridge TransportaƟon
27 Bridge 55C0292 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
28 Bridge 55C0288 Bridge TransportaƟon
29 Bridge 55C0293 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
30 Bridge 55C0291 Bridge TransportaƟon
31 Bridge 55C0224 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
32 Bridge 55C0228 Bridge TransportaƟon
33 Bridge 55C0226 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
34 Bridge 55C0225 Bridge TransportaƟon
35 Bridge 55C0227 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
36 Bridge 55C0229 Bridge TransportaƟon
37 Bridge 55C0386 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
38 Bridge 55C0230 Bridge TransportaƟon
39 Bridge 55C0120 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
40 Bridge 55C0346 Bridge TransportaƟon
41 Bridge 55C0289 Bridge Transporta Ɵon

3-20

ID NAME CRITICAL FACILITY
TYPE

COMMUNITY LIFELINE
42 Bridge 55C0602 Bridge TransportaƟon
43 Bridge 55C0638 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
44 Bridge 55C0584 Bridge TransportaƟon
45 Bridge 55C0233 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
46 Bridge 55C0231 Bridge TransportaƟon
47 Bridge 55C0235 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
48 Bridge 55C0294 Bridge TransportaƟon
49 Bridge 55C0243 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
50 Bridge 55C0242 Bridge TransportaƟon
51 Bridge 55C0244 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
52 Bridge 55C0234 Bridge TransportaƟon
53 Bridge 55C0418 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
54 Bridge 55C0703 Bridge TransportaƟon
55 Bridge 55C0297 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
56 Bridge 55C0298 Bridge TransportaƟon
57 Bridge 55C0296 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
58 Bridge 55C0387 Bridge TransportaƟon
59 Bridge 55C0345 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
60 Bridge 55C0586 Bridge TransportaƟon
61 Bridge 55C0384 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
62 Bridge 55C0308 Bridge TransportaƟon
63 Bridge 55C0236 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
64 Bridge 55C0526 Bridge TransportaƟon
65 Bridge 55C0232 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
66 Bridge 55C0263 Bridge TransportaƟon
67 Bridge 55C0585 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
68 Bridge 55C0310 Bridge TransportaƟon
69 Bridge 55C0311 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
70 Bridge 55C0312 Bridge TransportaƟon
71 Bridge 55C0664 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
72 Bridge 55C0383 Bridge TransportaƟon
73 Bridge 55C0385 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
74 Bridge 55C0309 Bridge TransportaƟon
75 Bridge 55C0307 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
76 Bridge 55C0295 Bridge TransportaƟon
77 Bridge 55C0525 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
78 Bridge 55C0685 Bridge TransportaƟon
79 Bridge 55C0681 Bridge Transporta Ɵon
80 Coyote Pump StaƟon (1) Pump StaƟon Water Systems
81 Coyote Pump Sta Ɵon (2) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems
82 Coyote Pump StaƟon (3) Pump StaƟon Water Systems
83 Coyote Reservoir Reservoir Water Systems
84 Hawks Point Pump StaƟon (1) Pump StaƟon Water Systems 85 Hawks Point Pump Sta Ɵon (2) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems 86 Hawks Pointe Reservoir Reservoir Water Systems
87 Hermitage Pump Sta Ɵon (1) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems

3-21

ID NAME CRITICAL FACILITY
TYPE

COMMUNITY LIFELINE
88 Hermitage Pump StaƟon (2) Pump StaƟon Water Systems
89 Hermitage Pump Sta Ɵon (3) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems 90 Hermitage Pump StaƟon (4) Pump StaƟon Water Systems
91 Hermitage Pump Sta Ɵon (5) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems 92 Hermitage Reservoir Reservoir Water Systems
93 Hillcrest Pump Sta Ɵon (1) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems 94 Hillcrest Pump StaƟon (2) Pump StaƟon Water Systems
95 Hillcrest Reservoir Reservoir Water Systems
96 Kimberly2 Pump StaƟon (1) Pump StaƟon Water Systems
97 Kimberly2 Pump Sta Ɵon (2) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems 98 Kimberly2 Pump StaƟon (3) Pump StaƟon Water Systems
99 Laguna Pump Sta Ɵon (2) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems
100 Laguna Pump StaƟon(1) Pump StaƟon Water Systems
101 Laguna Reservoir Reservoir Water Systems
102 Las Palmas Pump StaƟon (1) Pump StaƟon Water Systems 103 Las Palmas Pump Sta Ɵon (2) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems 104 Las Palmas Reservoir Reservoir Water Systems
105 Lower Acacia Pump Sta Ɵon (1) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems 106 Lower Acacia Pump StaƟon (2) Pump StaƟon Water Systems 107 Lower Acacia Pump Sta Ɵon (3) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems 108 Lower Acacia Pump StaƟon (4) Pump StaƟon Water Systems 109 Lower Acacia Pump Sta Ɵon (5) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems 110 Lower Acacia Pump StaƟon (6) Pump StaƟon Water Systems 111 Lower Acacia Reservoir Reservoir Water Systems
112 Main Plant Pump StaƟon (1) Pump StaƟon Water Systems 113 Main Plant Pump Sta Ɵon (2) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems 114 Main Plant Pump StaƟon (3) Pump StaƟon Water Systems 115 Main Plant Pump Sta Ɵon (4) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems 116 Main Plant Pump StaƟon (5) Pump StaƟon Water Systems 117 Main Plant Reservoir Reservoir Water Systems
118 State College Pump StaƟon (1) Pump StaƟon Water Systems 119 State College Pump Sta Ɵon (2) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems 120 State College Reservoir Reservoir Water Systems
121 Tank Farm Pump Sta Ɵon (1) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems 122 Tank Farm Pump StaƟon (2) Pump StaƟon Water Systems 123 Tank Farm-T1 Reservoir Reservoir Water Systems
124 Tank Farm-T2 Reservoir Reservoir Water Systems
125 Tank Farm-T3 Reservoir Reservoir Water Systems
126 Tank Farm-T4 Reservoir Reservoir Water Systems
127 Tank Farm-T5 Reservoir Reservoir Water Systems
128 Upper Acacia Pump StaƟon (1) Pump StaƟon Water Systems 129 Upper Acacia Pump Sta Ɵon (2) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems 130 Upper Acacia Pump StaƟon (3) Pump StaƟon Water Systems 131 Upper Acacia Pump Sta Ɵon (4) Pump Sta Ɵon Water Systems 132 Upper Acacia-T1 Reservoir Reservoir Water Systems
133 Upper Acacia-T2 Reservoir Reservoir Water Systems

3-22

ID NAME CRITICAL FACILITY
TYPE

COMMUNITY LIFELINE
134 Kimberly Well 1A PFAS Water
Treatment Plant
Water Treatment
Plant
Water Systems
135 Main Plant Treatment Water Treatment
Plant
Water Systems
136 Southern California Edison UƟlity – LocaƟon
Withheld
Energy
137 Southern California Edison U Ɵlity – LocaƟon
Withheld
Energy
138 Carbon Canyon Dam Dam – LocaƟon
Withheld
Water Systems, Safety
and Security
139 Prado Dam Dam – Loca Ɵon
Withheld
Water Systems, Safety
and Security
140 Caltrans Undercrossing 55 0466 Bridge – LocaƟon
Withheld
TransportaƟon
141 Caltrans Undercrossing 55 0465 Bridge – Loca Ɵon
Withheld
TransportaƟon
142 Caltrans Undercrossing 55 0456 Bridge – LocaƟon
Withheld
TransportaƟon
143 Caltrans Overhead Separa Ɵon
55 0502r
Bridge – LocaƟon
Withheld
TransportaƟon
144 Caltrans ConnecƟon Overhead
55 0503g
Bridge – LocaƟon
Withheld
TransportaƟon
145 Caltrans Undercrossing 55 0287 Bridge – Loca Ɵon
Withheld
TransportaƟon
146 Caltrans Diversion Channel 55
0528
Bridge – LocaƟon
Withheld
TransportaƟon
147 Caltrans O ﬀramp Overhead 55
0472s
Bridge – LocaƟon
Withheld
TransportaƟon
148 Caltrans Undercrossing 55
0296l
Bridge – LocaƟon
Withheld
TransportaƟon
149 Caltrans Undercrossing 55
0296r
Bridge – LocaƟon
Withheld
TransportaƟon
150 Caltrans Undercrossing 55
0296f
Bridge – LocaƟon
Withheld
TransportaƟon
151 Caltrans Undercrossing 55 0464 Bridge – Loca Ɵon
Withheld
TransportaƟon
152 Caltrans Undercrossing 55 0483 Bridge – LocaƟon
Withheld
TransportaƟon
153 Caltrans Overhead Separa Ɵon
55 0293l
Bridge – LocaƟon
Withheld
TransportaƟon
154 Caltrans Overhead 55 0468 Bridge – LocaƟon
Withheld
TransportaƟon
155 Extrac Ɵon Well (1) Well – Loca Ɵon
Withheld
Water Systems
156 ExtracƟon Well (2) Well – LocaƟon
Withheld
Water Systems

3-23

ID NAME CRITICAL FACILITY
TYPE

COMMUNITY LIFELINE
157 Extrac Ɵon Well (3) Well – Loca Ɵon
Withheld
Water Systems
158 ExtracƟon Well (4) Well – LocaƟon
Withheld
Water Systems
159 Extrac Ɵon Well (5) Well – Loca Ɵon
Withheld
Water Systems
160 ExtracƟon Well (6) Well – LocaƟon
Withheld
Water Systems
161 Extrac Ɵon Well (7) Well – Loca Ɵon
Withheld
Water Systems
162 ExtracƟon Well (8) Well – LocaƟon
Withheld
Water Systems
163 Injec Ɵon Well (1) Well – Loca Ɵon
Withheld
Water Systems
164 InjecƟon Well (2) Well – LocaƟon
Withheld
Water Systems
165 Injec Ɵon Well (3) Well – Loca Ɵon
Withheld
Water Systems
166 InjecƟon Well (4) Well – LocaƟon
Withheld
Water Systems
167 Injec Ɵon Well (5) Well – Loca Ɵon
Withheld
Water Systems

TABLE 3-10: FACILITIES OF CONCERN

ID NAME FACILITY TYPE COMMUNITY LIFELINE
1 Buena Park High School Educa Ɵon Safety and Security
2 Fullerton Union High School EducaƟon Safety and Security 3 La Habra High School Educa Ɵon Safety and Security
4 La Sierra High School EducaƟon Safety and Security
5 La Vista High School Educa Ɵon Safety and Security
6 Sonora High School EducaƟon Safety and Security
7 Sunny Hills High School Educa Ɵon Safety and Security 8 Troy High School EducaƟon Safety and Security
9 Acacia Elementary School Educa Ɵon Safety and Security 10 Beechwood School EducaƟon Safety and Security
11 Commonwealth Elementary
School
EducaƟon Safety and Security
12 Fern Drive Elementary School EducaƟon Safety and Security 13 Robert C. Fisler School Educa Ɵon Safety and Security 14 Golden Hill Elementary School EducaƟon Safety and Security 15 Hermosa Drive Elementary
School
EducaƟon Safety and Security
16 Ladera Vista Junior High School
Of The Arts
EducaƟon Safety and Security
17 Laguna Road Elementary School Educa Ɵon Safety and Security

3-24

ID NAME FACILITY TYPE COMMUNITY LIFELINE
18 Maple Elementary School EducaƟon Safety and Security 19 Nicolas Junior High School Educa Ɵon Safety and Security 20 Orangethorpe Elementary School EducaƟon Safety and Security 21 Paci ﬁc Drive Elementary School Educa Ɵon Safety and Security 22 Parks Jr High School EducaƟon Safety and Security
23 Raymond Elementary School Educa Ɵon Safety and Security 24 Richman Elementary School EducaƟon Safety and Security 25 Rolling Hills Elementary School Educa Ɵon Safety and Security 26 Sunset Lane Elementary School EducaƟon Safety and Security 27 Valencia Park Elementary School Educa Ɵon Safety and Security 28 Woodcrest Elementary School EducaƟon Safety and Security 29 California State University,
Fullerton
EducaƟon Safety and Security
30 Fullerton College EducaƟon Safety and Security
31 Hope University Educa Ɵon Safety and Security
32 Marshall B. Ketchum University EducaƟon Safety and Security 33 Ruby Drive Elementary Educa Ɵon Safety and Security
34 Sierra Vista Elementary School EducaƟon Safety and Security 35 Topaz Elementary School Educa Ɵon Safety and Security 36 Kids Adventure Learning Center EducaƟon Safety and Security 37 Stepping Stones Academy Educa Ɵon Safety and Security 38 St Juliana Falconieri School EducaƟon Safety and Security 39 Arborland Montessori School -
Valencia Campus
EducaƟon Safety and Security
40 Arborland Montessori School -
Hughes Campus
EducaƟon Safety and Security
41 Ivycrest Montessori Educa Ɵon Safety and Security
42 Eastside ChrisƟan EducaƟon Safety and Security
43 Rosary Academy Educa Ɵon Safety and Security
44 James A. Whitaker Elementary EducaƟon Safety and Security 45 Sunnycrest Senior Living Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
46 Sunrise of Fullerton Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
47 Park Vista Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
48 Acacia Villas Assisted Living Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
49 Cambridge Court Assisted Living Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
50 Fullerton Rosewood Assisted Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
51 Oasis Assisted Senior Living Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
52 Glencrest Manor Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical

3-25

ID NAME FACILITY TYPE COMMUNITY LIFELINE
53 Applecrest Homes Assisted Living Healthcare/Assisted Living Facility
Health and Medical
54 Glenwood Care Assisted Living Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
55 D'Best Care Board and Care Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
56 Senior Living Community Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
57 Cherub Home Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
58 Fullerton Gardens Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
59 Kindred Hospital Brea - Subacute Healthcare/Assisted Living Facility
Health and Medical
60 Gordon Lane Convalescent
Hospital
Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
61 Terrace View Care Center Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
62 The Pavilion at Sunny Hills Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
63 Windsor Garden of Fullerton Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
64 Genesis - St. Elizabeth Healthcare
and RehabilitaƟon Center
Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
65 Green ﬁeld Care Center Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
66 Park Vista at Morningside Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
45 Sunnycrest Senior Living Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
46 Sunrise of Fullerton Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
47 Park Vista Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
48 Acacia Villas Assisted Living Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
49 Cambridge Court Assisted Living Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
50 Fullerton Rosewood Assisted Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
51 Oasis Assisted Senior Living Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
52 Glencrest Manor Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
53 Applecrest Homes Assisted Living Healthcare/Assisted Living Facility
Health and Medical

3-26

ID NAME FACILITY TYPE COMMUNITY LIFELINE
54 Glenwood Care Assisted Living Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
55 D'Best Care Board and Care Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
56 Senior Living Community Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
57 Cherub Home Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
58 Fullerton Gardens Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
59 Kindred Hospital Brea - Subacute Healthcare/Assisted Living Facility
Health and Medical
60 Gordon Lane Convalescent
Hospital
Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
61 Terrace View Care Center Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
62 The Pavilion at Sunny Hills Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
63 Windsor Garden of Fullerton Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
64 Genesis - St. Elizabeth Healthcare
and RehabilitaƟon Center
Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
65 Green ﬁeld Care Center Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
66 Park Vista at Morningside Healthcare/Assisted
Living Facility
Health and Medical
67 Santa Ana Armory Cold Weather
Shelter
Community
Services
Safety and Security
68 Women's TransiƟonal Living
Center
Community
Services – LocaƟon
Withheld
Safety and Security
69 New Vista Immediate Response
Housing
Community
Services – LocaƟon
Withheld
Safety and Security

3.8 WHOLE COMMUNITY AND ACCESS AND FUNCTIONAL NEEDS

3.8.1 RESEARCH AND METHODOLOGY
The FEMA Whole Community approach is a founda Ɵonal philosophy in emergency management that emphasizes inclusive collaboraƟon across all sectors of society to enhance naƟonal preparedness and resilience. This planning process incorporated principles from the Whole Community approach speci ﬁcally to recognize community capabili Ɵes and needs, parƟcularly iden Ɵfying access and func Ɵonal needs within the planning area. Access and FuncƟonal Needs (AFN) refer to individuals who may require addi Ɵonal assistance before, during and a Ōer an emergency due to limita Ɵons in abili Ɵes to access services or func Ɵon

3-27
independently. CharacterisƟcs that contribute to AFN can include, but are not limited to:
disability status, age (children or senior ci Ɵzens), limited English pro ﬁciency, limited transportaƟon access, or are otherwise economical ly disadvantaged. These characteris Ɵcs may be temporary or permanent to be considered AFN. The LHMP Planning Team iden Ɵﬁed planning for AFN as a core priority for the LHMP Update.

To idenƟfy individuals with AFNs, US Census Tract and American Community Survey data was uƟlized. The City of Fullerton includes a total of 37 census tracts, though 15 census tracts includes geographies outside of the City jurisdic Ɵon (such as neighboring jurisdic Ɵons of La Habra, Brea, Placen Ɵa, Anaheim and Buena Park). Because these census tracts include porƟons of land in adjacent jurisdic Ɵons, some data may be distorted or skewed for the porƟon within the City of Fullerton. As a result, demographic informa Ɵon for these tracts reﬂects neighboring communiƟes as well as Fullerton.

The LHMP Planning Team uƟlized the two separate data sets to idenƟfy individuals with AFN within the City of Fullerton. These data so urces included Center for Disease Control (CDC) Vulnerability Index and the California O ﬃce of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) CalEnviroScreen 4.0. Both da tasets measure individual characteris Ɵcs that contribute to AFN, such as age, disability status, and English pro ﬁciency. A key diﬀerenƟator between the CDC Vulnerability Index and CalEnv iroScreen 4.0 is that CDC data primarily focuses on socioeconomic indicators, whereas CalEnviroScreen 4.0 also measures impacts from environmental pollu Ɵon. The socioeconomic indicators measured by both indices are included in Figure 3-2: Vulnerability Index Themes below.

FIGURE 3-2: VULNERABILITY INDEX THEMES

Source: Center of Disease Control/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, CDC/ATSDR Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/place-health/php/svi/index.html, accessed November 3, 2025.

3-28
AddiƟonally, it is noted there is a di ﬀerence in the naming conven Ɵon for census tracts between the CDC Vulnerability Index and CalEnviroScreen 4.0 dataset. The CDC shows Census Tracts 001603 and 001604 in the central northern porƟon of the City; CalEnviroScreen shows this area as one combined census tract— Census Tract 001601. Also, the CDC vulnerability index iden Ɵﬁes the northwesternmost census tract in the City as Census Tract 001710; CalEnviroScreen iden Ɵﬁes this as Census Tract 001707. The remaining census tracts in Fullerton are consistent between the CDC vulnerability index and CalEnviroScreen.

CDC VULNERABILITY INDEX
Figure 3-3: CDC Vulnerability Index by Census Tract shows the CDC vulnerability index scores for census tracts within the City. These scores are based on a naƟonwide comparison of census tracts, allowing Fullerton to assess how its communi Ɵes rank rela Ɵve to others across the country. This benchmarking is especially valuable for hazard mi ƟgaƟon planning, as it aligns with federal grant criteria and informs eligibility for programs such as FEMA’s hazard miƟgaƟon assistance.

Table 3-11: Fullerton Overall Vulnerability Index Scores shows the overall score and level of vulnerability for census tracts within the City. Possible scores range from 0 (lowest vulnerability) to 1 (highest vulnerability) and are classiﬁed into four categories:
• Low vulnerability: 0.00 – 0.25
• Low to medium vulnerability: 0.25 – 0.50
• Medium to high vulnerability: 0.50 – 0.75
• High vulnerability: 0.75 – 1.00
These classiﬁcaƟons help idenƟfy areas where residents may face disproporƟonate challenges during emergencies and guide targeted mi ƟgaƟon strategies that promote resilience for the whole community.

3-29
TABLE 3-11: FULLERTON OVERALL VULNERABILITY INDEX SCORES

CENSUS TRACT VULNERABILITY INDEX SCORES
2022 OVERALL SCORE LEVEL OF VULNERABILITY
001404* 0.8206 High
001503* 0.6623 Medium-High
001505* 0.3804 Low-Medium
001602 0.1921 Low
001603 0.5064 Medium-High
001604 0.568 Medium-High
001704 0.4093 Low-Medium
001705* 0.7224 Medium-High
001706 0.3803 Low-Medium
001708* 0.5098 Medium-High
001710* 0.1902 Low
001801* 0.8757 High
001802 0.9225 High
001901 0.5769 Medium-High
001902 0.802 High
001903 0.6974 Medium-High
011000 0.8007 High
011101 0.5214 Medium-High
011102 0.6877 Medium-High
011200 0.6437 Medium-High
011300 0.7457 Medium-High
011401 0.3424 Low-Medium
011402 0.2074 Low
011403 0.7764 High
011502 0.8039 High
011503 0.3776 Low-Medium
011504 0.8396 High
011601 0.9532 High
011602* 0.8815 High
011707* 0.6316 Medium-High
011708* 0.7293 Medium-High
011711* 0.9332 High
011712* 0.641 Medium-High
086701* 0.8407 High
086801* 0.505 Medium-High
086802* 0.8351 High
110605 0.577 Medium-High
*Note: Census tracts include porƟons of land in adjacent jurisdicƟons.

3-30

3-31
The CDC Vulnerability Index iden Ɵﬁes 13 census tracts in Fullerton as having high levels of vulnerability. These census tracts are geographically concentrated in the southeast, southwest, and northernmost por Ɵons of the City. Land uses within these census tracts include signiﬁcant industrial zones, buﬀered by commercial and residenƟal zones (at varying densiƟes). Census tracts in the southeast and southwest are also adjacent to major freeways, including SR-57 and SR-91.

Census tracts within the City indicate vulnerability based on 16 indicators iden Ɵﬁed in the vulnerability index including socioeconomic status, household characteris Ɵcs, racial/ethnic minority status and housing type/transportaƟon. The index ﬂags census tracts in the top ten percent (i.e., the 90 th percen Ɵle) for these demographic, socioeconomic and housing indicators to indicate a high level of vulnerability. According to the CDC Vulnerability Index, characterisƟcs contribuƟng to high levels of vulnerability include:
• Persons aged 65 and older (including those with a disability) • LinguisƟc isolaƟon
• Households in mulƟ-unit housing
• Crowded households
• Persons in group quarters
These characterisƟcs are generally re ﬂecƟve of individuals with increased AFN during and aŌer a disaster. Addi Ɵonally, these characteris Ɵcs were re ﬂected in census tracts repor Ɵng lower levels of vulnerability and therefore indicate paƩerns of AFN across the planning area.

ConsideraƟon for the AFN characteris Ɵcs as related to this LHMP and overall mi ƟgaƟon strategies are outlined below:
• Age and disability are closely linked, par Ɵcularly in relaƟon to ambulatory, cogniƟve, and independent living di ﬃculƟes. According to the City of Fullerton’s Housing Element, nearly 10 percent of the City’s populaƟon, live with one or more disabiliƟes.

The most reported types include independent living diﬃculty, cogniƟve diﬃculty, and ambulatory diﬃculty, followed by hearing, self-care, and vision impairments. Assisted living facili Ɵes are noted within Census Tracts 001706, 011000, 001802. These concentraƟons suggest localized areas where ol der adults and individuals with disabiliƟes may be more reliant on ins ƟtuƟonal support and infrastructure. These residents may face unique barriers to preparedness, evacua Ɵon, response and recovery.
• Limited English pro ﬁciency and linguis Ɵc isola Ɵon, which a ﬀects Census Tracts 001404, 001801, 001802, 011601, 011602, 086701, and 086802. Limited English proﬁciency is de ﬁned as persons (age 5+) who speak English "less than well”.

Residents in linguis Ɵcally isolated households may face signi ﬁcant barriers to accessing emergency informa Ɵon, public services, and disaster preparedness resources. During fast-moving hazard events such as wild ﬁres or ﬂash ﬂoods, delays in receiving or understanding evacua Ɵon orders can increase exposure to danger. In some households, younger family members serve as informal translators for older relaƟves, but this dynamic may break down during emergencies. Linguis Ɵc isolaƟon

3-32
oŌen overlaps with other vulnerability factors, compounding the risks faced by these communiƟes.
• Crowded households are another signiﬁcant vulnerability factor, present all idenƟﬁed high-vulnerability tracts. A crowded household is de ﬁned by the U.S. Census Bureau as an occupied housing unit where the number of people exceeds the number of rooms available for living. Inherently, when more individuals are concentrated in a single housing unit, more people are vulnerable to hazard impacts. Addi Ɵonally, crowding can exacerbate health risks, limit personal space for sheltering in place, and complicate evacua Ɵon logis Ɵcs. Crowded households may also re ﬂect underlying economic hardship, which can reduce ability to prepare for or recover from disasters. • Similarly, mulƟ-unit housing (deﬁned by CDC as residenƟal structures containing 10 or more units) show increased exposure to hazards. These buildings o Ōen have shared infrastructure, limited access points, and higher populaƟon densiƟes, which can slow evacuaƟon and increase the need for public sa fety agency response. simultaneously.

Residents may also face barriers to receiving individualized assistance, parƟcularly in large complexes where emergency personnel must navigate mulƟple units and ﬂoors.

Damage to a single structure may displace dozens or even hundreds of residents at once. These buildings may also house renters or students (par Ɵcularly near CSU Fullerton or Fullerton College) who lack access to insurance, transporta Ɵon, or long- term recovery resources.
• Last, Census Tracts 001902 and 011504 show a notable presence of persons living in group quarters. Group quarters refer to managed residen Ɵal facili Ɵes where individuals reside outside of tradi Ɵonal household se ƫngs and are o Ōen provided with custodial, medical, or ins ƟtuƟonal care. These include dormitories, nursing homes, assisted living facili Ɵes, and other congregate living environments. Census Tract 011504, located in the eastern por Ɵon of the City adjacent to California State University, Fullerton, is primarily zoned for medium-density residenƟal uses and likely includes student housing and university-a ﬃliated dormitories. Other forms of insƟtuƟonal housing, such as elder care or nursing facili Ɵes, reﬂecƟng the broader presence of older adults and individuals with disabili Ɵes are located throughout Fullerton. These popula Ɵons are o Ōen dependent on facility sta ﬀ for mobility, communicaƟon, and emergency response, making them parƟcularly vulnerable if staﬀ are unavailable or overwhelmed during a disaster. In dormitory seƫngs, students may lack access to personal transporta Ɵon, emergency supplies, or local support networks.

CALENVIROSCREEN 4.0
In addiƟon to the CDC vulnerability index, the LHMP Planning Team u Ɵlized the CalEPA DAC criteria based on CalEnviroScreen 4.0 to evaluate the presence of popula Ɵons with AFN.

CalEPA uses indicators such as polluƟon burden and populaƟon characterisƟcs listed in Table 3-12: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Indicators . As noted earlier, there are minor di ﬀerences in census tract numbering between the CDC vulnerability index and CalEnviroScreen 4.0. Speci ﬁcally, the CDC splits the central northern area into Tracts 001603 and 001604, while CalEnviroScreen combines it as Tract 001601. Addi Ɵonally, the northwesternmost tract is labeled 001710 by

3-33
the CDC and 001707 by CalEnviroScreen. All othe r tracts in Fullerton align across both datasets.

TABLE 3-12: CALENVIROSCREEN 4.0 INDICATORS

CATEGORY INDICATOR
PolluƟon Burden Ozone
PM2.5
Diesel ParƟculate MaƩer
Drinking Water Contaminants
Children’s Lead Risk from Housing
PesƟcide Use
Toxic Releases from FaciliƟes
Traﬃc Impacts
Cleanup Sites
Groundwater Threats
Hazardous Waste
Impaired Waters
Solid Waste Sites
PopulaƟon CharacterisƟcs Asthma
Cardiovascular Disease
Low Birth Weight
EducaƟon
Housing Burden
LinguisƟc IsolaƟon
Poverty
Unemployment
Source: State of California OEHHA, CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Excel and Data Dictionary, https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/maps-data, access August 27, 2025.

Figure 3-4: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Pollution Burden by Census Tract illustrates polluƟon burden by census tract in the City of Fullerton. Pollu Ɵon burden is assessed based on mul Ɵple environmental indicators shown in Table 3-12. The map reveals varying levels of pollu Ɵon burden across census tracts, with vulnerability ranging from low (green) to high (red) based on speciﬁc indicators.

Census tracts most impacted by pollu Ɵon burden include 001404, 001601, 001503, 011403, 011502, 011601, 011602, 001801, 086801, 086802, and 086701. Notably, several of these tracts extend beyond the City boundaries, indica Ɵng that land uses in adjacent jurisdic Ɵons, such as neighboring industrial zones, transporta Ɵon corridors, and commercial centers, may be contribuƟng to elevated polluƟon scores within Fullerton.

Areas with the highest pollu Ɵon burdens are predominantly located in the southeast, west, and northernmost parts of the city. These regions correspond closely with industrial land uses and major transportaƟon corridors. This spaƟal overlap suggests a strong correlaƟon between industrial acƟvity and elevated polluƟon exposure.

3-34

3-35
Many of the tracts with high polluƟon burden also overlap with those ﬂagged for populaƟons with limited adap Ɵve capacity and AFN, as iden Ɵﬁed by the CDC vulnerability index. For example, Census Tracts 001404, 001801, 001802, 011601, 011602, and 086701 are not only environmentally burdened but also contain high concentra Ɵons of older adults, individuals with disabili Ɵes, linguis Ɵcally isolated households, and residents in crowded or mul Ɵ-unit housing. These ﬁndings are generally consistent with socioeconomic data reﬂected by the CDC Vulnerability Index. These overlapping vulnerabili Ɵes compound risk, as residents in these areas may face greater diﬃculty evacuaƟng, accessing emergency informaƟon, or recovering from hazard events.

Figure 3-5: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Popula tion Characteristics by Census Tract illustrates vulnerability across census tracts in Fullerton, based on popula Ɵon indicators. Vulnerability levels are color-coded from low (green) to high (red), represen Ɵng percen Ɵle scores. The indicators used to assess vulnerability include health and socioeconomic factors such as asthma, cardiovascular disease, low birth weight, educaƟon levels, housing burden, linguisƟc isolaƟon, poverty, and unemployment. Census tracts with higher vulnerability scores tend to reﬂect communiƟes facing compounded health and social challenges.

Census Tracts 001404, 011504, 011601, and 011801 are among the most impacted by populaƟon vulnerability indica tors. Census Tracts 001404 and 001801 primarily include industrial, commercial, low- and medium-density residenƟal land uses; however, these census tracts extend beyond Fullerton’s boundaries and may be in ﬂuenced by demographic and socioeconomic condiƟons in adjacent jurisdicƟons. Census Tract 011504 is home to California State University, Fullerton, as well as medium-density residen Ɵal areas likely occupied by students and renters. Census Tract 011601 contains a mix of low- to high-density residen Ɵal, commercial, and industrial land uses, sugges Ɵng a diverse popula Ɵon with varying levels of vulnerability.

Again, these ﬁndings are consistent with those areas also iden Ɵﬁed by the CDC Vulnerability Index for populaƟons with AFN, older adults, individuals with disabiliƟes, linguisƟcally isolated households, and residents in crowded or mul Ɵ-unit housing. The convergence of socioeconomic stressors and AFN characteris Ɵcs in these areas compounds vulnerability during hazard events. For example, residents may lack the prepara Ɵon and resources to evacuate or recover, while those with limited English pro ﬁciency may struggle to access emergency informaƟon. In mulƟ-unit or crowded housing, evacuaƟon logisƟcs become more complex, and shared infrastructure can lead to cascading disrupƟons.

Figure 3-6: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Composite Scores by Census Tract and Table 3-13: Overall CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentiles compile the vulnerability scores.

3-36

3-37
TABLE 3-13: OVERALL CALENVIROSCREEN 4.0 PERCENTILES

CENSUS TRACT COMPOSITE

PERCENTILE

POLLUTION
BURDEN

PERCENTILE

POPULATION

CHARACTERISTICS

PERCENTILE
001404* 92 95 77
001503* 44 93 19
001505* 27 63 15
001601 50 90 26
001602 13 29 11
001704 41 56 33
001705* 49 89 25
001706 22 35 18
001707* 47 88 24
001708* 52 67 39
001801* 81 90 63
001802 75 86 59
001901 53 60 45
001902 35 48 29
001903 73 80 60
011000 60 84 40
011101 52 71 38
011102 59 73 45
011200 50 59 41
011300 45 89 22
011401 51 49 48
011402 34 48 27
011403 77 96 51
011502 70 95 43
011503 40 48 34
011504 70 62 69
011601 95 97 80
011602* 88 100 54
011707* 39 67 25
011708* 37 58 27
011711* 57 60 49
011712* 57 61 48
086701* 81 95 57
086801* 61 96 32
086802* 92 94 76
110605 39 66 25
*Note: Census tracts include porƟons of land in adjacent jurisdicƟons.

Source: State of California OEHHA, CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Maps & Data, https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/maps-data, access August 27, 2025.

3-38

3-39
In Fullerton, several census tracts exhibit elevated composite scores, with some ranking in the 75th percenƟle. For example, Census Tract 001404 has a composite percenƟle of 92, driven by a very high polluƟon burden (95th percenƟle) and a moderately high populaƟon characterisƟcs score (77 th percen Ɵle). Similarly, Census Tracts 011601 and 086802 both score in the 90 th percenƟle range for composite vulnerability, reﬂecƟng signiﬁcant environmental polluƟon and AFN.

3.8.2 VULNERABILITY DETERMINATION
Based on the vulnerability data and other vulnerable populaƟons discussed above, the LHMP Planning Team determined that for the purposes of this LHMP , the following census tracts would be formally established as vulnerable:
• Census tracts idenƟﬁed as having high levels of vulnerability by the CDC (Census Tracts 001404, 001801, 001802, 001902, 011000, 011403, 011502, 011504, 011601, 011602, 011711, 086701).
• Census tracts in the 75
th percenƟle of CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Composite Scores (Census Tracts 001404, 001802, 011403, 011601, 011602, 086701).

These census tracts contain concentra Ɵons of residents with limited adap Ɵve capacity and AFN. These include older adults including some living with a disability, linguis Ɵcally isolated individuals, and households in mul Ɵ-unit or crowded living condi Ɵons, as well as persons residing in group quarters. When layered with the CalEnviroScreen ﬁndings of elevated polluƟon burden and socioeconomic stressors, these AFN popula Ɵons face compounded barriers to resilience. These census tracts are shown on Figure 3-7: Areas with Access and Functional Needs in Fullerton.

Table 3-15: Vulnerable Populations and Potential Vulnerability outlines key popula Ɵon groups with AFN and the characteris Ɵcs that may heighten their vulnerability during hazard events.

Each group faces dis Ɵnct challenges that can limit their adap Ɵve capacity, such as reduced mobility, communica Ɵon barriers, and constrained access to emergency services.

Understanding these characterisƟcs is essenƟal for tailoring miƟgaƟon strategies to meet the needs of Fullerton’s most at-risk communiƟes.

TABLE 3-14: VULNERABLE POPULATIONS AND POTENTIAL VULNERABILITY

VULNERABLE

POPULATIONS

POTENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT ENHANCE

VULNERABILITY
Persons aged 65 and
older
Limited mobility, chronic health condiƟons, social isolaƟon, reduced access to emergency informaƟon or services
LinguisƟc isolaƟon Diﬃculty understanding emergency communicaƟons, limited access to resources, social isolaƟon, reduced advocacy
Households in mulƟ-
unit housing
Shared infrastructure, limited evacuaƟon opƟons, increased exposure to hazards (e.g., ﬁre, disease spread)
Crowded households Limited personal space, higher risk of disease transmission, resource scarcity, diﬃculty sheltering in place
Persons in group
quarters
InsƟtuƟonal constraints, limited autonomy, shared faciliƟes, higher exposure to communicable diseases

3-40

4-2
WHAT’S DIFFERENT ABOUT THE 2026 PLAN?
• All hazards from the previous LHMP conƟnued into this LHMP Update; hazards were reorganized for clarity.
• Vulnerability assessments were enhanced to include
consideraƟons for changes in land use and populaƟon
paƩerns, along with consideraƟons for individuals with
access and funcƟonal needs (AFN).

SECTION 4: HAZARDS ASSESSMENT

4.1 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND PRIORITIZATION

4.1.1 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION
The ﬁrst step in developing the vulnerability and risk assessment is hazard iden ƟﬁcaƟon. The LHMP Planning Team reviewed the previously prepared 2020 City of Fullerton Hazard Mi ƟgaƟon Plan, hazard mi ƟgaƟon plans from neighboring jurisdic Ɵons, and other relevant informaƟon to determine the extent of natural and human caused hazards with poten Ɵal to a ﬀect the City; refer to Table 2-5:

Existing Plans, Studies, Reports, and Other Technical Data/Information.

A discussion of potenƟal hazards during the ﬁrst LHMP Planning Team meeƟng resulted in the idenƟﬁcaƟon of the natural hazards that pose a poten Ɵal risk to the City of Fullerton. Table 4-1: Fullerton Hazard Identification summarizes the Planning Team’s discussion of each of the natural hazards and indicates those iden Ɵﬁed for inclusion in the LHMP .

TABLE 4-1: FULLERTON HAZARD IDENTIFICATION

LIST OF

HAZARDS

IDENTIFIED

IN PREVIOUS
LHMP

INCLUDED
IN

UPDATED
LHMP

DISCUSSION

SUMMARY
Avalanche No No The LHMP Planning
Team determined that
there is no threat of
avalanche to Fullerton
due to the City’s
locaƟon and climate.

AircraŌ
Incident
Yes Yes AircraŌ incidents are a
potenƟal risk to
Fullerton. This hazard
is included in the
human-caused
hazards proﬁle.

4-3

LIST OF

HAZARDS

IDENTIFIED
IN

PREVIOUS
LHMP

INCLUDED
IN

UPDATED
LHMP

DISCUSSION SUMMARY
Civil Unrest Yes Yes The LHMP Planning Team determined that civil unrest should be included in the LHMP .

This hazard is included in the human-caused
hazards proﬁle.

Coastal
Erosion
No No Fullerton is not a coastal city and is not
aﬀected by coastal erosion.

Coastal
Storms
No No Fullerton is not a coastal city and is not
aﬀected by coastal storms.

Cyber
Threats
Yes Yes The LHMP Planning Team determined that
cyber threats should be included in the LHMP .

This hazard is included in the human-caused
hazards proﬁle.

Dam Failure Yes Yes Fullerton is within the dam inunda Ɵon areas for mulƟple dams in the region.

Drought Yes Yes Droughts are a recurring and potenƟally severe hazard in Fullerton. This hazard is
included in the extreme weather hazard
proﬁle.

Expansive
Soils
No No There are no expansive soil issues iden Ɵﬁed
in Fullerton.

Extreme
Heat
Yes Yes The LHMP Planning Team determined that
extreme heat is a hazard of concern to
Fullerton. This hazard is included in the
extreme weather hazard proﬁle.

Flood Yes Yes Flood is a poten Ɵal threat to Fullerton and has historically impacted the City.

Hailstorm No No The LHMP Planning Team determined that
hailstorms do not pose a signiﬁcant risk to
Fullerton based upon limited previous
occurrences.

Human-
Caused
Hazards
Yes Yes Human-caused hazards are a poten Ɵal threat
to Fullerton and have historically impacted
the planning area. Human-caused hazards
include aircraŌ/transportaƟon/train
incidents, hazardous materials release,
terrorism/cybersecurity/acƟve shooter, civil
unrest, vector-borne disease, and pandemic.

Hurricane No No Fullerton has never been signiﬁcantly aﬀected by a hurricane.

Landslide
and Slope
Failure
Yes Yes Landslide and slope failure is a poten Ɵal
threat to Fullerton and has historically
impacted the City.

Lightning No No The LHMP Planning Team determined that
lightning does not pose a signiﬁcant risk to

4-4

LIST OF

HAZARDS

IDENTIFIED
IN

PREVIOUS
LHMP

INCLUDED
IN

UPDATED
LHMP

DISCUSSION SUMMARY
the City based upon limited previous
occurrences
Sea Level
Rise
No No Fullerton is not a coastal city and is not
aﬀected by sea level rise.

Seismic
Hazards
Yes Yes Seismic hazards pose a potenƟal threat to
Fullerton and have historically impacted the
City. Seismic hazards include fault rupture,
ground shaking and liquefacƟon.

Severe
Weather
Hazards
Yes Yes Severe weather hazards are a poten Ɵal threat
to Fullerton and have historically impacted
the planning area. Severe weather hazards
include drought, extreme heat, severe
winds/Santa Ana winds, heavy rain, and
power outage/uƟlity failure.

Tornado Yes No While the previous LHMP included tornado, the LHMP Planning Team determined that
tornado is a minimal risk to Fullerton and
tornado risks are adequately addressed by
other severe weather hazards in this LHMP .

Tsunami No No Fullerton is not a coastal city and is not at risk of tsunami.

Urban Fire Yes Yes Fullerton has a history of urban ﬁres that can endanger public safety and health. This is
jointly discussed with wildﬁres hazards.

Vector-
Borne
Disease and
Pandemic
Yes Yes The LHMP Planning Team determined that
vector-borne disease and pandemic poses a
threat to Fullerton.

Volcano No No There are no volcanoes near enough to
Fullerton to reasonably pose a threat.

Wildﬁre Yes Yes Wild ﬁres in Fullerton are likely due to a large amount of open and natural spaces in the
city. This is jointly discussed with urban ﬁre
hazards.

Windstorm Yes Yes The LHMP Planning Team determined this hazard poses a risk to Fullerton. Windstorm is
included in the severe weather hazards
proﬁle.

4.1.2 HAZARD PRIORITIZATION
The LHMP Planning Team built oﬀ the hazard prioriƟzaƟon of the previous plan which used a spreadsheet-based tool to prioriƟze the idenƟﬁed hazards by assigning each hazard a ranking based on probability of occurrence and magnitude of potenƟal impact. Hazard rankings were

4-5
assigned based on a group discussion, knowledge of past occurrences, and familiarity with the City’s vulnerabiliƟes. Four criteria were used to establish the hazard prioriƟes to be addressed in the LHMP:
• Probability (likelihood of occurrence)
• LocaƟon (size of potenƟally aﬀected area)
• Maximum Probable Extent (intensity of damage)
• Secondary impacts (severity of impacts to community
A value from one to four was assigned for each criterion by hazard, where one is the lowest and four is the highest. The assigned values for each criterion were mul Ɵplied by weighted factors to obtain a weighted score for each criterion. Weighted factors were based on the LHMP Planning Team’s opinion of each criterion’s importance. A higher weight was given to the criterion considered more important or signi ﬁcant. For example, the probability of the hazard occurrence received a higher weight than the potenƟal secondary impacts. Probability carries an importance factor of 2.0; locaƟon, an importance factor of 0.8; maximum probable extent a factor of 0.7; and secondary impacts a factor of 0.5; refer to Table 4-2: Hazard Ranking Methodology.

The weighted scores for loca Ɵon, maximum probable extent (an Ɵcipated damage), and secondary impacts for each hazard were added together to determine the total impact score.

The total impact score was then mul Ɵplied by the weighted probability score to determine the ﬁnal score. The ﬁnal scores were used to determine the prioriƟzaƟon of each hazard based on the following FEMA recommended scale:
• Low Threat: 0 to 12;
• Medium Threat: 12.1 to 42; and
• High Threat: 42.1 to 64.

To support the LHMP update, the LHMP Planning Team revisited the hazard rankings established in the previous plan. During Stakeholder Mee Ɵng #1, par Ɵcipants reviewed the prior hazard prioriƟzaƟon and engaged in a live polling exercise to reassess perceived risk and vulnerability across the iden Ɵﬁed hazards. This interac Ɵve poll provided an opportunity for individual input and group re ﬂecƟon based on recent experiences, evolving condi Ɵons, and current understanding of City vulnerabiliƟes.

The results of the poll indicated that perceived risk and vulnerability for Seismic Hazards, Dam Failure, Geologic Hazards, and Flood remained consistent with previous assessments. As such, no changes were made to the scores or priority levels for these hazards. However , the poll revealed increased concern and perceived risk for Wildﬁre/Urban Fire, Extreme Weather, and Human-Caused Hazards. In response, the LHMP Planning Team conducted a focused discussion during Focus Mee Ɵng #1 to reevaluate and update the probability and impact scores for these hazards. These updates re ﬂect a shi Ō in stakeholder percep Ɵon and a recogniƟon of emerging threats to the community.

4-6
TABLE 4-2: HAZARD RANKING METHODOLOGY

PROBABILITY , LOCATION, MAXIMUM PROBABLE EXTENT AND SECONDARY IMPACTS Probability (2.0): Estimated likelihood of occurrence from historical data.

Probability Score
Unlikely – less than 1% probability in next 100 years; recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years
1 Somewhat Likely – between 1% - 10% probability in next year; recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years
2 Likely – between 10% - 100% probability in next year; recurrence interval of 10 years or less
3 Highly Likely – near 100% probability in next year or happens every year 4 Location (0.8): Size of geographical area of community affected by the hazard.

Affected Area Score
Isolated 1
Small 2
Medium 3
Large 4
Maximum Probable Extent (0.7): Anticipated damage to a typical facility/structure.

Impact Score
Negligible – less than 10% damage 1
Limited – between 10% and 25% damage 2
Critical – between 25% and 50% damage 3
Catastrophic – more than 50% damage 4
Secondary Impacts (0.5): Estimated secondary impacts to the community at large.

Impact Score
Negligible – no loss of function, downtime, and/or evacuations 1 Limited – minimal loss of function, downtime, and/or evacuations 2 Moderate – some loss of function, downtime, and/or evacuations 3 High – major loss of function, downtime, and/or evacuations 4 TOTAL SCORE = PROBABILITY X IMPACT, WHERE:

Probability = (Probability Score x Importance)
Impact = (Affected Area + Primary Impact + Secondary Impacts), where:

Affected Area = Affected Area Score x Importance
Primary Impact = Primary Impact Score x Importance
Secondary Impacts = Secondary Impacts Score x Importance

HAZARD PLANNING CONSIDERATION
Score Range Value Count

0.0 12.0 Low 0

12.1 42.0 Medium 3

42.1 64.0 High 4
The probability of each hazard is determined by assigning a level, from unlikely to highly likely, based on the likelihood of occurrence from historical data. The total impact value includes the affected area, primary impact, and secondary impact levels of each hazard. Each level's score is reflected in the matrix. The total score for each hazard is the probability score multiplied by its importance factor times the sum of the impact level scores multiplied by their importance factors. Based on this total score, the hazards are separated into three categories based on the hazard level they pose to the communities: High, Medium, and Low.

4-7
AddiƟonally, the categories of Extreme We ather and Human-Caused Hazards were reorganized to incorporate broader hazard considera Ɵons. As part of this reorganiza Ɵon, several previously listed hazards—Drought, Severe Weather (heat/rain/wind), Human-Caused Hazards (aircra Ō, civil disturbance, transporta Ɵon accidents, terrorism, cyber), Hazardous Materials, and Disease/Pests—were consolidated within the updated hazard categories. This reorganizaƟon reﬂects stakeholder direcƟon and a reﬁned understanding of hazard relevance.

This reclassiﬁcaƟon supports the eleva Ɵon of Extreme Weather and Human-Caused Hazards from medium to high priority and ensures alignment with current risk proﬁles.

Table 4-3: Hazard Rankings idenƟﬁes the ﬁnal scores and the hazard planning considera Ɵon (threat level) for each hazard based on the discussions with the LHMP Planning Team and the prioriƟzaƟon process described above.

TABLE 4-3: HAZARD RANKINGS
HAZARD

TYPE PROBABILITY
IMPACT
TOTAL
SCORE
HAZARD

PLANNING
CONSIDERATION Location Primary
Impact
Secondary
Impacts
Dam
Failure 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 28.8 Medium
Flood 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 24.0 Medium
Extreme
Weather
Hazards

4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 54.4 High
Geologic
Hazards 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 27.0 Medium
Seismic
Hazards 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 64.0 High
Wildﬁre
and Urban
Fire

4.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 53.6 High
Human-
Caused
Hazards

4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 54.4 High

The LHMP Project Management Team ulƟmately idenƟﬁed four hazards including wildﬁre and urban ﬁre, seismic hazards, human-caused hazards, and extreme weather hazards as high hazard planning consideraƟons based on conversaƟons with the LHMP Planning Team.

Many hazards idenƟﬁed by the LHMP Planning Team are recognized to be interconnected or interrelated. Where appropriate, the hazard pro ﬁles (presented below) may include references to other hazard proﬁles (such as including liquefacƟon within the seismic hazards hazard category).

AddiƟonally, as part of the hazard idenƟﬁcaƟon and prioriƟzaƟon process, the LHMP Planning Team determined that some hazards could be combined for clarity purposes within a larger hazard category.

4-8
Some hazards were expanded or renamed to re ﬂect condiƟons more accurately for the City of Fullerton. Thus, for example the Severe Weather pro ﬁle includes drought, extreme heat, heavy rain, Santa Ana Winds, and power outage or u Ɵlity failure as a secondary impact. It is noted that power outage or uƟlity failure is not a direct hazard, but a secondary impact from other natural disasters (primarily Santa Ana Winds, but poten Ɵally extreme heat and heavy rains as well).

The Human-Caused Hazards pro ﬁle includes aircra Ō/transportaƟon incidents, hazardous materials spill, terrorism/cybersecurity, civil unrest/civil disturbance, and vector-borne disease and pandemic. The Seismic Hazards proﬁle includes fault rupture, ground shaking and liquefacƟon. The Geologic Hazards proﬁle includes landslide and land subsidence.

The following hazards are discussed within the 2024 LHMP , below:
• Dam Failure
• Flood
• Extreme Weather Hazards (Drought, Extreme Heat, Severe Winds/Santa Ana Winds, Heavy Rain, Power Outage/UƟlity Failure)
• Geologic Hazards (Landslide, Subsidence)
• Seismic Hazards (Fault Rupture, Ground Shaking, LiquefacƟon) • Human-Caused Hazards (AircraŌ/TransportaƟon Incidents, Hazardous Materials Spill, Terrorism/Cybersecurity, Civil Unrest/Civil Disturbance, Vector-Borne Disease) • Wildﬁre and Urban Fire

4.2 CLIMATE CHANGE CONSIDERATIONS
Climate change has the poten Ɵal to exacerbate many of the exis Ɵng hazards in the City. As such, the LHMP Team decided climate change would be included under each applicable hazard proﬁle with a discussion about how each hazard would intersect or become more signi ﬁcant with impacts of climate change. Discussion and analysis related to climate change is discussed as a subsecƟon under each hazard proﬁle included below.

4.3 VULNERABILITY /RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
Vulnerability describes asset suscepƟbility to damage and depends on a number of variables including the asset’s construcƟon, condi Ɵon, contents, and economic value of func Ɵons. A vulnerability analysis predicts the extent of in jury or damage on the built environment that may result from a hazard event of a given intensity in a speciﬁc area.

The vulnerability assessment considers risks to criƟcal faciliƟes and faciliƟes of concern listed in SecƟon 3.7, and to residen Ɵal and non-residen Ɵal buildings throughout Fullerton. Cri Ɵcal faciliƟes and facili Ɵes of concern serve an important func Ɵon in the opera Ɵons of the municipal government and in serving the community. CriƟcal faciliƟes include essenƟal public buildings, police and ﬁre staƟons, transportaƟon infrastructure, and essen Ɵal public u Ɵlity assets. Facili Ɵes of concern include schools, healthcare and assisted living facili Ɵes and community services. While the City owns and maintains many of the listed cri Ɵcal faciliƟes, there are also cri Ɵcal faciliƟes and facili Ɵes of concern owned by other public agencies or

4-9
jurisdicƟons. Direct and indirect impacts were considered as part of the vulnerability assessment as impacts to some facili Ɵes may have indirect impacts on other facili Ɵes or populaƟons.

The vulnerability assessment below quanƟﬁes, to the extent feasible using the best available data, City assets at risk to hazards and esƟmates potenƟal losses. This secƟon focuses on the proﬁled hazards and risks speciﬁc to the City of Fullerton.

Each hazard proﬁle in the following sec Ɵon includes a Vulnerability Assessment sec Ɵon that presents the results using the methodology described below. Replacement and content values for the faciliƟes in each the hazard areas are tallied in each vulnerability table to esƟmate the total potenƟal losses for each facility. The vulnerability assessment gives equal weight to all hazards, regardless of the idenƟﬁed probability. This assessment considers the physical threat to the criƟcal faciliƟes and faciliƟes of concern, as well as the physical threat to residenƟal and non-residenƟal structures. The speci ﬁc hazard and associated probability are considered as part of the miƟgaƟon prioriƟzaƟon, discussed in SecƟon 5.0, MiƟgaƟon Strategy.

Socioeconomic impacts are generally discussed as some hazards have the potenƟal to impact the City in ways beyond physical damages. To con ﬁrm at-risk community popula Ɵons, a detailed parcel analysis inves Ɵgated the intersec Ɵon of each mapped natural hazard with development and populaƟon vulnerability. The criƟcal faciliƟes and faciliƟes of concern listed in SecƟon 3.7, CriƟcal FaciliƟes, were mapped in GIS and overlaid with mapped hazard areas (those hazards that have a speciﬁc or deﬁned geographic area) to determine which assets are located in each hazard area.

Using the comprehensive parcel database from the City of Fullerton, parcels with residen Ɵal and non-residenƟal structures were iden Ɵﬁed within each mapped natural hazard zone. For residenƟal assets, the number of units is reported per hazard zone. Zoning codes and density/intensity standards were used to es Ɵmate the number of units for residen Ɵal uses.

Single family homes are assumed to be one unit. The average density standard per zoning designaƟon was used to esƟmate the number of units in some instances for parcels zoned for medium- and high-density land uses, where exact unit data was unavailable at a parcel basis.

The number of residen Ɵal units then informs an es Ɵmate of residents within each hazard zone. The es Ɵmate was generated using the average household size of 2.91 persons per household iden Ɵﬁed by the American Community Su rvey (ACS) 2023 dataset. For non- residenƟal assets, the total structure square footage was calculated.

Hazard areas and cri Ɵcal facility overlays were conducted for: ﬂood, landslide, liquefac Ɵon, and wildﬁre. It should be noted that the parcel analysis is based on the best available data and is intended for planning purposes only. The City of Fullerton provided parcel data via GIS ﬁles in September 2025. Michael Baker Interna Ɵonal did not manipulate the data and used the data as it was provided to esƟmate hazard vulnerabiliƟes. As such, the parcel analysis serves as an esƟmate of potenƟal losses based on this data snapshot and may not re ﬂect actual or current condiƟons within the City at the Ɵme of LHMP approval.

Overlays were not prepared for the following hazards: dam failure, extreme weather hazards (drought, extreme heat, severe winds/Santa Ana winds, heavy rain, power outage/u Ɵlity

4-10
failure), geologic hazards (subsidence), seismic hazards (fault rupture and ground shaking), human-caused hazards (aircra Ō/transportaƟon incidents, hazardous materials spill, terrorism/cybersecurity, civil unrest/civil disturbance, vector-borne disease), and urban ﬁre.

These hazards are not geographically de ﬁned and/or have the poten Ɵal to a ﬀect the en Ɵre City. For the purposes of this LHMP and vulner ability assessment, it is assumed that these hazards could impact the en Ɵrety of the planning area, including all cri Ɵcal facili Ɵes and faciliƟes of concern.

Replacement and contents values for the faciliƟes and the number of residents and residenƟal and non-residenƟal structures in each hazard area are provided where possible, to es Ɵmate the potenƟal losses based on the method described above. Es ƟmaƟons were prepared using replacement values iden Ɵﬁed in the HAZUS 6.1 Inventory Technical Manual (2024), where appropriate and related land use categories are listed. Some criƟcal faciliƟes have unavailable replacement cost values due to ownership status or unique characteris Ɵcs that make replacement esƟmates infeasible.

4.4 HAZARD PROFILES STRUCTURE AND DESCRIPTION
The following sec Ɵons, Sec Ɵon 4.5 through Sec Ɵon 4.11, contain pro ﬁles for the hazards idenƟﬁed in Table 4-1, above. The proﬁles include a vulnerability analysis and risk assessment using the methods described in SecƟon 4.3, Vulnerability/Risk Assessment Methodology. Each hazard proﬁle is organized by the following subsecƟons:
• DescripƟon: A brief introducƟon to the mechanisms behind the hazard. • LocaƟon/Extent: An indicaƟon of geographic areas that are most likely to experience the hazard and a descripƟon of the potenƟal magnitude and impacts of the hazard. • Previous Occurrences: A highlight of recent and historical occurrences of the hazard accompanied by the impacts or damage to the planning area, if available. • Probability of Future Occurrences: Discussion of the likelihood of the hazard occurring (or a Ɵmeframe of recurrence, if available).
• Climate Change: A discussion of how climate change may impact the locaƟon, magnitude, recurrence, or extent of the hazard into the future. • Vulnerability Assessment: A descripƟon of the potenƟal magnitude of losses associated with the hazard. Vulnerability may be expressed in quanƟtaƟve or qualitaƟve values depending upon available data. This secƟon also discusses the changes in vulnerability due to expected growth and development within the planning area.
• Changes in Vulnerability (Previous Five Years/Next Five Years): A discussion of how changes in populaƟons, development, and land use over the previous ﬁve years and projected changes over the next ﬁve years has impacted vulnerability to each hazard.
• Limited AdapƟve Capacity and AFN PopulaƟons: A discussion of how the hazard may impact idenƟﬁed limited adapƟve capacity and AFN populaƟons within the planning area and consideraƟons that have been incorporated into the miƟgaƟon strategy of this LHMP .

4-11

4.5 DAM FAILURE

4.5.1 DESCRIPTION
A dam is an arƟﬁcial barrier prevenƟng the ﬂow of water or a barrier built across a watercourse for impounding water. Dam failure is the uncontrolled release of impounded water from behind a dam. Flooding, earthquakes, blockages, landslides, lack of maintenance, improper operaƟon, poor construcƟon, vandalism, and terrorism can all cause dam infrastructure to fail.

Dam failure causes downstream ﬂooding of varying velociƟes that can result in loss of life and property.

Reservoirs are deﬁned as an arƟﬁcial lake, pond, impoundment, or tank, used to store water (both potable and non-potable). Reservoirs can be created on the surface by construc Ɵng dams to store water. Addi Ɵonally, tank reservoirs can be constructed to store water above ground, on the surface, or below ground. Reservoir failure is the uncontrolled release of impounded water from a reservoir.

Dam or reservoir failures are most likely to happen for the following reasons:1 • Overtopping, caused by water spilling over the top of the dam, usually a precursor of dam failure because of inadequate spillway design, debris blockage of spillways, or seƩlement of the dam crest;
• FoundaƟon defects, including seƩlement or slope stability; • Cracking caused by natural seƩling of a dam or seismic movements; • Inadequate maintenance and upkeep; and/or
• Piping, when seepage through a dam is not properly ﬁltered, soil parƟcles conƟnue to progress and form sinkholes in the dam.

Because dam failure can have severe consequences, FEMA and Cal OES require all dam owners to develop an Emergency Ac Ɵon Plan (EAP) for warning, evacua Ɵon, and post-ﬂood acƟons.

In the event of a major dam failure, mutual aid from all levels of government would be required for an extended period. Recovery e ﬀorts would include the removal of debris, clearing roadways, demolishing unsafe structures, assistance in reestablishing public services, and providing conƟnued care for the aﬀected populaƟon.

Dams in Fullerton are either regulated by th e California Department of Water Resources, Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD) or the Un ited States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), depending on the dam owner. DSOD ensures dam safety by:
2 • Reviewing and approving dam enlargements, repairs, alteraƟons, and removals, and ensuring that the dam appurtenant structures are designed to meet minimum requirements;

1 AssociaƟon of State Dam Safety Oﬃcials, Dam Failures and Incidents, hƩps://damsafety.org/dam- failures, accessed September 3, 2025.
2 California Department of Water Resources, Division of Safety of Dams, hƩps://water.ca.gov/Programs/All-Programs/Division-of-Safety-of-Dams, accessed September 3, 2025.

4-12
• Performing independent analyses to understand dam and appurtenant structures performance (including structural, hydrologic, hydraulic, and geotechnical evaluaƟons);
• Overseeing construcƟon to ensure work is performed in accordance with approved plans/speciﬁcaƟons;
• InspecƟng each dam on an annual basis to ensure safety and performance standards; and,
• Periodically reviewing the stability of dams/major appurtenances, as well as new ﬁndings regarding earthquake hazards and hydrologic esƟmates in California.

DSOD is responsible for assigning each jurisdicƟonal dam a downstream hazard classiﬁcaƟon.

This classiﬁcaƟon is based only on potenƟal downstream impacts to life and property, should the dam fail when opera Ɵng with a full reservoir. This hazard status is not related to the condiƟon of the dam or the likelih ood of the dam to fail in eith er the short- or long-term.

AddiƟonally, dams in southern California usually do not operate at full capacity at all Ɵmes of the year, and thus hazard risks and classi ﬁcaƟons are a worst-case scenario assessment. The DSOD de ﬁniƟons for downstream hazards are borrowed from the Federal Guidelines for InundaƟon Mapping of Flood Risks Associated with Dam Incidents and Failures and are outlined in
Table 4-4: DSOD Downstream Hazard Potential Classification Levels.

TABLE 4-4: DSOD DOWNSTREAM HAZARD POTENTIAL CLASSIFICATION LEVELS

DOWNSTREAM HAZARD

POTENTIAL CLASSIFICATION

POTENTIAL DOWNSTREAM IMPACTS TO LIFE AND

PROPERTY
Low No probable loss of human life and low economic and environmental losses. Losses are expected to be
principally limited to the owner’s property.

Signiﬁcant No probable loss of human life but can cause economic loss, environmental damage, impacts to criƟcal faciliƟes, or other signiﬁcant impacts.

High Expected to cause loss of at least one human life.

Extremely High Expected to cause considerable loss of human life or would result in an inundaƟon area with a populaƟon of
1,000 or more.

Source: California Department of Water Resources, Division of Safety of Dams, Dams within the Jurisdiction of the State of California, https://water.ca.gov/-/media/DWR-Website/Web- Pages/Programs/All-Programs/Division-of-Safety-of-Dams/Files/Publications/Dams-Within- Jurisdiction-of-the-State-of-California-Listed-Alphabetically-by-Name-September-2022.pdf, published September 2022, accessed September 3, 2025.

DSOD inspects dams once annually and provides a condi Ɵon assessment. This condi Ɵon assessment is a more accurate tool to evaluate infrastructure risk. DSOD uses the Na Ɵonal Inventory of Dams (NID) condiƟon raƟng deﬁniƟons, with addiƟonal criteria, as a guideline in assigning condiƟon assessments. This ra Ɵng system is outlined in Table 4-5: DSOD Condition Assessment Rating Levels.

4-13
TABLE 4-5: DSOD CONDITION ASSESSMENT RATING LEVELS
SAFETY
RATING

NATIONAL INVENTORY OF

DAMS DEFINITIONS

CALIFORNIA DSOD

ADDITIONAL CRITERIA
SaƟsfactory
No exisƟng or potenƟal dam safety
deﬁciencies are recognized. Acceptable
performance is expected under all loading
condiƟons (staƟc, hydrologic, seismic) in
accordance with the applicable regulatory
criteria or tolerable risk guidelines.

None.

Fair
No exisƟng dam safety deﬁciencies are
recognized for normal loading condiƟons.

Rare or extreme hydrologic and/or
seismic events may result in a dam safety
deﬁciency. Risk may be in the range to
take further acƟon.

Dam has a long-standing
deﬁciency that is not being
addressed in a Ɵmely
manner.

Dam is not cerƟﬁed and its
safety is under evaluaƟon.

Dam is restricted and
operaƟon of the reservoir at
the lower level does not
miƟgate the deﬁciency.

Poor
A dam safety deﬁciency is recognized for
loading condiƟons that may realisƟcally
occur. Remedial acƟon is necessary. A
poor raƟng may also be used when
uncertainƟes exist as to criƟcal analysis
parameters that idenƟfy a potenƟal dam
safety deﬁciency. Further invesƟgaƟons
and studies are necessary.

Dam has mulƟple
deﬁciencies or a signiﬁcant
deﬁciency that require
extensive remedial work.

UnsaƟsfactory
A dam safety deﬁciency is recognized that
require immediate or emergency
remedial acƟon for problem resoluƟon.

None.

Not Rated
The dam has not been inspected, is not
under State jurisdicƟon, or has been
inspected but, for whatever reason, has
not been rated.

None.

For dams owned and operated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) the Dam Safety AcƟon ClassiﬁcaƟon System (DSAC) is used based on their inspecƟons to determine the probability of failure and poten Ɵal safety, economic and environmental risks. This ra Ɵng system is outlined in Table 4-6: USACE Dam Safety Action Classification System.

4-14
TABLE 4-6: USACE DAM SAFETY ACTION CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM SAFETY
CLASS
SAFETY

CHARACTERISTICS DESCRIPTION
DSAC I
(Urgent and
Compelling)
Unsafe; CriƟcally near
failure or extreme high
risk
Dams where progression toward failure is
conﬁrmed to be taking place under normal
operaƟons, and the dam is almost certain to
fail under normal operaƟons within a Ɵme
frame from immediately to within a few years
without intervenƟon; or the combinaƟon of
life or economic consequences with
probability of failure is extremely high.

DSAC II (High
Urgency)
Unsafe or PotenƟally
Unsafe; Failure iniƟaƟon
foreseen or very high
risk
Dams where failure could begin during normal
operaƟons or be iniƟated as the consequence
of an event. The likelihood of failure from one
of these occurrences, prior to remediaƟon, is
too high to assure public safety; or the
combinaƟon of life or economic consequences
with probability of failure is very high.

DSAC III
(Moderate
Urgency)
CondiƟonally Unsafe;
Signiﬁcantly inadequate
or moderate to high risk
Dams that have issues where the dam is
signiﬁcantly inadequate, or the combinaƟon of
life, economic or environmental consequences
with probability of failure is moderate to high.

DSAC IV (Low
Urgency)
Marginally Safe;
Inadequate with low
risk
Dams are inadequate with low risk such that
the combinaƟon of life, economic or
environmental consequences with a
probability of failure is low, and the dam may
not meet all essenƟal USACE engineering
guidelines.

DSAC V
(Normal)
Adequately Safe;
Residual risk considered
tolerable
Dams considered adequately safe, meeƟng all
essenƟal agency guidelines, and the residual
risk is considered tolerable.

Source: USACE, Dam Safety Program, https://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-Works/Dam- Safety-Program/Program-Activities/, accessed September 3, 2025.

Dam or reservoir failure within highly urbanized areas like the City can be catastrophic and result in property damage, destruc Ɵon, and loss of life. Reservoirs in Orange County are regularly inspected and monitored to ensure structural integrity and safety; thus, most issues are idenƟﬁed early and immediately rec Ɵﬁed to prevent dam failure. Dam failures can also increase in magnitude and severity when coupled with other natural disasters. Earthquakes or heavy rain can threaten the structural integrity of dam/reservoir infrastructure and create challenging condiƟons for emergency response.

4.5.2 LOCATION/EXTENT
CriƟcal dams and reservoirs within and in proximity to the City of Fullerton, are listed in Table 4-7: Dams and Reservoirs Within or Affecting City of Fullerton. Dam inundaƟon maps show areas downstream that would be inundated by water from an uninten Ɵonal release of water from a dam’s reservoir. There are ﬁve dams that have poten Ɵal impact on the planning area; the

4-15
locaƟon of each dam and the extent of failure are described below, and shown in Figure 4-1:

Dam Inundation Map.

TABLE 4-7: DAMS AND RESERVOIRS WITHIN OR AFFECTING THE CITY OF FULLERTON DAM
NAME

DAM OWNER HAZARD

CLASSIFICATION

TYPE SIZE DSOD

CONDITION/
DSAC
Fullerton
Dam
USACE High Earthen
Embankment
1,342
acre-
feet
DSAC V
(Normal)
Prado
Dam
USACE High Earthen
Embankment
295,581
acre-
feet
DSAC II (High
Urgency)
Carbon
Canyon
Dam
USACE High Earthen
Embankment
12,063
acre-
feet
DSAC II (High
Urgency)
Orange
County
Reservoir
Metropolitan
Water District
Low Earthen
Embankment
217
acre-
feet
SaƟsfactory
Brea Dam USACE High Earthen
Embankment
7,420
acre-
feet

DSAC IV
(Low
Urgency)
Source: US Army Corps of Engineers, National Inventory of Dams, https://nid.sec.usace.army.mil/#/, accessed September 3, 2025.

FIGURE 4-1: DAM INUNDATION MAP

4-16
Fullerton Dam is owned and operated by the USACE and is located in the northeast porƟon of the City just west of State Route 57 and south of Craig Regional Park. The dam is an earthen embankment constructed in 1941. It has a ma ximum storage capacity of 1,342 acre-feet; however, because the dam is designed primarily for ﬂood control, its reservoir is typically dry and only impounds water during signi ﬁcant storm events or the unlikely scenario of an upstream dam failure. Under the DSAC, Fullerton Dam is designated as DSAC V, indicaƟng the dam is considered adequately safe with a normal priority for safety ac Ɵon.3 Despite this classiﬁcaƟon, the dam carries a high downstream hazard potenƟal. A high downstream hazard potenƟal classi ﬁcaƟon indicates that, in the event of a dam failure while opera Ɵng at full capacity, the resulƟng inundaƟon is expected to cause the loss of at least one human life. The downstream hazard poten Ɵal is based solely on poten Ɵal downstream impacts to life and property should these dams fail when opera Ɵng with a full reservoir and is not an indica Ɵon of structural integrity or probability of failure. Inunda Ɵon from a dam failure would a ﬀect areas throughout the City of Fullerton, par Ɵcularly along Fullerton Creek, including southern porƟons of the City and the downtown area. The extent of ﬂooding would depend on the nature and severity of the failure. Because the dam is usually dry, the likelihood of such extensive inundaƟon is low under normal operaƟng condiƟons.

Prado Dam is owned and operated by the USACE and is located in San Bernardino County approximately 16 miles east of Fullerton along the Santa Ana River. The dam is an earth-ﬁlled embankment constructed in 1941 and has a maximum capacity of 295,581 acre-feet. The dam has been classi ﬁed as DSAC II, which is described as high urgency of ac Ɵon.4 Prado Dam is classiﬁed as having a high downstream hazard poten Ɵal, meaning that a failure while operaƟng at full capacity could result in loss of life and signi ﬁcant impacts to property. This classiﬁcaƟon reﬂects the potenƟal consequences of such a failure and not the dam’s structural condiƟon or the likelihood of failure. The dam serves as a major ﬂood control basin and is the primary regulaƟng structure on the Santa Ana River; typically, Prado Dam is not impounding water at its maximum capacity. USACE has control measures to release water from the reservoir depending on the surface elevaƟon of water behind the dam, however, there would potenƟally be signi ﬁcant impacts in the event of a dam failure at maximum capacity.

InundaƟon would potenƟally impact a sizeable porƟon of the City. The inundaƟon zone would also potenƟally inundate areas downstream and travel to the Paci ﬁc Ocean. The Prado Dam Emergency AcƟon Plan, prepared in 2021, es Ɵmated that the populaƟon at risk could be 1.4 million for a maximum capacity failure scenario.5
Carbon Canyon Dam is owned and operated by USACE and is located within an unincorporated area of Orange County to the northeast of Fullerton. The dam is an earthen embankment constructed in 1961 by USACE as a ﬂood control measure for the Carbon Canyon Creek drainage basin. The NID notes that Carbon Canyon Dam has a capacity of 12,063 acre-feet and

3 US Army Corps of Engineers, NaƟonal Inventory of Dams, hƩps://nid.sec.usace.army.mil/#/, accessed September 3, 2025.
4 US Army Corps of Engineers, NaƟonal Inventory of Dams, hƩps://nid.sec.usace.army.mil/#/, accessed September 3, 2025.
5 US Army Corps of Engineers, Flood Emergency AcƟon Plan: Prado Dam, December 2021.

4-17
is classiﬁed as DSAC II, which is described as high urgency. 6 Carbon Canyon Dam is classi ﬁed as having a high downstream hazard potenƟal, indicaƟng that a failure at full reservoir capacity could result in loss of life and serious damage to downstream property. This designa Ɵon is based solely on the poten Ɵal consequences of such a failure and does not re ﬂect the dam’s structural integrity or the likelihood of failure. InundaƟon would potenƟally impact signiﬁcant porƟons of the City, entering from the northeast and following Fullerton Creek throughout southern porƟons of the City. However, since the dam is primarily designed for ﬂood control, its reservoir remains dry under normal condi Ɵons and only stores water during major storm events or in the rare event of an upstream dam failure.

Orange County Reservoir is owned and operated by the Metropolitan Water District and is located north of the City of Fullerton and just west of State Route 57. Constructed in 1941, this earthen embankment reservoir has a rela Ɵvely small maximum storage capacity of 217 acre-feet. According to the DSOD, the reservoir has a SaƟsfactory condiƟon assessment raƟng and is classiﬁed as having a low hazard potenƟal.7 In the event of a failure, inundaƟon would primarily aﬀect the northeastern por Ɵons of Fullerton, with ﬂow potenƟally reaching Craig Regional Park and conƟnuing downstream toward Fullerton Dam.

Brea Dam is owned and operated by USACE and is located near the center of the City of Fullerton. Constructed in 1942 as an earthen embankment, the dam serves primarily as a ﬂood control facility. In addiƟon to the main embankment, Brea Dam includes a saddle dike located approximately 0.8 miles north of the dam within the Fullerton Golf Course. A saddle dike is a secondary embankment constructed across a natural low point in the surrounding terrain.

According to the NID, Brea Dam has a maximum storage capacity of 7,420 acre-feet and is classiﬁed as DSAC IV, indica Ɵng low urgency. 8 Despite this, the dam carries a high hazard potenƟal classiﬁcaƟon due to the potenƟal downstream impacts in the event of failure. A high downstream hazard potenƟal classiﬁcaƟon means that failure at full reservoir capacity could result in loss of life and signi ﬁcant property damage. However, because the dam is designed primarily for ﬂood control, its reservoir is typically dry and only impounds water during signiﬁcant storm events or the unlikely scenario of an upstream dam failure. A failure event at full capacity would poten Ɵally a ﬀect central areas of Fullerton, par Ɵcularly around Harbor Boulevard, downtown Fullerton, and southwestern por Ɵons of the City south of West Chapman Avenue and Malvern Avenue.

4.5.3 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES
While California’s dam infrastructure is relaƟvely modern, the state has already experienced several signiﬁcant dam-related incidents — including one in Fullerton itself. On February 22, 2005, following a period of intense winter rainfall, the Brea Dam reservoir exceeded its

6 US Army Corps of Engineers, NaƟonal Inventory of Dams, hƩps://nid.sec.usace.army.mil/#/, accessed September 3, 2025.
7 US Army Corps of Engineers, NaƟonal Inventory of Dams, hƩps://nid.sec.usace.army.mil/#/, accessed September 3, 2025.
8 US Army Corps of Engineers, NaƟonal Inventory of Dams, hƩps://nid.sec.usace.army.mil/#/, accessed September 3, 2025.

4-18
capacity, resul Ɵng in water spilling over the dam’s crest. The over ﬂow caused localized ﬂooding at the Fullerton Golf Course and along Bastanchury Road. Impacts included the closure of Bastanchury Road for one day, the golf course sustained damage, and an adjacent storm channel was eroded by the ﬂoodwaters. The event highlighted the importance of spillway capacity and stormwater management during extreme weather events.9 AddiƟonally, a documented incident at Prado Dam occurred in January 2005, a Ōer an extended period of heavy precipitaƟon, water began seeping through the dam infrastructure.

AŌer the seepage was detected, more than 2,000 residents in Riverside and Orange CounƟes were evacuated from downstream inunda Ɵon zones. Flows were safely released into the Santa Ana River to relieve pressure on the dam and seepage was contained before authoriƟes oﬃcially rescinded the voluntary evacuaƟon the next day.10 Failure risk of Prado Dam has been a recurring concern since the seepage in 2005. While this incident did not impact Fullerton, it serves as a reminder of potenƟal threats from dam and reservoir infrastructure aﬀecƟng the City.

California has also seen catastrophic dam failures with far-reaching consequences. One of the most devastaƟng occurred in San Francisquito Canyon with the collapse of the St. Francis Dam on March 13, 1928. The disaster remains one of the worst engineering failures in U.S. history and led to major reforms in dam safety standards. Another notable failure occurred at the Baldwin Hills Dam in Los Angeles on Decemb er 14, 1963. A structural breach released approximately 250 million gallons of reservoi r water. The Baldwin Hills Dam failure underscored the importance of real- Ɵme monitoring and emergency response planning in urban dam seƫngs.

No federally declared disasters relaƟng to dam or reservoir failure have occurred including the planning area within the last ﬁve years; refer to T able 4 - 3 0: Summary o f Declar ed Disas t er s Affecting the Planning Area.

4.5.4 PROBABILITY OF FUTURE OCCURRENCES
The likelihood of future dam failure events impacƟng the City of Fullerton is informed by both historical context and current dam safety assessments. While past incidents, such as the 2005 Brea Dam over ﬂow and the Prado Dam seepage event, serve as reminders of poten Ɵal vulnerabiliƟes, the condi Ɵon raƟngs of nearby dams provide a more current and technical basis for evaluaƟng risk. Among the dams with poten Ɵal to aﬀect Fullerton, Prado Dam and Carbon Canyon Dam are both classiﬁed by the USACE as DSAC II, indicaƟng a high urgency of acƟon. In contrast, Brea Dam and Fullerton Dam are generally dry and carry lower classiﬁcaƟons, DSAC IV and DSAC V, respecƟvely. This suggests low to normal priority for safety acƟon. The Orange County Reservoir, used for water storage, is rated as “SaƟsfactory” by the DSOD, indicaƟng no known deﬁciencies.

9 Rancho SanƟago Community College District, RSCCD Natural Hazard MiƟgaƟon Plan, 2016. 10 Los Angeles Times, 2,000 Near Dam Are Evacuated, hƩps://www.laƟmes.com/archives/la-xpm- 2005-jan-15-me-prado15-story.html, accessed September 3, 2025.

4-19
Based on these assessments, future dam failure is considered to have an occasional probability of directly impac Ɵng Fullerton. An occasional probability means a one to 10 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years.

Most nearby dams are either dry under normal condi Ɵons or have been evaluated as structurally sound or manageable under current safety protocols. However, the presence of high-priority dams like Prado and Carbon Canyon, combined with Fullerton’s urbanized seƫng, means that any failure, however unlikely, could have signiﬁcant consequences.

4.5.5 CLIMATE CHANGE
Climate change could indirectly increase the likelihood of dam/reservoir infrastructure failure.

Increased severe storm events and ﬂooding incidents could increase strain on dam/reservoir infrastructure, including dams within and upstream of the City. This is evidenced by the 2005 seepage incident at Prado Dam, triggered by unusually high repe ƟƟve rain events. Incidents such as this one could increase “wear and tear” and require addi Ɵonal maintenance and infrastructure improvements to protect dam integrity and func Ɵon. Addi Ɵonally, increased climate change-induced rains may cause more erosion which could compromise the structural integrity of the dam or the foundaƟon it sits on. Severe storm events could also oversaturate soils and compromise dam infrastructure.

4.5.6 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
At the Ɵme of LHMP development, detailed dam inunda Ɵon maps illustraƟng ﬂood depths, Ɵming, or other data was not consistently available for all dams that could potenƟally impact the City of Fullerton. This is a Ʃributed to the mix of local and federal ownership of dam infrastructure. Therefore, this vulnerability assessment uses planning level data from the City of Fullerton General Plan and the previous LHMP that illustrates the extent of inundaƟon only and does not provide detail related to ﬂood depths or Ɵming.

Signiﬁcant overlap exists between dam failure and ﬂood inundaƟon areas in the City, resulƟng in shared areas of vulnerable assets. An inventory of these vulnerable assets is provided in Table 4-8: Critical Facilities and Facilities of Concern Vulnerable to Dam Failure, which outlines the speciﬁc faciliƟes vulnerable to the dam failure hazard.

TABLE 4-8: CRITICAL FACILITIES AND FACILITIES OF CONCERN VULNERABLE TO DAM

FAILURE

4-20

ID NAME FACILITY TYPE REPLACEMENT
VALUE
11 Maple Community Center Community Center $3,312,650
12 Richman Community Center Community Center $3,312,650 13 Main Library Library Not Available
14 Gilbert Community Center Community Center $3,312,650 15 Amerige Park Park Not Available
17 Fullerton Museum Center Museum $3,312,650
19 Fullerton Community Center Community Center $3,312,650 21 Independence Park Park Not Available
23 Fullerton Airport Airport $14,306,673
25 Bridge 55C0147 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
26 Bridge 55C0290 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
27 Bridge 55C0292 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
28 Bridge 55C0288 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
29 Bridge 55C0293 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
30 Bridge 55C0291 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
31 Bridge 55C0224 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
32 Bridge 55C0228 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
33 Bridge 55C0226 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
34 Bridge 55C0225 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
35 Bridge 55C0227 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
36 Bridge 55C0229 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
37 Bridge 55C0386 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
38 Bridge 55C0230 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
40 Bridge 55C0346 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
41 Bridge 55C0289 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
45 Bridge 55C0233 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
46 Bridge 55C0231 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
47 Bridge 55C0235 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
48 Bridge 55C0294 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
49 Bridge 55C0243 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
50 Bridge 55C0242 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
51 Bridge 55C0244 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
52 Bridge 55C0234 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
53 Bridge 55C0418 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
54 Bridge 55C0703 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
57 Bridge 55C0296 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
61 Bridge 55C0384 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
62 Bridge 55C0308 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
63 Bridge 55C0236 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
65 Bridge 55C0232 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
66 Bridge 55C0263 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
67 Bridge 55C0585 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
68 Bridge 55C0310 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
69 Bridge 55C0311 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
70 Bridge 55C0312 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
71 Bridge 55C0664 Bridge Assumed $583/SF

4-21

ID NAME FACILITY TYPE REPLACEMENT
VALUE
72 Bridge 55C0383 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
73 Bridge 55C0385 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
74 Bridge 55C0309 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
75 Bridge 55C0307 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
76 Bridge 55C0295 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
78 Bridge 55C0685 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
96 Kimberly2 Pump Sta Ɵon (1) Pump Sta Ɵon $525,000
97 Kimberly2 Pump StaƟon (2) Pump StaƟon $525,000
98 Kimberly2 Pump Sta Ɵon (3) Pump Sta Ɵon $525,000
112 Main Plant Pump StaƟon (1) Pump StaƟon $525,000
113 Main Plant Pump Sta Ɵon (2) Pump Sta Ɵon $525,000
114 Main Plant Pump StaƟon (3) Pump StaƟon $525,000
115 Main Plant Pump Sta Ɵon (4) Pump Sta Ɵon $525,000
116 Main Plant Pump StaƟon (5) Pump StaƟon $525,000
117 Main Plant Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
134 Kimberly Well 1A PFAS Water
Treatment Plant
Water Treatment
Plant
$720,000,000
135 Main Plant Treatment Water Treatment
Plant
$720,000,000
FaciliƟes of Concern
1 Buena Park High School Educa Ɵon $72,097,328
2 Fullerton Union High School EducaƟon $57,867,998
4 La Sierra High School Educa Ɵon Not Available
5 La Vista High School EducaƟon Not Available
7 Sunny Hills High School Educa Ɵon $54,619,651
18 Maple Elementary School EducaƟon $8,418,496
19 Nicolas Junior High School Educa Ɵon $20,041,754
20 Orangethorpe Elementary School EducaƟon $16,034,073
21 Paci ﬁc Drive Elementary School Educa Ɵon $14,410,425 23 Raymond Elementary School EducaƟon Not Available
24 Richman Elementary School Educa Ɵon $19,184,566
27 Valencia Park Elementary School EducaƟon $16,754,018 28 Woodcrest Elementary School Educa Ɵon $16,095,256
33 Ruby Drive Elementary EducaƟon Not Available
35 Topaz Elementary School Educa Ɵon Not Available
36 Kids Adventure Learning Center EducaƟon Not Available 39 Arborland Montessori School -
Valencia Campus
EducaƟon Not Available
41 Ivycrest Montessori EducaƟon Not Available
42 Eastside Chris Ɵan Educa Ɵon Not Available
44 James A. Whitaker Elementary EducaƟon $16,455,229
48 Acacia Villas Assisted Living Medical $6,536,250.00
55 D'Best Care Board and Care Medical $6,536,250.00
56 Senior Living Community Medical $6,536,250.00
57 Cherub Home Medical $6,536,250.00
59 Kindred Hospital Brea - Subacute Medical $6,536,250.00

4-22

ID NAME FACILITY TYPE REPLACEMENT
VALUE
60 Gordon Lane Convalescent Hospital Medical $6,536,250.00 67 Santa Ana Armory Cold Weather
Shelter
Community
Services
$6,536,250.00
In total, 70 cri Ɵcal faciliƟes are located within the dam failure hazard zone. These include municipal buildings, police and ﬁre staƟons essen Ɵal for emergency response, community centers that may serve as emergency staging areas or gathering sites, transporta Ɵon infrastructure such as bridges, and key water system uƟliƟes including pump staƟons and two water treatment plants. Addi Ɵonally, 27 facili Ɵes of concern are poten Ɵally vulnerable, primarily consisƟng of schools and several healthcare and assisted living facili Ɵes that serve sensiƟve populaƟons.

If any or all of these facili Ɵes were impacted by dam inunda Ɵon, the consequences for the City of Fullerton would be severe. Damage to infrastructure and service providers would hinder emergency response, disrupt power and water delivery, and impair transporta Ɵon networks, including major evacua Ɵon routes. The loss or impairment of these assets would signiﬁcantly aﬀect the City's ability to respond to the disaster and recover in its aŌermath.

Based on popula Ɵon es Ɵmates u Ɵlized for the ﬂood hazard vulnerability assessment, approximately 88,625 residents are es Ɵmated to be vulnerable to the dam failure hazard within the City of Fullerton. This es Ɵmate reﬂects the signi ﬁcant overlap between mapped ﬂood inundaƟon areas and poten Ɵal dam failure inunda Ɵon zones. While some dams have smaller inunda Ɵon footprints that would a ﬀect fewer residents, this ﬁgure represents a conservaƟve esƟmate of potenƟal exposure. The LHMP Planning Team intenƟonally selected a conservaƟve approach to ensure that vulnerability is not underesƟmated and that miƟgaƟon strategies adequately address populaƟons most at risk.

In the event of dam failure, certain popula Ɵons in the City of Fullerton would be par Ɵcularly vulnerable to impacts, including older adults over the age of 65 and residents living in crowded households or mul Ɵ-unit housing where evacua Ɵon and emergency response may be more challenging. These populaƟons may face increased challenges related to evacuaƟon, mobility, access to informa Ɵon, and recovery following a disaster. Older adults may also be more suscepƟble to health complica Ɵons during emergencies, while residents in dense housing environments may experience compounding impacts due to shared infrastructure and limited egress opƟons.

4.5.7 CHANGES IN VULNERABILITY (PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS/NEXT FIVE YEARS) Since the previously prepared 2020 LHMP , the City of Fullerton has experienced minimal changes in populaƟon and land use. The popula Ɵon increased by less than one percent, and development acƟvity was largely limited to residen Ɵal inﬁll, mixed-use redevelopment, and rehabilitaƟon of exis Ɵng structures. While the total number of housing units grew by approximately 4.2 percent, this modest increase in residenƟal density suggests only a marginal rise in vulnerability to dam and reservoir failure. Given the assump Ɵon that the enƟre city is potenƟally vulnerable to dam inunda Ɵon, any new development over the past ﬁve years,

4-23
regardless of locaƟon, represents a slight increase in exposure. However, the overall stability in popula Ɵon pa Ʃerns and land use over the past ﬁve years indicates that changes in vulnerability have been minimal.

Looking ahead, Fullerton is expected to accommodate signi ﬁcant residenƟal growth, driven by its obligaƟon to meet the Regional Housing Need AllocaƟon (RHNA) target of 13,209 units by 2029. The City’s strategy to meet this goal includes inﬁll development, adapƟve reuse, and zoning ﬂexibility, parƟcularly through the Housing IncenƟve Overlay Zone (HIOZ), which spans 759 parcels across various corridors. These e ﬀorts will likely result in increased residen Ɵal density and redevelopment throughout the city. Addi Ɵonally, a diverse mix of development projects including mul Ɵ-family housing, student accommoda Ɵons, industrial expansion, and commercial revitalizaƟon will reshape the urban landscape. Upcoming development projects, combined with an Ɵcipated infrastructure improvements, suggest a moderate increase in exposure to dam and reservoir failure over the next ﬁve years.

While past development trends have resulted in only marginal increases in exposure, future growth, parƟcularly in residenƟal density and mixed-use redevelopment, will likely elevate the City’s overall vulnerability.

4.5.8 LIMITED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY AND AFN POPULATIONS
SecƟon 3.8, Whole Community and Access and Func Ɵonal Needs , includes a detailed determinaƟon of vulnerable populaƟons within the planning area, including census tracts with concentraƟons of individuals with AFN or limited adap Ɵve capacity. Dam failure poses a signiﬁcant risk to porƟons of the City of Fullerton, with par Ɵcular concentraƟon in the south and southwestern regions of the City. Notably, mapped dam inunda Ɵon zones overlap with census tracts formally designated as areas with limited adap Ɵve capacity and AFN populaƟons, including Census Tracts 001801, 001802, 001902, 011601, 011602, 011403, 011502, 011504, and 011711. These tracts are known to have high concentra Ɵons of older adults, individuals with disabili Ɵes, linguis Ɵcally isolated households, and residents in crowded households, mulƟ-unit housing, or persons living in group quarters.

The primary concern for those with AFN is evacuaƟons and access to resources and emergency services in the event of dam failure. People aged 65 and older may have mobility issues, disabiliƟes, or chronic health condiƟons that complicate evacuaƟon and access to emergency services. Disabled paƟents in congregate care, assisted living faciliƟes, or similar paƟent care environments are par Ɵcularly vulnerable to the e ﬀects of dam failure. Limited mobility and dependence on caregivers make evacua Ɵon extremely challenging when faced with sudden emergencies like dam inunda Ɵon. PopulaƟons with linguis Ɵc isola Ɵon may face challenges with emergency instrucƟons, and communicaƟon barriers may prevent them from receiving or understanding emergency alerts. Households in mul Ɵ-unit housing crowded households, and persons in group quarters may lack ﬁnancial resources, making it di ﬃcult to secure transportaƟon and temporary housing during evacua Ɵons. Further, these groups might face overcrowding and limited escape routes, increasing the risk during evacuaƟons.

4-24
ConsideraƟons for vulnerable groups throughout the planning area were incorporated into the miƟgaƟon strategy in SecƟon 5. Speciﬁcally, the LHMP Planning Team tailored MiƟgaƟon AcƟons #1, 3, 11 and 18 with these groups in mind, e ﬀorts to educate and inform them of available resources to prepare for and respond to hazard events.

4.6 FLOOD

4.6.1 DESCRIPTION
Flooding occurs when a waterway (either natural or arƟﬁcial drainage channel) receives more water than capable of conveying, causing the water level in the waterway to rise. Depending on how long these condi Ɵons last and the amount of runo ﬀ the waterway receives in proporƟon to its capacity, the rising water level may eventually overtop the waterway’s banks or any other boundaries to the drainage area, resulƟng in ﬂooding.

Floods oŌen occur during heavy precipitaƟon events, when the amount of rainwater exceeds the capacity of storm drains or ﬂood control channels. Floods can also happen when infrastructure such as levees, dams, or culverts fail, or when a sec Ɵon of drainage infrastructure fails, and water cannot be drained from an area quickly enough. These failures can be linked to precipitaƟon events (i.e., when water erodes away a levee, allowing water to escape and ﬂood nearby areas), or can be a consequence of other emergency situaƟons (i.e., a dam collapsing due to an earthquake). FEMA de ﬁnes ﬂood or ﬂooding as a general and temporary condiƟon of parƟal or complete inundaƟon of normally dry land areas from:11 • The overﬂow of inland or Ɵdal waters;
• The unusual and rapid accumulaƟon or runoﬀ of surface waters from any source; or, • Mudslides (i.e., mudﬂows) which are proximately caused by ﬂooding and are akin to a river of liquid and ﬂowing mud on the surfaces of normally dry land areas, as when earth is carried by a current of water and deposited along the path of the current; or • Collapse or subsidence of land along the shore of a lake or similar body of water as a result of erosion or undermining caused by waves or currents of water exceeding anƟcipated cyclical levels that result in a ﬂood as deﬁned above.

Floods can be caused by a number of factors, including:
• Weather and climate paƩerns (e.g., El Niño, La Niña, Pineapple Express, Atmospheric River, etc.)
o El Niño and La Niña are complex weather paƩerns resulƟng from variaƟons in ocean temperatures in the equatorial Paciﬁc. Warmer or colder than average ocean temperatures in one part of the world can inﬂuence weather around the globe. El Niño and La Niña episodes typically last 9 to 12 months, but some prolonged events may last for years.
12 11 FEMA, Glossary: Flood, hƩps://www.fema.gov/about/glossary/b, accessed September 4, 2025. 12 NOAA, What are El Nino and La Nina?, hƩps://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/ninonina.html, accessed September 4, 2025.

4-25
o Pineapple Express is a name given to an atmospheric river on the West Coast. It is a channel in the atmosphere that moves vast amounts of moisture and can result in massive rain showers.
• Hydrologic features such as reservoirs, ponds, lakes, rivers, etc., can have a large impact on the amount of ﬂooding.
• The absorpƟon capacity of the ground depends on the composiƟon of soil and bedrock of the area. Less absorbent soil condiƟons in addiƟon to lack of proper storm infrastructure can result in ﬂooding.
• Type and density of vegetaƟon is related to moisture absorpƟon aﬀecƟng the ﬂow of water.
• PaƩerns of land use/urbanizaƟon relates to the pervious and impervious nature of the ground.
• Expected level, age, and condiƟon of ﬂood management infrastructure can impact ﬂooding condiƟons.
• Large-scale wildﬁres dramaƟcally alter the terrain and ground condiƟons. VegetaƟon absorbs rainfall, reducing runoﬀ. However, wildﬁres leave the ground charred, barren, and unable to properly absorb water, creaƟng condiƟons ripe for ﬂash ﬂooding and debris ﬂow. Flood risk remains signiﬁcantly higher unƟl vegetaƟon is restored – up to ﬁve years aŌer a wildﬁre.13
The force of ﬂood can be enough to carry away large objects and damage structures, causing considerable damage to buildings and infrastructure. In severe instances, ﬂoodwaters themselves can destroy structures or move structures o ﬀ founda Ɵons. Floods can saturate and weaken the soil, poten Ɵally making structures or infrastructure more suscep Ɵble to damage or collapse. Flooding can also a ﬀect water quality, as large volumes of water can transport contaminants into water bodies and overload storm/wastewater systems.

AddiƟonally, large increases in water volume can cause water body erosion and loss of aquaƟc habitat. Flood events may be parƟcularly destrucƟve when they create condiƟons conducive to geologic hazards including landslides or debris ﬂows.

4.6.2 LOCATION/EXTENT
The City of Fullerton is located in the Coyote Creek Watershed, the northernmost watershed in Orange County.14 This watershed ulƟmately ﬂows into Coyote Creek, the San Gabriel River and then the Paci ﬁc Ocean. Locally, the City is traversed by Fullerton Creek and Brea Creek, which ﬂow southwest from Chino Hills and serve as primary drainage pathways during storm events.

13 FEMA, Flood Risk Increases AŌer Fires Are Out – Buy Flood Insurance Now, hƩps://www.fema.gov/fact-sheet/4562/ﬂood-risk-increases-aŌer-ﬁres-are-out-buy-ﬂood-insurance- now, published October 21, 2020, accessed September 4, 2025. 14 Orange County Public Works, Orange County GIS Open Data Portal: Our Watersheds, hƩps://data- ocpw.opendata.arcgis.com/maps/OCPW::orange-county-our-
watersheds/explore?locaƟon=33.766961%2C-117.759619%2C11.14, accessed September 5, 2025.

4-26
Flood z ones in Fullerton are determined by Flood Insur ance Rate Maps (FIRMs). FIRMs are produced by FEMA and shows ﬂood hazard areas. These may include high-hazard areas, moderate- to low-hazard areas, and undetermined areas. A high-hazard area is iden Ɵﬁed as a special ﬂood hazard area (SFHA) denoƟng the 100-year ﬂoodplain (Zone A, AE, AO, AH, VE, V). A FIRM map also includes the 500-year ﬂoodplain (Zone X), classi ﬁed as moderate and minimal risk areas. A 100-year ﬂood event has a 1 in 100 chance (1 percent) of occurring in any given year; a 500-year ﬂood event has a 1 in 500 chance (0.2 percent). This data is incorporated into FIRMs to support the NaƟonal Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and provide the basis for community ﬂoodplain management regula Ɵons and ﬂood insurance requirements. Table 4-9: Flood Zone Definitions idenƟﬁes each ﬂood zone type within the City.

TABLE 4-9: FLOOD ZONE DEFINITIONS

FLOOD ZONE RISK
(SFHA) Floodplain – 100-year ﬂood zone (AO) 1% annual ﬂood risk 500-year ﬂood zone (X) 0.2% annual ﬂood risk
Area of minimal ﬂood hazard Minimal ﬂood risk
Source: FEMA, FEMA Flood Maps and Zones Explained, https://www.fema.gov/blog/fema-flood- maps-and-zones-explained, accessed September 5, 2025.

Figure 4-2: FEMA Flood Zones idenƟﬁes the ﬂood hazard areas within the City. In Fullerton the 100-year ﬂoodplain is not a conƟguous area but consists instead of various pockets across the City. Primarily these include a residenƟal area northeast of the intersec Ɵon of I-5 and SR-91, a porƟon of land that follows the Union Paci ﬁc Railway abuƫng Bastanchury Road between Parks Road and W Malvern Avenue, and other small pockets throughout the City. In contrast, the 500-year ﬂoodplain covers a large secƟon of Fullerton. Most of the City south of Malvern Avenue and Chapman Avenue, a mulƟfamily neighborhood across SR-57 from California State University, Fullerton (CSUF), and sec Ɵons of Harbor Boulevard south of the Brea Dam are included in the 500-year ﬂoodplain category.

Localized ﬂooding can occur outside of mapped ﬂood hazard zones, especially during heavy rain events. Localized ﬂooding typically occurs when signi ﬁc an t amoun ts of r ain f all ov er a short Ɵme period and/or, as a result of overloaded or blocked stormwater drainage systems, cause sheet ﬂow into streets and low-lying areas. Localized ﬂooding has been noted to occur in the following areas:
• The intersecƟon of Orangethorpe Ave. and Raymond Ave, • The length of Commonwealth Ave. from S. Richman Ave. to Euclid St. • The length of Brookhurst Road between Orangethorpe Ave. and SR-91 • The intersecƟon of N. Yale Ave. and E. Brookdale Pl.
• The length of Dorothy Ln. between Raymond Ave. and Acacia Ave. • The length of N. Arroyo Pl. to the extent that it is unusable for evacuaƟons • The length of Julie Ave.

4-27
The extent or magnitude of ﬂooding is measured by percentage and annual chance ﬂoods.

The ﬂooding areas are classi ﬁed as 1 in 100 (one percent) or high risk, and 1 in 500 (0.2 percent) or moderate risk of ﬂooding. Areas having a chance of less than 0.2 percent are classiﬁed as low risk areas. Floods are measured by stream gages that are installed in bodies of water near populated areas. They are in stalled and operated by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and conƟnuously monitor water levels.

4.6.3 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES
The City of Fullerton has experienced mulƟple signiﬁcant ﬂood events throughout its history, parƟcularly in the early to mid-20th century. According to historical accounts and regional ﬂood control documenta Ɵon, Fullerton was notably impacted by ﬂoods throughout the nineteenth and twenƟeth centuries.

Between December 1861 to January 1862, a 30-da y-long period of rain called the “Noachian Deluge of California” poured across all of California. The Santa Ana River over ﬂowed and spread across all of the low-lying areas of Orange County between Anaheim and the Coyote Hills (present-day Fullerton) in a four-foot-deep sea. Twenty deaths were recorded in Orange County alone. 15 In 1900 and 1916, intense rainfall overwhelmed natural drainage systems, prompƟng the eventual forma Ɵon of the Orange County Flood Control District in 1927 to address recurring ﬂood risks.16
The 1938 ﬂood, one of Southern California’s most catastrophic weather events, severely aﬀected Fullerton and surrounding areas. Between February 27 and March 4, approximately

5.16 inches of rainfall fell over 36 hours, causing widespread ﬂooding throughout the Santa Ana River watershed. Fullerton experienced inunda Ɵon along Brea Creek, which over ﬂowed and led to signiﬁcant property damage. In response, the Works Progress AdministraƟon (WPA) constructed the Brea Creek Channel in 1940, followed by the Brea Dam and Fullerton Dam in 1941, as part of a regional ﬂood control eﬀort led by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 17 In February 1969, a 100-year storm event brought over 7 inches of rainfall to Orange County.

Thanks to the ﬂood control infrastructure developed aŌer the 1938 disaster, including dams, channels, and storm drain, Fullerton was largely protected from the severe impacts experienced in earlier decades. Reports credit the system with prevenƟng over $1.5 billion in damages across the region.

15 NOAA NaƟonal Weather Service, A History of Signiﬁcant Weather Events in Southern California, hƩps://www.weather.gov/media/sgx/documents/weatherhistory.pdf, updated March, 2025, accessed September 5, 2025.
16 Living New Deal, Brea Creek Flood Control Project – Fullerton CA, hƩps://livingnewdeal.org/sites/brea-creek-ﬂood-control-project-fullerton-ca/, accessed September 5, 2025.
17 Living New Deal, Brea Creek Flood Control Project – Fullerton CA, hƩps://livingnewdeal.org/sites/brea-creek-ﬂood-control-project-fullerton-ca/, accessed September 5, 2025.

4-28

4-29
More recently, Fullerton has experienced several impac ƞul ﬂood events Ɵed to atmospheric river storms and tropical systems. In December 2021, a series of winter storms swept through Southern California, triggering ﬂash ﬂood warnings and mandatory evacua Ɵons in parts of Orange County. While Fullerton was spared from severe damage, nearby areas experienced mudslides and debris ﬂows due to saturated soils and burn scars from previous wildﬁres.

During late February and March 2023, Southern Ca lifornia was hit by a series of powerful winter storms, including mul Ɵple atmospheric rivers and bomb cyclones. These systems brought record-breaking rainfall and above-average precipita Ɵon across the region, with Orange County experiencing widespread urban ﬂooding. Though not heavily featured in statewide damage reports, Fullerton experienced localized street ﬂooding, parƟcularly in low- lying zones and areas with older drainage infrastructure.

On August 20, 2023, Tropical Storm Hilary br ought record-breaking rainfall to Southern California, marking the ﬁrst tropical storm to hit the region in over 80 years. In Orange County, rainfall totals ranged from 1.5 to over 3 inches, with inland ciƟes like Fullerton likely receiving around 2 inches during the peak of the storm. According to Orange County Public Works, there were no signi ﬁcant issues along ﬂood control channels or major roadways, though crews responded to localized ﬂooding and blocked drains, including in residenƟal neighborhoods.18 Fullerton was not speciﬁcally named in damage reports.

In February 2024, a series of powerful winter storms led to widespread urban ﬂooding across Orange County. Fueled by back-to-back atmospheric rivers, the storms brought record- breaking rainfall, damaging winds, and ﬂash ﬂood warnings throughout Southern California.

Orange County was placed under a state of emergency due to the magnitude of the impacts.19 In the last ﬁve years, two FEMA-declared disasters and ﬁve state declared disasters for ﬂood or winter storms have aﬀected the planning area:
• EM-3591-CA: Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, and Mudslides – January 8, 2023 • EM-3592-CA: Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, Landslides, and Mudslides – March 9, 2023
• State Disaster 146: Severe Winter Storms – February 2024 • State Disaster 142: Tropical Storm Hilary – August 2023 • State Disaster 141: Severe Winter Storms – February 2023 - March 2023 • State Disaster 140: Severe Winter Storms – December 2022 - January 2023 • State Disaster 127: Severe Winter Storms – December 2021

18 Patch News, Orange County Rain Totals From Tropical Storm Hilary: Cleanup Ensues, hƩps://patch.com/california/orange-county/orange-county-rain-totals-tropical-storm-hilary-cleanup- ensues, accessed September 17, 2025.
19 California Governor’s Oﬃce, ProclamaƟon of a State of Emergency: February Winter Storms, hƩps://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/2024-2-4.Feb-Winter-Storms-SOE-Proc.pdf, accessed September 18, 2025.

4-30
Refer to Table 4-30: Summary of Declared Disasters Affecting the Planning Area for a full list of federally declared disasters aﬀecƟng the planning area.

4.6.4 PROBABILITY OF FUTURE OCCURRENCES
Based on the frequency of severe weather events and the capacity of exisƟng faciliƟes, there is a likely probability of a ﬂood occurring in Fullerton. A likely probability means a 10 to 90 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 1 to 10 years.

The majority of the City is outside of any designated ﬂood hazard zone, where a ﬂood is not likely to occur. For areas located within the 100-year ﬂood zone, the probability of ﬂood is a one percent chance in a given year that this area will be inundated by ﬂood waters. For moderate ﬂood hazard areas located within the 500-year ﬂood zone, the probability decreases to 0.2 percent chance in a given year that the area will be inundated by ﬂood water. Minimal ﬂood hazard areas exist beyond the 0.2 percent annual chance for a ﬂood zone.

AddiƟonally, since historic ﬂooding in the area, there have been signi ﬁcant regional drainage infrastructure improvements including channeliza Ɵon, ﬂood control dams/reservoirs, and debris basins to prevent Orange County from subsequent ﬂooding. The construcƟon of Prado Dam, Fullerton Dam, and Brea Dam in the 1940’s conƟnue to miƟgate ﬂood risk in the areas within and in proximity to the City of Fullerton.

4.6.5 CLIMATE CHANGE
Climate change is likely to have a direct e ﬀect on ﬂooding. According to research conducted by the University of California, Los Angeles, California will experience extremely wet and extremely dry seasons by the end of the century. It is predicted that “over the next 40 years, the State will be 300 to 400 percent more likely to have a prolonged storm sequence as severe as the one that caused the legendary California ﬂood more than 150 years ago.”20 This research team con ﬁrmed the recent ﬁndings from a New York Times ar Ɵcle Ɵtled “The Coming California Megastorm,” predic Ɵng a future superstorm exacerbated by climate change. A warmer climate can carry atmospheric rivers in rapid succession to California, tesƟng the capacity of dams and ﬂood control infrastructure. The risk of a month-long megastorm as modeled and visualized by this ar Ɵcle has a one in 50 chance of occurring annually. If global temperatures con Ɵnue to climb, the likelihood of such a storm could increase to one in 30. 21 Thus, ﬂood consideraƟons should con Ɵnue to remain a mi ƟgaƟon priority into the future.

20 UCLA Newsroom, Study forecasts a severe climate future for California, hƩps://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/california-extreme-climate-future-ucla-study, accessed September 5, 2025.
21 New York Times, The Coming California Megastorm,
hƩps://www.nyƟmes.com/interacƟve/2022/08/12/climate/california-rain-storm.html, published August 12, 2022, accessed September 5, 2025.

4-31

4.6.6 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
To idenƟfy populaƟons at risk for ﬂood hazards, hazard data layers from FEMA were overlaid and compared with City parcel data in Geographic Informa Ɵon Systems, ArcGIS. If a hazard layer either completely or parƟally overlapped with a parcel in the data layer, then the enƟre parcel is conserva Ɵvely considered vulnerable in this analysis. In some instances, the ﬂood hazard zones intersected with only small por Ɵons of individual proper Ɵes. However, to provide a detailed understanding of risk and vulnerability as part of this hazard mi ƟgaƟon plan, these parcels (including all residen Ɵal and non-residen Ɵal development on the parcel, regardless of locaƟon) are considered vulnerable.

Flooding poses a signi ﬁc a n t r i s k t o p o rƟons of the City of Fullerton, par Ɵcularly within designated 100-year and 500-year ﬂood zones, which are distributed throughout the City with notable concentraƟons in the southwestern region. These mapped ﬂood zones indicate that a range of criƟcal faciliƟes and faciliƟes of concern are potenƟally vulnerable to ﬂood impacts.

An inventory of these vulnerable assets is provided in Table 4-10: Critical Facilities and Facilities of Concern Vulnerable to Flood , which outlines the speci ﬁc faciliƟes located within the ﬂood hazard zones.

TABLE 4-10: CRITICAL FACILITIES AND FACILITIES OF CONCERN VULNERABLE TO FLOOD

ID NAME FACILITY TYPE REPLACEMENT
VALUE
CriƟcal FaciliƟes
1 City Hall Municipal
Government
$7,276,800
2 City Yard Municipal
Government
Not Available
4 Fire StaƟon 2 Fire StaƟon $1,630,720
5 Fire Sta Ɵon 3 Fire Sta Ɵon $1,630,720
7 Fire StaƟon 5 Fire StaƟon $1,630,720
9 Police Sta Ɵon Police Sta Ɵon $8,534,160
10 Garnet Community Center Community Center $3,312,650
11 Maple Community Center Community Center $3,312,650
12 Richman Community Center Community Center $3,312,650 13 Main Library Library Not Available
14 Gilbert Community Center Community Center $3,312,650 15 Amerige Park Park Not Available
17 Fullerton Museum Center Museum $3,312,650
19 Fullerton Community Center Community Center $3,312,650 21 Independence Park Park Not Available
23 Fullerton Airport Airport $14,306,673
25 Bridge 55C0147 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
26 Bridge 55C0290 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
27 Bridge 55C0292 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
28 Bridge 55C0288 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
29 Bridge 55C0293 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
30 Bridge 55C0291 Bridge Assumed $583/SF

4-32

ID NAME FACILITY TYPE REPLACEMENT
VALUE
31 Bridge 55C0224 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
32 Bridge 55C0228 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
33 Bridge 55C0226 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
34 Bridge 55C0225 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
35 Bridge 55C0227 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
36 Bridge 55C0229 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
37 Bridge 55C0386 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
38 Bridge 55C0230 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
40 Bridge 55C0346 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
41 Bridge 55C0289 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
45 Bridge 55C0233 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
46 Bridge 55C0231 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
47 Bridge 55C0235 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
48 Bridge 55C0294 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
49 Bridge 55C0243 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
50 Bridge 55C0242 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
51 Bridge 55C0244 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
52 Bridge 55C0234 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
53 Bridge 55C0418 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
54 Bridge 55C0703 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
57 Bridge 55C0296 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
61 Bridge 55C0384 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
62 Bridge 55C0308 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
63 Bridge 55C0236 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
65 Bridge 55C0232 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
66 Bridge 55C0263 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
67 Bridge 55C0585 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
68 Bridge 55C0310 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
69 Bridge 55C0311 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
70 Bridge 55C0312 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
71 Bridge 55C0664 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
72 Bridge 55C0383 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
73 Bridge 55C0385 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
74 Bridge 55C0309 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
75 Bridge 55C0307 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
76 Bridge 55C0295 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
78 Bridge 55C0685 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
96 Kimberly2 Pump Sta Ɵon (1) Pump Sta Ɵon $525,000
97 Kimberly2 Pump StaƟon (2) Pump StaƟon $525,000
98 Kimberly2 Pump Sta Ɵon (3) Pump Sta Ɵon $525,000
112 Main Plant Pump StaƟon (1) Pump StaƟon $525,000
113 Main Plant Pump Sta Ɵon (2) Pump Sta Ɵon $525,000
114 Main Plant Pump StaƟon (3) Pump StaƟon $525,000
115 Main Plant Pump Sta Ɵon (4) Pump Sta Ɵon $525,000
116 Main Plant Pump StaƟon (5) Pump StaƟon $525,000
117 Main Plant Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000

4-33

ID NAME FACILITY TYPE REPLACEMENT
VALUE
134 Kimberly Well 1A PFAS Water
Treatment Plant
Water Treatment
Plant
$720,000,000
135 Main Plant Treatment Water Treatment
Plant
$720,000,000
FaciliƟes of Concern
1 Buena Park High School Educa Ɵon $72,097,328
2 Fullerton Union High School EducaƟon $57,867,998
4 La Sierra High School Educa Ɵon Not Available
5 La Vista High School EducaƟon Not Available
7 Sunny Hills High School Educa Ɵon $54,619,651
18 Maple Elementary School EducaƟon $8,418,496
19 Nicolas Junior High School Educa Ɵon $20,041,754
20 Orangethorpe Elementary School EducaƟon $16,034,073
21 Paci ﬁc Drive Elementary School Educa Ɵon $14,410,425 23 Raymond Elementary School EducaƟon Not Available
24 Richman Elementary School Educa Ɵon $19,184,566
27 Valencia Park Elementary School EducaƟon $16,754,018 28 Woodcrest Elementary School Educa Ɵon $16,095,256
33 Ruby Drive Elementary EducaƟon Not Available
35 Topaz Elementary School Educa Ɵon Not Available
36 Kids Adventure Learning Center EducaƟon Not Available 39 Arborland Montessori School -
Valencia Campus
EducaƟon Not Available
41 Ivycrest Montessori EducaƟon Not Available
42 Eastside Chris Ɵan Educa Ɵon Not Available
44 James A. Whitaker Elementary EducaƟon $16,455,229
48 Acacia Villas Assisted Living Medical $6,536,250.00
55 D'Best Care Board and Care Medical $6,536,250.00
56 Senior Living Community Medical $6,536,250.00
57 Cherub Home Medical $6,536,250.00
59 Kindred Hospital Brea - Subacute Medical $6,536,250.00 60 Gordon Lane Convalescent Hospital Medical $6,536,250.00 67 Santa Ana Armory Cold Weather
Shelter
Community
Services
$6,536,250.00
In total, 70 criƟcal faciliƟes are located within the ﬂood hazard zones. These include municipal buildings, police and ﬁre staƟons essenƟal for emergency response, community centers that may serve as emergency staging areas or gathering sites, transportaƟon infrastructure such as bridges, and key water system u ƟliƟes including pump sta Ɵons and two water treatment plants. AddiƟonally, 27 faciliƟes of concern are potenƟally vulnerable, primarily consisƟng of schools and several healthcare and assisted living faciliƟes that serve sensiƟve populaƟons.

Flooding in these areas could disrupt emergency services, damage infrastructure, impair transportaƟon routes, and compromise water system operaƟons. The presence of criƟcal and sensiƟve faciliƟes within ﬂood-prone zones underscores the importance of targeted miƟgaƟon

4-34
strategies and emergency preparedness planning to reduce poten Ɵal impacts and enhance community resilience.

AddiƟonally, approximately 914 residenƟal units are located within the 100-year ﬂood zone (1.0 percent annual chance of ﬂood), and 29,541 residenƟal units are located within the 500- year ﬂood zone (0.2 percent annual chance of ﬂood). The vulnerability assessment cross- referenced hazard layers with parcel data layers in GIS. The number of vulnerable residen Ɵal units mul Ɵplied by the average of 2.91 persons per household for Fullerton indicates that approximately 2,660 people reside in the 100-year ﬂood zone and approximately 85,965 residents reside in the 500-year ﬂood zone. Addi Ɵonally, approximately 16,296,271 square feet and 282,620,699 square feet of non-residenƟal structures are located within the 100- and 500-year ﬂood zones respec Ɵvely. Refer to Table 4-11: Populations at Risk for Flood for a summary of vulnerable residents, residenƟal units, and non-residenƟal buildings.

TABLE 4-11: POPULATIONS AT RISK FOR FLOOD

RESIDENTS AT RISK RESIDENTIAL UNITS AT
RISK

NON-RESIDENTIAL AREA
AT RISK (SQ.FT.)
100-Year Flood (1% Chance Flood Zone)
2,660 residents 914 residenƟal units 16,296,271 sq. Ō.
500-Year Flood (0.2% Chance Flood Zone)
85,965 residents 29,541 residenƟal units 282,620,699 sq. Ō.

Flooding could directly impact the City of Fullerton and cause secondary impacts leading to displacement of residents and the destrucƟon of homes and businesses. The economic impact would include signiﬁcant losses in property value, local businesses, commercial industries, and tourism. Overall, the potenƟal social, economic, and environmental consequences of ﬂooding in the city could be far-reaching and may require investment in mi ƟgaƟon and adapta Ɵon strategies.

4.6.7 CHANGES IN VULNERABILITY (PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS/NEXT FIVE YEARS) Since the previously prepared 2020 LHMP , the Ci ty of Fullerton has experienced marginal populaƟon growth and moderate increases in housing development, primarily through residenƟal in ﬁll, mixed-use redevelopment, and rehabilita Ɵon of exis Ɵng structures. While development was not concentrated in ﬂood-prone areas, it is reasonable to assume that some new housing units and infrastructure improvements occurred within mapped ﬂood zones.

Given the mapped extent of ﬂood hazards in Fullerton, any increase in popula Ɵon or development within these zones contributes to a corresponding rise in vulnerability. However, due to the limited scale of growth and the relaƟvely stable land use paƩerns over the past ﬁve years, the overall increase in ﬂood vulnerability has likely been minimal.

Fullerton is expected to accommodate substan Ɵal residen Ɵa l g r o w t h t o m e e t i t s R H N A allocaƟon of 13,209 units by 2029. Much of this fu ture development is planned within the HIOZ, which includes parcels along Commonwealth Avenue, South Harbor Boulevard, East Valencia Drive, and other areas that overlap with the mapped 500-year ﬂood zone. These areas are likely to see increased residen Ɵal density through mul Ɵ-family and higher-density

4-35
housing projects. AddiƟonally, student housing near California State University, Fullerton, may be vulnerable to mapped 500-year ﬂood zones. While the 100-year ﬂood zone is not expected to experience new development, the overlap between planned housing sites and the 500-year ﬂood zone suggests a measurable increase in exposure to ﬂood hazards with a 0.2 percent annual chance of occurrence.

In summary, ﬂood vulnerability in Fullerton has increased slightly over the past ﬁve years due to modest development within mapped ﬂood zones. However, projected growth within the 500-year ﬂood zone, especially through the HIOZ and near CSU Fullerton, indicates a more notable rise in vulnerability over the next ﬁve years. As the City pursues higher-density and aﬀordable housing to meet RHNA targets, it will be important to integrate ﬂood miƟgaƟon strategies and resilient design standards into future development plans to reduce risk and protect residents in ﬂood-prone areas.

4.6.8 LIMITED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY AND AFN POPULATIONS
SecƟon 3.8, Whole Community and Access and Func Ɵonal Needs , includes a detailed determinaƟon of vulnerable populaƟons within the planning area, including census tracts with concentraƟons of individuals with AFN or limited adap Ɵve capacity. Flooding poses a signiﬁcant risk to porƟons of the City of Fullerton, parƟcularly within designated 100-year and 500-year ﬂood zones, which are distributed throughout the City with notable concentra Ɵons in the south and southwestern regions. Notably, the mapped 100-year and 500-year ﬂood zones overlap with census tracts formally designated as areas with limited adap Ɵve capacity and AFN popula Ɵons, including Census Tracts 001404, 001801, 001802, 086701, 011000, 001902, 011601, 011602, 011403, 011502, 011504, and 011711. These tracts are known to have high concentra Ɵons of older adults, individuals with disabili Ɵes, linguis Ɵcally isolated households, and residents in crowded households, mul Ɵ-unit housing, or persons living in group quarters.

In addiƟon to these idenƟﬁed tracts, AFN populaƟons are distributed throughout the City and may also be impacted by ﬂood. These individuals face unique challenges during ﬂood events.

Older adults and individuals with disabili Ɵes may have limited mobility or chronic health condiƟons that complicate evacuaƟon and access to emergency services. Residents in mul Ɵ- unit or crowded housing may lack ﬁnancial resources or transporta Ɵon op Ɵons, making it diﬃcult to relocate during ﬂood emergencies. LinguisƟcally isolated households may struggle to understand emergency alerts or evacuaƟon instrucƟons, increasing their risk during rapidly evolving ﬂood condi Ɵons. Furthermore, ﬂooding can disrupt access to caregivers, medical equipment, and essenƟal services, compounding the vulnerability of AFN populaƟons.

ConsideraƟons for vulnerable groups throughout the planning area were incorporated into the miƟgaƟon strategy in SecƟon 5. Speciﬁcally, the LHMP Planning Team tailored MiƟgaƟon AcƟons #1, 3, 11 and 18 to address the needs of socially vulnerable popula Ɵons, including eﬀorts to improve ﬂood risk communica Ɵon, enhance evacua Ɵon planning for AFN communiƟes, and expand outreach to ensure residents are aware of available resources to prepare for and respond to ﬂood hazards.

4-36

4.7 EXTREME WEATHER (DROUGHT, EXTREME HEAT, SEVERE WINDS/SANTA ANA

WINDS, HEAVY RAIN, POWER OUTAGE/UTILITY FAILURE)

4.7.1 DESCRIPTION

DROUGHT
Drought is de ﬁned as a prolonged period of below-average precipita Ɵon during which available water resources fall below the sta ƟsƟcal norm for a region. In addi Ɵon to rainfall deﬁcits, drought is characterized by factors such as vegeta Ɵon stress, reduced agricultural producƟvity, low soil moisture, declining reservoir levels, and diminished stream ﬂow.

Droughts typically develop gradually over mul Ɵ-year periods and intensify with the persistence of dry condi Ɵons. When precipita Ɵon remains below normal, stream and river ﬂows decrease, lake and reservoir levels drop, and groundwater depths increase. If dry weather conƟnues and water supply issues emerge, the situaƟon may escalate into a drought.

Drought cycles are common in Southern California and are in ﬂuenced by clima Ɵc pa Ʃerns such as El Niño and La Niña.

The term “drought” can vary in meaning depending on how water shortages a ﬀect daily life.

Four commonly used deﬁniƟons help describe the complexity of drought:22 • Agricultural drought refers to soil moisture deﬁciencies that impact crop health and producƟvity.
• Hydrological drought involves reduced stream ﬂows and lower levels in reservoirs, lakes, and groundwater systems.
• Meteorological drought is deﬁned by a signiﬁcant departure from normal precipitaƟon over monthly, seasonal, or annual periods. • Regulatory (or socioeconomic) drought occurs when water availability is limited due to policy restricƟons on water transfers between regions. Southern California relies heavily on imported water from the Colorado River and Northern California via aqueducts, making local drought condiƟons sensiƟve to water availability in those source regions.

While climate is a primary driver of hydrological drought, human ac ƟviƟes such as land use changes, deforestaƟon, land degrada Ɵon, and dam construc Ɵon can also in ﬂuence regional water dynamics. These changes may alter in ﬁltraƟon and runo ﬀ rates, leading to more variable stream ﬂows and increased drought risk downstream. As natural systems are interconnected across geographic boundaries, drought impacts can extend well beyond the area experiencing reduced precipitaƟon.23
Droughts can result in a wide range of public health, safety, economic, environmental, and social impacts. Health an d safety concerns are o Ōen linked to increased wild ﬁre risk and

22 NOAA, DeﬁniƟon of Drought, hƩps://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/dyk/drought- deﬁniƟon, accessed September 5, 2025.
23 NaƟonal Drought MiƟgaƟon Center, Drought Basics,
hƩps://drought.unl.edu/EducaƟon/DroughtBasics.aspx, accessed September 5, 2025.

4-37
reduced access to drinking water. Other impacts include damage to residen Ɵal landscaping, degradaƟon of urban aestheƟcs, fallowing of agricultural land and associated job losses, harm to ﬁsh habitats, and widespread tree mortality. Drought-stressed vegeta Ɵon may also pose physical hazards, such as falling limbs or trees that can damage infrastructure. Addi Ɵonally, drought condi Ɵons can accelerate the spread of invasive pests like the Invasive Shot Hole Borer (ISHB), which targets weakened trees and contributes to further ecological degradaƟon.

In urban areas of Orange County, drought condi Ɵons typically prompt large-scale water conservaƟon measures, including reduced water allocaƟons and Ɵered pricing structures that penalize excessive use. Extended drought periods o Ōen lead to increased reliance on groundwater, which can strain local aquifers. Drought also contributes to drier vegeta Ɵon, increasing the size and intensity of wildﬁres and complicaƟng ﬁreﬁghƟng eﬀorts due to limited water availability. Water and wastewater infrastructure located in wild ﬁre-prone areas may be at greater risk of damage or service disrup Ɵon. For more informaƟon on wildﬁre hazards, refer to SecƟon 4.10.

EXTREME HEAT
Extreme heat condiƟons refer to periods when temperatures are signiﬁcantly higher than the seasonal average for a speci ﬁc region. These events o Ōen involve a combina Ɵon of high temperatures and elevated humidity, which can lead to heat-related illnesses. The heat index, or apparent temperature, re ﬂects how hot it feels to the human body when both air temperature and relaƟve humidity are considered.24 High humidity can signi ﬁcantly increase the heat index, reducing the body’s ability to cool itself and increasing the risk of heat cramps, heat exhausƟon, and heat stroke.

Extreme heat is locaƟon-speciﬁc and deﬁned relaƟve to the historical climate norms of a given area. The NaƟonal Weather Service (NWS) provides forecasts for Orange County through its San Diego Weather Forecast O ﬃce (NWS-San Diego). Communi Ɵes in the inland por Ɵon of Orange County, including Fullerton, fall within the NWS Inland Orange County zone, which encompasses the inland coastal valleys and plains. In this zone, excessive heat is generally considered to occur when ambient air temper atures reach 105°F or higher for two or more consecuƟve days.25
Excessive heat events in the region oŌen coincide with Santa Ana Wind condiƟons, which can exacerbate wild ﬁre risk. These hot, dry winds reduce atmospheric moisture, accelerate evaporaƟon, and dry out vegetaƟon, creaƟng ideal condiƟons for wildﬁre igniƟon and spread.

Dry vegetaƟon acts as fuel, and the strong winds can rapidly drive ﬁre through urban-wildland interface areas.

24 NaƟonal Weather Service, What is the Heat Index?,
hƩps://www.weather.gov/ama/heaƟndex#:~:text=The%20heat%20index%2C%20also%20known,swe at%20to%20cool%20itself%20oﬀ., accessed September 9, 2025. 25 County of Orange and Orange County OperaƟonal Area, Excessive Temperature Annex, May 2021.

4-38

SEVERE WINDS/SANTA ANA WINDS
According to the Na Ɵonal Weather Service (NWS), Santa Ana Winds occur when air from a region of high pressure over the dry, desert region of the southwestern U.S. ﬂows westward towards low pressure located oﬀ the California coast.26 This creates dry winds that ﬂow east to west through the mountain passages in Southern California. These winds are most common during the cooler months of the year, occurring from September through May. Santa Ana winds typically feel warm (or even hot) because as the cool desert air moves down the side of the mountain, it is compressed, which causes the temperature of the air to rise. These strong winds can cause major property damage and increase wild ﬁre risk because of the dryness of the winds and the speed at which they can spread a ﬂame across the landscape.

Severe incidents of Santa Ana Winds may pose a signiﬁcant risk to life and property by creaƟng condiƟons that disrupt essen Ɵal systems such as public u ƟliƟes, telecommunica Ɵons, and transportaƟon routes. DestrucƟve impacts to trees, power lines, and u Ɵlity services also are associated with high winds. Falling trees can occasionally cause fataliƟes and serious structural damage and fallen power lines could cause widespread power outages and ﬁre.

HEAVY RAIN
Heavy rains refer to events during which the amount of rainfall in a loca Ɵon substan Ɵally exceeds normal or typical rainfall condi Ɵons. Establishing a threshold to de ﬁne periods of heavy rain varies greatly, depending on loca Ɵon and season. Heavy precipita Ɵon is not necessarily an indicator that the total amount of precipita Ɵon has increased, rather that precipitaƟon is occurring in more intense events. Changes in the intensity of precipita Ɵon, coupled with changes in the interval between events, can aﬀect overall precipitaƟon totals.27 One method for determining heavy rain events is to consider what percentage of a locaƟon’s total annual precipitaƟon has come from extreme, one-day events. PotenƟal impacts of heavy rains include property damage, soil erosion, and increased ﬂood risk, which in turn contribute to other hazards including debris ﬂows and landslides. The contribuƟon of heavy rains to other hazards has the potenƟal to cause signiﬁcant property damage and loss of life within the City of Fullerton.

POWER OUTAGE/UTILITY FAILURE
Power outages are a major secondary e ﬀect of severe weather events in the City. An outage could result in damaged power equipment or equipment failures and can a ﬀect mul Ɵple jurisdicƟons for hours. This type of event can range from a moderate event to a catastrophic regional event that may threaten human life, safety, and health, or interferences with vital services.

During severe weather incidents such as high winds, extreme heat, or severe ﬂooding, Southern California Edison (SCE) may implement an opera Ɵonal pracƟce called Public Safety

26 NWS, Mountain and Valley Winds, hƩps://www.weather.gov/safety/wind-mountain-valley, accessed September 9, 2025.
27 U.S. EPA, Climate Change Indicators: Heavy PrecipitaƟon, hƩps://www.epa.gov/climate- indicators/climate-change-indicators-heavy-precipitaƟon, accessed September 9, 2025.

4-39
Power Shutoﬀs (PSPS) to preemp Ɵvely shut o ﬀ power in high-risk areas during poten Ɵally dangerous condi Ɵons. This program is designed to proac Ɵvely prevent SCE facili Ɵes from starƟng a wildﬁre in at risk areas when winds and temperatures are high.

Strong Santa Ana winds, high temperatures, and low humidity are all severe weather condiƟons that could trigger a PSPS event. It is possible for extreme weather incidents outside of the City to trigger a PSPS that a ﬀects the service area (i.e., strong winds a ﬀecƟng regional infrastructure that powers SCE grids in Orange County). The frequency of these events depends on the weather and environmental factors, and SCE makes decisions based on internal threat thresholds, assessment of real- Ɵme informaƟon, and situa Ɵonal awareness data. When possible, SCE intends to no Ɵfy customers prior to a PSPS event. When weather forecasts indicate extreme ﬁre condi Ɵons, SCE begins predic Ɵve modeling to assess the potenƟal impacts while monitoring weather watch alerts from the NaƟonal Weather Service.

Three days prior to the forecasted PSPS, SCE would coordinate ﬁrst with local governments, the emergency management community, ﬁrst responders, and other cri Ɵcal infrastructure/service providers. Two days prior to the forecasted PSPS, noƟces would go out to SCE customers with a follow-up one day before a no Ɵce of power shut o ﬀ. It is noted that actual or sudden onset of extreme weather condi Ɵons could impact the intended coordinaƟon and noƟﬁcaƟon eﬀorts.28
Outside of the PSPS events, there is the potenƟal for unplanned power outages to occur within Fullerton. SCE de ﬁnes a major outage as a large, unexpected outage caused by either accidents or natural disasters. While uncommon, loss of electrical power is a poten Ɵal secondary e ﬀect of heavy rains or strong winds. Other types of events that could occur is mechanical power failure due to aging equipment.

4.7.2 LOCATION/EXTENT

DROUGHT
Droughts are widespread regional events that aﬀect the enƟrety of the City of Fullerton, and the larger southern California region. Geographically, drought condiƟons would extend to the enƟre City and poten Ɵally impact all residents, businesses and local agencies. Certain areas within the City may experience more severe drought impacts than others due to variaƟons in infrastructure, water demand, and local environmental condiƟons.

The City of Fullerton relies on a combina Ɵon of imported and local water sources to meet its water needs. As a retail water supplier, the City obtains imported potable water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern Ca lifornia (MET) and local groundwater from the Orange County Groundwater Basin. 29 Drought condi Ɵons are not con ﬁned to the City’s boundaries, and a ﬀect the broader region, including the watersheds and infrastructure that support MET and groundwater resources. Reduc ed rainfall and snowpack across can limit imported supplies, while prolonged dry periods can diminish groundwater recharge. These

28 Southern California Edison, Public Safety Power Shutoﬀ, hƩps://www.sce.com/wildﬁre/psps, accessed September 9, 2025.
29 City of Fullerton, 2020 Urban Water Management Plan, June, 2021.

4-40
regional impacts directly in ﬂuence the availability of water within Fullerton, and drought- related stress on regional sources can sƟll result in water shortages, restricƟons, and increased costs for all residents and businesses in the City.

Drought severity and extent depends on numerous factors including dura Ɵon, intensity, and geographic extent, as well as regional water supply demands by humans and vegetaƟon. The magnitude of drought is usually measured by Ɵme and severity of the hydrologic deﬁcit. The United States Drought Monitor provides weekly data idenƟfying porƟons of the United States that are experiencing drought. The intensity of drought is categorized as one ﬁve classiﬁcaƟons: abnormally dry (D0), showing areas that may be going into or are coming out of drought, and four levels of drought: moderate (D1), severe (D2), extreme (D3), and excepƟonal (D4); refer to Table 4-12: Drought Severity Classification.

TABLE 4-12: DROUGHT SEVERITY CLASSIFICATION

CATEGORY DESCRIPTION POSSIBLE IMPACTS
D0 Abnormally Dry Going into drought: short-term dryness slowing plan Ɵng, growth of crops or pastures.

D1 Moderate
Drought
Coming out of drought: some lingering water deﬁcits;
pastures or crops not fully recovered.

D2 Severe Drought Some damage to crops, pastures; streams, reservoirs, or wells low, some water shortages developing or imminent; voluntary water-use restricƟons requested.

D3 Extreme
Drought
Crop or pasture losses likely; water shortages common;
water restricƟons imposed.

D4 Excep Ɵonal
Drought
Major crop/pasture losses; widespread water shortages or restricƟons.

Source: U.S. Drought Monitor, Drought Classification,
https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/About/AbouttheData/DroughtClassification.aspx, accessed September 9, 2025.

Figure 4-3: Drought Monitor Map
idenƟﬁes areas of drought within California and labels them by intensity as shown in Table 4-12 a b o v e . A s o f S e p t e m b e r , 2 0 2 5 , t h e e nƟrety of Orange County, including the City of Fullerton, is experiencing “Moderate Drought” according to the United States Drought Monitor. The Drought Monitor is not a forecast but looks backward, providing a weekly assessment of drought condiƟons based on how much precipitaƟon did or did not fall.

4-41
FIGURE 4-3: DROUGHT MONITOR MAP

Source: U.S. Drought Monitor, California,
https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/CurrentMap/StateDroughtMonitor.aspx?CA, accessed September 11, 2025.

EXTREME HEAT
Extreme heat events are regional occurrences, and the geographic extent of extreme heat condiƟons would extend to every resident within the City. As temperatures rise across the region, all parts of Fullerton would experience elevated heat levels, which can strain local infrastructure, increase energy demand, and pose health risks.

Extreme heat events typically last mulƟple days. The NaƟonal Weather Service (NWS) uses a heat index, or apparent temperature, to help idenƟfy extreme heat events and predict extent of potenƟal impacts. The dangers of extreme heat increase with Ɵme and exposure, meaning that a prolonged period of extreme heat over just a few days can be par Ɵcularly dangerous.

Figure 4-4: Heat Index shows the likelihood of heat diso rder with prolonged exposure or strenuous acƟvity associated with temperature and relaƟve humidity.

4-42
FIGURE 4-4: HEAT INDEX

Source: National Weather Service, What is the Heat Index?, https://www.weather.gov/ama/heatindex#:~:text=The%20heat%20index%2C%20also%20known,s weat%20to%20cool%20itself%20off., accessed September 12, 2025.

The greatest risks from extreme heat events are health related. Although some heat-related illnesses are o Ōen minor and/or temporary such as heat rash, heat cramps, and heat exhausƟon, extreme heat can overwhelm the body’s ability to maintain a safe internal temperature, causing a person’s body temperature to reach dangerous levels. If a person’s internal temperature rises to 104°F or above, heatstroke can occur. 30 Heatstroke can cause fainƟng, seizures, and mental impairment. If le Ō untreated, it may lead to permanent organ damage, coma, or death.

Extreme heat is unlikely to result in physical damage to structures; however, residents may experience the eﬀects of heat exhausƟon or heat stroke. AddiƟonally, the increased use of air condiƟoning may put stress on the power grid and lead to power outages. The Na Ɵonal Weather Service (NWS) provides weather forecasts for Fullerton based on data collected from the Santa Ana and Los Angeles NOAA Weather Radio (NWR) sta Ɵons. AnƟcipated extreme heat events would be reported by these weather sta Ɵons, including speci ﬁc an Ɵcipated duraƟon and severity.

SEVERE WINDS/SANTA ANA WINDS
Wind events such as the Santa Ana Winds typically impact large areas and can poten Ɵally impact any area within the City. Depending on the condiƟons of the wind event, impacts could

30 Mayo Clinic, Heat ExhausƟon, hƩps://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-condiƟons/heat- exhausƟon/symptoms-causes/syc-20373250, accessed September 12, 2025.

4-43
be widespread or localized. It is reasonable to assume that severe winds or Santa Ana winds and their impacts could be experienced at any locaƟon throughout the City.

The Beaufort Wind Scale relates wind speed to observed condi Ɵons and is used to measure the intensity of wind events up to 74 miles per hour. Observed impacts associated with strong winds range from swaying trees to devastaƟng or widespread damage.

TABLE 4-13: BEAUFORT WIND SCALE

BEAUFORT
SCALE

WIND SPEED DESCRIPTION
0: Calm Less than 1 mph Smoke rises ver Ɵcally.
1: Light air 1 to 3 mph DirecƟon shown by smoke driŌ but not by wind vanes.
2: Light breeze 4 to 7 mph Wind felt on face; leaves rustle; wind vane moved by wind.
3: Gentle
breeze
8 to 12 mph Leaves and small twigs in constant moƟon; light ﬂags extended.
4: Moderate
breeze
13 to 18 mph Raises dust and loose paper; small branches moved. 5: Fresh breeze 19 to 24 mph Small trees in leaf begin to sway; crested wavelets form on inland waters.
6: Strong
breeze
25 to 31 mph Large branches in mo Ɵon; whistling heard in telegraph wires; umbrellas used with diﬃculty.
7: Near gale 32 to 38 mph Whole trees in moƟon; inconvenience felt when walking against the wind.
8: Gale 39 to 46 mph Twigs break o ﬀ trees; generally impedes progress. 9: Severe gale 47 to 54 mph Slight structural damage (chimney pots and slates removed).
10: Storm 55 to 63 mph Seldom experienced inland; trees uprooted; considerable structural damage.
11: Violent
storm
64 to 72 mph ExcepƟonally high waves (small and medium-size ships might be for a Ɵme lost to view behind the
waves).
12: Hurricane 73 mph and
above
Very rarely experienced; accompanied by
widespread damage.

Source: National Weather Service, Beaufort Wind Scale, https://www.weather.gov/mfl/beaufort, accessed September 12, 2025.

The speciﬁc magnitude, severity, and actual impacts from wind events in the City can vary greatly depending on sustained windspeed and event dura Ɵon. Fullerton experiences mild seasonal variaƟon in average hourly wind speeds throughout the year. The windier season lasts from September through May, with average speeds exceeding 6.5 mph and peaking in December at 7.7 mph, while the calmer season spans May 7 to November 9, with August being

4-44
the calmest month at an average of 5.1 mph.31 Santa Ana wind events that sporadically aﬀect the City regularly reach speeds of 40 to 60 mph with gusts up to 100 mph. 32 Santa Ana Wind events can result in damaged buildings and infrastructure, damaging personal property including vehicles and homes. Downed trees, damaged power lines, and power outages may also aﬀect residents within the City.

HEAVY RAIN
Heavy rain events typically a ﬀect large geographic areas and can impact any loca Ɵon within the City of Fullerton. While the severity of impacts may vary depending on local topography, drainage infrastructure, and land use, it is reasonable to assume that intense rainfall and associated hazards—such as ﬂooding or stormwater runo ﬀ—could be experienced throughout the City. These events are regional in nature, and their e ﬀects are not limited to isolated porƟons of the planning area.

An indicator for the extent of a heavy rain season is the Oceanic Niño Index (ONI), used to monitor the El Niño-Southern Oscilla Ɵon (ENSO). To calculate the ONI, scien Ɵsts from the NaƟonal Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra Ɵon’s (NOAA) Climate Predic Ɵon Center calculate the average sea surface temperature in the El Niño 3.4 region (area of the east- central equatorial Paci ﬁc Ocean) for each month, and then average it with values from the previous and following months. The observed diﬀerence from the average temperature in that region, whether warmer or cooler, is the ONI value for that three-month “season”. El Niño and La Niña condi Ɵons can a ﬀect climate condi Ɵons in southern California signi ﬁcantly. El Niño causes the Paciﬁc jet stream to move south of the neutral posi Ɵon, oŌen bringing increased precipitaƟon and secondary impacts such as increased ﬂooding. La Niña usually has the opposite eﬀect and causes the Paciﬁc jet stream to move northward. This usually leads to dry and drought-like condi Ɵons, along with warmer than normal temperatures during the winter.33 It is important to note that El Niño and La Niña are only predictors of precipitaƟon in southern California and may not always result in rainy or dry years.

The average annual precipita Ɵon for Fullerton is 11.86 inches with the most precipita Ɵon occurring from November through April. January and February are typically the we Ʃest months of the year with an average of 2.85 and 3.02 inches per month respecƟvely.34 Typically, municipal drainage infrastructure systems are designed to accommodate heavy rain events.

During uncharacterisƟcally heavy storms or rain events (such as those caused by an El Niño weather paƩern), these drainage systems may not be suﬃcient to move stormwater ﬂows and

31 Weather Spark, Climate and Average Weather Year Round in Fullerton, hƩps://weatherspark.com/y/1846/Average-Weather-in-Fullerton-California-United-States-Year- Round, accessed September 12, 2025.
32 Britannica, Santa Ana winds, hƩps://www.britannica.com/science/Santa-Ana-winds, accessed September 12, 2025.
33 NOAA, What are El Niño and La Niña?, hƩps://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/ninonina.html, accessed September 12, 2025.
34 U.S. Climate Data, Climate Fullerton - California,
hƩps://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/fullerton/california/united-states/usca1767, accessed September 12, 2025.

4-45
thus, result in ﬂooding. Severe storms could also cause overtopping of dams or reservoirs or threaten slope stability.

POWER OUTAGE/UTILITY FAILURE
PSPS events o Ōen target wildland areas with high wild ﬁre risk, but they can impact a much wider region. The targeted areas are more vulnerable due to environmental condi Ɵons like dry vegetaƟon, high winds, and steep terrain, which may cause wildﬁres when power lines are damaged. However, because the electrical grid is interconnected, de-energizing circuits in high-risk zones can lead to power outages that extend beyond the immediate area. As a result, even parts of the City of Fullerton outside designated ﬁre risk zones may experience outages during a PSPS event, making it a citywide concern.

SCE designates High Fire Risk Areas as areas with circuits within California Public U ƟliƟes Commission’s (CPUC) Tier 2 (elevated risk) and Tier 3 (extreme risk) Fire Threat Areas, refer to Figure 4-5: CPUC Fire Threat Map. The CPUC Fire-Threat Map was developed with input from the U.S. Forest Service, California Department of Forestry and Fire ProtecƟon, and the State’s investor-owned uƟliƟes, including SCE. SCE uses their own thresholds prior to iniƟaƟng a PSPS event. When evalua Ɵng weather and environmental condi Ɵons, SCE considers a variety of factors which include but are not limited to:35
• NaƟonal Weather Service Red Flag Warnings;
• SCE meteorological assessments;
• SCE Fire PotenƟal Index;
• SCE Fire ScienƟst assessments;
• Real-Ɵme situaƟonal awareness informaƟon;
• SCE Fire Management/Oﬃce of Emergency Management input; • Concerns from local or State ﬁre authoriƟes;
• Mandatory or voluntary evacuaƟon orders in place;
• Expected impact of de-energizing circuits on essenƟal services (including public safety agencies, water pumps, traﬃc controls, etc.); and • Other operaƟonal consideraƟons to minimize wildﬁre igniƟons.

The magnitude or extent of impacts to the City would depend on the dura Ɵon of the outage and the size of the impacted area. Power outages can range from short, localized disrupƟons to prolonged, citywide events depending on the cause—such as equipment failure, extreme weather, or PSPS ac Ɵons. Because the electrical grid is interconnected, outages ini Ɵated in high-risk wild ﬁre zones can cascade into broader service interrup Ɵons a ﬀecƟng areas well outside the ini Ɵal target. Longer outages can signi ﬁcantly disrupt daily life, impact cri Ɵcal infrastructure like traﬃc signals and water systems, and pose risks to vulnerable populaƟons, especially during extreme heat or emergency situaƟons.

35 Southern California Edison Transmission and DistribuƟon, Transmission InspecƟon and Maintenance Program (TIMP), June 24, 2022.

4-46

4-47

4.7.3 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES

DROUGHT
Historically, the City of Fullerton and Orange County have experienced various periods of drought. Figure 4-6: Historical Drought Conditions in Orange County shows the seasonal recurrence of drought since the year 2000.

FIGURE 4-6: HISTORICAL DROUGHT CONDITIONS IN ORANGE COUNTY

Source: U.S. Drought Monitor, Time Series,
https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/DmData/TimeSeries.aspx, accessed September 12, 2025.

The most severe drought on record began in 2012 and con Ɵnued through 2017. On January 17, 2014, the Governor of California declared a State drought emergency, and on April 1, 2015, the Governor announced the ﬁrst-ever mandatory 25 percent Statewide water use reducƟon.

A s p a r t o f t h i s r e d u cƟon e ﬀort, the state proposed a series of ac Ɵons to help save water, increase enforcement to prevent wasteful water use, streamline the State’s drought response, and invest in new technologies that would make California more drought resilient. At the Ɵme of the announcement, the volume of Sierra Nevada snowpack was approximately 14 percent of normal. By the end of May 2014, all of California was in a condi Ɵon of “extreme” or “excepƟonal” drought. At the same Ɵme, the volume of the Sierra Nevada snowpack had decreased to less than 10 percent of normal and water stored in Lake Oroville, the major reservoir for the State Water Project, was at 58 percent of normal. 36 AŌer a series of winter rains, the Governor issued an execuƟve order in April 2017 ending the drought emergency in Southern California, including Orange County.

36 California Department of Water Resources, California’s Most Signiﬁcant Droughts: Comparing Historical and Recent CondiƟons, February 2015.

4-48
California saw drought condiƟons reoccur in during 2020 and 2021. A proclamaƟon of a State of Emergency was made by the Governor of California for northern California counƟes in April of 2021, and the proclamaƟon was expanded during summer 2021 to include the majority of northern and central California. 37 On October 19, 2021, the State of Emergency was again expanded, this Ɵme including Orange County. 38 Extreme drought and severe drought condiƟons persisted seasonally in Orange County throughout 2021 and 2022. However, aŌer two wet seasons in 2023 and 2024, the Orange County was no longer su ﬀering from widespread drought.

In 2025, drought condi Ɵons would recur in Orange County reaching the level of extreme drought in February. Since March, 2025, the enƟrety of Orange County has been experiencing severe drought condiƟons according to the United States Drought Monitor.

No federally declared disasters relaƟng to drought have occurred including the planning area within the last ﬁve years; refer to Table 4-30: Summary of Declared Disasters Affecting the Planning Area.

EXTREME HEAT
Fullerton has experienced various extreme heat events in the past. On average, Fullerton experiences 5.52 very hot days annually compared to past average temperatures.39 Extreme heat events do not typica lly cause physical damage or loca Ɵon-speciﬁc impacts, however, extreme heat events throughout Orange County can be used to indicate events that aﬀected Fullerton. Table 4-14: Orange County Extreme Heat Events summarizes extreme heat events that occurred in Orange County in the past 5 years.

TABLE 4-14: ORANGE COUNTY EXTREME HEAT EVENTS

DATE EVENT SUMMARY
August 14,
2020
Temperatures of 95 to 105 degrees were recorded during this heat event.

The Laguna Hills CWOP recorded a high temperature of 107 degrees on August 14th.

September
17, 2020
Temperatures climbed into the upper 90s and low 100s during this heat wave. Santa Ana reached 99 degrees on the 17th and Anaheim broke a daily record, reaching 96, on the 18th.

37 Oﬃce of Governor Gavin Newsome, Governor Newsome Expands Drought Emergency to Klamath River, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, and Tulare Lake Watershed CounƟes, hƩps://www.gov.ca.gov/2021/05/10/governor-newsom-expands-drought-emergency-to-klamath- river-sacramento-san-joaquin-delta-and-tulare-lake-watershed-counƟes/, published May 10, 2021, accessed September 12, 2025.
38 Oﬃce of Governor Gavin Newsom, Governor Newsom Expands Drought Emergency Statewide, Urges Californians to Redouble Water ConservaƟon Eﬀorts, hƩps://www.gov.ca.gov/2021/10/19/governor-newsom-expands-drought-emergency-statewide- urges-californians-to-redouble-water-conservaƟon-eﬀorts/, accessed September 12, 2025. 39 Cal-Adapt, Extreme Heat Days and Warm Nights, hƩps://cal-adapt.org/tools/extreme-heat/, accessed September 12, 2025.

4-49

DATE EVENT SUMMARY
September
29, 2020
High temperatures from the 90s at the beaches to just over 100 degree readings were reported a few miles inland during this heat wave. John Wayne Airport ASOS reached 100 degrees on September 30th.

October 12,
2020
Some areas recorded temperatures near 100 degrees during this heat wave from the 12th to the 16th. Santa Ana set a daily record high temperature on the 14th, hiƫng 96 degrees.

April 1,
2021
Temperatures reached into the upper 80s and the low 90s, including Fullerton Airport at 92 degrees.

April 28,
2021
The region saw high temperatures top out into the low to mid 90s.

June 14,
2021
Hot temperatures occurred with high temperatures in the mid to upper 90s. Anaheim broke a daily record on June 15th with a high of 96 degrees.

August 2,
2021
Some areas reached near 100 degrees on August 2nd with 90s thereaŌer.

August 25,
2021
The region saw widespread 90s with some locales hit near 100 degrees, including Yorba Linda on the 26th.

September
21, 2021
Anaheim broke the daily record for maximum high temperature on September 21. Anaheim recorded a high of 104 degrees, breaking the record of 102 set in 2015.

September
1, 2022
The ASOS at Fullerton Airport observed daily highs ranging from the middle to upper 90s through much of early September, with several days also exceeding 100 degrees for a daily high. The highest daily maximum temperature of 111 degrees occurred on the aŌernoon of Sunday, September 4th, with a high of 103 occurring on the 3rd and 8th of September.

July 11,
2023
Hot condiƟons occurred across inland Orange County Valleys from July 10-

14. Highs reached the upper-80s and 90s each day. Fullerton ranged from 89-93 through the duraƟon of the event.

August 28,
2023
Very hot dayƟme temperatures occurred across inland porƟons of Orange County on August 28-30th, when Heat Advisories were in eﬀect. Highs between 91 and 103 degrees occurred each day, with Yorba Linda and Anaheim seeing the hoƩest temperatures, both exceeding 100 degrees on the 28th and 29th.

September
6, 2024
High temperature reached a record 112 in Anaheim on September 6, 2024.

The heat wave lasted through September 9th with high temperatures of 104 to 113F across inland Orange County.

Source: NOAA, Storm Events Database,
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/stormevents/eventdetails.jsp?id=1218698, accessed September 12, 2025.

Most recently a heat advisory was issued for inland Orange County areas from August 21 through August 22, 2025; temperatures were expected to reach up to 95 degrees.

No federally declared disasters relaƟng to extreme heat have occurred including the planning area within the last ﬁve years; refer to Table 4-30: Summary of Declared Disasters Affecting the Planning Area.

4-50

SEVERE WINDS/SANTA ANA WINDS
Severe winds and Santa Ana wind events seasonally a ﬀect the City of Fullerton, typically between the cooler months of September through May. In January 2025, Southern California experienced a powerful Santa Ana windstorm, with gusts reaching up to 80 mph across the region. Orange County was placed under a High Wind Warning, and while coastal and canyon areas faced the greatest risk of ﬁre and structural damage, inland ci Ɵes like Fullerton were largely spared from direct impacts. Residents may have experienced brief power ﬂickers and fallen tree limbs, but no major incidents were reported. By April 2025, the Na Ɵonal Weather Service and local forecasters oﬃcially declared the end of the Santa Ana wind season, which typically spans from September through May. 40 Fullerton, like many inland Orange County communiƟes, has a seasonal history of Santa Ana winds, but the primary risks—wild ﬁre spread and power outages—have not resulted in signi ﬁcant direct impacts to the city in recent years.

No federally declared disasters related to Santa Ana Wind events have impacted the planning area within the last ﬁve years; refer to Table 4-30: Summary of Declared Disasters Affecting the Planning Area.

HEAVY RAIN
The City of Fullerton has a long history of experiencing intense rainfall events, many of which have shaped regional weather preparedness and infrastructure planning. Historical records indicate that prolonged and heavy rains have periodically impacted the area since the 19th century, oŌen Ɵed to broader storm systems aﬀecƟng Southern California.

One of the earliest documented episodes o ccurred during the winter of 1861–1862, when a month-long deluge known as the “Noachian Deluge of California” drenched the region.

Rainfall during this period was so extensive that low-lying areas between Anaheim and the Coyote Hills—now part of Fullerton—were submerged under several feet of water.

Subsequent decades saw addi Ɵonal episodes of extreme precipita Ɵon, including notable storms in 1900 and 1916, which overwhelmed natural drainage and contributed to the eventual creaƟon of the Orange County Flood Control District.

In more recent years, Fullerton has been a ﬀected by a series of heavy rain events linked to atmospheric rivers, tropical systems, and winter storm cycles. December 2021 brought widespread rainfall across Southern California, with Fullerton receiving between 1.5 to 2.5 inches of precipita Ɵon in a short span. The winter of 2022–2023 was marked by relentless storms that saturated soils and strained stormwater infrastructure throughout Orange County.

Fullerton, while not the epicenter of damage, likely experienced signi ﬁcant rainfall and temporary disrupƟons due to runoﬀ and pooling in older neighborhoods.

Tropical Storm Hilary in August 2023 delivered another round of intense rain, with Fullerton recording approximately 2 inches during the peak of the storm. Though the city avoided major

40 FOX 11 Los Angeles, 'Life-threatening' windstorm brings criƟcal ﬁre weather back to Southern California, hƩps://www.foxla.com/news/southern-california-windstorm-january-7-2025, accessed September 18, 2025.

4-51
impacts, crews responded to blocked drains and minor street-level water accumula Ɵon.

February 2024 saw back-to-back atmospheric rivers that prompted a statewide emergency declaraƟon. Fullerton again received substan Ɵal rainfall, contribuƟng to seasonal challenges such as traﬃc delays and maintenance demands.

In the last ﬁve years, two FEMA-declared disasters and ﬁve state declared disasters for ﬂood or winter storms have aﬀected the planning area:
• EM-3591-CA: Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, and Mudslides – January 8, 2023 • EM-3592-CA: Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, Landslides, and Mudslides – March 9, 2023
• State Disaster 146: Severe Winter Storms – February 2024 • State Disaster 142: Tropical Storm Hilary – August 2023 • State Disaster 141: Severe Winter Storms – February 2023 - March 2023 • State Disaster 140: Severe Winter Storms – December 2022 - January 2023 • State Disaster 127: Severe Winter Storms – December 2021 Refer to Table 4-30: Summary of Declared Disasters Affecting the Planning Area for a full list of federally declared disasters aﬀecƟng the planning area.

POWER OUTAGE/UTILITY FAILURE
The City of Fullerton does not have a recent history of city-wide power outages resulƟng from extreme weather, wildﬁre risk, or PSPS events. While there are areas of CPUC Tier 2 and Tier 3 Fire Threat areas located to the north of the city, Fullerton itself has remained largely unaﬀected by signi ﬁcant outages Ɵed to wild ﬁre-related shuto ﬀs. Its loca Ɵon outside the highest-risk zones has helped limit direct impacts from PSPS protocols implemented by SCE.

Smaller-scale outages do occur periodically in Fullerton, typically as a result of equipment failure, tra ﬃc accidents, or precau Ɵonary responses to severe weather. For example, in September 2025, a pickup truck struck a power pole in neighboring La Habra, knocking out electricity to more than 2,300 customers across the area.41 Though Fullerton was not directly impacted, the incident illustrates how localized disrupƟons can aﬀect nearby communiƟes.

In January 2025, powerful Santa Ana winds and wild ﬁre condiƟons swept across Southern California, leaving thousands without power in areas such as Riverside, Ventura, and parts of Los Angeles County.42 Fullerton avoided major outages during this event, but the high winds and dry condiƟons prompted regional alerts and uƟlity monitoring. Similarly, in July 2025, SCE issued warnings of poten Ɵal PSPS ac ƟvaƟons to prevent wild ﬁre igniƟon during a heatwave

41 The Orange County Register, More than 2,300 lose power aŌer pickup truck hits power pole in La Habra, hƩps://www.ocregister.com/2025/09/14/more-than-2300-lose-power-aŌer-pickup-truck-hits- power-pole-in-la-habra/, accessed September 19, 2025.
42 Los Angeles Daily News, Tens of thousands in Southern California could lose power starƟng Monday with return of high winds, hƩps://www.dailynews.com/2025/01/18/thousands-in-southern-california- sƟll-without-power-because-of-high-wind-damage/, accessed September 19, 2025.

4-52
and elevated ﬁre weather condi Ɵons.43 These warnings did not result in shuto ﬀs within Fullerton, but they reﬂect the broader vulnerability of Southern California’s power grid during peak ﬁre season.

Overall, Fullerton’s experience with power outages has been limited to short-term, isolated incidents without signiﬁcant citywide impacts. While the city remains adjacent to areas with elevated ﬁre risk, it has not been subject to direct PSPS events. Regional trends and nearby disrupƟons underscore the importance of con Ɵnued coordinaƟon with u Ɵlity providers and emergency preparedness for weather-related service interrupƟons.

No federally declared disasters leading to power outages have impacted the planning area within the last ﬁve years; refer to Table 4-30: Summary of Declared Disasters Affecting the Planning Area.

4.7.4 PROBABILITY OF FUTURE OCCURRENCES

DROUGHT
California weather is classi ﬁed by a typical dry and wet season. During the wet season, the state relies on heavy precipitaƟon events to consƟtute the majority of the annual total rainfall, so the absence of any event can signi ﬁcantly impact water availability. Certain atmospheric circulaƟon pa Ʃerns de ﬁne California’s temperature and precipita Ɵon extremes. Examining these paƩerns, researchers discovered that atmospheric condiƟons associated with extreme drought have become increasingly common in recent decades.44 Based on previous occurrences and trends in California, the likelihood that Orange County and the City of Fullerton will conƟnue to experience drought condiƟons in the future is considered high. The United States Seasonal Drought Outlook depicts large-scale trends based on United States Drought Monitor areas (intensiƟes of D1 to D4), as shown in Figure 4-7: United States Seasonal Drought Outlook . It is indicated that drought development is likely to persist throughout southern California, including Fullerton and Orange County. While the City received high levels of precipitaƟon from 2022 through 2024, drought is a known reoccurring hazard within the southern California region and current drought condiƟons exist throughout the region. Based on current and historical data, drought is considered to have a high probability for reoccurrence within the City of Fullerton and the southern California region.

43 San Bernardino Sun, SCE warns of potenƟal power shutoﬀs to prevent wildﬁres, hƩps://www.sbsun.com/2025/07/04/sce-warns-of-potenƟal-power-shutoﬀs-to-prevent-wildﬁres/, accessed September 19, 2025.
44 Stanford News, California drought paƩerns becoming more common, Stanford scienƟsts say, hƩps://news.stanford.edu/2016/04/01/drought-paƩerns-change-040116/, published April 1, 2016, accessed September 12, 2025.

4-53
FIGURE 4-7: UNITED STATE SEASONAL DROUGHT OUTLOOK

Source: National Weather Service Climate Prediction Center, U.S. Seasonal Drought Outlook, https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/expert_assessment/sdo_summary.php, accessed September 12, 2025.

EXTREME HEAT
The City of Fullerton has experienced mulƟple extreme heat events in recent years, with inland Orange County regularly recording temperatures in the upper 90s and beyond during summer and early fall. While these events have not resulted in federally declared disasters or widespread physical damage, they have prompted heat advisories and elevated public health concerns across the region.

According to the Cal-Adapt Extreme Heat Days tool, Fullerton has an expected average of 5.52 extreme heat days per year, with projec Ɵons showing a poten Ɵal maximum of 17 days annually as climate change intensi ﬁes.45 Based on historical trends and regional climate modeling, there is a highly likely probability of future extreme heat occurrences—de ﬁned as a 90 to 100 percent chance of occurrence in any given year or a recurrence interval of less than one year. The LHMP planning team has designated extreme heat as a high hazard

45 Cal-Adapt, Extreme Heat Days, hƩps://cal-adapt.org/dashboard/data-explorer?metric=extreme- heat, accessed September 19, 2025.

4-54
consideraƟon, recognizing that future events may occur with greater frequency and longer duraƟon, parƟcularly during peak summer months.

SEVERE WINDS/SANTA ANA WINDS
Severe wind events, including seasonal Santa Ana winds, are a recurring hazard in Southern California and have historically a ﬀected Orange County between the months of September and May.

Based on regional wind paƩerns and historical data, there is a highly likely probability of future severe wind occurrences in Fullerton—de ﬁned as a 90 to 100 percent chance of occurrence in any given year or a recurrence interval of less than one year. The LHMP planning team has designated severe wind as a high hazard consideraƟon, recognizing that Santa Ana winds will conƟnue to pose seasonal risks.

HEAVY RAIN
Heavy rain events are a seasonally recurring hazard in Fullerton, typically concentrated between late fall and early spring. Historical records show that the city has experienced mulƟple impac ƞul rainstorms over the past century, including atmospheric river events, tropical systems, and prolonged winter storms . While not all heavy rain events result in ﬂooding, they frequently lead to saturated soils, overwhelmed drainage systems, and localized disrupƟons.

Based on regional climate paƩerns and historical frequency, there is a highly likely probability of future heavy rain occurrences in Fullerton—de ﬁned as a 90 to 100 perent chance of occurrence in any given year or a recurrence interval of less than one year. The LHMP planning team has designated heavy rain as a high hazard considera Ɵon, recognizing that seasonal storms will con Ɵnue to a ﬀect the city. As climate change contributes to more intense and erraƟc precipita Ɵon cycles, future events may bring higher rainfall totals over shorter duraƟons, increasing the poten Ɵal for runo ﬀ-related impacts even in areas with established ﬂood control infrastructure.

POWER OUTAGE/UTILITY FAILURE
Power outages and u Ɵlity failures in Fullerton are typically limited to short-term, localized incidents caused by equipment malfuncƟons, traﬃc accidents, or precauƟonary responses to severe weather. While Fullerton is located near areas designated as CPUC Fire Threat areas, the city has not experienced signi ﬁcant outages or PSPS events due to wild ﬁre risk. Regional windstorms and wildﬁre condiƟons have prompted PSPS warnings and widespread outages in neighboring communiƟes, but Fullerton has remained largely unaﬀected.

Given the city’s infrastructure and historical trends, there is a highly likely probability of future uƟlity disrupƟons—de ﬁned as a 90 to 100 percent chance of occurrence in any given year or a recurrence interval of less than one year. These events are expected to remain isolated and short-term, without major citywide impacts. The LHMP planning team has designated power outage and uƟlity failure as a high hazard consideraƟon, recognizing that while Fullerton is not highly vulnerable to large-scale outages, regional condi Ɵons and aging infrastructure may contribute to occasional service interrupƟons.

4-55

4.7.5 CLIMATE CHANGE

DROUGHT
Climate change is a phenomenon that will likely exacerbate drought hazards. According to the 2023 California State Hazard Mi ƟgaƟon Plan, climate scien Ɵsts studying California ﬁnd that drought condiƟons are likely to become more frequent and persistent over the twenty- ﬁrst century due to changing weather pa Ʃerns such as more frequent and extended periods of high temperature condi Ɵons.46 Rising temperatures intensify drought by accelera Ɵng evaporaƟon rates, reducing snowpack, and increasing water demand. This increase in extreme heat contributes to soil moisture loss and diminished water availability, compounding the eﬀects of reduced precipitaƟon.

Climate change is also altering precipita Ɵon pa Ʃerns, leading to variability in rainfall and snowfall. Climate change can cause more overall rainfall or snowfall due to increased global temperatures and thus increased atmospheric capacity for moisture. However, this moisture doesn't fall evenly, some regions experience heavier and more frequent storms, while others become drier. In southern California, it is an Ɵcipated that increased temperature will cause drier condiƟons, leading to less rainfall and snowpack which in turns aﬀects water supplies.47 These changes pose serious challenges for local water management, agriculture, and public health, especially in communi Ɵe s d e p e n d e n t o n v u l n e r a b l e w a t e r s y s t e m s . T h e C i t y o f Fullerton has developed a comprehensive approach to water planning through its 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), which evaluates long-term water supply reliability and outlines strategies to address future demand and poten Ɵal shortages. Fullerton sources its water from both imported supplies via the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California and local groundwater from the Orange County Groundwater Basin, managed by the Orange County Water District. To prepare for drought and other supply disrup Ɵons, the City’s Water Shortage ConƟngency Plan (WSCP) provides a structured framework for reducing demand and augmenƟng supply during varying levels of shortage, ensuring that residents and stakeholders have access to water even during prolonged drought condiƟons.

EXTREME HEAT
Climate change is projected to increase the frequency and intensity of extreme heat events in Orange County, including the City of Fullerton. Average temperatures have already increased throughout the region and the daily maximum average temperature, an indicator of extreme heat events, is expected to con Ɵnue to rise into the mid- and late-century. 48 These ho Ʃer

46 California Governor’s Oﬃce of Emergency Services, 2023 California State Hazard MiƟgaƟon Plan, hƩps://www.caloes.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/Hazard-MiƟgaƟon/Documents/2023-California- SHMP_Volume-1-Exec-Summary_11.10.2023.pdf, accessed September 9, 2025. 47 California Climate AdaptaƟon Strategy 2024, Summary of Projected Climate Change Impacts on California, hƩps://climateresilience.ca.gov/overview/impacts.html, accessed September 11, 2025. 48 California Climate AdaptaƟon Strategy 2024, Summary of Projected Climate Change Impacts on California, hƩps://climateresilience.ca.gov/overview/impacts.html, accessed September 11, 2025.

4-56
condiƟons will not only increase the risk of heat-related illnesses, par Ɵcularly among vulnerable populaƟons such as older adults, children, and outdoor workers, but also strain energy systems and public health infrastructure.

Furthermore, this increase in extreme heat will compound exis Ɵng climate risks like drought and wild ﬁre, and may lead to more frequent heat advisories and emergency responses.

Climate change and the projected increased occurrences of extreme heat events highlight the need for proac Ɵve adapta Ɵon strategies, such as cooling centers, heat alert systems, and urban greening, to protect public health and community resilience.

SEVERE WINDS/SANTA ANA WINDS
Climate change is in ﬂuencing the behavior and impacts of Santa Ana winds in Southern California, including Orange County and Fullerton. Research from the Scripps Ins ƟtuƟon of Oceanography suggests that climate change may suppress the overall frequency of Santa Ana wind events, parƟcularly in the fall and spring, while sharpening their seasonal concentraƟon around winter months. 49 However, even with fewer events, the combina Ɵon of warmer temperatures, prolonged drought, and dry vegetaƟon indicate that the remaining wind events are s Ɵll dangerous during the wild ﬁre season. Furthermore, increased intensity of severe winds in the winter months may compound with heavy rains and winter storms.

HEAVY RAIN
Climate change will aﬀect the frequency and intensity of heavy rain events, causing secondary impacts such as ﬂooding, erosion, and . As global temperatures rise, the atmosphere holds more moisture, which can lead to more intense storms and heavier precipita Ɵon. However, this does not necessarily mean more consistent rainfall overall. In fact, climate change is also expected to increase the frequency and severity of droughts due to shiŌing weather paƩerns, longer dry spells, and reduced snowpack. This apparent contradic Ɵon, more intense rain but also more drought, is explained by the growing variability in precipita Ɵon.50 Dry periods may become longer and more extreme, while wet periods may bring short bursts of intense rainfall that are less eﬀecƟve at replenishing water supplies and more likely to cause ﬂooding.

POWER OUTAGE/UTILITY FAILURE
As the e ﬀects of climate change con Ɵnue to intensify, PSPS events are expected to become more frequent due to the increasing severity of wildﬁre-related hazards. Rising temperatures, prolonged droughts, and more frequent high-wind events create ideal condiƟons for wildﬁres, parƟcularly in areas with accumulated dry vegetaƟon. These condiƟons increase the likelihood

49 Guzman-Morales, J., & Gershunov, A., Scripps InsƟtuƟon of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, Climate change suppresses Santa Ana winds of Southern California and sharpens their seasonality, 2019.
50 US EPA, Future of Climate Change, hƩps://www.epa.gov/climatechange-science/future-climate- change, accessed September 11, 2025.

4-57
that electrical infrastructure could spark a ﬁre, promp Ɵng u ƟliƟes to proac Ɵvely shut o ﬀ power to reduce the risk of igniƟon.51
Climate change also contributes to more extreme weather events, such as high winds, heatwaves, and storms. These can directly damage power infrastructure, leading to outages even outside of PSPS protocols. According to Climate Central, weather-related power outages in the U.S. have doubled over the past two decades, with California among the most aﬀected states.52 In the event of a severe storm, for example, high winds may down power lines, triggering a PSPS or causing unplanned outages that threaten public safety and disrupt criƟcal services. As these climate-driven hazards grow more frequent and intense, communi Ɵes like Fullerton must prepare for both the direct and indirect impacts of power loss.

4.7.6 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
Extreme weather including drought, extreme heat, severe wind events, heavy rain, and uƟlity failures are regional hazards. Thus, the en Ɵre City of Fullerton is considered poten Ɵally vulnerable to their impacts. This includes all 167 cri Ɵcal faciliƟes and 69 faciliƟes of concern.

CriƟcal faciliƟes encompass municipal government buildings, ﬁre and police staƟons essenƟal for emergency response and conƟnuity of operaƟons, community centers and parks that may serve as emergency staging areas or cooling cent ers, and vital infrastructure such as water systems, power uƟliƟes, and transportaƟon networks. Within the City, persons aged 65 and older may face par Ɵcular vulnerability from these extreme weather hazards due to various factors associated with aging such as chronic health condiƟons, medicaƟons that may increase weather sensiƟvity, and reduced ability to regulate body temperature. Facili Ɵes of concern include schools, healthcare and assisted living facili Ɵes, and other community services that support residents.

While these hazards vary in their physical e ﬀects, each poses a signi ﬁcant threat to City operaƟons, infrastructure, and public health:

Drought and Extreme Heat: These hazards do not typically cause direct physical damage to buildings, but they can severely strain water and energy systems. Drought may reduce water availability for residents, businesses, and ﬁreﬁghƟng operaƟons, while also contribu Ɵng to wildﬁre risk and ecological stress. Extreme heat can lead to heat-related illnesses, parƟcularly among vulnerable populaƟons, and increase demand on power systems, potenƟally resulƟng in outages. Cooling centers may be needed to mi Ɵgate health risks during prolonged heat events.

Severe Winds and Santa Ana Winds: These events can damage trees, power lines, and lightweight structures. While criƟcal faciliƟes are generally built to withstand such condiƟons, fallen debris and downed u ƟliƟes can disrupt opera Ɵons, communicaƟons, and emergency

51 California Public UƟliƟes Commission, Public Safety Power Shutoﬀs (PSPS), hƩps://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PSPS/, accessed September 11, 2025. 52 Climate Central, Weather-related Power Outages Rising, hƩps://www.climatecentral.org/climate- maƩers/weather-related-power-outages-rising, published April 24, 2024, accessed September 11, 2025.

4-58
response. Santa Ana Winds also elevate wild ﬁre risk and may exacerbate respiratory condiƟons among residents.

Heavy Rain: Intense rainfall can overwhelm stormwater systems, leading to sewer over ﬂows, ﬂooded roads, and water contamina Ɵon. These impacts can disrupt transporta Ɵon and damage homes and businesses. Flooding may also result in temporary or permanent displacement of residents.

Power Outages and Utility Failures: These can occur independently or be triggered by other hazards such as extreme heat or severe winds. U Ɵlity disrup Ɵons a ﬀect ligh Ɵng, hea Ɵng, cooling, and water treatment systems, with cascading e ﬀects on hospitals, emergency services, and daily opera Ɵons. Businesses may su ﬀer, while residents face risks related to medical equipment failure, and communicaƟon breakdowns.

In addi Ɵon to these facili Ɵes, the en Ɵre popula Ɵon of 141,278 residents and all 47,484 occupied housing units within Fullerton are considered vulnerable to these hazards. The combined impacts could result in widespread service disrup Ɵons, economic losses, health risks, and displacement. Given the scale and interconnected nature of these threats, it is essenƟal to adopt a citywide mi ƟgaƟon strategy that addresses the full range of poten Ɵal consequences and prioriƟzes resilience across infrastructure, services, and communiƟes.

4.7.7 CHANGES IN VULNERABILITY (PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS/NEXT FIVE YEARS) Over the past ﬁve years, the City of Fullerton has experienced minimal populaƟon growth and moderate increases in housing development, primarily through residen Ɵal in ﬁll, mixed-use redevelopment, and rehabilitaƟon of exisƟng structures. Because extreme weather hazards— such as drought, extreme heat, severe winds (including Santa Ana winds), heavy rain, and power outage/u Ɵlity failure—have the poten Ɵa l t o i m p a c t t h e e nƟre city, any increase in populaƟon or development inherently contributes to increased vulnerability. While some of these hazards, such as severe winds and heavy rain, may result in physical damage to buildings, infrastructure, and u ƟliƟes, others—like drought, extreme heat, and power outages—primarily a ﬀect residents through public health risks, service disrup Ɵons, and economic impacts. Given the modest scale of growth, the overall increase in vulnerability to extreme weather hazards over the past ﬁve years is considered marginal.

Over the next ﬁve years, Fullerton is expected to see notable residenƟal growth as it works to meet its RHNA alloca Ɵon of 13,209 housing units by 2029. Much of this development will occur within the HIOZ, which includes 759 parc els distributed across the city which may be developed through higher-density housing projects, including mul Ɵ-family housing. As the city’s populaƟon and built environment expand, exposure to extreme weather hazards—such as drought, extreme heat, severe winds, heavy rain, and power outages—will increase. While some of these hazards, like wind and heavy rain, may cause physical damage to buildings and infrastructure, others may disrupt essen Ɵal services or strain energy and water systems, parƟcularly in denser residenƟal areas.

In summary, vulnerability to extreme weather hazards in Fullerton has increased slightly over the past ﬁve years due to modest development and popula Ɵon growth. However, projected

4-59
increases in residenƟal density and popula Ɵon suggest a more notable rise in exposure over the next ﬁve years. Because these hazards can a ﬀect the en Ɵre city and manifest in both physical damage and indirect impacts on health, safety, and infrastructure, it is essenƟal that future development incorporate resilient design, infrastructure, and emergency preparedness strategies to miƟgate the growing risks associated with extreme weather.

4.7.8 LIMITED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY AND AFN POPULATIONS
SecƟon 3.8, Whole Community and Access and Func Ɵonal Needs , includes a detailed determinaƟon of vulnerable populaƟons within the planning area – including those with AFN or limited adap Ɵve capacity – and the characteris Ɵcs that make those popula Ɵons more vulnerable to hazards. The impacts of extreme weather would apply to the en Ɵrety of the planning area, including census tracts with concentra Ɵons of individuals with AFN or limited adapƟve capacity. Census Tracts 001404, 001801, 001802, 086701, 011000, 001902, 011601, 011602, 011403, 011502, 011504, and 011711 are known to have high concentraƟons of older adults, individuals with disabili Ɵes, linguis Ɵcally isolated households, and residents in crowded households, mulƟ-unit housing, or persons living in group quarters. AddiƟonally, it is understood that these vulnerable populaƟons may exist throughout the City and face unique challenges to extreme weather hazards.

Older adults are parƟcularly vulnerable to extreme heat and power outages due to increased risk of heat-related illness and dependence on climate control systems. Many may have chronic health condiƟons that are exacerbated by poor air quality during Santa Ana winds or limited access to water during drought. Mobility limita Ɵons can make it di ﬃcult to evacuate or access cooling centers during heat waves or shelters during severe storms. People with physical, sensory, or cogni Ɵve disabili Ɵes may face barriers to receiving emergency alerts, evacuaƟng during severe weather, or accessing medical care during uƟlity failures. Those who rely on powered medical devices or mobility aids are especially at risk during power outages.

Heavy rain and wind events can create physical hazards that are more diﬃcult to navigate for individuals with limited mobility. Language barriers can prevent residents from receiving or understanding emergency instruc Ɵons, weather alerts, or informa Ɵon about available resources such as cooling centers or water distribuƟon during drought. These households may also be less likely to engage with preparedness campaigns unless materials are translated and culturally tailored. Residents in crowded households, mul Ɵ-unit housing, or group quarters may have limited access to cooling or hea Ɵng systems, and may be more a ﬀected by u Ɵlity failures due to shared infrastructure. Overcrowding can increase the health risks during extreme heat or poor air quality events. In group quarters, evacuaƟon during severe weather may be logisƟcally complex, and access to emergency supplies may be limited.

ConsideraƟons for vulnerable groups throughout the planning area were incorporated into the miƟgaƟon strategy in SecƟon 5. Speciﬁcally, the LHMP Planning Team tailored MiƟgaƟon AcƟons #1, 3, 11, 18, 57, 58, and 59 with these groups in mind, including e ﬀorts to expand access to cooling centers and em ergency shelters, improve mul Ɵlingual emergency communicaƟons, and support con Ɵnuity of care for individuals dependent on u ƟliƟes or caregivers during extreme weather events.

4-60

4-61

4.8 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS (LANDSLIDE, SUBSIDENCE)

4.8.1 DESCRIPTION

LANDSLIDE
Landslide is a generalized term for a falling mass of soil or rocks. When a hillside or slope becomes unstable, downslope movement of rock and soil occurs under the direct inﬂuence of gravity. Landslides are oŌen sudden, although some occur very slowly over a long period of Ɵme. Loose and fractured materials are more likely to slide than compact materials or solid rock, and steep slopes are at greater risk than gentle rises.

Landslides are usually induced by either earthquakes or saturated slopes. The shaking of an earthquake can decrease slope stability, or in a more severe instance, fracture the earth material enough that the material slides. Moisture-induced landslides can occur when the ground soaks up enough water that the soil becomes loose and unstable. This is o Ōen the result of intense or long-las Ɵng rainfall, but can also result from a pipeline burst or overwatering landscapes. Loss of vegetaƟon to ﬁre or drought many cause an area to be more vulnerable to landslides. VegetaƟon holds soil in place and without the root system of trees, bushes, and other plants, the land is more likely to slide away.53 One type of landslide that is di ﬀerent from debris ﬂows or rock ﬂows are deep-seated landslides. Deep-seated landslides are not necessarily triggered by any single storm or earthquake. Rather, these types of landslides occur weeks to months aŌer heavy rainfall ends, when water has had Ɵme to percolate deeper under the surface to saturate weak zones of rock. This creates a “landslide plane” under the saturated weight of the overlying rock and soil.54 The landslide plane may oŌen be associated with earlier slides and can occur regardless of whether rain is occurring or not. As these landslides begin so deeply, they tend to carry more material and cover more territory than other types of slides. Deep-seated landslides generally occur on moderately steep slopes, travel much slower than mud ﬂows or debris ﬂows, and can conƟnue for several days.

Regardless of the cause or speci ﬁc form, a landslide can damage or destroy structures or roadways in its path. Underground infrastructure, such as pipelines or telecommunica Ɵon lines, may be severed during a landslide. This could lead to infrastructure induced ﬂooding if water pipes, or sewage lines burst. In addi Ɵon to property damage, landslides can crush or bury people, creaƟng a risk of serious injury or death.

53 NaƟonal Geographic Society, Landslide,
hƩps://educaƟon.naƟonalgeographic.org/resource/landslide/, accessed September 9, 2025. 54 California Department of ConservaƟon, 2023 California Landslide Response, hƩps://www.conservaƟon.ca.gov/cgs/landslides/2023, accessed September 9, 2025.

4-62

SUBSIDENCE
The USGS deﬁnes land subsidence as a gradual seƩling or sudden sinking of the Earth’s surface due to removal or displacement of earth materials. 55 The primary causes include aquifer- system compac Ɵon associated with groundwater withdrawals, drainage of organic soils, underground mining, and natural compac Ɵon or collapse, such as with sinkholes or thawing permafrost. More than 17,000 square miles of the United States have been directly aﬀected by subsidence, with 80 percent of known land subsidence in the United States occurring as a consequence of groundwater use.56
In southern California, the primary cause of land subsidence is groundwater extrac Ɵon in areas where aquifer recharge is exceeded by the amount of water extracted, a phenomenon known as “over-dra Ōing.” DepleƟon of aquifers creates a lower water table, allowing for permanent land subsidence and a reducƟon in the total storage capacity of the aquifer system.

Damage to infrastructure, reducƟon in water quality, and potenƟal intrusion from seawater in coastal areas have been documented as a result of land subsidence. Condi Ɵons typical to southern California, including an arid climate, high popula Ɵon density, and frequent drought condiƟons all exacerbate over-draŌing incidents.

4.8.2 LOCATION/EXTENT

LANDSLIDE
Landslides are generally more likely to occur in areas with steep slopes, unstable soils. Within the City, landslides are generally limited to areas with notable slopes or unstable terrain, which tend to be concentrated in speci ﬁc parts of the city. Most of Fullerton is rela Ɵvely ﬂat and heavily urbanized, making the majority of the city less suscep Ɵble to landslide hazards.

However, there are certain areas within th e city that are vulnerable to landslide. Figure 4-8:

Landslide Hazard Zone idenƟﬁes landslide hazard zones within the City.

Generally, the City of Fullerton does not have extensive landslide hazard zones. The topography of Fullerton is characterized by hills and valleys but also ﬂat terrain. While the northern and southern areas of the city are predominantly ﬂat and urbanized—making them less suscep Ɵble to landslides—the central region feat ures steeper slopes that increase the potenƟal for slope instability. Mapped landslide zones are sparse but are primarily located within the Panorama Nature Preserve and the Robert E. Ward Nature Preserve. These natural open space areas, characterized by slopes and eleva Ɵon changes, represent the highest potenƟal for landslide acƟvity within the city.

In urban areas like Fullerton, landslides—especially those triggered by intense precipita Ɵon— can cause signiﬁcant localized damage. These events typically occur on steep slopes and can result in rapid movement of soil and debris, damaging homes, roads, and uƟlity infrastructure.

Urban environments are par Ɵcularly vulnerable due to human altera Ɵons to the landscape,

55 USGS, Land Subsidence, hƩps://www.usgs.gov/mission-areas/water-resources/science/land- subsidence?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects, accessed September 9, 2025. 56 USGS, Water Science School: Land Subsidence, hƩps://www.usgs.gov/water-science- school/science/land-subsidence, accessed September 9, 2025.

4-63
such as grading, road cuts, and reduced vegetaƟon cover, which can destabilize slopes. Studies show that urban areas may be up to 10 Ɵmes more sensi Ɵve to precipita Ɵon-triggered landslides than rural areas, meaning even moderate rainfall can lead to slope failures.57 While most landslides are relaƟvely small in area, their sudden onset and potenƟal to disrupt densely populated zones make them a serious hazard.

57 American Geophysical Union, Urban areas more likely to have precipitaƟon-triggered landslides, exposing growing populaƟons to slide hazards, hƩps://news.agu.org/press-release/urban-areas- more-likely-to-have-precipitaƟon-triggered-landslides/, accessed September 12, 2025.

4-64

4-65
In addiƟon to the landslide hazard zones discussed above, Fullerton is suscep Ɵble to deep- seated landslide hazards. Figure 4-9: Deep-Seated Landslide Zones shows landslide hazard by suscepƟbility class.

Deep-seated landslide hazard zones in Fullerton are more extensive than typical surface landslide areas and generally a ﬀect the same hillside regions of the City, par Ɵcularly around the two nature preserves. However, these zones also extend into surrounding areas to a lesser degree, reﬂecƟng broader subsurface instability. The suscepƟbility of these zones is classiﬁed from Class III to Class X, with lower classes being more common throughout the City. Only a few locaƟons reach the highest levels of suscepƟbility, typically in steeper terrain.

Deep-seated landslides di ﬀer from surface slides in that they involve movement of large volumes of earth extending into bedrock, o Ōen covering wide areas and progressing slowly over weeks or months. In ci Ɵes, these types of landslides can be par Ɵcularly destrucƟve due to their scale and the diﬃculty in detecƟng early movement. They can cause extensive damage to infrastructure, including roads, founda Ɵons, and underground u ƟliƟes, and may lead to long-term land instability. Although typically slower-moving, deep-seated landslides can result in catastrophic failures if not idenƟﬁed and miƟgated early.

4-66

4-67

SUBSIDENCE
Reliable land subsidence mapping is limited for the City of Fullerton, and land subsidence may potenƟally impact any area within the City. Land subsidence is more likely to occur in the southern por Ɵons of the city, par Ɵcularly in areas that overlie the Orange County Groundwater Basin. These southern areas are closer to the basin’s center, where groundwater extracƟon has historically been more concentrated . However, it is important to note that speciﬁc or discrete loca Ɵons of land subsidence risk within Fullerton are not currently mapped. The potenƟal for subsidence is inﬂuenced by subsurface condiƟons and groundwater management pracƟces, making it a diﬀuse hazard rather than one conﬁned to clearly deﬁned zones.

Land subsidence is a gradual and ongoing process that can result in long-term impacts to infrastructure, uƟliƟes, and buildings. In Fullerton, much of the city, especially the southern areas, is already developed, which increases the poten Ɵal for damage if subsidence were to occur. Impacts may include damage to roads, pipelines, and founda Ɵons, as well as changes in drainage paƩerns that could exacerbate ﬂooding risks.

4.8.3 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES

LANDSLIDE
There is a limited history of landslide incidents within the City of Fullerton. While the city’s topography includes hills and valleys, much of Fullerton—par Ɵcularly the northern and southern areas—is characterized by ﬂat, urbanized terrain that is generally not conducive to landslide acƟvity. The central region of the city features steeper slopes, and mapped landslide hazard zones are sparse, primarily located within the Panorama Nature Preserve and the Robert E. Ward Nature Preserve. These natural open space areas, with their elevaƟon changes and slope characterisƟcs, represent the highest potenƟal for slope instability within the city.

The only recorded landslide in the city happened in January of 2005 when a ﬁve-day rainstorm destabilized an embankment at the 2000 block of N. Euclid Avenue. While the landslide did not cause any injuries, deaths, or signi ﬁcant property damage, the street and an adjacent recreaƟonal trail were parƟally washed out for a few days. During the same episode, a second landslide occurred between blocks 1700 and 1900 on Harbor Boulevard. The resul Ɵng destabilizaƟon parƟally washed-out Harbor Boulevard but caused no other impacts.

In the past ﬁve years, two FEMA-declared disaster ev ents listed landslides and mudslides as contribuƟng hazards:
• EM-3591-CA: Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, and Mudslides – January 8, 2023 • EM-3592-CA: Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, Landslides, and Mudslides – March 9, 2023
However, the landslides and mudslides associat ed with these events did not impact the Fullerton planning area. The city primarily experienced heavy rainfall, and no slope failures or debris ﬂows were reported. Based on available records and sta ﬀ accounts, Fullerton has not experienced any notable landslide ac Ɵvity in recent history; refer to Table 4-30: Summary of Declared Disasters Affecting the Planning Area.

4-68

SUBSIDENCE
There is no documented history of land subsid ence incidents within the City of Fullerton.

While subsidence is a known hazard in parts of Orange County due to groundwater extracƟon and subsurface condi Ɵons, Fullerton has not experienced any reported cases of ground sinking, structural damage, or infrastructure disrup Ɵon aƩributable to land subsidence. City staﬀ have not idenƟﬁed any past events or localized impacts related to this hazard.

No federally declared disasters rela Ɵng to land subsidence have occurred including the planning area within the last ﬁve years; refer to T able 4 - 3 0: Summary o f Declar ed Disas t er s Affecting the Planning Area.

4.8.4 PROBABILITY OF FUTURE OCCURRENCES

LANDSLIDE
Given the topography and mapped hazard zones within Fullerton, the probability of future landslides is considered likely. This probability is de ﬁned as a 10 to 90 percent probability of occurrence in any given year or a recurrence interval of one to 10 years. While most of the city is rela Ɵvely ﬂat and urbanized, certain areas with steeper terrain such as within the Panorama Nature Preserve and the Robert E. Ward Nature Preserve present elevated risks for both surface and deep-seated landslide acƟvity.

The presence of mapped landslide hazard zones and deep-seated suscep Ɵbility classes in these hillside regions indicates a persistent poten Ɵal for slope instability, especially during periods of intense or prolonged rainfall. Although Fullerton has not experienced frequent or large-scale landslide events, the combina Ɵon of steep slopes and seasonal storm ac Ɵvity supports the LHMP planning team’s designa Ɵon of landslide as a medium hazard consideraƟon. Future events are expected to remain localized but could result in signi ﬁcant impacts to infrastructure and public safety if they occur in developed or heavily tra ﬃcked areas.

SUBSIDENCE
Land subsidence is considered a gradual hazard, with poten Ɵal to aﬀect various parts of the city over Ɵme. While reliable subsidence mapping is limited, the southern por Ɵons of Fullerton overlying the Orange County Groundwater Basin are more suscepƟble due to historic groundwater extracƟon and subsurface condiƟons. Because land subsidence is inﬂuenced by long-term groundwater management prac Ɵces rather than discrete surface features, its occurrence is diﬃcult to predict and not conﬁned to clearly deﬁned zones.

Given the limited history of land subsidence an d managed groundwater use, there is a likely probability of future land subsidence—de ﬁned as a 10 to 90 percent chance of occurrence in any given year or a recurrence interval of one to 10 years. The LHMP planning team has designated land subsidence as a medium hazard considera Ɵon, recognizing that events may be slow-moving and subtle. Land subsidence can result in long-term impacts to infrastructure, uƟliƟes, and drainage systems, however, conƟnued monitoring and sustainable groundwater management may be eﬀecƟve for minimizing future risks.

4-69

4.8.5 CLIMATE CHANGE

LANDSLIDE
Landslides are generally caused by one of two factors, seismic ac Ɵvity, and soil satura Ɵon.

Earthquakes and ground shaking are not linked to climate change, however heavy rains are aﬀected by climate change and understood to contribute to saturated soils and landslides.

Climate change is linked to increased precipitaƟon and more frequent and/or severe storms.

California is already experiencing climate changing impacts with increasing variable precipitaƟons and becoming the highest variability of year-to-year precipita Ɵon in the conƟguous United States. 58 Increased rainfall due to climate change will lead to saturated slopes, erosion, and likely will exacerbate the eﬀects of landslide within the planning area.

Climate change is intensifying both wild ﬁre ac Ɵvity and extreme rainfall events, which together increase the risk of landslides and mudslides. As temperatures rise and droughts become more frequent, vegetaƟon on hillsides becomes more vulnerable to burning during wildﬁres. This loss of vegeta Ɵon reduces slope stability, as plant roots help anchor soil and absorb rainfall. At the same Ɵme, climate change is also increasing the intensity of rainstorms, which can deliver large volumes of water in short periods. When heavy rain falls on ﬁre- scarred slopes, the absence of vegeta Ɵon allows water to saturate and destabilize the soil, triggering debris ﬂows and landslides.

SUBSIDENCE
While drought driven by climate change is likely to con Ɵnue and place an increased burden on local aquifers, regional leadership and groundwater sustainability plans reduce the likelihood of future overdra Ō condi Ɵons. Reduc Ɵons in overdra Ō condi Ɵons reduce the likelihood of land subsidence occurrences. As men Ɵoned above, water purveyors have taken criƟcal steps to monitor and reduce dependence on groundwater resources including implemenƟng water waste preven Ɵon ordinances, water metering, conserva Ɵon pricing, public educaƟon and outreach, and programs to assess and manage water loss. These steps promote water use eﬃciency and reduce the demand for groundwater. Thus, while drought is expected to conƟnually occur in the southern California region, land subsidence as a result of groundwater extracƟon is not likely to occur in the City of Fullerton.

4.8.6 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT

LANDSLIDE
To idenƟfy popula Ɵons at risk for landslide hazards, landslide hazard data layers from the California Geological Survey were overlaid and compared with City parcel data in Geographic InformaƟon Systems, ArcGIS. If a hazard layer either completely or par Ɵally overlapped with a parcel in the data layer, then the enƟre parcel is conservaƟvely considered vulnerable in this analysis. In many instances, the landslide hazard zone intersected with only small porƟons of individual properƟes. However, to provide a detailed un derstanding of risk and vulnerability

58 California Climate AdaptaƟon Strategy 2024, Summary of Projected Climate Change Impacts on California, hƩps://climateresilience.ca.gov/overview/impacts.html, accessed September 11, 2025.

4-70
a s p a r t o f t h i s h a z a r d m iƟgaƟon plan, these parcels (including all residen Ɵal and non- residenƟal development on the parcel, regardless of locaƟon) are considered vulnerable.

Landslide hazards in the City of Fullerton are primarily concentrated in hillside and sloped areas, where geological condi Ɵons increase the risk of slope instability. These mapped landslide hazard zones intersect with a limited number of cri Ɵcal facili Ɵes and facili Ɵes of concern. A detailed inventory of these vulnerable assets is provided in Table 4-15: Critical Facilities and Facilities of Concern Vulnerable to Landslide , which lists the speci ﬁc facili Ɵes located within landslide-prone areas.

TABLE 4-15: CRITICAL FACILITIES AND FACILITIES OF CONCERN VULNERABLE TO

LANDSLIDE

ID NAME FACILITY TYPE REPLACEMENT
VALUE
CriƟcal FaciliƟes
39 Bridge 55C0120 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
84 Hawks Point Pump Sta Ɵon
(1)
Pump StaƟon $525,000
85 Hawks Point Pump StaƟon
(2)
Pump StaƟon $525,000
86 Hawks Pointe Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
95 Hillcrest Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
102 Las Palmas Pump Sta Ɵon
(1)
Pump StaƟon $525,000
103 Las Palmas Pump StaƟon
(2)
Pump StaƟon $525,000
104 Las Palmas Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
132 Upper Acacia-T1
Reservoir
Reservoir $1,500,000
133 Upper Acacia-T2
Reservoir
Reservoir $1,500,000
FaciliƟes of Concern
46 Sunrise of Fullerton Healthcare/Assisted Living
Facility
$6,536,250
62 The Pavilion at Sunny Hills Healthcare/Assisted Living Facility
$6,536,250

In total, 10 criƟcal faciliƟes are located within mapped landslide hazard zones. These include one transportaƟon bridge and several water system components such as pump sta Ɵons and reservoirs, which are essenƟal for maintaining water supply and pressure throughout the City.

AddiƟonally, two faciliƟes of concern are located in these zones—both senior living or nursing faciliƟes that serve residents and may require specialized evacuaƟon procedures in the event of a hazard.

Damage to these facili Ɵes from a landslide event could result in signi ﬁcant opera Ɵonal disrupƟons. Impacts may include compromised water delivery and storage systems, restricted transportaƟon access due to bridge damage, and threats to the safety and mobility of elderly

4-71
residents in assisted living faciliƟes. Landslides could also hinder emergency response e ﬀorts in aﬀected areas and require extensive repair and stabilizaƟon work to restore infrastructure and services.

AddiƟonally, approximately 2,517 residen Ɵal units are located with in the landslide hazard zone. The vulnerability assessment cross-referenced hazard layers with parcel data layers in GIS. The number of vulnerable residenƟal units mulƟplied by the average of 2.91 persons per household for Fullerton indicates that approx imately 7,322 people reside in the landslide hazard zone. Addi Ɵonally, approximately 103,193,284 square feet of non-residen Ɵal structures are located within the landslide hazard area. Refer to Table 4-16: Populations at Risk for Landslide for a summary of vulnerable residents, residen Ɵal units, and non-residen Ɵal buildings.

TABLE 4-16: POPULATIONS AT RISK FOR LANDSLIDE

RESIDENTS AT RISK RESIDENTIAL UNITS AT
RISK

NON-RESIDENTIAL AREA
AT RISK (SQ.FT.)
7,322 residents 2,516 residen Ɵal units 103,193,284 sq. Ō.

Impacts of landslides would depend on locaƟon and severity of the event; however, landslides could have signi ﬁcant impacts on various aspects of a community. Landslides may obstruct transportaƟon and evacua Ɵon routes, making it di ﬃcult for residents to evacuate and for emergency responders to reach a ﬀected areas. Developed areas, including homes and businesses, can be damaged or destroyed, leading to signi ﬁcant economic losses and displacement of residents. Natural resources su ch as the City’s streams and creeks can be altered or contaminated, aﬀecƟng water quality and ecosystems. Landslides may also hinder the day-to-day operaƟons of the city, impacƟng criƟcal faciliƟes and faciliƟes of concern that provide essen Ɵal services. Given the poten Ɵal for widespread opera Ɵonal and economic impacts, targeted miƟgaƟon and emergency planning are essenƟal to protect lives, property, and criƟcal services in landslide-prone areas.

SUBSIDENCE
Land subsidence has the poten Ɵal to aﬀect any area of the city. This includes all 167 cri Ɵcal faciliƟes, 69 faciliƟes of concern, 47,484 occupied residenƟal units, and the full populaƟon of 141,278 residents.

Subsidence can result in gradual ground sinkage, which may compromise the structural integrity of buildings and infrastructure across residen Ɵal, commercial, and industrial areas.

Homes may develop foundaƟon cracks or become structurally unstable, parƟcularly in lower elevaƟon zones where subsidence may also increase ﬂood risk during heavy rainfall.

Businesses and factories could experience infrastructure instability, opera Ɵonal disrupƟons, and economic losses due to damaged faciliƟes and equipment.

CriƟcal facili Ɵes that support water systems, communica Ɵons, transporta Ɵon, and energy delivery may be especially vulnerable. Damage to these assets could delay essenƟal services, hinder emergency response, and disrupt daily opera Ɵons. Facili Ɵes of concern—such as

4-72
schools, healthcare centers, and assisted living facili Ɵes—may face safety risks and require costly repairs or temporary relocaƟon.

Given the poten Ɵal for widespread and unpredictable impacts, it is essen Ɵal to incorporate subsidence into citywide mi ƟgaƟon planning to protect infrastructure, maintain service conƟnuity, and safeguard residents across Fullerton.

4.8.7 CHANGES IN VULNERABILITY (PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS/NEXT FIVE YEARS) Since the 2020 LHMP , the City of Fullerton has experienced marginal populaƟon growth—less than one percent—and moderate increases in housing development. Most new development has consisted of residen Ɵal in ﬁll, mixed-use redevelopment, and rehabilita Ɵon of exis Ɵng structures. While mapped landslide hazard zones and deep-seated landslide areas are concentrated in the hills of the city, land subsidence is a non-mapped hazard and may a ﬀect any part of Fullerton. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that some development over the past ﬁve years has occurred in areas potenƟally vulnerable to subsidence or landslide hazards.

Given the limited scale of growth, the overall increase in vulnerability to geologic hazards during this period is considered minimal.

Over the next ﬁve years, Fullerton is expected to accommodate signiﬁcant residenƟal growth to meet its RHNA alloca Ɵon of 13,209 housing units by 2029. Much of this development will occur within the HIOZ, which includes 759 parc els located primarily in the southern and central por Ɵons of the city—along Commonwealth Avenue, South Harbor Boulevard, East Valencia Drive. These areas do not overlap with mapped landslide hazard zones, and signiﬁcant development is not expected to occur in the hillside areas where landslide risk is highest. However, because land subsidence is a non-mapped hazard, the enƟrety of the city— including areas targeted for future development—may be considered poten Ɵally vulnerable.

As Fullerton pursues higher-density residen Ɵal projects, including mul Ɵ-family and student- oriented housing, the expansion of the built environment and suppor Ɵng infrastructure may contribute to increased exposure to subsidence-related impacts. Accordingly, vulnerability to geologic hazards is expected to rise moderately over the next ﬁve years.

Thus, vulnerability to geologic hazards in Fullerton has increased slightly over the past ﬁve years due to modest development and popula Ɵon growth, primarily in areas outside of mapped landslide zones. However, future development—par Ɵcularly within the HIOZ and other inﬁll areas—may lead to a more notable increase in exposure to land subsidence, which is considered a citywide hazard.

4.8.8 LIMITED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY AND AFN POPULATIONS
SecƟon 3.8, Whole Community and Access and Func Ɵonal Needs , includes a detailed determinaƟon of vulnerable populaƟons within the planning area, including census tracts with concentraƟons of individuals with AFN or limited adap Ɵve capacity. The northern and southern areas of the city are predominantly ﬂat and urbanized, making them less suscepƟble to landslides. The central region features steeper slopes that increase the poten Ɵal for slope instability. Mapped landslide zones are sparse but are primarily located within the Panorama Nature Preserve and the Robert E. Ward Nature Preserve. Mapped landslide hazard zones and

4-73
deep-seated landslide hazard zones generally do not overlap with these designated census tracts, with the excepƟon of Census Tract 011000, which is overlapped by the mapped deep- seated landslide hazards. However, it is understood that AFN and limited adap Ɵve capacity populaƟons are distributed throughout the City and may be impacted by landslide hazards, parƟcularly if they reside near hazard zones or rely on infrastructure and services that traverse these areas.

Vulnerable groups, including older adults, individuals with disabili Ɵes, linguisƟcally isolated households, and residents in mulƟ-unit or group housing, face heightened risks from landslide hazards due to mobility challenges, communicaƟon barriers, limited access to transportaƟon, and potenƟal isolaƟon from emergency services if infrastructure is compromised. PopulaƟons with limited mobility, such as older adults and individuals with disabiliƟes, may face challenges evacuaƟng or reloca Ɵng in the event of slope failure or road closures caused by landslides.

Residents in mul Ɵ-unit housing, crowded households, or group quarters may lack access to transportaƟon or ﬁnancial resources needed to respond to sudden disrup Ɵons. LinguisƟcally isolated households may not receive or understand emergency alerts or evacua Ɵon instrucƟons, especially if landslide risks escalate quickly due to heavy rainfall or seismic acƟvity. Addi Ɵonally, landslides can damage u Ɵlity lines, roadways, and access routes, potenƟally isolaƟng vulnerable populaƟons from emergency services or caregivers.

ConsideraƟons for vulnerable groups throughout the planning area were incorporated into the miƟgaƟon strategy in SecƟon 5. Speciﬁcally, the LHMP Planning Team tailored MiƟgaƟon AcƟons #1, 3, 11, 18, 51, 53 and 54 with these groups in mind, including e ﬀorts to improve emergency communicaƟon systems, assess transporta Ɵon access for AFN popula Ɵons near hazard zones, and ensure con Ɵnuity of care and services in the event of infrastructure disrupƟon caused by landslides.

4.9 SEISMIC HAZARDS (FAULT RUPTURE, GROUND SHAKING, LIQUEFACTION)

4.9.1 DESCRIPTION
The US Geological Survey (USGS) de ﬁnes an earthquake as a sudden slip on a fault and the resulƟng ground shaking and radiated seismic energy caused by the slip (or any other sudden stress changes in the earth).59 Faults are fractures along the earth’s crust between two blocks of earth and can be deﬁned as a strike slip, normal, or thrust faults. Earthquakes occur without warning, and result in eﬀects such as fault rupture, ground shaking, and liquefacƟon described below.

FAULT RUPTURE
Fault rupture or surface faulƟng is the diﬀerenƟal movement of two sides of a fracture, where the ground breaks apart. The length, width, and displacement of the ground characterize surface faults, which occur based on the type of underlying fault. Faults occur at boundaries between large sec Ɵons of the earth’s surface, called tectonic plates. Most of California

59 USGS, Earthquake Hazard Program, hƩps://www.usgs.gov/glossary/earthquake-hazards- program#E, accessed September 9, 2025.

4-74
underlies the North American plate, but coastal areas (including Fullerton) are on the Paci ﬁc plate. The San Andreas Fault is the main boundary between North American and Paciﬁc plates, but other fault lines can be found up to 200 miles away. The presence of the San Andreas Fault and other regional faults is the reason for frequent seismic acƟvity in California.

Where surface traces of ac Ɵve faults are found in California, an Alquist-Priolo fault zone is mapped. A regulatory zone, which is a 500-foot bu ﬀer, is then created around the mapped Alquist-Priolo fault zone. 60 If an ac Ɵve surface fault has a poten Ɵal for surface rupture, a structure for human occupancy cannot be placed over the fault and must be a minimum distance from the fault (generally ﬁŌy feet). The intent of the Alquist-Priolo Act is to reduce losses from surface fault rupture, and to prevent the construcƟon of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of acƟve faults. Before a new development is permiƩed, ciƟes and counƟes require a geologic invesƟgaƟon to demonstrate that proposed buildings will not be constructed on acƟve faults.61 Quaternary faults are not included in the Alquist-Priolo fault zone as they include faults that moved within the last 2.6 million years and have not ruptured recently enough to be considered under the Alquist-Priolo fault zone de ﬁniƟon. Thus, only faults with Holocene surface rupture evidence are included in these zones such as the nearby San Andreas fault zone.

GROUND SHAKING
Ground moƟon is the movement of the earth's surface from earthquakes. Ground mo Ɵon is produced by seismic waves that are generated by sudden slip on a fault or sudden pressure at the explosive source and travel through the earth and along its surface. 62 Seismic waves produce ground vibraƟons above the surface. The severity of the vibraƟon increases with the amount of energy released and decreases with distance from the causaƟve fault or epicenter.

SoŌ soils can further amplify ground moƟon.63
Seismic shaking can be strong enough to result in widespread devasta Ɵon or be virtually undetectable by the average person. The intensity of seismic shaking is a result of the release by the fault rupture (how much of the accumulated stress was released), the length of the rupture (the longer the slip along the fault line, the greater the shaking), and the depth at which the rupture occurs (ruptures that occur closer to the surface o Ōen cause stronger shaking). Usually, areas closest to the site of the rupture experience the greatest shaking, although diﬀerences in geology and soil can also have an impact. Seismic shaking can damage

60 California Department of ConservaƟon, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones, hƩps://www.conservaƟon.ca.gov/cgs/alquist-priolo, accessed September 9, 2025. 61 USGS, Alquist-Priolo Faults, hƩps://earthquake.usgs.gov/educaƟon/geologicmaps/apfaults.php, accessed September 9, 2025.
62 USGS, Earthquake Hazard Program, hƩps://www.usgs.gov/glossary/earthquake-hazards- program#E, accessed September 9, 2025.
63 Yeats, Robert. Living with Earthquakes in the Paciﬁc Northwest. AmpliﬁcaƟon of Seismic Waves by SoŌ Surﬁcial Deposits.
hƩps://geo.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Seismology/Living_With_Earthquakes_in_The_Paciﬁc_Northw est_%28Yeats%29/06%3A_Shaky_Ground_and_Big_Waves/6.01%3A_Solid_Rock_and_Bowls_of_Jello /6.1.02%3A_AmpliﬁcaƟon_of_Seismic_Waves_by_SoŌ_Surﬁcial_Deposits, accessed September 10, 2025.

4-75
or destroy buildings and structures, and may cause parƟal or total collapse. Ground movement can damage or destroy infrastructure on or beneath the surface, such as roads, rail lines, and uƟlity lines and pipes. This in turn, can cause hazardous materials releases, water main breaks, and other dangerous situa Ɵons resul Ɵng from infrastructure failure. Falling debris and structures also create a risk of injury or death.

LIQUEFACTION
LiquefacƟon occurs when ground shaking causes saturated soils, primarily clay-free deposits such as sand or silt, to lose strength and act like a viscous ﬂuid. Certain soils are more suscepƟble to liquefacƟon, parƟcularly younger and looser sediment closer to the water table.

According to FEMA, liquefacƟon causes three types of ground failure, as described below:
• Lateral spreads involve the lateral movement of large blocks of soil as a result of liquefacƟon of an underlying layer. They generally develop on gentle slopes, most commonly between 0.3 and 3 degrees. Horizontal movements commonly are as much as 10 to 15 feet. However, where slopes are parƟcularly favorable, and the duraƟon of ground shaking is long, lateral movement may be as much as 100 to 150 feet. Lateral spread usually breaks up internally, forming numerous ﬁssures and scarps.
• Flow failures consist of liqueﬁed soil or blocks of intact material riding on a layer of liqueﬁed soil and are the most catastrophic type of ground failure caused by liquefacƟon. They commonly move several feet and up to dozens of miles under certain condiƟons. Flow failures usually form in loose saturated sands or silts on slopes greater than three degrees.
• Loss of bearing strength occurs when the soil supporƟng buildings or other structures liqueﬁes. When large deformaƟons occur, structures seƩle and Ɵp. The general subsurface geometry required for liquefacƟon-caused bearing failures is a layer of saturated, cohesionless soil that extends from near the ground surface to a depth equal to about the width of the building.

4.9.2 LOCATION/EXTENT

FAULT RUPTURE AND GROUND SHAKING
The City is located within the Southern California region, known to be seismically acƟve. AcƟve faults that are close to the city include the Elsinore Fault, Joaquin Hills Thrust Fault, Newport- Inglewood Fault, San Andreas Fault, and the Peralta Hills Fault. The locaƟon of regional faults and big earthquake epicenters in rela Ɵon to the City are depicted in Figure 4-10: Earthquake Epicenters and Fault Zones.

There are two primary fault systems that run through the city, the Puente Hills blind thrust system and the Lower Elysian Park thrust. These are undi ﬀerenƟated quaternary faults and thus not mapped in the Alquist-Priolo Zone. The faults are the Puente Hills thrust runs east- west through the center of the city and the Lower Elysian Park thrust runs southeast through the southwest corner of the city. Figure 4-11: Traversing Faults in Fullerton shows fault systems within the City.

4-76

4-77
Table 4-17: Local Earthquake Faults lists each acƟve and potenƟally acƟve fault near Fullerton, distance to the City, and esƟmated magnitude.

TABLE 4-17: LOCAL EARTHQUAKE FAUL TS
FAULT NAME DISTANCE1
(MILES)

LAST MAJOR RUPTURE ESTIMATED
MAGNITUDE2
Puente Hills blind
thrust system
Within City
Boundaries
UndiﬀerenƟated Quaternary
(< 1.6 million years)
Unknown
Lower Elysian Park
thrust
Within City
Boundaries
UndiﬀerenƟated Quaternary
(< 1.6 million years)
Unknown
Elsinore 2.75 May 15, 1910 6.5-7.5
San Joaquin Hills
Thrust

12.0 Latest Quaternary (<15,000
years)
Unknown
Newport-
Inglewood

10.2 March 10, 1933 6.0-7.4
Peralta Hills 1.31 UndiﬀerenƟated Quaternary
(< 1.6 million years)
Unknown
San Andreas 35.0 January 9, 1857 6.8-8.0
1 EsƟmated Distance
2 In Mw (Moment Magnitude)
Sources: Southern California Earthquake Data Center, Earthquake Information, https://scedc.caltech.edu/earthquake/faults.html, accessed September 16, 2025.

USGS, Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States, https://earthquake.usgs.gov/cfusion/qfault/show_report_AB_archive.cfm?fault_id=186&section_id=, accessed September 16, 2025.

The list below shows more informa Ɵon on nearby faults. There is limited informa Ɵon on undiﬀerenƟated Quaternary faults, however, these may sƟll pose seismic risks despite limited available data. While faults such as the Puente Hills blind thrust system and the Lower Elysian Park thrust do run through the city, they are classi ﬁed as undiﬀerenƟated Quaternary faults, meaning there is limited data available regarding their most recent acƟvity. • The Elsinore Fault Zone runs from the Chino Hills region to the California-Mexico border, and is approximately 2.75 miles from the City at its closest point. Near Chino Hills it splits into two separate segments, the Chino Fault, and the Whiƫer Fault.

This fault is believed to cause a major event approximately every 250 years with a probable magnitude of 6.5 to 7.5.
64 The last major event along this fault was a 1910
earthquake measuring an esƟmated 6.0 on the moment magnitude scale.

64 Southern California Earthquake Data Center, Elsinore Fault Zone, hƩps://scedc.caltech.edu/earthquake/elsinore.html, accessed September 16, 2025.

4-78

4-79
• The Newport/Inglewood Fault, a right-lateral fault system, extends along the coast approximately 10.2 miles south of the City. The system is capable of producing a 6.9 magnitude earthquake and has a slip rate of 1mm/yr.
65 The movement on this fault
caused the 1933 Long Beach magnitude 6.3 earthquake, and the 1920 Inglewood earthquake (esƟmated magnitude 4.9). The 1933 earthquake resulted in 120 deaths and over $50 million in property damage.
• The San Andreas Fault, the largest and most well-known of California’s faults, runs from Cape Mendocino to the Salton Sea. It is approximately 35 miles from the City at its closest point. It has caused numerous major earthquakes throughout California’s history, including the 1906 San Francisco earthquake and the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake which caused widespread damage in the San Francisco Bay Area. The central porƟon of the San Andreas Fault was responsible for an earthquake measuring an esƟmated 7.9 on the moment magnitude scale, the strongest in California’s recorded history in 1857 near the town of Parkﬁeld. The Southern California Earthquake Data Center esƟmates that a future major event along the southern part of the San Andreas Fault could measure 6.8 to 8.0 on the moment magnitude scale. The recurrence interval along the fault varies greatly, from less than 20 years to more than 300 years between events.
66 Alquist-Priolo earthquake fault zones are regulatory zones surrounding the surface traces of acƟve faults in California as mapped and de ﬁned by the California Department of ConservaƟon. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zo ning Act is a California law enacted in 1972 to reduce the risk of damage from surf ace rupture during earthquakes. Under the Alquist-Priolo Act, a fault is considered ac Ɵve if it has shown evidence of surface rupture within the last 11,000 years. The undiﬀerenƟated Quaternary faults that run through the City have not ruptured the surface within the last 11,000 years and thus are not classiﬁed as acƟve under the Alquist-Priolo Act.

Due to the regional nature of seismic waves, ground shaking from earthquakes can aﬀect large geographic areas well beyond the epicenter. Given that the City of Fullerton is located near several regional fault systems—and even contains fault traces within its boundaries—ground shaking has the potenƟal to impact the enƟre city. This widespread vulnerability is especially concerning for certain types of structures, including residen Ɵal buildings made of wood or reinforced masonry, mobile homes, and so Ō-story buildings. So Ō-story buildings, which typically have a ground ﬂoor lacking suﬃcient lateral support due to limited shear walls, are parƟcularly suscepƟble to damage.

There are two scales commonly used by scien Ɵsts to measure earthquakes: the Moment Magnitude Scale and the Modi ﬁed Mercalli Intensity Scale. The moment magnitude scale is based on the now largely unused Richter scale and measures the amount of energy released by the earthquake. The Modiﬁed Mercalli Intensity Scale (MMI Scale) measures the eﬀects of

65 Southern California Earthquake Data Center, Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone, hƩps://scedc.caltech.edu/earthquake/newport.html, accessed September 16, 2025. 66 Southern California Earthquake Data Center, San Andreas Fault Zone, hƩps://scedc.caltech.edu/earthquake/sanandreas.html, accessed September 16, 2025.

4-80
the earthquake and is based on qualitaƟve observaƟons rather than a mathemaƟcal basis. The intensity scale consists of a series of certain key responses such as people awakening from sleep, movement of furniture, damage to chimneys, and destruc Ɵon. Although numerous scales have been developed to evaluate earthquake e ﬀects, the scale currently used in the United States is the Modi ﬁed Mercalli Intensity Scale. This scale, composed of twelve increasing levels of intensity ranging from impercepƟble shaking to catastrophic destrucƟon, is designated by Roman numerals I through XII. Table 4-18: Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale shows the diﬀerent categories of the Mercalli intensity scale.

TABLE 4-18: MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE

CATEGORY DESCRIPTION POSSIBLE IMPACTS
I Non felt Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable condiƟons.

II Weak Felt only by few persons at rest, especially on upper ﬂoors of buildings.

III Weak Felt quite no Ɵceably by persons indoors, especially on upper ﬂoors of buildings. Many people do not recognize as an
earthquake. Standing motor cars may rock slightly.

VibraƟons similar to the passing of a truck. DuraƟon
esƟmated.

IV Light Felt indoors by many, outdoors by few during the day. At night, some awakened. Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make cracking sound. SensaƟon like heavy truck
striking building. Standing motor cars rocked noƟceably.

V Moderate Felt by nearly everyone; many awakened. Some dishes, windows broken. Unstable objects overturned. Pendulum
clocks may stop.

VI Strong Felt by all, many frightened. Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of fallen plaster. Damage slight.

VII Very Strong Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construcƟon; slight to moderate in well-built ordinary
structures; considerable damage in poorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys broken.

VIII Severe Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable damage in ordinary substanƟal buildings with parƟal
collapse. Damage great in poorly built structures. Fall of chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, walls. Heavy furniture overturned.

IX Violent Damage considerable in speci ﬁcally designed structures; well-designed frame structures thrown out of plumb.

Damage great in substanƟal buildings, with parƟal collapse.

Buildings shiŌed oﬀ foundaƟons.

X Extreme Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundaƟons.

Rails bent.

Source: USGS, The Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale, https://www.usgs.gov/natural- hazards/earthquake-hazards/science/modified-mercalli-intensity-scale?qt- science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects, accessed September 17, 2025.

4-81
Magnitude and intensity measure diﬀerent characterisƟcs of earthquakes but oŌen correlate.

Magnitude measures the energy released at the source of the earthquake, determined by measurements on seismographs. Intensity measures the strength of shaking produced by an earthquake at a certain locaƟon, and is determined by eﬀects on people, structures, and the natural environment. Refer to Table 4-19: Approximate Comparison of Moment Magnitude and Mercalli Intensity Scale, which lists the intensiƟes that are typically observed at locaƟons near the epicenter of earthquakes of diﬀerent magnitudes.

TABLE 4-19: APPROXIMATE COMPARISON OF MOMENT MAGNITUDE AND MERCALLI

INTENSITY SCALE

MOMENT MAGNITUDE MERCALLI INTENSITY

1.0 to 3.0 I

3.0 to 3.9 II to III

4.0 to 4.9 IV to V

5.0 to 5.9 VI to VII

6.0 to 6.9 VII to IX

7.0 and greater VIII and greater
Source: USGS, Magnitude/Intensity Comparison, http://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/ topics/mag_vs_int.php, accessed September 17, 2025.

The City of Fullerton faces considerable seismic risk due to its proximity to several acƟve faults capable of producing earthquakes with esƟmated Moment Magnitudes of 6.0 and above. Even if an earthquake does not originate within city limits, regional seismic events can sƟll generate intense ground shaking across Fullerton. Such magnitudes are commonly associated with Modiﬁed Mercalli Intensity levels that indicate signi ﬁcant structural damage, especially to vulnerable buildings like soŌ-story structures, older masonry homes, and mobile residences.

The impacts of this ground shaking could include widespread damage to infrastructure, disrupƟon of u ƟliƟes, compromised roadways, and poten Ɵal collapse of cri Ɵcal facili Ɵes.

These consequences would severely hinder the city's ability to respond e ﬀecƟvely—delaying emergency services, complica Ɵng evacua Ɵon routes, and straining coordina Ɵon among agencies. CommunicaƟon networks may be impaired, emergency shelters overwhelmed, and transportaƟon corridors blocked, all of which would challenge Fullerton’s capacity to manage a Ɵmely and organized disaster response.

LIQUEFACTION
The poten Ɵal for liquefac Ɵon exists in areas suscep Ɵble to ground shaking where loose, unconsolidated soils and shallow groundwater are present. In Fullerton, this risk is heightened by the presence of acƟve regional faults, geologically young sediments, groundwater, various valleys and creek beds. The California Geological Survey Seismic Hazard Zona Ɵon Program idenƟﬁes and maps areas prone to liquefacƟon; refer to Figure 4-12: Liquefaction Hazard Zone.

4-82

4-83
Notably, the Orange County Groundwater Basin underlies much of the city, par Ɵcularly in its southern por Ɵons, linked to groundwater levels that increase liquefac Ɵon suscep Ɵbility.

LiquefacƟon hazard zones are concentrated in the following key areas: the south and southwest por Ɵons of the city, where low eleva Ɵon and the groundwater basin converge; central valleys throughout the city, including areas surrounding Brea Creek, Fullerton Creek, and the Brea and Fullerton Dams; and the northernmost por Ɵon of the city near Imperial Highway. These areas align with zones idenƟﬁed by the California Geological Survey’s Seismic Hazard ZonaƟon Program.

LiquefacƟon-prone zones in Fullerton underlie a diverse mix of land uses—including residenƟal neighborhoods, commercial centers, and industrial faciliƟes—making the poten Ɵal impacts both widespread and severe. During a strong earthquake, saturated soils in these areas may lose strength and behave like a liquid, causing buildings to Ɵlt, sink, or collapse, and underground uƟliƟes to rupture. In residenƟal zones, this could result in extensive damage to homes, displacement of residents, and disrup Ɵon of essen Ɵal services. Commercial and industrial areas may experience structural failures, inventory losses, and hazardous material spills, especially where heavy equipment or storage tanks are present. Roadways, bridges, and rail lines crossing liquefacƟon zones could buckle or become impassable, impeding emergency response, evacua Ɵon e ﬀorts, and coordina Ɵon among city departments. The cumula Ɵve eﬀect would be a signi ﬁcant strain on Fullerton’s ability to maintain public safety, restore infrastructure, and resume normal operaƟons in the aŌermath of a major seismic event.

4.9.3 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES

FAULT RUPTURE AND GROUND SHAKING
As discussed above, a variety of faults are located near the City of Fullerton. Table 4-20: Major Earthquake Faults of Particular Concern idenƟﬁes faults of concern within the region and their last major ruptures.

TABLE 4-20: MAJOR EARTHQUAKE FAULTS OF PARTICULAR CONCERN FAULT
NAME

TYPE OF

FAULTING

LAST MAJOR

RUPTURE

SLIP RATE INTERVAL

BETWEEN

RUPTURES

ESTIMATED

MAGNITUDE
Puente Hills
blind thrust
system
Thrust Undi ﬀerenƟated
Quaternary (< 1.6
million years)
Between

0.2 and

1.0 mm/yr
Unknown Unknown
Lower
Elysian Park
thrust
Thrust UndiﬀerenƟated
Quaternary (< 1.6
million years)
Between

1.0 and

5.0 mm/yr
Unknown Unknown
Elsinore Right-
lateral
strike-slip
May 15, 1910,
Magnitude 6 – no
surface rupture
Roughly

4.0 mm/yr
Roughly 250
years

6.5 - 7.5 Mw
San Joaquin
Hills Thrust
Thrust Latest Quaternary
(<15,000 years)
Between

0.2 and

1.0 mm/yr
Unknown Unknown
Newport-
Inglewood
Right-
lateral
March 10, 1933 0.6 mm/yr Unknown 6.0-7.4

4-84
FAULT
NAME

TYPE OF

FAULTING

LAST MAJOR

RUPTURE

SLIP RATE INTERVAL

BETWEEN

RUPTURES

ESTIMATED

MAGNITUDE
reverse
slip
Peralta Hills Reverse UndiﬀerenƟated
Quaternary (< 1.6
million years)
Unknown Unknown Unknown
San
Andreas
Right-
lateral
strike-slip
January 9, 1857 20 to 35
mm/year
Roughly 140
years

6.8-8.0
mm = millimeters, yr = year, Mw = Moment Magnitude
Source: Southern California Earthquake Center, Significant Earthquakes and Faults, http://scedc.caltech.edu/significant/fault-index.html, accessed September 19, 2025.

USGS, Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States, https://earthquake.usgs.gov/cfusion/qfault, accessed September 19, 2025.

Table 4-21: Significant Historical Earthquakes in Southern California and Figure 4-10 above
idenƟﬁes the major earthquakes that have occurred in southern California. As shown in Table 4-21, mulƟple regional major earthquakes over the past two decades have resulted in seismic ground shaking in Fullerton.

TABLE 4-21: SIGNIFICANT HISTORICAL EARTHQUAKES IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

EARTHQUAKE NAME YEAR ESTIMATED MAGNITUDE
Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara 1812 7.1 Mw
Wrightwood 1812 7.3 Mw
Wrightwood 1899 6.4 Mw
Elsinore 1910 6.0 Mw
San Jacinto 1918 6.8 Mw
North San Jacinto 1923 6.3 Mw
Long Beach 1933 6.4 Mw
San Fernando 1971 6.6 Mw
Whiƫer Narrows 1987 6.0 Mw
Newport Beach 1989 4.7 Mw
Northridge 1994 6.7 Mw
Yorba Linda 2002 4.6 Mw
Chino Hills 2008 5.4 Mw
Source: Southern California Earthquake Data Center, Significant Earthquakes and Faults, https://scedc.caltech.edu/earthquake/significant.html, accessed September 19, 2025.

The Yorba Linda and Chino Hills Earthquakes ar e the two most recent earthquakes in close proximity to the City. On September 3, 2002, a 4.8 magnitude earthquake occurred at midnight northeast of Fullerton in the Chino Hills area. The epicenter of the quake occurred at the foot of the Gilman Peak in Telegraph Canyon. It was widely felt in the epicentral region and as far away as San Diego, Palm Springs, Barstow, and Mojave. Although the ground moƟon earthquake was no Ɵced by residents, it did not result in any major injuries or structural

4-85
damage.67 On July 29, 2008, a 5.4 magnitude earthquake started 2 miles southwest of Chino Hills, in the Chino Hills State Park. Seismic ground shaking reached a magnitude of VI on the Modiﬁed Mercalli Intensity and the resulƟng ground moƟon resulted in structural damage to three residences within the neighboring City of Yorba Linda.68 No federally declared disasters relaƟng to fault rupture and ground shaking have occurred including the planning area within the last ﬁve years; refer to Table 4-30: Summary of Declared Disasters Affecting the Planning Area.

LIQUEFACTION
Comprehensive, historic accounts of liquefacƟon-related damage within the City of Fullerton are limited. The Orange County and Orange County Fire Authority Local Hazard MiƟgaƟon Plan does not document any con ﬁrmed liquefac Ɵon incidents occurring in Fullerton in recent history. City staﬀ have not reported speciﬁc recollecƟons of past liquefacƟon events. However, regional seismic ac Ɵvity—par Ɵcularly the 1987 Whi ƫer Narrows Earthquake—highlighted suscepƟbility to liquefac Ɵon in areas underlain by young alluvial sediments and shallow groundwater, including zones along the Santa Ana River and other low-lying creek beds.69 In Fullerton, the California Geological Survey’s Seismic Hazard Zona Ɵon Program iden Ɵﬁes several areas as having a high poten Ɵal for liquefacƟon during strong ground shaking. These include the southern and southwestern por Ɵons of the city, central valleys near Brea Creek and Fullerton Creek, and the northernmost areas near Imperial Highway. While no documented damage has occurred in these zones to date, their geological characterisƟcs and proximity to acƟve faults suggest that future seismic events could trigger liquefacƟon, posing signiﬁcant risks to infrastructure, residenƟal neighborhoods, and commercial operaƟons.

No federally declared disasters rela Ɵng to liquefacƟon have occurred including the planning area within the last ﬁve years; refer to Table 4-30: Summary of Declared Disasters Affecting the Planning Area.

4.9.4 PROBABILITY OF FUTURE OCCURRENCES

FAULT RUPTURE AND GROUND SHAKING
Given the loca Ɵon of the planning area, the presence of several local/regional faults, and previous occurrences, it has been determined that the probability of ground shaking impacƟng the planning area in the future is considered highly likely. A highly likely probability means there is a 90 to 100 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence

67 Los Angeles Times, Magnitude 4.8 Quake RaƩles the Southland, hƩps://www.laƟmes.com/archives/la-xpm-2002-sep-04-me-quake4-story.html, accessed September 22, 2025.
68 Los Angeles Times, 3 Yorba Linda homes more than shaken by quake, hƩps://www.laƟmes.com/local/la-me-yorbaquake31-2008jul31-story.html, accessed September 22, 2025.
69 Los Angeles Times, The Earthquake in Orange County: Warning: Soil Could Turn to Mush in a Strong Earthquake, hƩps://www.laƟmes.com/archives/la-xpm-1987-10-03-me-2848-story.html, published October 3, 1987, accessed September 19, 2025.

4-86
interval of less than one year. The LHMP planning team assigned a high hazard planning consideraƟon to the hazards and impacts associated with ground shaking based upon a likely probability and expected impacts of future events.

The USGS Uniform Earthquake Rupture Forecast Version 3 released in 2017 provides a perspecƟve of the likelihood each California region will experience a magnitude 6.7 or larger earthquake in the next 30 years; refer to Table 4-22 Likelihood of One or More Earthquakes Occurring in the Next 30 Years in Orange County Region by Fault. Likelihood of occurrence of for the local undi ﬀerenƟated quaternary faults are not included, however probability for major earthquake faults in the region are provided. The Elsinore and Newport/Inglewood faults, shows lower probabiliƟes for an earthquake greater than 6.7 M in the next 30 years compared to the San Andreas Fault. It is noted that while less likely, an earthquake on the nearby Elsinore Fault would have the highest probability for strong ground shaking within the City.

TABLE 4-22: LIKELIHOOD OF ONE OR MORE EARTHQUAKES OCCURRING IN THE NEXT 30

YEARS IN ORANGE COUNTY REGION BY FAULT

MAGNITUDE ELSINORE FAULT NEWPORT/INGLEWOOD FAULT SAN ANDREAS M ≥ 6.7 3.66% 0.95% 19.21%
M ≥ 7.0 1.82% 0.81% 12.86%
M ≥ 7.5 0.90% 0.42% 10.21%
M ≥ 8.0 <0.01% -- 3.24%
1 M≥6.7 means magnitude greater than or equal to 6.7, and likewise for the other magnitude thresholds. 2 The 30-year period measured by this report is 2014 to 2044; a 30-year period is the typical duraƟon of a homeowner mortgage.
3 Percentages for fault secƟons closest to the City.

Source: U.S. Department of the Interior and U.S. Geological Survey, The Third California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3), March 2015.

LIQUEFACTION
Because several areas in Fullerton are located within idenƟﬁed liquefacƟon hazard zones the likelihood of future liquefac Ɵon occurrences is considered highly likely. These zones are characterized by low eleva Ɵon, unconsolidated sediments, and shallow groundwater levels, especially where the Orange County Groundwater Basin underlies the city. Liquefac Ɵon should be expected and an Ɵcipated as a secondary hazard resul Ɵng from seismic ac Ɵvity in the region.

LiquefacƟon would only be triggered by a signi ﬁcant earthquake event occurring on or near one of the fault zones close to Fullerton. The undi ﬀerenƟated quaternary faults within and near the City, as well as the regional Elsinore and Newport/Inglewood faults, have a limited probability of producing a magnitude 6.7 or greater earthquake within the next 30 years. This reduces the probability of liquefac Ɵon resulƟng from seismic ac Ɵvity on this fault. However, earthquakes are more probable on the San Andreas fault system, which is located farther from the planning area. Depending on the epicenter loca Ɵon, depth, and magnitude of such an event, ground shaking may or may not be su ﬃcient to trigger liquefac Ɵon within Fullerton’s jurisdicƟon.

Given the locaƟon of the planning area, the presence of several local and regional faults, and limited recent impacts, it has been determined that the probability of liquefac Ɵon impacƟng

4-87
the City of Fullerton in the future is considered highly likely. A highly likely probability means there is a 90 to 100 percent chance of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of less than one year. The LHMP planning team assigned a high hazard planning consideraƟon to the hazards and impacts associated with liquefac Ɵon based upon this probability and the expected impacts of future events.

4.9.5 CLIMATE CHANGE

FAULT RUPTURE & GROUND SHAKING
Both fault rupture and ground shaking are caused by seismic ac Ɵvity, which is not correlated with climate change. Thus, fault ruptures or ground shaking is not more likely to occur as climate change impacts become more signiﬁcant.

LIQUEFACTION
Climate change may increase suscep Ɵbility to liquefac Ɵon. Climate change is likely to bring more severe rain events to southern California, increasing the amount of water saturaƟon in loose soils. Saturated soils are known to be at risk for liquefac Ɵon or ground failure in an earthquake. Thus, heavy periods of rain combined with a local earthquake with strong ground shaking could increase the likelihood of liquefacƟon potenƟal.

4.9.6 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT

FAULT RUPTURE AND GROUND SHAKING
Although no Alquist-Priolo fault zones traverse the City of Fullerton, nearby and regional faults—including mapped Quaternary faults—pose a credible threat of fault rupture and ground shaking. Given the proximity of these fault systems and the unpredictable nature of seismic acƟvity, a conservaƟve planning approach assumes that the en Ɵre City is poten Ɵally vulnerable to earthquake-related hazards. This includes all 167 criƟcal faciliƟes, 69 faciliƟes of concern, 47,484 occupied residenƟal units, and the full populaƟon of 141,278 residents.

Ground shaking is expected to be the most widespread and damaging eﬀect of a seismic event.

Older buildings and infrastructure may be especially suscep Ɵble to collapse or structural failure. Bridges and highways could be compromised, isola Ɵng neighborhoods and delaying emergency response. Underground systems such as water mains, gas lines, and sewer networks may rupture, leading to ﬂooding, contaminaƟon, ﬁres, and service outages. Fault rupture, while more localized, could cause severe damage to structures and infrastructure directly overlying or adjacent to fault lines, including facili Ɵes that provide power, transportaƟon, and emergency services.

Damage to criƟcal faciliƟes—such as police and ﬁre staƟons, water and energy u ƟliƟes, and transportaƟon infrastructure—could signi ﬁcantly hinder City opera Ɵons and emergency response capabiliƟes. FaciliƟes of concern, including schools and healthcare centers, may face evacuaƟon challenges and safety risks. Residen Ɵal areas could experience displacement, injury, or loss of life, par Ɵcularly in densely populated or structurally vulnerable neighborhoods.

4-88
Given the poten Ɵal for widespread disrup Ɵon and cascading impacts, it is essen Ɵal to incorporate seismic hazard mi ƟgaƟon strategies that strengthen infrastructure, protect vulnerable populaƟons, and ensure conƟnuity of essenƟal services across Fullerton.

LIQUEFACTION
To idenƟfy populaƟons at risk for liquefac Ɵon hazards, liquefac Ɵon hazard data layers from the California Geological Survey were overlaid and compared with City parcel data in Geographic Informa Ɵon Systems, ArcGIS. If a hazard layer either completely or par Ɵally overlapped with a parcel in the data layer, then the enƟre parcel is conservaƟvely considered vulnerable in this analysis. In many instances, the liquefac Ɵon hazard zone intersected with only small porƟons of individual properƟes. However, to provide a detailed understanding of risk and vulnerability as part of this hazard mi ƟgaƟon plan, these parcels (including all residenƟal and non-residen Ɵal development on the parcel, regardless of loca Ɵon) are considered vulnerable.

LiquefacƟon hazard zones in the City of Fullerton are primarily concentrated in the southwestern porƟon of the City, as well as along creeks, valleys, and other low-lying areas where the water table is shallow or near the surface. These mapped zones indicate a signiﬁcant vulnerability to ground failure during seismic events, par Ɵcularly in areas with saturated soils. A detailed inventory of vulnerable assets is provided in Table 4-23: Critical Facilities and Facilities of Concern Vulnerable to Liquefaction, which lists the criƟcal faciliƟes and faciliƟes of concern located within the liquefacƟon hazard zone.

Table 4-23: Critical Facilities and Facilities of Concern Vulnerable to Liquefaction

ID NAME FACILITY TYPE REPLACEMENT
VALUE
CriƟcal FaciliƟes
1 City Hall City Hall $7,276,800
2 City Yard Municipal Government Not Available
3 Fire StaƟon 1 Fire StaƟon $1,630,720
4 Fire Sta Ɵon 2 Fire Sta Ɵon $1,630,720
7 Fire StaƟon 5 Fire StaƟon $1,630,720
8 Fire Sta Ɵon 6 Fire Sta Ɵon $1,630,720
9 Police StaƟon Police StaƟon $1,630,720
11 Maple Community Center Community Center $3,312,650
12 Richman Community Center Community Center $3,312,650 13 Main Library Library Not Available
14 Gilbert Community Center Community Center $3,312,650 15 Amerige Park Park Not Available
17 Fullerton Museum Center Museum $3,312,650
19 Fullerton Community Center Community Center $3,312,650 20 Fullerton Tennis Center Sports Center Not Available
21 Independence Park Park Not Available
22 Laguna Lake Park Park Not Available
23 Fullerton Airport Airport $14,306,673
24 TransportaƟon Center TransportaƟon Center Not Available

4-89

ID NAME FACILITY TYPE REPLACEMENT
VALUE
25 Bridge 55C0147 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
26 Bridge 55C0290 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
27 Bridge 55C0292 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
28 Bridge 55C0288 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
29 Bridge 55C0293 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
30 Bridge 55C0291 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
31 Bridge 55C0224 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
32 Bridge 55C0228 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
33 Bridge 55C0226 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
34 Bridge 55C0225 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
35 Bridge 55C0227 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
36 Bridge 55C0229 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
37 Bridge 55C0386 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
38 Bridge 55C0230 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
39 Bridge 55C0120 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
41 Bridge 55C0289 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
42 Bridge 55C0602 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
45 Bridge 55C0233 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
46 Bridge 55C0231 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
47 Bridge 55C0235 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
48 Bridge 55C0294 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
49 Bridge 55C0243 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
50 Bridge 55C0242 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
51 Bridge 55C0244 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
52 Bridge 55C0234 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
53 Bridge 55C0418 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
61 Bridge 55C0384 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
62 Bridge 55C0308 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
63 Bridge 55C0236 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
65 Bridge 55C0232 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
66 Bridge 55C0263 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
67 Bridge 55C0585 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
68 Bridge 55C0310 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
69 Bridge 55C0311 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
70 Bridge 55C0312 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
71 Bridge 55C0664 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
72 Bridge 55C0383 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
73 Bridge 55C0385 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
74 Bridge 55C0309 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
75 Bridge 55C0307 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
76 Bridge 55C0295 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
77 Bridge 55C0525 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
86 Hawks Pointe Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
87 Hermitage Pump StaƟon (1) Pump StaƟon $525,000
88 Hermitage Pump Sta Ɵon (2) Pump Sta Ɵon $525,000
89 Hermitage Pump StaƟon (3) Pump StaƟon $525,000

4-90

ID NAME FACILITY TYPE REPLACEMENT
VALUE
90 Hermitage Pump Sta Ɵon (4) Pump Sta Ɵon $525,000
92 Hermitage Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
134 Kimberly Well 1A PFAS Water
Treatment Plant
Water Treatment Plant $720,000,000
FaciliƟes of Concern
1 Buena Park High School Educa Ɵon $72,097,328
2 Fullerton Union High School EducaƟon $57,867,998
13 Robert C. Fisler School Educa Ɵon $14,367,891
18 Maple Elementary School EducaƟon $8,418,496
19 Nicolas Junior High School Educa Ɵon $20,041,754
20 Orangethorpe Elementary
School
EducaƟon $16,034,073
21 Paci ﬁc Drive Elementary School Educa Ɵon $14,410,425 24 Richman Elementary School EducaƟon $19,184,566
26 Sunset Lane Elementary School Educa Ɵon $14,900,306
27 Valencia Park Elementary School EducaƟon $16,754,018 28 Woodcrest Elementary School Educa Ɵon $16,095,256
32 Marshall B. Ketchum University EducaƟon Not Available 36 Kids Adventure Learning Center Educa Ɵon Not Available 39 Arborland Montessori School -
Valencia Campus
EducaƟon Not Available
42 Eastside Chris Ɵan Educa Ɵon Not Available
44 James A. Whitaker Elementary EducaƟon $16,455,229
46 Sunrise of Fullerton Healthcare/Assisted Living
Facility
$6,536,250.00
50 Fullerton Rosewood Assisted Healthcare/Assisted Living Facility
$6,536,250.00
53 Applecrest Homes Assisted
Living
Healthcare/Assisted Living
Facility
$6,536,250.00
55 D'Best Care Board and Care Healthcare/Assisted Living Facility
$6,536,250.00
56 Senior Living Community Healthcare/Assisted Living
Facility
$6,536,250.00
57 Cherub Home Healthcare/Assisted Living
Facility
$6,536,250.00
59 Kindred Hospital Brea -
Subacute
Healthcare/Assisted Living
Facility
$6,536,250.00
63 Windsor Garden of Fullerton Healthcare/Assisted Living Facility
$6,536,250.00
67 Santa Ana Armory Cold Weather
Shelter
Community Services $6,536,250.00

A total of 68 cri Ɵcal faciliƟes are located within these zones, including municipal buildings, police and ﬁre staƟons essenƟal for emergency response, community centers that may serve as emergency staging areas or gathering places, transportaƟon infrastructure such as bridges,

4-91
water system components including pump staƟons and reservoirs, and one water treatment plant. Addi Ɵonally, 25 facili Ɵes of concern are situated within liquefac Ɵon-prone areas, primarily consisƟng of schools, healthcare and assisted living facili Ɵes, and other community services that support residents.

AddiƟonally, approximately 32,779 residenƟal units are located within the liquefacƟon hazard zone. The vulnerability assessment cross-referenced hazard layers with parcel data layers in GIS. The number of vulnerable residenƟal units mulƟplied by the average of 2.91 persons per household for Fullerton indicates that approx imately 95,387 people reside in the landslide hazard zone. Approximately 343,711,021 square feet of non-residenƟal structures are located within the liquefacƟon hazard area. Refer to Table 4-24: Populations at Risk for Liquefaction for a summary of vulnerable residents, residenƟal units, and non-residenƟal buildings.

TABLE 4-24: POPULATIONS AT RISK FOR LIQUEFACTION

RESIDENTS AT RISK RESIDENTIAL UNITS AT
RISK

NON-RESIDENTIAL AREA
AT RISK (SQ.FT.)
95,387 residents 32,779 residen Ɵal units 343,711,021 sq. Ō.

LiquefacƟon may cause severe damage to residen Ɵal and commercial structures, leading to foundaƟon failures and building collapses. With residenƟal units and residents located within the hazard zone, the poten Ɵal for displacement and property loss is substan Ɵal. Cri Ɵcal faciliƟes and facili Ɵes of concern may become unsafe or unusable, disrup Ɵng essen Ɵal services such as emergency response, shelter, water delivery, and public safety. Water service infrastructure may be compromised, resul Ɵng in broken pipelines and loss of water supply.

TransportaƟon infrastructure, including roads and bridges, could su ﬀer signi ﬁcant damage, hindering travel and emergency opera Ɵons. These impacts could severely disrupt the City’s ability to coordinate emergency response and evacua Ɵons, leaving residents with prolonged uƟlity outages, limited access to essenƟal services, and increased risk during emergencies.

4.9.7 CHANGES IN VULNERABILITY (PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS/NEXT FIVE YEARS) Since the 2020 LHMP , the City of Fullerton has experienced marginal populaƟon growth and moderate increases in housing development, primarily through residen Ɵal in ﬁll, mixed-use redevelopment, and rehabilitaƟon of exisƟng structures. Although faults run through the City, they are not classi ﬁed as ac Ɵve Alquist-Priolo Zone faults. Nonetheless, Fullerton remains suscepƟble to ground shaking from regional seismic ac Ɵvity, and for planning purposes, the enƟre city is considered potenƟally vulnerable to fault rupture and ground shaking. Therefore, all development and populaƟon growth over the past ﬁve years—regardless of loca Ɵon—has contributed to a slight increase in seismic vulnerability. AddiƟonally, some of this development may have occurred within mapped liquefac Ɵon zones, which are distributed throughout the city, further elevaƟng exposure to seismic hazards.

Looking ahead, Fullerton is expected to accommodate signi ﬁcant residenƟal growth to meet its RHNA allocaƟon of 13,209 housing units by 2029. Much of this development is anƟcipated within the HIOZ, which includes 759 parcels concentrated along Commonwealth Avenue, South Harbor Boulevard, East Valencia Drive, and other corridors. These areas are located in

4-92
the southern and southwestern por Ɵons of the city, where liquefac Ɵon zones are most prominent. AddiƟonal liquefacƟon zones are mapped in the northernmost part of Fullerton, which includes industrial and commercial land uses that may be redeveloped under the HIOZ program. Furthermore, a liquefacƟon zone is located just north of California State University, Fullerton, where future student housing and higher-density residen Ɵal development may occur. Because the enƟre city is considered vulnerable to fault rupture and ground shaking, and several planned development areas coincide with mapped liquefac Ɵon zones, seismic vulnerability is expected to increase moderately over the next ﬁve years.

In summary, seismic vulnerability in Fullerto n has increased slightly over the past ﬁve years due to modest development and popula Ɵon growth across areas poten Ɵally a ﬀected by ground shaking and liquefacƟon. Future development—par Ɵcularly within the HIOZ and near CSU Fullerton—is expected to occur in areas mapped for liquefac Ɵon and will contribute to a more notable rise in exposure. As Fullerton con Ɵnues to grow, it is essen Ɵal that new development incorporate seismic design standards and geotechnical evalua Ɵons to mi Ɵgate risks associated with fault rupture, ground shaking, and liquefacƟon.

4.9.8 LIMITED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY AND AFN POPULATIONS
SecƟon 3.8, Whole Community and Access and Func Ɵonal Needs , includes a detailed determinaƟon of vulnerable popula Ɵons within the planning area, including older adults, individuals with disabili Ɵes, linguis Ɵcally isolated households, and residents in mul Ɵ-unit, crowded households or group housing. Seismic hazards in the City of Fullerton include fault rupture, ground shaking, and liquefacƟon. Fault rupture and ground shaking are non-mapped hazards that could aﬀect the enƟrety of the City; liquefacƟon is a mapped hazard with zones extending throughout Fullerton and concentrated in the southern and southwestern regions.

These liquefac Ɵon zones notably overlap with Census Tracts 001404, 001801, 001802, 086701, 011000, 001902, 011601, 011602, 011403, and 011504—represen Ɵng all but two of the o ﬃcially designated census tracts with high concentra Ɵons of individuals with AFN or limited adapƟve capacity. These populaƟons may be parƟcularly vulnerable to seismic hazards due to a range of physical, social, and economic vulnerabiliƟes.

Older adults and individuals with disabili Ɵes may face signiﬁcant challenges during and a Ōer seismic events. Ground shaking and fault rupture can cause structural damage, disrupt uƟliƟes, and block access routes, making evacua Ɵon or sheltering-in-place di ﬃcult for those with mobility limita Ɵons or chronic health condi Ɵons. Liquefac Ɵon can further destabilize foundaƟons and roadways, increasing the risk of injury and isola Ɵon. LinguisƟcally isolated households may not receive or understand emergency alerts, evacuaƟon instrucƟons, or post- disaster recovery informaƟon. Language barriers can hinder evacuaƟon orders and emergency response instrucƟons, leading to delays and increased risk during evacua Ɵons. Residents in mulƟ-unit, crowded households or group quarters are at elevated risk due to building vulnerabiliƟes, limited escape routes, and poten Ɵal delays in emergency response.

LiquefacƟon-prone areas may experience dispropor
Ɵonate structural damage, compounding
the challenges for these populaƟons in securing temporary shelter or accessing medical care.

ConsideraƟons for vulnerable groups throughout the planning area were incorporated into the miƟgaƟon strategy in SecƟon 5. Speciﬁcally, the LHMP Planning Team tailored MiƟgaƟon

4-93
AcƟons ##1, 3, 11, 18, 51, 53 and 54 with these groups in mind, including eﬀorts to strengthen seismic resilience in vulnerable housing stock, improve mul Ɵlingual emergency communicaƟons, and ensure con Ɵnuity of care and access to emergency services for AFN populaƟons during and aŌer seismic events.

4.10 WILDFIRE AND URBAN FIRE

4.10.1 DESCRIPTION

WILDFIRE
Fire is an integral component of many of California’s ecosystems. However, uncontrolled ﬁre hazards threaten lives, property, and natural resources and also present a considerable risk to vegetaƟon and wildlife habitat. Fires occur in wildland and urban areas. A wildland ﬁre is a large destruc Ɵve ﬁre that can spread quickly over woodland or brush. A wild ﬁre is an uncontrolled ﬁre spreading through vegetaƟve fuels. Wildﬁres can be caused by human error (such as campﬁres), intenƟonally by arson, by mechanical sources of igniƟon (such as heaters and generators), and by natural events (such as lightning). Wild ﬁres oŌen occur in forests or other areas with ample vegetaƟon. In areas where structures and other human development meets or intermingles with wildland or vegeta Ɵve fuels (referred to as the wildland urban interface), wildﬁres can cause signi ﬁcant property damage and present extreme threats to public health and safety.

There are three categories of interface ﬁre: the classic wildland urban interface exists where well-deﬁned urban and suburban development presses up against open wildland areas; the mixed wildland urban interface is characterized by isolated homes, subdivisions and small communiƟes situated predominantly in wildland se ƫngs; and the occluded wildland urban interface exists where islands of wildland vegetaƟon occur inside a largely urbanized area. The wildland-urban interface is present in the eastern inland porƟon of the City.

Certain condiƟons must be present for signiﬁcant interface ﬁres to occur. The most common condiƟons include: hot, dry and windy weather; the inability of ﬁre protec Ɵon forces to contain or suppress the ﬁre; the occurrence of mul Ɵple ﬁres that overwhelm commi Ʃed resources; and a large fuel load (dense vegetaƟon). Once a ﬁre has started, several condiƟons inﬂuence its behavior, including fuel topography, weather, drought and development.

Southern California faces challenges with wild ﬁre hazards from the increasing number of houses being built in the wildland-urban interface. Every year the growing popula Ɵon has expanded further and further into the hills a nd mountains, including into brush and forest lands. The increased “interface” between urban/suburban areas and the open spaces created by this expansion has produced a signiﬁcant increase in threats to life and property from ﬁres and has pushed exis Ɵng ﬁre protec Ɵon systems beyond original or current design and capability.

The Santa Ana winds can also further exacerbate wild ﬁres. Santa Ana winds ranging from 45 to 100 mph push dry air from the inland desert s of California and the Southwest over the mountains that lie between these desert areas and coastal California. The Santa Ana winds

4-94
also remove moisture in the air resul Ɵng in evaporaƟon and dry vegeta Ɵon. Dry vegeta Ɵon acts as a fuel for wildﬁres to grow, with the strong Santa Ana winds driving wildﬁre spread.

URBAN FIRE
Urban ﬁres refer to structural ﬁres that occur within developed areas, typically involving residenƟal, commercial, industrial, or public buildings. Unlike wildﬁres, which spread through vegetaƟon and open land, urban ﬁres are con ﬁned to the built environment and are o Ōen triggered by human acƟviƟes, electrical faults, gas leaks, or accidents. In ci Ɵes like Fullerton, the density of structures and populaƟon increases the potenƟal for rapid ﬁre spread, property damage, and threats to life safety. These ﬁres can overwhelm emergency response systems, disrupt essenƟal services, and result in signiﬁcant economic losses.

The impacts of urban ﬁres could parƟcularly aﬀect older buildings, high-density housing, and commercial zones. Fires in these cases may lead to displacement of residents, loss of historic structures, and interrupƟon of business opera Ɵons. AddiƟonally, urban ﬁres can strain local infrastructure, such as water supply and transporta Ɵon networks, and pose environmental risks through the release of toxic smoke and debris.

Urban ﬁres may also be exacerbated by other hazards common to Southern California. For example, Santa Ana Winds can intensify ﬁre behavior by rapidly spreading ﬂames and embers across rooŌops and through densely packed neighborhoods. While wildﬁres typically originate in wildland areas, embers carried by these winds can ignite urban ﬁres at the wildland-urban interface or within city limits. Earthquakes, another regional hazard, may also trigger urban ﬁres by damaging gas lines or electrical systems.

4.10.2 LOCATION/EXTENT

WILDFIRE
The California Department of Forestry and Fire ProtecƟon (CAL FIRE) prepares wildﬁre hazard severity maps, including mapping areas of signi ﬁcant ﬁre hazards based on fuels, terrain, weather, and other relevant factors. These zones, referred to as Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ), de ﬁne the applica Ɵon of various mi ƟgaƟon strategies and in ﬂuence development.

While FHSZ do not predict when or where a wild ﬁre will occur, they do idenƟfy areas where wildﬁre hazards could be more severe and therefore, are of greater concern for mi ƟgaƟon purposes.

Zones are designated on varying degrees from moderate, high, and very high. There are three types of responsibility areas that FHSZ may fall under: Local Responsibility Area (LRA), State Responsibility Area (SRA), or Federal Responsi bility Area (FRA). LRAs are incorporated ci Ɵes, urban regions, and agriculture lands where the local government is responsible for wild ﬁre protecƟon. SRAs are those which the State of California is ﬁnancially responsible for the prevenƟon and suppression of wild ﬁres. FRAs are lands on which neither the State nor the local government has legal responsibility for providing ﬁre protecƟon.

4-95
Figure 4-13: Fire Hazard Severity Zones shows the responsibility areas and the FHSZs for the City of Fullerton.

The City of Fullerton is primarily designated as LRA, meaning that wild ﬁre protec Ɵon and miƟgaƟon eﬀorts is under the jurisdic Ɵon of the City. However, there are two dis Ɵnct areas within Fullerton that are classi ﬁed as FRA, where federal agencies are responsible for ﬁre protecƟon. The ﬁrst FRA is located north of the Brea Dam in the central part of the city and includes Brea Dam, Brea Dam Park, Brea Cr eek, the Fullerton Sports Complex, and the Fullerton Golf Course. The second FRA is situated in the northeast por Ɵon of the city and encompasses Fullerton Dam and Craig Regional Park. Notably, neither of these FRA- designated areas fall within mapped FHSZ, indica Ɵng a lower rela Ɵve risk of wild ﬁre hazard based on CAL FIRE’s criteria.

Within Fullerton, Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) are concentrated in two key areas. The ﬁrst is the Robert E. Ward Nature Preserve, located at the northwestern boundary of the city. This large greenbelt area, along with adjacent residen Ɵal neighborhoods, is designated as VHFHSZ, with surrounding zones of high and moderate ﬁre hazard severity. The second VHFHSZ is in the northeast por Ɵon of Fullerton and includes the Panorama Nature Preserve and the Coyote Hills Golf Course —another greenbelt co ncept area—along with nearby residenƟal land uses. These areas are parƟcularly vulnerable due to their proximity to natural vegetaƟon and open space, which can serve as fuel for ﬁres. The presence of high and moderate severity zones around these VHFHSZs underscores the need for targeted miƟgaƟon strategies and community preparedness in these parts of the city.

4-96

4-97
The magnitude and severity of wildﬁre impacts can vary signiﬁcantly, based on size, scale and locaƟon of the ﬁre. Wildﬁres are not measured on a speciﬁc scale and are usually classiﬁed by size or impact. The size and severity of any ﬁre depends on the availability of fuel, weather condiƟons, and topography, although wildﬁres in the wildland urban interface do not need to be signi ﬁcant in acreage to be damaging. Small ﬁres in Orange County history have been known to cause signiﬁcant property damage or loss of human life.

Fire protecƟon challenges occur where development is located within and directly adjacent to wildland urban interface areas, thus increasing the extent of the hazard. As the number of structural features increases, so does the risk of incidence of ﬁre. Due to the loca Ɵon of development within and adjacent to the VHFHSZ, there is the potenƟal for a wildﬁre to spread quickly within the City, depending on the condiƟons and nature of the ﬁre.

URBAN FIRE
Urban ﬁre risk in Fullerton is considered citywide due to the nature of how these ﬁres originate and spread. Unlike wild ﬁre hazards, which are mapped based on terrain, vegeta Ɵon, and weather condi Ɵons, urban ﬁres can start anywhere within the built environment—making every structure, whether residenƟal, commercial, industrial, or public, potenƟally vulnerable.

Because igniƟon sources such as electrical faults, cooking accidents, or mechanical failures are not geographically limited, the en Ɵr e c i t y i s p o t e nƟally suscep Ɵble to urban ﬁre. Areas adjacent to mapped Fire Hazard Severity Zones, par Ɵcularly those near greenbelt areas like the Robert E. Ward Nature Preserve and Panora ma Nature Preserve, may face elevated risk due to the potenƟal for ﬁre to spread from wildland areas into urban neighborhoods.

There is no speci ﬁc scale of measurement for ﬁres apart from the destruc Ɵon they cause (acres burned, structures razed, injuries, de aths, cost of damage, etc.). The extent and magnitude of urban ﬁre impacts in Fullerton can vary widely depending on the loca Ɵon, density of development, and eﬀecƟveness of emergency response. A single structural ﬁre can result in signi ﬁcant property damage, displacement of residents, business interrup Ɵon, and even loss of life. In densely populated or older parts of the city, ﬁres may spread more rapidly due to building proximity and outdated infrastructure. Urban ﬁres also pose secondary risks, such as compromised air quality, traﬃc disrupƟons, and strain on public safety resources.

4.10.3 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES

WILDFIRE
The City of Fullerton is periodically impacted by wild ﬁre acƟvity due to its proximity to open space areas in the Chino Hills and the in ﬂuence of Santa Ana winds. Santa Ana Canyon—the gap between the Santa Ana Mountains and the Chino Hills—is known to funnel par Ɵcularly strong Santa Ana winds, which can intensify ﬁre behavior across northern Orange County.

Fullerton’s locaƟon near the Santa Ana Canyon contribu tes to its vulnerability to regional wildﬁre events. Several of the most signiﬁcant wildﬁres in Orange County history have aﬀected Fullerton and its surrounding communi Ɵes, including the Blue Ridge Fire, Freeway Complex Fire, Owl Fire, Bond Fire, Silverado Fire, and Airport Fire.

4-98
Table 4-25: Recent Regional Fires documents wildﬁre acƟvity both within and in the vicinity of Fullerton over the past ﬁve years, based on NOAA’s wildﬁre database and the CAL FIRE incident database. Southern California’s ﬁre season tradi Ɵonally spans May through September.

However, Fullerton and the broader Orange County region have experienced some of their most destrucƟve wildﬁres during the fall and winter months. These ﬁres have varied in scale, with acreage ranging from a few hundred to over 23,000 acres, and have occurred both within and outside the bounds of the tradiƟonal wildﬁre season.

TABLE 4-25: RECENT REGIONAL FIRES

NAME LOCATION BEGIN DATE ACRES

CLAIMED
Silverado Fire Santa Ana Mountains and
foothills
10/26/2020 12,466
Blue Ridge Fire Yorba Linda and Chino Hills area 10/26/2020 13,964 Bond Fire Silverado Canyon 12/2/2020 6,686
Airport Fire Western Riverside County 12/26/2020 1,087
Chaparral Fire Santa Ana Mountains and
foothills
8/28/2021 1,427
Emerald Fire Coastal Orange County 2/10/2022 154
Jim Fire Santa Ana Mountains and
foothills
3/2/2022 553
Coastal Fire
Incident
Coastal Orange County 5/11/2022 200
Airport Fire Trabuco Canyon and Rose Canyon 9/9/2024 23,526 Source: NOAA: National Centers for Environmental Information, Storm Events Database, https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/, accessed September 23, 2025.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Incident Database, https://www.fire.ca.gov/incidents/, accessed September 23, 2025.

In comparison, Table 4-26: Major Wildfires in Orange County iden Ɵﬁes the most signi ﬁcant historical ﬁres in the county daƟng back to 2006. Signiﬁcant ﬁres are deﬁned as those burning over 10,000 acres either within or parƟally within Orange County. A total of 7 major wildﬁres since 2006 have occurred, the most recent in 2024. Acreage burned ranges from 10,592 acres to over 30,000 acres.

TABLE 4-26: MAJOR WILDFIRES IN ORANGE COUNTY

FIRE NAME ACRES DATE
Sierra 10,592 2006
SanƟago 28,430 2007
Freeway Complex 30,305 2008
Holy 23,025 2018
Blue Ridge 13,695 2020
Silverado 12,469 2020
Airport 23,526 2024
Source: CAL FIRE, Incidents, https://www.fire.ca.gov/incidents, accessed September 23, 2025.

4-99
Freeway Complex Fire (2008) Origina Ɵng near SR-91 and Green River Road, this ﬁre merged with the Landﬁll Fire from Brea and consumed 30,305 acres across four coun Ɵes.70 Fullerton experienced degraded air quality. Damage across the region totaled nearly $125 million.

Canyon 2 Fire (2017) Sparked in Anaheim, this ﬁre burned 9,217 acres.71 Though Fullerton was not directly impacted by ﬂames, poor air quality led to school acƟvity cancellaƟons and indoor relocaƟons.

Blue Ridge Fire (2020) Started north of SR-91 in the Chino Hills and Yorba Linda area, this ﬁre burned nearly 14,000 acres. 72 Fullerton was under threat of evacua Ɵon and experienced signiﬁcant smoke and ash fallout. The ﬁre strained emergency resources due to its Ɵming alongside the Silverado Fire and the COVID-19 pandemic.

Silverado Fire (2020) Ignited near SanƟago Canyon Road and Silverado Canyon Road, this ﬁre burned 13,390 acres and prompted evacuaƟon orders for 90,000 residents.73 Two ﬁreﬁghters were criƟcally injured.74 Fullerton experienced air quality degradaƟon and regional emergency coordinaƟon impacts.

Bond Fire (2020) Sparked by a house ﬁre in Silverado Canyon, the Bond Fire burned 6,686 acres and destroyed 31 structures.75 It prompted evacuaƟons of 25,000 residents and injured two ﬁreﬁghters.76 The ﬁre occurred just weeks aŌer the Silverado Fire and overlapped its burn scar, compounding regional recovery eﬀorts.

Airport Fire (2024) Accidentally ignited by Or ange County Public Works crews in Trabuco Canyon, this ﬁre burned 23,526 acres across Orange and Riverside counƟes. It destroyed 160 structures and injured 21 people. 77 Fullerton experienced poor air quality and regional emergency coordinaƟon impacts. The ﬁre prompted widespread evacua Ɵons and strained ﬁreﬁghƟng resources due to concurrent wildﬁres in neighboring counƟes.

70 CAL FIRE, Freeway Complex, hƩps://www.ﬁre.ca.gov/incidents/2008/11/15/freeway-complex/, accessed September 23, 2025.
71 CAL FIRE, Canyon Fire 2, hƩps://www.ﬁre.ca.gov/incidents/2017/10/9/canyon-2-ﬁre, accessed September 23, 2025.
72 CAL FIRE, Blue Ridge Fire, hƩps://www.ﬁre.ca.gov/incidents/2020/10/26/blue-ridge-ﬁre, accessed September 23, 2025.
73 CAL FIRE, Silverado Fire, hƩps://www.ﬁre.ca.gov/incidents/2020/10/26/silverado-ﬁre, accessed September 23, 2025.
74 Los Angeles Times, Orange County under siege by wildﬁres; 2 ﬁreﬁghters gravely burned, hƩps://www.laƟmes.com/california/story/2020-10-26/silverado-ﬁre-ignites-in-orange-county, accessed September 23, 2025.
75 CAL FIRE, Bond Fire, hƩps://www.ﬁre.ca.gov/incidents/2020/12/2/bond-ﬁre/, accessed September 23, 2025.
76 Los Angeles Times, Bond ﬁre rapidly jumps through Orange County canyons, forcing evacuaƟons, hƩps://www.laƟmes.com/california/story/2020-12-03/wind-driven-bond-ﬁre-threatens-homes-in- orange-county-as-santa-anas-hit-southern-california, accessed September 23, 2025. 77 CAL FIRE, Airport Fire, hƩps://www.ﬁre.ca.gov/incidents/2024/9/9/airport-ﬁre, accessed September 23, 2025.

4-100
In the last ﬁve years, three FEMA-declared disasters for wild ﬁre have a ﬀected the planning area:
• FM-5381-CA: Blue Ridge Fire – October 26, 2020
• FM-5380-CA: Silverado Fire – October 26, 2020
• FM-5383-CA: Bond Fire – December 3, 2020
Refer to Table 4-30: Summary of Declared Disasters Affecting the Planning Area for a full list of federally declared disasters aﬀecƟng the planning area.

URBAN FIRE
The City of Fullerton does not have a history of signiﬁcant or widespread urban ﬁre incidents.

Like most urbanized communiƟes, Fullerton has experienced isolated structure ﬁres over the years, including residenƟal house ﬁres and occasional commercial building ﬁres. These events are typically contained by the Fullerton Fire Department and do not result in large-scale impacts to the broader community.

Several notable incidents have occurred in recent years that highlight the poten Ɵal risks associated with urban ﬁre.

February 6, 2025: A residen Ɵal ﬁre in Fullerton escalated into a fully engulfed blaze due to hoarding condiƟons inside the home. Although no injuries occurred, the ﬁre caused severe property damage and displaced one resident and their pet.

January 3, 2025: A small plane crashed into a furniture warehouse near Fullerton Municipal Airport, igni Ɵng a four-alarm ﬁre that injured 19 people and killed two. The ﬁre caused extensive damage to the building and prompted a large-scale emergency response and evacuaƟon. This incident was highly unusual and not representa Ɵve of typical urban ﬁre acƟvity in the city.78
January 22, 2024: A structure ﬁre near Orangethorpe Elementary School prompted a temporary lockdown of the campus as a precauƟonary measure. The ﬁre was contained, and no injuries were reported, but the incident underscored the potenƟal for urban ﬁres to disrupt public safety operaƟons and aﬀect sensiƟve faciliƟes.79 November 29, 2022: A house ﬁre near Glenhaven and Highland avenues resulted in one man sustaining serious burn injuries and three dogs requiring medical care. The ﬁre, believed to

78 ABC, 2 killed, 19 injured aŌer small plane crashes through roof of Fullerton building, hƩps://abc7.com/post/small-plane-crashes-fullerton-resulƟng-4-alarm-ﬁre-police-say/15742833/, accessed September 22, 2025.
79 KTLA5, Fire in Fullerton causes school lockdown, hƩps://ktla.com/video/ﬁre-in-fullerton-causes- school-lockdown/9351338/, accessed September 22, 2025.

4-101
have originated in the garage, was exacerbated by clu Ʃered condi Ɵons and required coordinated eﬀorts from emergency responders. 80
While these incidents demonstrate that urban ﬁres do occur in Fullerton, they have been isolated in nature and have not resulted in widespread damage or long-term disrup Ɵon. The city maintains robust ﬁre response capabili Ɵes through the Fullerton Fire Department and mutual aid agreements with neighboring jurisdic Ɵons, which help mi Ɵgate the impacts of urban ﬁre events when they arise.

No federally declared disasters relaƟng to urban ﬁre have occurred including the planning area within the last ﬁve years; refer to Table 4-30: Summary of Declared Disasters Affecting the Planning Area.

4.10.4 PROBABILITY OF FUTURE OCCURRENCES

WILDFIRE
The probability of future wildﬁre occurrence in the City of Fullerton has been determined by the LHMP Planning Team to be highly likely. While Fullerton is largely urbanized, por Ɵons of the city are designated as moderate to very high ﬁre hazard severity zones with elevated wildﬁre hazard potenƟal. Although Fullerton has not experienced large-scale wild ﬁres within city limits, the proximity to regional wildland areas and the poten Ɵal for wind-driven ﬁre spread during dry seasons contribute to ongoing vulnerability.

Based on historical trends and current condi Ɵons, the probability of future wild ﬁre incidents aﬀecƟng Fullerton is considered highly likely, indica Ɵng a 90 to 100 percent chance of occurrence within the next year or a recurrence interval of less than one year.

URBAN FIRE
The probability of future urban ﬁre incidents in Fullerton has been determined by the LHMP Planning Team to highly likely. Urban ﬁres are a more frequent and localized hazard than wildﬁres. Fullerton’s dense development paƩern, aging building stock, and mix of land uses contribute to the poten Ɵal for ﬁre outbreaks caused by electrical faults, cooking accidents, industrial processes, or arson. Areas with older infrastructure, high occupancy buildings, and industrial operaƟons are more suscepƟble to ﬁre igniƟon and rapid spread.

The Fullerton Fire Department ac Ɵvely engages in ﬁre prevenƟon, code enforcement, and public educa Ɵon to reduce the risk of urban ﬁres. However, the presence of hazardous materials, high-density housing, and commercial corridors means that even small ﬁres can result in signi ﬁcant property damage, displacement, and service disrup Ɵon. Based on historical trends and current condi Ɵons, the probability of future urban ﬁre incidents in Fullerton is considered highly likely, indicaƟng a 90 to 100 percent chance of occurrence within the next year or a recurrence interval of less than one year.

80 KTLA5, Man in criƟcal condiƟon, dogs injured aŌer Fullerton house ﬁre, hƩps://ktla.com/news/local-news/man-in-criƟcal-condiƟon-dogs-injured-aŌer-fullerton-house-ﬁre/, accessed September 22, 2025.

4-102

4.10.5 CLIMATE CHANGE

WILDFIRE
Climate change and global warming pa Ʃerns cause an increase in temperatures, as well as more frequent and intense drought condiƟons. This is understood to be a contribuƟng factor to more frequent and severe wild ﬁres. As menƟoned previously, the severity of a wild ﬁre is dependent on the amount of oxygen, heat, wind, rela Ɵve humidity, and fuel. Most of these factors have direct or indirect Ɵes to climate change and increased global temperatures.

A 2016 study idenƟﬁed the contribuƟon of climate change to dry vegetaƟon as it doubled the occurrence of large ﬁres from 1984 and 2015 throughout the western United States. 81 As climate change conƟnues to increase global temperatures, drought condi Ɵons and excessive heat may become more common.82 Excessive heat and low humidity during the summer and fall months are likely to occur. This would increase dry vegetaƟon, which could cause wildﬁres to move more quickly or spread into developed areas.

URBAN FIRE
Climate change is expected to increase the frequency and severity of urban ﬁres due to rising temperatures, prolonged droughts, and more extreme weather events. As ci Ɵes experience hoƩer and drier condi Ɵons, vegeta Ɵon in urban and suburban areas becomes more ﬂammable, and the risk of igni Ɵon from human ac Ɵvity or infrastructure failures grows.

AddiƟonally, as wild ﬁre risk increases with climate ch a n g e , s o d o e s t h e r i s k o f w i l dﬁre spreading to urban and suburban areas. These risks are compounded by the urban heat island eﬀect and expanding development into ﬁre-prone zones, making ci Ɵes more vulnerable to ﬁre-related hazards.

4.10.6 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT

WILDFIRE
To idenƟfy populaƟons at risk for wildﬁre hazards, hazard data layers from CAL FIRE’s LRA FHSZ were overlaid and compared with City parcel data in Geographic InformaƟon Systems, ArcGIS.

The CAL FIRE federal responsibility area (FRA) is not included in this assessment as it is unknown if the FRA is within an FHSZ. If th e LRA FHSZ layer either completely or par Ɵally overlapped with a parcel in the data layer, then the enƟre parcel is conservaƟvely considered vulnerable in this analysis. In many instance s, the LRA FHSZ intersected with only small porƟons of individual proper Ɵes. However, to provide a detailed understanding of risk and vulnerability as part of this hazard miƟgaƟon plan, these parcels (including all residenƟal and non-residenƟal development on the parcel, regardless of loca Ɵon) are considered vulnerable.

81 John, T. Abatzoglou, and A. Park William, “Impact of Anthropogenic Climate Change on Wildﬁre Across western US Forests,” Proceedings of the NaƟonal Academy of Sciences, October 10, 2016. hƩps://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1607171113, accessed September 11, 2025. 82 NaƟonal Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministraƟon, Wildﬁre Climate ConnecƟon, hƩps://www.noaa.gov/noaa-wildﬁre/wildﬁre-climate-connecƟon, accessed September 11, 2025.

4-103
Wildﬁre hazard zones in the City of Fullerton are primarily located around the Robert E. Ward Nature Preserve, Panorama Nature Preserve, and the Coyote Hills Golf Course. These areas contain a mix of open space, vegeta Ɵon, and sloped terrain that increase the risk of wild ﬁre igniƟon and spread. A detailed inventory of vulnerable assets is provided in Table 4-27: Critical Facilities and Facilities of Concern Vulnerable to Wildfire , which lists the cri Ɵcal faciliƟes and faciliƟes of concern located within the mapped LRA FHSZ.

TABLE 4-27: CRITICAL FACILITIES AND FACILITIES OF CONCERN VULNERABLE TO WILDFIRE

ID NAME FACILITY TYPE REPLACEMENT
VALUE
CriƟcal FaciliƟes
8 Fire StaƟon 6 Fire StaƟon $1,630,720
22 Laguna Lake Park Park Not Available
64 Bridge 55C0526 Bridge Assumed $583/SF
84 Hawks Point Pump Sta Ɵon
(1)
Pump StaƟon $525,000
85 Hawks Point Pump StaƟon
(2)
Pump StaƟon $525,000
86 Hawks Pointe Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
87 Hermitage Pump StaƟon (1) Pump StaƟon $525,000
88 Hermitage Pump Sta Ɵon (2) Pump Sta Ɵon $525,000
89 Hermitage Pump StaƟon (3) Pump StaƟon $525,000
90 Hermitage Pump Sta Ɵon (4) Pump Sta Ɵon $525,000
91 Hermitage Pump StaƟon (5) Pump StaƟon $525,000
92 Hermitage Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
99 Laguna Pump StaƟon (2) Pump StaƟon $525,000
100 Laguna Pump Sta Ɵon(1) Pump Sta Ɵon $525,000
101 Laguna Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
102 Las Palmas Pump Sta Ɵon
(1)
Pump StaƟon $525,000
103 Las Palmas Pump StaƟon
(2)
Pump StaƟon $525,000
104 Las Palmas Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
118 State College Pump StaƟon
(1)
Pump StaƟon $525,000
119 State College Pump Sta Ɵon
(2)
Pump StaƟon $525,000
120 State College Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
121 Tank Farm Pump Sta Ɵon (1) Pump Sta Ɵon $525,000
122 Tank Farm Pump StaƟon (2) Pump StaƟon $525,000
123 Tank Farm-T1 Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
124 Tank Farm-T2 Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
125 Tank Farm-T3 Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
126 Tank Farm-T4 Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
127 Tank Farm-T5 Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
128 Upper Acacia Pump StaƟon
(1)
Pump StaƟon $525,000

4-104

ID NAME FACILITY TYPE REPLACEMENT
VALUE
129 Upper Acacia Pump Sta Ɵon
(2)
Pump StaƟon $525,000
130 Upper Acacia Pump StaƟon
(3)
Pump StaƟon $525,000
131 Upper Acacia Pump Sta Ɵon
(4)
Pump StaƟon $525,000
132 Upper Acacia-T1 Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
133 Upper Acacia-T2 Reservoir Reservoir $1,500,000
FaciliƟes of Concern
25 Rolling Hills Elementary
School
EducaƟon $12,242,628
46 Sunrise of Fullerton Healthcare/Assisted Living
Facility
$6,536,250
47 Park Vista Healthcare/Assisted Living
Facility
$6,536,250
59 Kindred Hospital Brea -
Subacute
Healthcare/Assisted Living
Facility
$6,536,250
66 Park Vista at Morningside Healthcare/Assisted Living Facility
$6,536,250

A total of 34 cri Ɵcal facili Ɵes are located within the wild ﬁre hazard zone. These primarily include water system infrastructure such as pump staƟons and reservoirs, which are essenƟal for ﬁreﬁghƟng operaƟons and maintaining water supply. Also included are one ﬁre staƟon, a public park, and a transporta Ɵon bridge—all of which play key roles in emergency response, community access, and public safety. Damage to these facili Ɵes could impair ﬁreﬁghƟng capabiliƟes, limit access to recrea Ɵonal and evacua Ɵon routes, and disrupt water service delivery. AddiƟonally, ﬁve faciliƟes of concern are located within the wild ﬁre hazard zone, consisƟng mostly of healthcare and assisted living facili Ɵes and one school. These facili Ɵes serve vulnerable popula Ɵons who may require assistance during evacua Ɵon and are at increased risk from smoke exposure and ﬁre-related disrupƟons. Damage or inaccessibility of these sites could hinder medical care, educa Ɵonal con Ɵnuity, and community support services.

Approximately 7,058 residen Ɵal units are located within the LRA FHSZ. The vulnerability assessment cross-referenced hazard layers with parcel data layers in GIS. The number of vulnerable residen Ɵal units mul Ɵplied by the average of 2.91 persons per household for Fullerton indicates that approximately 20,537 pe ople reside in the LRA FHSZ. Approximately 93,056,137 square feet of non-residenƟal structures are located within the LRA FHSZ. Refer to Table 4-28: Populations at Risk for LRA Fire Hazard Severity Zone for a summary of vulnerable residents, residenƟal units, and non-residenƟal buildings.

4-105
TABLE 4-28: POPULATIONS AT RISK FOR LRA FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONE

RESIDENTS AT RISK RESIDENTIAL UNITS AT
RISK

NON-RESIDENTIAL AREA
AT RISK (SQ.FT.)
20,537 residents 7,057 residen Ɵal units 93,056,137 sq. Ō.

Depending on the extent and magnitude of a wildﬁre event, major transportaƟon routes could become severely congested or inaccessible, complica Ɵng evacua Ɵon and emergency response. Limited exit routes in wild ﬁre-prone areas may delay evacua Ɵon e ﬀorts and increase risk to residents. Wild ﬁre smoke may trigger emergency medical events and hinder mobility, while also a ﬀecƟng air quality beyond City boundaries. Impacts to cri Ɵcal faciliƟes such as pump staƟons, reservoirs, and uƟlity infrastructure could result in loss of power, gas, and water supply. Facili Ɵes designated as shelter or staging loca Ɵons may be damaged or inaccessible, increasing the vulnerability of residents to secondary hazards such as smoke inhalaƟon and heat exposure. These disrupƟons could signiﬁcantly impair the City’s ability to coordinate emergency operaƟons and protect public health and safety.

URBAN FIRE
Urban ﬁres pose a signiﬁcant threat to the City of Fullerton due to the dense concentraƟon of residenƟal, commercial, and public infrastructure throughout the community. Unlike wildﬁres, which are typically con ﬁned to open space or hillside areas, urban ﬁres originate within developed environments and can rapidly spread through neighborhoods, business districts, and public facili Ɵes. Given this context, a conserva Ɵve planning approach assumes that the enƟre City is potenƟally vulnerable to urban ﬁre hazards. This includes all 167 criƟcal faciliƟes, 69 faciliƟes of concern, 47,484 occupied residen Ɵal units, and the full popula Ɵon of 141,278 residents.

Urban ﬁres can result in severe property damage, injuries, and loss of life. Cri Ɵcal faciliƟes such as municipal buildings, emergency service providers (ﬁre and police staƟons), water and power u ƟliƟes, and transporta Ɵon infrastructure may be directly impacted or rendered inaccessible. Damage to these assets coul d disrupt emergency response, delay evacua Ɵons, and impair the delivery of essen Ɵal services. Facili Ɵes of concern—including schools, healthcare centers, assisted living faciliƟes, and community service providers—are par Ɵcularly vulnerable due to the presence of sensiƟve populaƟons and the need for rapid evacuaƟon and conƟnuity of care.

ResidenƟal areas face the greatest exposure, with the potenƟal for widespread displacement, structural damage, and long-term recovery challenges. Urban ﬁres may also escalate into larger wildﬁre events if they occur near open space or designated Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ), compounding the threat to surrounding communiƟes and natural resources.

The operaƟonal impacts of an urban ﬁre could be extensive, a ﬀecƟng public safety, u Ɵlity systems, transportaƟon networks, and the City’s ability to coordinate emergency response and recovery. MiƟgaƟon eﬀorts should prioriƟze ﬁre prevenƟon, rapid response capabiliƟes, and community preparedness to reduce the risk and consequences of urban ﬁre events across Fullerton.

4-106

4.10.7 CHANGES IN VULNERABILITY (PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS/NEXT FIVE YEARS) Since the 2020 LHMP , the City of Fullerton has experienced less than one percent populaƟon growth. Housing development has grown by approximately 4.2 percent, with new construcƟon, residen Ɵal in ﬁll, mixed-use redevelopment, and rehabilita Ɵon of exis Ɵng structures contribuƟng to a modest expansion of the built environment. These changes have generally occurred outside of the VHFHSZs, wh ich are concentrated in the northwestern and northeastern porƟons of the city—speci ﬁcally around the Robert E. Ward Nature Preserve, Panorama Nature Preserve, and Coyote Hills Golf Course. While wildﬁre vulnerability in these areas remains high due to proximity to natural vegeta Ɵon and open space, recent development has not signiﬁcantly encroached into these zones. However, urban ﬁre is a non- mapped hazard and can a ﬀect any developed area within the city. As such, even modest citywide growth over the past ﬁve years has contributed to a slight increase in vulnerability to urban ﬁre.

Over the next ﬁve years, Fullerton is expected to accommodate substanƟal residenƟal growth to meet its RHNA alloca Ɵon of 13,209 housing units by 2029. Much of this development is anƟcipated within the HIOZ, which includes 759 parcels concentrated along Commonwealth Avenue, South Harbor Boulevard, East Valencia Drive, and other corridors. These areas do not overlap with mapped VHFHSZs and are not expected to experience increased wild ﬁre vulnerability. However, because urban ﬁre can occur in any developed area, future growth will increase exposure to ﬁre-related hazards. As the built environment expands, the potenƟal for ﬁre igni Ɵon, property damage, and strain on emer gency response systems may grow. This underscores the importance of ﬁre-safe building pracƟces, code enforcement, and emergency preparedness across all areas of the city.

In summary, wildﬁre vulnerability in Fullerton has remained relaƟvely stable over the past ﬁve years due to limited development in mapped VHFHSZs. Urban ﬁre vulnerability, however, has increased slightly due to citywide development and populaƟon growth. Looking ahead, future development under the HIOZ program is not expected to encroach into wild ﬁre-prone areas but will contribute to a moderate rise in urban ﬁre vulnerability. As Fullerton con Ɵnues to grow, it is essenƟal to maintain ﬁre prevenƟon strategies and ensure that new development incorporates ﬁre-resilient design and infrastructure to reduce risk across the city.

4.10.8 LIMITED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY AND AFN POPULATIONS
SecƟon 3.8, Whole Community and Access and Func Ɵonal Needs , includes a detailed determinaƟon of vulnerable populaƟons within the planning area, including census tracts with concentraƟons of individuals with AFN or limited adap Ɵve capacity. Wildﬁre and urban ﬁre hazards pose disƟnct but overlapping risks to the City of Fullerton. Mapped wild ﬁre hazards are concentrated in Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ), primarily located in two key areas: the Robert E. Ward Nature Preserve at the northwestern boundary of the city, which includes adjacent residen Ɵal neighborhoods surrounded by high and moderate ﬁre hazard severity zones; and the northeast por Ɵon of Fullerton including the Panorama Nature Preserve and the Coyote Hills Golf Course, along with nearby residen Ɵal land uses. Mapped wildﬁre zones do not overlap with census tracts iden Ɵﬁed as having high concentra Ɵons of vulnerable popula Ɵons; however, it is important to note that AFN popula Ɵons may reside

4-107
throughout the city, including areas adjacent to wild ﬁre-prone zones. In contrast, urban ﬁre hazards are not geographically con ﬁned and have the poten Ɵal to impact any or all areas of the City, including all designated vulnerable census tracts—speci ﬁcally Census Tracts 001404, 001801, 001802, 086701, 011000, 001902, 011601, 011602, 011403, 011502, 011504, and 011711.

Vulnerable groups—including older adults, individuals with disabili Ɵes, linguisƟcally isolated households, and residents in mul Ɵ-unit, crowded households or group housing—face heightened risks from ﬁre hazards due to mobility limita Ɵons, communicaƟon barriers, and socioeconomic constraints. Older adults and individuals with disabili Ɵes may have di ﬃculty evacuaƟng quickly during fast-moving ﬁres, especially if dependent on caregivers or medical equipment. Linguis Ɵcally isolated households may not receive or understand emergency alerts or evacua Ɵon instrucƟons, increasing their risk during ﬁre emergencies. Residents in mulƟ-unit housing or group quarters may face challenges related to building design, limited escape routes, and overcrowding, which can complicate evacuaƟon and increase exposure to smoke and ﬁre-related injuries.

ConsideraƟons for vulnerable groups throughout the planning area were incorporated into the miƟgaƟon strategy in SecƟon 5. Speciﬁcally, the LHMP Planning Team tailored MiƟgaƟon AcƟons #1, 3, 11, 17, 18, 21 and 22 with these groups in mind, including e ﬀorts to improve ﬁre safety educa Ɵon, enhance emergency alert systems in mul Ɵple languages, and support evacuaƟon planning and shelter access for AFN popula Ɵons in both wild ﬁre-prone and urbanized areas of the City.

4.11 HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS (AIRCRAFT/TRANSPORTATION/TRAIN INCIDENTS,

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RELEASE/SPILL, TERRORISM/CYBERSECURITY /ACTIVE

SHOOTER, CIVIL UNREST, VECTOR-BORNE DISEASE, PANDEMIC)

4.11.1 DESCRIPTION

AIRCRAFT/TRANSPORTATION/TRAIN INCIDENTS
AircraŌ, transportaƟon, and train incidents refer to unexpected events involving the failure, collision, derailment, or crash of vehicles used for public or commercial transit. These incidents can occur on land, in the air, or along rail corridors, and may result in signi ﬁcant impacts to public safety, infrastructure, and the environment.

AircraŌ incidents, parƟcularly those involving loss of control, are among the leading causes of aviaƟon fataliƟes worldwide.83 Train derailments and rail-related accidents can be triggered by mechanical failure, operator error, track defe cts, or external factors such as weather or

83 Federal Transit AdministraƟon, Safety Risk MiƟgaƟons and CorrecƟve AcƟons, hƩps://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/Ōa.dot.gov/ﬁles/docs/regulaƟons-and-guidance/safety/public- transportaƟon-agency-safety-program/134101/safety-risk-miƟgaƟons-and-correcƟve-acƟons- guide.pdf, accessed September 10, 2025.

4-108
debris.84 When hazardous materials are involved, these events can escalate into large-scale emergencies requiring specialized response.

Such incidents are considered high-consequence hazards due to their poten Ɵal to cause a wide range of serious impacts. These include injuries or fatali Ɵes among passengers, operators, and nearby individuals; disrup Ɵon of cri Ɵcal transporta Ɵon routes, which can hinder emergency response and daily mobility; and environmental contaminaƟon, parƟcularly when hazardous materials are involved. Addi Ɵonally, aircra Ō, transporta Ɵon, and train incidents can result in extensive property damage to public infrastructure and private assets, as well as signi ﬁcant economic losses stemming from service interrup Ɵons, cleanup e ﬀorts, health impacts, and legal liabiliƟes.

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RELEASE/SPILL
A hazardous material is a substance that, because of its quanƟty, concentraƟon or physical or chemical composiƟon, poses a signi ﬁcant present or poten Ɵal hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released. The term “release” means spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, emiƫng, emptying, discharging, injecƟng, escaping, leaching, dumping, or disposing into the environment, unless permi Ʃed or authorized by a regulatory agency. 85 Hazardous materials can be in the form of explosives, ﬂammable and combusƟble substances, poisons, and radioac Ɵve materials. Hazardous materials accidents can occur during produc Ɵon, storage, transportaƟon, use, or disposal.86
AddiƟonally, oil and gas opera Ɵons pose environmental and public health risks through air polluƟon, groundwater contaminaƟon, and odor nuisances that a ﬀect nearby communi Ɵes.

Toxic emissions—including vola Ɵle organic compounds and other hazardous pollutants—can lead to respiratory, neurological, and dermatological symptoms, with studies linking proximity to oil wells to increased rates of asthma, headaches, and skin irritaƟon. Poorly constructed or inadequately maintained facili Ɵes heighten the risk of leaks, aquifer contamina Ɵon, and explosions. Even abandoned wells can release harmful substances if not properly cleaned, and the process of plugging or decommissioning wells may trigger short-term health e ﬀects such as nausea, vomiƟng, rashes, and worsened respiratory condiƟons.

The impacts of a hazardous materials release can vary, depending on the type and amount of material released. Hazardous materials exposure can include the following e ﬀects: skin/eye irritaƟon; di ﬃculty breathing; headaches; nausea; behavior abnormali Ɵes; cancer; gene Ɵc

84 Federal Transit AdministraƟon, Recommended Emergency Preparedness Guidelines for Rail Transit Systems, hƩps://www.transit.dot.gov/regulaƟons-and-guidance/safety/recommended-emergency- preparedness-guidelines-rail-transit-systems, accessed September 10, 2025. 85 Health and Safety Code Division 20, Chapter 6.95, Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory, ArƟcle 1.
86 Department of Homeland Security, Hazardous Materials Incidents, hƩps://www.ready.gov/hazardous-materials-incidents, accessed September 10, 2025.

4-109
mutaƟons; physiological malfuncƟons (i.e., reproducƟve impairment, kidney failure); physical deformaƟons; or birth defects.87

TERRORISM/CYBERSECURITY /ACTIVE SHOOTER
Terrorism, cybersecurity threats, and acƟve shooter incidents represent complex and evolving hazards that pose serious risks to public sa fety, infrastructure, and community resilience.

DomesƟc terrorism is deﬁned by the Federal Bureau of Inves ƟgaƟon (FBI) as perpetuated by individuals and/or groups inspired by or associated with a primarily United States based movement that espouses extremist ideologies of a poli Ɵcal, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature. Interna Ɵonal terrorism is perpetuated by individuals and/or groups inspired by or associated with designated foreign terrorist organizaƟons or naƟons (i.e., State sponsored).88 The United States Federal Code states that terrorism must be intended to 1) inƟmidate or coerce a civilian popula Ɵon; 2) in ﬂuence the policy of a government by inƟmidaƟon or coercion; or, 3) a ﬀect the conduct of a government by mass destruc Ɵon, assassinaƟon, or kidnapping.89
Cybersecurity threats, including cyberterrorism and cyber-a Ʃacks, are increasingly prevalent as criƟcal infrastructure and public services rely on digital systems. According to the NaƟonal InsƟtute of Standards and Technology (NIST), cyber-a Ʃacks aim to disrupt, disable, or maliciously control compu Ɵng environments, or compromise the integrity of data. 90 These aƩacks may originate from external hackers seeking ﬁnancial gain or internal actors with personal mo Ɵves. Common methods include malware, phishing, and ransomware—each capable of causing widespread disrupƟon to essenƟal services and data systems.

AcƟve shooter incidents are de ﬁned by the FBI as events where an individual is ac Ɵvely engaged in killing or a ƩempƟng to kill people in a populated area. These incidents are o Ōen unpredictable, evolve rapidly, and may result in mass casualƟes.91 AcƟve shooters frequently target public spaces such as schools, places of worship, and transportaƟon hubs. While there is no single pro ﬁle of an ac Ɵve shooter, such events o Ōen stem from unresolved grievances and a perceived need for violent resoluƟon.

Together, these hazards can overwhelm emergency response systems, disrupt essen Ɵal services, and cause signiﬁcant psychological, physical, and economic harm.

87 U.S. EPA, Health and Ecological Hazards Caused by Hazardous Substances, hƩps://www.epa.gov/emergency-response/health-and-ecological-hazards-caused-hazardous- substances, accessed September 10, 2025.
88 Federal Bureau of InvesƟgaƟon, Terrorism, hƩps://www.ĩi.gov/invesƟgate/terrorism, accessed September 10, 2025.
89 U.S. Federal Code Title 18, Chapter 113B, SecƟon 2331. 90 NaƟonal InsƟtute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special PublicaƟon 1800-10, ProtecƟng InformaƟon and System Integrity in Industrial Control System Environments: Cybersecurity for the Manufacturing Sector, hƩps://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/sp/1800/10/ﬁnal, accessed September 10, 2025. 91 Federal Bureau of InvesƟgaƟon, OPS AcƟve Shooter Guide, hƩps://www.ĩi.gov/ﬁle- repository/acƟve-shooter-508.pdf/view, accessed September 10, 2025.

4-110

CIVIL UNREST
FEMA deﬁnes civil unrest as an acƟvity such as a demonstraƟon, riot, or strike that disrupts a community and requires interven Ɵon to maintain public safety. Civil unrest can also be referenced as civil disorder, civil disturbance, or social unrest. The Orange County Emergency OperaƟons Plan (EOP) notes that civil disturbance o Ōen arises from a mass act of civil disobedience that escalates when par Ɵcipants become hosƟle towards authority. According to the County of Orange, civil disturbances may be triggered by:92 • Spontaneous reacƟons to verdicts in high-proﬁle trials (retaliaƟon or celebraƟon) • Spontaneous reacƟons to organized sporƟng event outcomes • Organized reacƟons or demonstraƟons
• PoliƟcal rallies or demonstraƟons
A civil disturbance could be ini Ɵated by small gatherings or large crowds. Impacts can range from a passive disturbance where groups block roadways or buildings that interfere with public order, or full-scale riots where par Ɵcipants also commit crimes such as arson, the Ō, property damage, vandalism, assault, or other violence. Secondary impacts from civil disturbance can vary signi ﬁcantly, and poten Ɵally include urban ﬁre, u Ɵlity failure, transportaƟon, and environmental hazards. While rare, the most signi ﬁcant impact is the interrupƟon of the conƟnuity of government.

In Orange County, responses to civil unrest are generally handled at the City level; in the case of Fullerton, the local Fullerton Police Department would serve as the primary response agency. If restoraƟon of law and order is beyond local and county abili Ɵes, state and federal resources could be deployed.

VECTOR-BORNE DISEASE
InfecƟous diseases are caused by undesirable organisms (insects, bacteria, viruses, etc.), resulƟng in health impacts, symptoms and/or serious harm to plants, animals, or humans.

These organisms threaten human health by infecƟng people with disease, some of which are potenƟally fatal. Vector-borne diseases are a type of infec Ɵous disease which the World Health Organiza Ɵon (WHO) de ﬁnes as human illnesses caused by parasites, viruses, and bacteria that are only transmiƩed by vectors. In this context, vectors are “living organisms that can transmit infecƟous pathogens between humans, or from animals to humans”.93 Communicable disease is an umbrella term for infec Ɵous diseases that are spread from one person to another through contaminated surfaces, bodily ﬂuids, and through the air. In any case, infecƟous diseases transmi Ʃed from vector-to-person or person-to-person may have signiﬁcant health impacts and symptoms that aﬀect the structure or funcƟon of the immune,

92 County of Orange, Uniﬁed County of Orange and Orange County OperaƟonal Area Emergency OperaƟons Plan, February 2019.
93 World Health OrganizaƟon, Vector-Borne Diseases, hƩps://www.who.int/news-room/fact- sheets/detail/vector-borne-diseases, accessed September 10, 2025.

4-111
neurological, or other physiological system of the human body. In many cases, infec Ɵous diseases have severe health impacts up to and including death.

Speciﬁc vectors of concern in Fullerton include mosquitos, Ɵcks, rodents, and other animals.

These vectors are known carriers of hantavirus, rabies, West Nile Virus (WNV), and Ɵck-borne diseases such as Lyme disease.

PANDEMIC
The Centers for Disease Control and Preven Ɵon (CDC) de ﬁnes an epidemic as an increase, oŌen sudden, in the number of cases of a disease above what is normally expected in a populaƟon. The CDC makes the dis ƟncƟon that a pandemic ref ers to an epidemic that has spread over several countries or conƟnents, usually aﬀecƟng signiﬁcaƟon proporƟons of the populaƟon.94 This de ﬁniƟon of pandemic refers speci ﬁcally to infec Ɵous diseases that have spread over or impacted large geographic areas. Non-infec Ɵous diseases, such as asthma or diabetes, may exist in “pandemic propor Ɵons” but do not readily spread throughout a populaƟon and thus do not cons Ɵtute a pandemic. Pandemics also exclude vector-borne diseases, categorized by transmission through a vector (rats, mosquitos, etc.).

Pandemics require two components: 1) an agent (disease or virus) and 2) a suscep Ɵble host populaƟon. The host popula Ɵon, usually humans, is the primary mode by which agents are spread under this deﬁniƟon of pandemic. Pandemic agents are spread from person to person through direct or indirect contact, so humans are understood to be the causal element of pandemics. Airborne diseases and those spread through physical contact pose higher risks to the community because they are di ﬃcult to isolate and control. Diseases such as in ﬂuenza, pertussis, tuberculosis, and meningiƟs are spread by these pathways and therefore have the potenƟal to reach pandemic levels.

Viruses of special concern in pandemics are no vel viruses, which are new viral strains not previously iden Ɵﬁed in humans. Novel viruses present public health challenges as limited informaƟon about transmission, preven Ɵon, and treatment is available. Further, the human body does not have natural immune defenses prepared to ﬁght novel viruses. 95 In recent history, novel viruses originated as zoono Ɵc diseases; the virus beginning in animals evolves to transfer from human to human. Examples of zoonoƟc diseases becoming human pandemics include Covid-19 (theorized to originate in bats), H1N1 inﬂuenza (originated in pigs), and H5N1 inﬂuenza (originated in birds).96

94 CDC, Lesson 1: IntroducƟon to Epidemiology, SecƟon 11, hƩps://archive.cdc.gov/#/details?url=hƩps://www.cdc.gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/lesson1/secƟon11.ht ml, accessed September 10, 2025.
95 GoodRX Health, The Novel Coronavirus: What are Novel Viruses, and How do they Impact Public Health?, hƩps://www.goodrx.com/condiƟons/covid-19/what-does-novel-coronavirus-mean-science- medical-deﬁniƟon, updated February 21, 2023, accessed September 10, 2025. 96 CDC, Lesson 1: IntroducƟon to Epidemiology, SecƟon 11, hƩps://archive.cdc.gov/#/details?url=hƩps://www.cdc.gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/lesson1/secƟon11.ht ml, accessed September 10, 2025.

4-112

4.11.2 LOCATION/EXTENT

AIRCRAFT/TRANSPORTATION/TRAIN INCIDENTS
TransportaƟon-related hazards are of parƟcular concern in urban areas like Fullerton, where mulƟple transit modes intersect and where dense popula Ɵons increase the poten Ɵal for cascading impacts. The City of Fullerton is a major transporta Ɵon hub in northern Orange County, intersected by a complex network of highways, rail lines, and air tra ﬃc routes. This mulƟmodal infrastructure supports regional mobility but also introduces poten Ɵal hazards associated with transporta Ɵon-related incidents. Transporta Ɵon-related incidents have the potenƟal to impact any area within the City of Fullerton, though they are more likely to occur in proximity to major infrastructure such as highways, rail corridors, transit sta Ɵons, and the municipal airport where transit acƟvity is most concentrated.

Fullerton’s arterial roadway system includes key east-west corridors such as Imperial Highway (State Route 90), Bastanchury Road, Malvern/Chapman Avenue, Commonwealth Avenue, and Orangethorpe Avenue. North-south routes include Beach Boulevard (State Route 39), Euclid Street, Harbor/Brea Boulevard, State College Boulevard, and Placen Ɵa Avenue. These roads connect to major freeways including the Orange Freeway (SR-57) along the eastern border, the Riverside Freeway (SR-91) along the southern edge, and the Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) near the southwestern city limits. In the event of a transporta Ɵon incident—such as a major collision, hazardous material spill, or freeway closure—these routes could become severely congested, complicaƟng evacuaƟon and emergency response eﬀorts across the city.

Fullerton’s rail infrastructure is centered around the Fullerton TransportaƟon Center, located at 120 East Santa Fe Avenue in the heart of downtown. This staƟon is a criƟcal node served by Metrolink’s 91/Perris Valley Line and Orange County Line, Amtrak’s Paci ﬁc Sur ﬂiner and Southwest Chief routes, and freight services operated by BNSF and Union Paci ﬁc Railroads.

The convergence of passenger and freight rail lines increases the risk of derailments, collisions, and hazardous material incidents, parƟcularly in densely populated areas near the staƟon and along the rail corridors. These lines traverse the city from east to west and north to south, passing through residen Ɵal, commercial, and industrial zones. Any disrup Ɵon or accident along these corridors could result in widespread impacts, including blocked crossings, structural damage, and delays in emergency access.

The Fullerton Municipal Airport, located in the southwestern por Ɵon of the city near Commonwealth Avenue and the I-5 corridor, serves general avia Ɵon aircraŌ and is the only airport within city limits. While it does not support commercial ﬂights, its proximity to residenƟal and industrial areas raises concerns about poten Ɵal aircraŌ accidents, especially during takeoﬀ and landing. Addi Ɵonally, Fullerton lies within the broader airspace used by nearby commercial airports—John Wayne Interna Ɵonal Airport and Long Beach Airport— making it suscep Ɵble to over ﬂight risks. AircraŌ incidents, though less frequent, could have severe consequences including ﬁre hazards, structural damage, and mass casualty events, parƟcularly in areas adjacent to ﬂight paths.

TransportaƟon infrastructure spans the enƟre city. Thus, incidents involving aircraŌ, trains, or roadways have the potenƟal to aﬀect any area in Fullerton. The dense popula Ɵon and mixed

4-113
land uses—residen Ɵal, commercial, and industrial—amplify the risk of cascading impacts. A major transportaƟon incident could disrupt evacuaƟon routes, delay emergency services, and impair communica Ɵon systems. Coordina Ɵon among city departments, regional transit agencies, and emergency responders would be criƟcal to managing such events.

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RELEASE/SPILL
Hazardous materials are generated, used, stored, and transported throughout the City of Fullerton for a wide range of purposes across residenƟal, commercial, and industrial land uses.

These materials may be present in everyday opera Ɵons such as household cleaning, automoƟve maintenance, and small business acƟviƟes, as well as in more intensive industrial processes. Because hazardous materials are not conﬁned to a single locaƟon or land use type, potenƟal incidents could occur anywhere in the City.

Small-scale hazardous materials incidents ma y arise from common sources such as gas staƟons, dry cleaners, medical o ﬃces, schools, and retail businesses. These typically involve substances like diesel fuel, chlorine, paint thinners, pes Ɵcides, and solvents. However, Fullerton also contains several concentrated industrial zones where larger quan ƟƟes of hazardous materials may be stored or used. These zones are primarily located in the southeast porƟon of the city—south of the Metrolink 91-Pe rris Valley Line and east of the Metrolink Orange County Line; in the west, between Malvern Avenue and Commonwealth Avenue; and in the north, north of Imperial Highway. These areas are more likely to experience substanƟal hazardous materials incidents due to the nature and scale of industrial operaƟons.

AddiƟonally, oil and gas opera Ɵons in Fullerton are primarily concentrated in the northern secƟon of the city, where most oil ﬁelds are now plugged or abandoned. However, ac Ɵve oil wells operated by Breitburn Opera Ɵng LP remain in the East Coyote Hills area. These operaƟons can negaƟvely aﬀect air quality within approximately 600 feet and produce odors detectable up to 1,500 feet, raising concerns for nearby sensi Ɵve land uses such as homes, schools, and hospitals. Addi Ɵonally, a Southern California Gas Company pipeline runs east- west through the center of Fullerton, posing combus Ɵon and asphyxiaƟon risks if damaged.

Pipeline failure risks are heightened by factors such as aging infrastructure, seismic ac Ɵvity, and populaƟon density, which can amplify the impact of potenƟal explosions or leaks.

In addiƟon to ﬁxed faciliƟes, hazardous materials are rouƟnely transported through Fullerton via major roadways and rail corridors. The BNSF Railway, which runs through the city, is a known carrier of hazardous freight, including ﬂammable liquids, corrosives, and other regulated substances. This creates potenƟal risks along the rail lines, especially near densely populated or industrialized areas. Major transportaƟon routes such as Orangethorpe Avenue, Commonwealth Avenue, and the adjacent freeways also serve as corridors for hazardous materials movement, further expanding the geographic scope of potenƟal incidents.

While most hazardous materials ac ƟviƟes in Fullerton are regulated and occur without incident, the combina Ɵon of widespread use, industrial concentra Ɵon, and ac Ɵve transportaƟon routes means that both minor and major hazardous materials events remain a possibility. The severity and extent of such incidents would depend on the type of material

4-114
involved, the loca Ɵon of the release, and the proximity to sensi Ɵve popula Ɵons or environmental resources.

Hazardous materials cleanup e ﬀorts in the City of Fullerton are monitored and documented through two statewide geodatabases: EnviroStor and GeoTracker. These systems are maintained by California’s environmental regulatory agencies and serve as essenƟal tools for tracking contaminaƟon, remediaƟon, and regulatory oversight.

EnviroStor, managed by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), is a comprehensive data management system that tracks cleanup, permi ƫng, enforcement, and invesƟgaƟon ac ƟviƟes at hazardous waste facili Ɵes and sites with known or suspected contaminaƟon. It includes a wide range of site types such as Federal Superfund Sites, State Response Sites, Voluntary Cleanup Sites, Evalua Ɵon Sites, and Correc Ɵve Ac Ɵon Sites.

EnviroStor provides detailed informa Ɵon about the nature of contamina Ɵon, responsible parƟes, and the status of cleanup eﬀorts. EnviroStor idenƟﬁes mulƟple cleanup eﬀorts within Fullerton, including Federal Superfund sites and other state-regulated loca Ɵons undergoing voluntary or correcƟve acƟon. These sites vary in size and complexity, and their distribu Ɵon reﬂects the city’s diverse land uses and industrial history.

GeoTracker, operated by the California State Water Resources Control Board, focuses on sites that impact—or have the poten Ɵal to impact—water quality, with an emphasis on groundwater contamina Ɵon. GeoTracker tracks Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Cleanup Sites and Cleanup Program Sites, which include a broad spectrum of faciliƟes such as dry cleaners, industrial plants, rail yards, and bulk transfer sta Ɵons. These sites may involve contaminants like petroleum hydrocarbons, solvents, heavy metals, and pes Ɵcides. While many sites have been closed following successful remedia Ɵon, a signi ﬁcant number remain open or under ac Ɵve invesƟgaƟon. Table 4-29: Active Cleanup Sites iden Ɵﬁes the ongoing cleanup eﬀorts within the City of Fullerton.

TABLE 4-29: ACTIVE CLEANUP SITES

NAME/ID ADDRESS TYPE/STATUS STATUS DATE
UNOCAL #5198
T0605900967
100 West
Bastanchury Rd
LUST Cleanup Site
Open - RemediaƟon 3/13/2008
McColl Dump Site
SLT8R1574166
Rosecrans Avenue
W
Cleanup Program Site
Open - Assessment
Interim Remedial AcƟon
6/23/2009
AviaƟon FaciliƟes
T10000022581
4119
Commonwealth
LUST Cleanup Site
Open - Site Assessment 5/29/2024
Chinet Co.

Slt8r1214092
2300 Raymer
Avenue
Cleanup Program Site
Open - RemediaƟon 4/1/2013
Former Raytheon
Facility
T0605900143
2357 Moore
Avenue
Cleanup Program Site
Open - RemediaƟon 2/15/2006
Raytheon CorporaƟon
T10000007668
1901 W. Malvern
Ave
Cleanup Program Site
Open - RemediaƟon 9/18/2015

4-115

NAME/ID ADDRESS TYPE/STATUS STATUS DATE
Fullerton
Manufacturing
Company
Sl208403895
311 South
Highland Ave
Cleanup Program Site
Open - Site Assessment 10/1/2018
De Anda Property
T0605900397 300 W Valencia Dr LUST Cleanup Site
Open - Site Assessment 11/29/2023
Pennzoil/Quaker State
Facility
T10000008692
336 E Santa Fe
Avenue
Cleanup Program Site
Open - Site Assessment 3/23/2016
Orange County North
Basin
T10000010669
Orangethorpe
Avenue
Cleanup Program Site
Open - Site Assessment 7/25/2017
Rodriguez Sweeping
Service
T10000021239
800 E. Walnut
Avenue
LUST Cleanup Site
Open - Site Assessment 7/14/2023
Rodriguez Sweeping
Service
T10000017160
800 E. Walnut
Avenue
Cleanup Program Site
Open - Site Assessment 11/1/2021
Chicago Musical
Instruments
T10000006450
350 South
Raymond
Cleanup Program Site
Open - RemediaƟon 2/2/2015
Former Arnold
Engineering
Slt8r2213999
1551 East
Orangethorpe
Avenue
Cleanup Program Site
Open - Site Assessment 6/30/2017
PCA Metals
Slt8r2203998 1723 East Kimberly Cleanup Program Site
Open - Site Assessment 6/1/2010
Khyber Foods
Slt8r2244002
1818 East Rosslynn
Avenue
Cleanup Program Site
Open - Site Assessment 1/15/2025
Orange County Metal
Processing
Slt8r2193997
1711 East Kimberly
Avenue
Cleanup Program Site
Open - Site Assessment 11/7/1992
Vista Paint
T10000011480
2020 East
Orangethorpe Ave
Cleanup Program Site
Open - Site Assessment 7/19/2019
Trent Tube Division
Slt8r2224000
2100 East
Orangethorpe
Avenue
Cleanup Program Site
Open - Site Assessment 7/19/2019
Howmet Global
Fastening Systems
Sl0605956921
800 South State
College Boulevard
Cleanup Program Site
Open - RemediaƟon 1/29/2007
Aerojet General
Groundwater
Sl0605973469
601 South
PlacenƟa Avenue
Cleanup Program Site
Open - Assessment &
Interim Remedial AcƟon
1/18/2011
Source: State Water Resources Control Board, GeoTracker, https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/, accessed September 17, 2025.

According to the GeoTracker database, there are currently four acƟve LUST Cleanup Sites and 17 ac Ɵve Cleanup Program Sites within the City of Fullerton. These sites are primarily

4-116
concentrated in the southern porƟons of the city, where industrial and commercial land uses are most prevalent.

AddiƟonally, the Environmental Protec Ɵon Agency (EPA) biennially collects informa Ɵon regarding the genera Ɵon, management, and disposal of hazardous materials under the Resource Conserva Ɵon and Recovery Act (RCRA). The Biennial Report Summary for 2023 indicated 15 hazardous waste generators in the City of Fullerton:
• Aeroﬁt LLC (S. Acacia Avenue, Fullerton, CA 92831)
• AmtreND (S. ManhaƩan Ave, Fullerton, CA 92831)
• California State University, Fullerton (N. State College Blvd., Fullerton, CA 92634- 0000)
• CVS Pharmacy #7079 (North Harbor Boulevard, Fullerton, CA 92835-0000) • CVS Pharmacy #9598 (North State College Boulevard, Fullerton, CA 92831) • Fullerton Custom Works Inc (E Elm Ave, Fullerton, CA 92831) • Howmet Global Fastening Systems Inc (S State College Blvd, Fullerton, CA 92831- 5334)
• Howmet Global Fastening Systems Inc (S PlacenƟa Ave, Fullerton, CA 92831-0000) • Inmar Supply Chain SoluƟons, LLC (S Sally Pl, Fullerton, CA 92831-0000) • Kryler Corp. (E. Ash Ave., Fullerton, CA 92831)
• St Jude Medical Center (E Valencia Mesa Dr, Fullerton, CA 92835) • Universal Molding Company (E Orangethorpe Ave, Fullerton, CA 92831) • Walgreens #6215 (1826 W Orangethorpe Ave, Fullerton, CA 92833) • Winonics Inc DBA Bench 2 Bench (South State College Blvd, Fullerton, CA 92831) These sites are primarily iden Ɵﬁed as large quan Ɵty generators (LQG) which generate more than 1,000 kg of hazardous waste or more than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month.

AddiƟonally, there is one generator iden Ɵﬁed as a small quan Ɵty generator (SQG) which generate between 100 to 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month, and one generator idenƟﬁed as a condi Ɵonally exempt small quan Ɵty generator (CESQG) which generates less than 100 kg of hazardous waste or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month.97 Hazardous materials incidents pose a signi ﬁcant risk to the City of Fullerton due to the widespread presence, use, and movement of regulated substances across various land uses.

While industrial zones in the southern, western, and northern por Ɵons of the city contain concentrated faciliƟes that generate, store, or transport hazardous materials—as documented in the EPA Biennial Report and tracked through databases like GeoTracker and EnviroStor— the potenƟal for incidents is not limited to these areas. Hazardous materials are also present in commercial corridors, small businesses, schools, and households throughout Fullerton.

Moreover, the city’s extensive transportaƟon infrastructure, including major arterial roadways and ac Ɵve rail lines such as the BNSF Railway, facilitates the movement of hazardous substances through densely populated areas. This means that even small-scale spills or leaks

97 US EPA, Biennial Report Search, hƩps://enviro.epa.gov/envirofacts/br/search, accessed September 17, 2025.

4-117
could occur anywhere in the city, while larger incidents in industrial zones or along transportaƟon corridors could have far-reaching impacts. Whether through accidental release, equipment failure, or transporta Ɵon mishaps, hazardous materials incidents in Fullerton have the poten Ɵal to a ﬀect public health, environmental quality, and emergency response capabiliƟes citywide.

TERRORISM/CYBERSECURITY /ACTIVE SHOOTER
The speci ﬁc loca Ɵon and severity of terrorism, cybersecurity breaches, or ac Ɵve shooter incidents in Fullerton are inherently di ﬃcult to predict. These threats can occur anywhere within the city, but certain loca Ɵons are more suscep Ɵble due to their public visibility, populaƟon density, or strategic importance. Generally, sites most vulnerable to such incidents include places where people gather, cri Ɵcal infrastructure, and high-pro ﬁle desƟnaƟons. In Fullerton, these include:
• Schools and educaƟonal insƟtuƟons such as California State University, Fullerton and Fullerton College
• Hospitals and medical faciliƟes including Providence St. Jude Medical Center • City Hall and other government buildings
• Community centers and public libraries
• The Fullerton TransportaƟon Center and associated Metrolink and Amtrak services • Shopping centers such as Fullerton Town Center and Amerige Heights Town Center • Major highways and arterial roads including SR-57, SR-91, and SR-90 • UƟlity infrastructure and energy distribuƟon faciliƟes • Entertainment venues and event spaces
These locaƟons represent potenƟal targets due to their symbolic value, public accessibility, or operaƟonal signiﬁcance. The severity of an incident would depend on the nature of the aƩack and the speci ﬁc target. Addi Ɵonally, Fullerton could experience secondary e ﬀects from incidents occurring in neighboring jurisdic Ɵons, par Ɵcularly given its proximity to major regional infrastructure and densely populated urban centers.

Unlike physical a Ʃacks, cyberterrorism is not con ﬁned by geography. Cybera Ʃacks can originate from anywhere and s Ɵll have profound impacts on Fullerton’s ins ƟtuƟons and residents. Targets may include government systems, healthcare networks, ﬁnancial insƟtuƟons, educaƟonal plaƞorms, and public u ƟliƟes. A cyberaƩack on an energy provider, for example, could result in widespread power outages across the city, disrupƟng emergency services, communica Ɵons, and daily life. Alterna Ɵvely, smaller-scale a Ʃacks may focus on stealing personal or ﬁnancial data from individuals or businesses. The e ﬀects of cyberterrorism can include service disrup Ɵons, economic losses, psychological stress, and compromised public trust.

AcƟve shooter incidents, while rare, pose a se rious threat in urban environments like Fullerton. Loca Ɵons with high foot tra ﬃc or limited security—such as schools, shopping centers, transit hubs, and entertainment venues—are par Ɵcularly vulnerable. The Fullerton Police Department employs intelligence-led policing and community partnerships to monitor and miƟgate such risks. Nonetheless, preparedness through training, public awareness, and

4-118
coordinated emergency response remains essen Ɵal to minimizing harm should such an incident occur.

CIVIL UNREST
Civil unrest can occur anywhere within the City of Fullerton. While unpredictable in nature, certain areas are more suscep Ɵble due to their visibility, accessibility, and symbolic or operaƟonal signi ﬁcance. Government facili Ɵes, educa Ɵonal ins ƟtuƟons, and commercial corridors are common focal points for demonstra Ɵons, protests, and public gatherings. In Fullerton, locaƟons such as City Hall, the Fullerton Police Department, Fullerton Public Library, and community centers are poten Ɵal sites for poli Ɵcally mo Ɵvated unrest. The downtown district has historically served as a gathering point for protests and marches. Addi Ɵonally, California State University, Fullerton and Fullerton College are prominent insƟtuƟons that may aƩract ac Ɵvism and civil demonstra Ɵons due to their large student popula Ɵons and civic engagement.

Other vulnerable areas include shopping centers like Fullerton Town Center, Amerige Heights Town Center, and major intersecƟons which may be used as protest locaƟons. Parks, schools, and places of worship located throughout the city also represent poten Ɵal gathering sites.

Civil disturbances may originate in one locaƟon and migrate across neighborhoods, impacƟng public faciliƟes, businesses, and private property.

The extent and severity of damage from civil unrest depends on several factors: the moƟvaƟon behind the disturbance, the number of parƟcipants, and the response from law enforcement and emergency services. Minor incidents may be localized and result in limited property damage, while more severe unrest could span mulƟple districts, involve mass gatherings, and lead to injuries, arrests, or signi ﬁcant economic losses. Property damage may include vandalism, looƟng, and arson, with uninsured residents and business owners facing greater ﬁnancial hardship. Recovery eﬀorts may require extended downƟme for cleanup, repairs, and restoraƟon of public trust. As with other urban centers, Fullerton’s vulnerability to civil unrest is shaped by its infrastructure, populaƟon density, and civic landscape.

VECTOR-BORNE DISEASE AND PANDEMIC
Vector-borne diseases and pandemics pose a signi ﬁcant public health threat to the City of Fullerton and, unlike many other hazards, are not con ﬁned to speci ﬁc geographic locaƟons.

These types of health emergencies can impact any and all areas of the city, spreading rapidly across neighborhoods, business districts, schools, and public facili Ɵes. While the origin of an outbreak may be localized—such as a cluster of mosquito-borne illness near standing water or a respiratory virus introduced through travel—its e ﬀects can quickly extend citywide due to Fullerton’s interconnected infrastructure and acƟve populaƟon.

Outdoor spaces, par Ɵcularly parks, greenbelts, and areas with poor drainage, may be more suscepƟble to vector acƟvity. Mosquitoes thrive in standing water and warmer climates, while rodents and Ɵcks may be found in unmaintained structures, alleyways, and wildland-adjacent areas. However, vectors can interact with humans anywhere in the city, including residen Ɵal zones, commercial centers, and industrial sites. The severity of a vector-borne disease outbreak depends on the density of the vector populaƟon, environmental condiƟons, and the

4-119
vulnerability of residents—especially the elderly, immunocompromised individuals, and those living in overcrowded or underserved communiƟes.

Pandemics, by contrast, are inherently widespread and can aﬀect the enƟre city regardless of geography. Fullerton’s dense urban core, public transit systems, educaƟonal insƟtuƟons like California State University, Fullerton, and high-tra ﬃc commercial areas increase the risk of rapid disease transmission. Indoor environmen ts where people gather—such as schools, oﬃces, restaurants, and transit hubs—are par Ɵcularly vulnerable to airborne or contact-based diseases. While less populated areas may experience slower spread, no part of the city is immune to pandemic impacts.

The extent and severity of a disease outbreak—whether vector-borne or pandemic—depends on the nature of the illness, its transmissibility, and the eﬀecƟveness of public health response.

Some diseases may cause mild symptoms and limited disrupƟon, while others could result in widespread illness, fatali Ɵes, and long-term economic and social consequences. In a worst- case scenario, a highly contagio us and deadly disease could overwhelm healthcare systems, disrupt essen Ɵal services, and require extensive coordina Ɵon between city departments, regional agencies, and public health o ﬃcials. Fullerton’s preparedness, including vaccinaƟon programs, public educaƟon, and emergency planning, will be criƟcal in miƟgaƟng the impacts of future outbreaks.

4.11.3 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES

AIRCRAFT/TRANSPORTATION/TRAIN INCIDENTS
Fullerton has experienced mulƟple aircraŌ-related incidents in recent years, underscoring the need for conƟnued vigilance. In 1986, a tragic mid-air collision occurred above the nearby city of Cerritos when a passenger jetliner struck a small propeller plane, resul Ɵng in the jetliner crashing into a residenƟal neighborhood, killing 15 residents and destroying 16 homes. Within Fullerton itself, two notable accidents occurred at the Fullerton Municipal Airport: in 2004, a pilot was injured aŌer losing control during an airshow and crashing shortly aŌer takeoﬀ, and in 2016, a small propeller plane crashed into a hangar wall, causing minor injuries to both the pilot and co-pilot. In February 2019, a twin-engine BeechcraŌ B60 Duke crashed shortly aŌer takeoﬀ from Fullerton Municipal Airport, resulƟng in ﬁve fataliƟes and extensive damage to a nearby neighborhood. The incident impacted the neighboring City of Yorba Linda raining debris and igniƟng a house ﬁre before landing in a backyard.98 More recently, in January 2025, a small plane crashed into a furniture warehouse near the airport, killing two people and injuring 19 others, including warehouse employees and ﬁrst

98 CBS News, Plane crash kills 5, sparks house ﬁre, scaƩers debris in neighborhood outside L.A., hƩps://www.cbsnews.com/news/yorba-linda-plane-crash-today-2019-02-03-live-updates/, accessed September 17, 2025.

4-120
responders.99 These events illustrate that while aircraŌ incidents are infrequent, they can have devastaƟng consequences and aﬀect areas beyond the immediate airport vicinity.

AddiƟonally, Fullerton has experienced several transportaƟon-related incidents involving rail and roadway systems. In November 1999, a Metrolink train collided with a freight train near Brookhurst Road, injuring 19 people and temporarily closing the Orange County rail corridor, aﬀecƟng over 3,500 commuters. More recently, in 2018, three separate rail-related incidents occurred near the Fullerton Train Depot: an Amtrak train struck a trespasser who survived with injuries, a Metrolink train fatally struck a man in an apparent suicide, and a freight train killed another individual who ha d entered the right-of-way. Addi Ɵonally, in April 2018, a freight truck overturned on SR -57 near Bastanchury Road, shu ƫng down the highway for nearly 12 hours.

No federally declared disasters rela Ɵng to aircra Ō, transporta Ɵon, or train incidents have occurred including the planning area within the last ﬁve years; refer to Table 4-30: Summary of Declared Disasters Affecting the Planning Area.

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RELEASE/SPILL
Fullerton has experienced several hazardous materials release incidents over the past two decades, involving substances such as diesel fuel, corrosive liquids, sewage, and ammonia.

Notable events include a 2006 diesel spill into a ﬂood control channel following a truck collision, a corrosive liquid release in 2010 caused by a forkli Ō breach, and two signi ﬁcant sewage leaks in 2010 and 2015 that contaminated local storm drains and creek channels. In 2011, an ammonia release occurred due to a faul ty valve, and in 2018, another diesel spill impacted SR-57 a Ōer a freight truck struck the center divider. These incidents highlight the city's vulnerability to transportaƟon and infrastructure-related hazardous material releases.

AddiƟonal hazardous materials releases in the City of Fullerton have been documented through state and federal repor Ɵng systems, including the California Department of Toxic Substances Control’s EnviroStor database and the State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker system. These databases track both historical and acƟve cleanup eﬀorts related to hazardous substances, including petroleum hydrocarbons, solvents, heavy metals, and other regulated chemicals. According to GeoTracker, Fullerton currently has four ac Ɵve Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Cleanup Sites and 17 ac Ɵve Cleanup Program Sites, primarily concentrated in the southern por Ɵons of the city where industrial and commercial land uses are most prevalent. These sites re ﬂect a history of spills and contamina Ɵon events that have required formal invesƟgaƟon and remediaƟon.

EnviroStor idenƟﬁes mul Ɵple cleanup e ﬀorts within Fullerton, including Federal Superfund Sites, State Response Sites, Voluntary Cleanup Sites, and Correc Ɵve Ac Ɵon Sites. These locaƟons vary in size and complexity, and their distribuƟon reﬂects the city’s industrial legacy and diverse land uses. Many of these sites are associated with facili Ɵes that generate

99 ABC News, 2 dead, 19 hurt aŌer small plane crashes into furniture warehouse in Southern California, hƩps://abcnews.go.com/US/18-hurt-aŌer-small-plane-crashes-building- southern/story?id=117284216, accessed September 17, 2025.

4-121
hazardous waste as part of rouƟne operaƟons. According to the U.S. Environmental ProtecƟon Agency’s Biennial Report Summary for 2023, Fullerton is home to 15 hazardous waste generators, most of which are classiﬁed as Large QuanƟty Generators (LQGs). These faciliƟes include manufacturers, supply chain operaƟons, medical centers, and retail pharmacies, and are located throughout the city, with notable concentra Ɵons along State College Boulevard, Orangethorpe Avenue, and in the industrial zones south of the Metrolink rail lines.

Spills reported in recent years have generally involved petroleum products, chemical solvents, and other industrial substances. While many incidents have been relaƟvely small in scale and quickly contained, they underscore the ongoing risk posed by hazardous materials in urban environments. Releases have occurred during rou Ɵne opera Ɵons, equipment failures, and transportaƟon mishaps, including along major arterial roadways and acƟve rail corridors such as the BNSF Railway, which transports hazardous freight through Fullerton. These incidents have the potenƟal to impact air and water quality, disrupt local services, and pose health risks to nearby populaƟons.

No federally declared disasters rela Ɵng to hazardous materials have occurred including the planning area within the last ﬁve years; refer to T able 4 - 3 0: Summary o f Declar ed Disas t er s Affecting the Planning Area.

TERRORISM/CYBERSECURITY /ACTIVE SHOOTER
The City of Fullerton has not experienced any documented terrorist a Ʃacks in recent history.

While Fullerton is part of a densely populated and strategically signi ﬁcant region in Southern California, no incidents meeƟng federal deﬁniƟons of terrorism have occurred within the city limits. Nonetheless, the potenƟal for terrorism—whether domes Ɵc or internaƟonal—remains a concern due to Fullerton’s proximity to major transporta Ɵon corridors, public gathering spaces, and criƟcal infrastructure.

In terms of cybersecurity, Fullerton has not reported any major cybera Ʃacks targe Ɵng municipal systems. However, regional agencies serving Fullerton have experienced signiﬁcant incidents. Notably, the Orange County TransportaƟon Authority (OCTA), which provides transit services throughout the county, was the vicƟm of a cyberaƩack in 2016. The breach disabled dozens of servers, including email and voicemail systems, and cost over $600,000 in recovery eﬀorts. Fortunately, transporta Ɵon services con Ɵnued uninterrupted, and no sensi Ɵve personal data was compromised.100 This event highlights the vulnerability of interconnected public systems and the importance of robust cy bersecurity protocols across all levels of government and service providers.

100 Voice of OC, TransportaƟon Authority Kept Secret Cyber AƩacker That Cost $600,000, hƩps://voiceofoc.org/2024/06/santana-cyber-aƩacking-your-right-to- know/#:~:text=Here%20in%20Orange%20County%2C%20we%20have%20some%20experience,cybers ecurity%20dealings%20with%20large%20agencies.&text=And%20thanks%20to%20the%20reporƟng, out%20computer%20servers%20for%20days., published August 2, 2016, accessed September 17, 2025.

4-122
Regarding ac Ɵve shooter incidents, Fullerton has experienced isolated events involving ﬁrearms in public spaces, though none have met the federal threshold for mass casualty acƟve shooter classiﬁcaƟon. Given the city’s populaƟon density, presence of educaƟonal insƟtuƟons, and public venues, the risk remains pres ent. Local law enforcement agencies con Ɵnue to engage in preparedness training and community outreach to miƟgate this threat.

No federally declared disasters rela Ɵng to terrorism, cybersecurity, or ac Ɵve shooter have occurred including the planning area within the last ﬁve years; refer to Table 4-30: Summary of Declared Disasters Affecting the Planning Area.

CIVIL UNREST
The City of Fullerton has historically experienced instances of civil unrest and public demonstraƟons, oŌen Ɵed to broader social and poli Ɵcal movements. While many of these events have remained peaceful, some have escalated into unlawful assemblies requiring law enforcement intervenƟon. For example, In the spring of 1970, protests erupted at California State University, Fullerton (CSUF) in response to the Vietnam War, a visit from Governor Ronald Reagan, and the Kent State University shoo Ɵngs, ulƟmately leading Reagan to order the campus closed before ﬁnal exams and resul Ɵng in over 60 arrests. Between 2011 and 2014, a series of protests followed the death of a homeless man involving Fullerton Police, culminaƟng in violent demonstra Ɵons a Ōer the o ﬃcers were acqui Ʃed, with 13 arrests, vandalism at a police staƟon, and an assault on a news reporter. In 2017, clashes broke out at CSUF when a white supremacist speaker was invited to campus, leading to physical altercaƟons, the use of pepper spray, and eight arrests by law enforcement.

More recently, in February 2025, pro-immigra Ɵon protesters marched from Orangethorpe Avenue and Harbor Boulevard to downtown Fullerton and the Fullerton Police Department, blocking intersec Ɵons and protes Ɵng. The demonstra Ɵon was ini Ɵally peaceful but was declared an unlawful assembly when protesters began obstrucƟng traﬃc and access to public buildings. Law enforcement deployed SWAT and mounted units for crowd control and issued dispersal orders in accordance with California Penal Code SecƟon 409.101 While Fullerton has not experienced large-scale riots or prolonged civil disturbances, civil unrest can occur within the city, par Ɵcularly in response to poli Ɵcally sensi Ɵve issues. The city’s acƟve civic culture, diverse popula Ɵon, and proximity to regional protest movements suggest that future occurrences remain possible, especially during periods of heightened social tension.

No federally declared disasters rela Ɵng to civil unrest have occurred including the planning area within the last ﬁve years; refer to Table 4-30: Summary of Declared Disasters Affecting the Planning Area.

101
Daily Titan, Pro-immigraƟon protesters block downtown Fullerton, hƩps://dailyƟtan.com/news/pro- immigraƟon-protesters-block-downtown-fullerton/arƟcle_7329de14-e779-11ef-ab88- 67ĩ443a7b40.html, accessed September 17, 2025.

4-123

VECTOR-BORNE DISEASE AND PANDEMIC
In December 2019, the Covid-19 pandemic began in Wuhan, China before becoming a global pandemic that would infect over 775 million peop le and claim the lives of over 7 million. 102 The enƟre populaƟon of the City of Fullerton was impacted by this event, and the City was included in the federal disaster declaraƟon issued for this hazard event by FEMA.

Fullerton experienced signi ﬁcant impacts from the Covid-19 Pandemic. By March 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom issued a statewide stay at home order, prohibiƟng all people in the State of California from leaving their homes apart from essen Ɵal services and limi Ɵng the operaƟons of non-essenƟal businesses.

At the Ɵme this document was prepared, 8,928 know n deaths in Orange County have been aƩributed to Covid-19.103 As part of the response to slow the spread of the virus, non-essenƟal businesses and schools were closed or transi Ɵoned to remote environments, if feasible. A signiﬁcant milestone and improvement against the pandemic came in December of 2020 with the release of the Covid-19 vaccine. The City of Fullerton and County of Orange made various resources available based on guidance from the WHO, CDC, and California Department of Public Health (CDPH). Mask mandates were issued for indoor spaces, and proof of vaccinaƟon requirements were established for certain acƟviƟes to help stop transmission. Generally, the pandemic resulted in signi ﬁcant economic and public health impacts that reverberated throughout the City. At the Ɵme of this wri Ɵng, Covid-19 is a seasonally recurring issue as vaccines, masks, and social distancing has ma de disease transmission and treatment much more manageable.

Before Covid-19, the most recent pandemic occurred in 2009: the (H1N1) pdm09, “swine ﬂu” pandemic.104 H1N1pdm09 primarily aﬀected children and young/middle-aged adults, atypical from most inﬂuenza pandemics. Between April 2009 and April 2010, the CDC es Ɵmates over 60 million cases, nearly 275,000 hospitalizaƟons, and over 12,000 deaths aﬀected the United States populaƟon. The World Health OrganizaƟon declared an end to the global pandemic in August 2010; however, the virus con Ɵnues to circulate as a seasonal in ﬂuenza virus. 105 In Orange County, the local impact was signiﬁcant, with 226 severe cases and 57 fataliƟes tracked by the Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA).106

102 World Health OrganizaƟon, WHO Covid-19 Dashboard,
hƩps://data.who.int/dashboards/Covid19/deaths?n=o, accessed September 17, 2025. 103 OC Healthcare Agency, Orange County Covid-19 Dashboard, hƩps://www.ochealthinfo.com/services-programs/disease-prevenƟon/diseases-condiƟons/covid-19- resources, accessed September 17, 2025.
104 CDC, CDC H1N1 Flu: Origin of 2009 H1N1 Flu (Swine Flu), hƩps://archive.cdc.gov/#/details?url=hƩps://www.cdc.gov/h1n1ﬂu/informaƟon_h1n1_virus_qa.htm, 2009, accessed September 17, 2025.
105 CDC, Inﬂuenza Pandemics of the 20th Century, hƩps://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/16102, accessed September 17, 2025.
106 Orange County Health Care Agency, Response to Pandemic H1N1 2009 Inﬂuenza, hƩps://www.ochealthinfo.com/sites/hca/ﬁles/import/data/ﬁles/13257.pdf, accessed September 23, 2025.

4-124
Historically, other in ﬂuenza pandemics have also le Ō a profound mark. Both the 1968 and 1918 pandemics were caused by avian ﬂu outbreaks. The 1968 pandemic was caused by an inﬂuenza H3N2 virus, with an es Ɵmated death toll of 116,000 in the United States and an esƟmated worldwide toll of 1.1 million. 107 Medical advances in the 1960s including an Ɵviral medicaƟons and expanded in ﬂuenza vaccine op Ɵons signi ﬁcantly helped to combat this pandemic. The 1918 pandemic was an outbreak of in ﬂuenza caused by an H1N1 virus. The virus spread worldwide from 1918-1919. It is es Ɵmated that one third of the worldwide populaƟon at the Ɵme, about 500 million people, became infected with the virus. The pandemic resulted in an es Ɵmated 675,000 deaths in the United States alone and over 50 million deaths worldwide.108
Beyond inﬂuenza, vector-borne diseases and epidemics have periodically a ﬀected Fullerton and the broader Southern California region. A hepa ƟƟs A outbreak that began in San Diego County in 2016 spread to Santa Cruz, Los Angeles, and Monterey counƟes, primarily impacƟng homeless populaƟons and individuals who use drugs. In response, Governor Brown issued an emergency proclama Ɵon in 2017 to boost vaccine supply. 109 In 2015, a measles outbreak linked to Disneyland in Anaheim underscored the risks of low vaccinaƟon rates, with 49 cases among unvaccinated individuals. By 2016, the outbreak had been resolved.110 West Nile Virus also posed a regional threat, peaking in 2014 with nearly 280 reported cases in Orange County before declining to 97 cases in 2015 and just 12 by 2018.111 In the last ﬁve years, two FEMA-declared disasters for the pandemic hazard have aﬀected the planning area:
• EM-3428-CA: Covid-19 Pandemic – January 20, 2020
• DR-4482-CA: Covid-19 Pandemic – January 20, 2020
Refer to Table 4-30: Summary of Declared Disasters Affecting the Planning Area for a full list of federally declared disasters aﬀecƟng the planning area.

4.11.4 PROBABILITY OF FUTURE OCCURRENCES

AIRCRAFT/TRANSPORTATION/TRAIN INCIDENTS
Given the City of Fullerton’s extensive transportaƟon infrastructure and history of incidents, the probability of future transportaƟon-related hazards is a concern. The LHMP Planning Team has determined the probability of occurrence for this hazard to be highly likely. Fullerton is intersected by major arterial highways and freeways such as State Routes 90, 91, and 57, and Interstate 5, which serve as cri Ɵcal evacua Ɵon routes but also pose risks for hazardous material spills, mulƟ-vehicle collisions, and traﬃc disrupƟons. The city’s dense populaƟon and

107 Ibid.
108 Ibid.
109 CDC, Homelessness and HepaƟƟs A—San Diego County, 2016–2018 , hƩps://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/153467, accessed September 23, 2025. 110 CDC, Measles Outbreak — California, December 2014–February 2015 , hƩps://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6406a5.htm, accessed September 23, 2025. 111 Orange County Health Care Agency, West Nile Virus, Orange County 2011 – 2018, hƩps://ochealthinfo.com/sites/hca/ﬁles/import/data/ﬁles/102025.pdf, accessed September 23, 2025.

4-125
mixed land uses further increase the likelihood that any transporta Ɵon incident could have cascading impacts on mobility, emergency response, and public safety.

Rail infrastructure adds another layer of risk. The Fullerton Transporta Ɵon Center, located in the heart of downtown, is a major hub for Metrolink, Amtrak, and freight services operated by BNSF and Union Paci ﬁc. These rail lines traverse residen Ɵal, commercial, and industrial zones, increasing the poten Ɵal for derailments, collisions, and hazardous material releases.

Notably, BNSF Railway is known to transport hazardous substances through the city, which heightens the risk of high-impact incidents along rail corridors.

AircraŌ-related hazards, while less frequent than other transporta Ɵon incidents, remain a concern for the City of Fullerton due to the presence of the Fullerton Municipal Airport and the city’s locaƟon within regional airspace used by nearby commercial airports.

Considering the city’s mulƟmodal transit environment, history of incidents, and proximity to regional airspace and freight corridors, future transporta Ɵon-related hazards are considered highly likely, indicaƟng a 90 to 100 percent chance of occurrence within the next year or a recurrence interval of less than one year.

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RELEASE/SPILL
Hazardous materials use, storage, and transport will con Ɵnue to be a rou Ɵne part of operaƟons across the City of Fullerton, and as such, the poten Ɵal for future hazardous materials incidents remains an ongoing concern. The probability of occurrence for this hazard has been determined by the LHMP Planning Team to be highly likely. Fullerton’s industrial land uses—par Ɵcularly in the southern, western, and northern por Ɵons of the city—host a concentraƟon of facili Ɵes that generate and manage hazardous substances, many of which are tracked through the EPA Biennial Report, GeoTracker, and EnviroStor databases. These include ac Ɵve Cleanup Program sites, Leaking Underg round Storage Tank (LUST) sites, and various federal and state-regulated cleanup e ﬀorts. Addi Ɵonally, hazardous materials are transported through the city via major arterial roadways and ac Ɵve rail corridors, including the BNSF Railway, which increases the risk of mobile incidents. Despite these concentraƟons, hazardous materials incidents could occur anywhere in the city, including at small businesses, schools, and residenƟal properƟes where regulated substances are used in smaller quanƟƟes.

Federal, state, and local agencies implement a range of policies and regula Ɵons to mi Ɵgate the risk of hazardous materials releases. The City of Fullerton parƟcipates in Orange County’s household hazardous waste disposal program, which provides residents with access to regional collecƟon centers in Anaheim, Hun Ɵngton Beach, Irvine, and San Juan Capistrano.

AddiƟonally, hazardous materials handling and repor Ɵng are overseen by the local Cer Ɵﬁed Uniﬁed Program Agency (CUPA), which enforces compliance with California Environmental ProtecƟon Agency standards. While these preventa Ɵve measures signi ﬁcantly reduce the likelihood of large-scale incidents, the presence of diverse industries and acƟve transportaƟon corridors means that spills, leaks, or accidental releases remain a possibility. Based on current condiƟons and regulatory oversight, the probability of future hazardous materials incidents in Fullerton is considered highly likely, indica Ɵng a 90 to 100 percent likelihood of occurrence within the next year or a recurrence interval of less than one year.

4-126

TERRORISM/CYBERSECURITY /ACTIVE SHOOTER
Terrorism threats are inherently unpredictable and can occur without warning in any part of the city. Fullerton’s diverse and densely populated environment—including government faciliƟes, educaƟonal insƟtuƟons, commercial centers, and transit hubs—creates a range of potenƟal targets for intenƟonal acts of violence or disrup Ɵon. While Fullerton does not host high-proﬁle federal or military installa Ɵons, it contains numerous loca Ɵons where people gather, making it vulnerable to localized incidents of civil disturbance or targeted violence.

Cybersecurity threats are parƟcularly relevant in Fullerton due to the widespread use of digital infrastructure across public and private sectors. Government agencies, healthcare providers, ﬁnancial insƟtuƟons, educaƟonal campuses such as California State University, Fullerton, and uƟlity services all rely on interconnected systems that could be targeted by cyberaƩacks. The increasing sophisƟcaƟon of cyber threats and the city’s reliance on technology for essen Ɵal services elevate the risk of data breaches, service disrupƟons, and economic impacts.

AcƟve shooter incidents, though sta ƟsƟcally rare, remain a concern in urban se ƫngs like Fullerton. Loca Ɵons such as schools, shopping centers, transit sta Ɵons, and entertainment venues are par Ɵcularly vulnerable due to high foot tra ﬃc and public accessibility. The Fullerton Police Department and other local agencies engage in preparedness e ﬀorts, including training, threat assessments, and community outreach, to reduce risk and improve response capabiliƟes. Nonetheless, the dynamic nature of these threats means that future occurrences cannot be ruled out, and the city must remain vigilant in its preven Ɵon and miƟgaƟon strategies.

The probability of terrorism, cybersecurity threats, and ac Ɵve shooter threats has been determined by the LHMP Planning Team to be highly likely. A highly likely probability means a 90 to 100 percent chance of occurrence within the next year or a recurrence interval of less than one year.

CIVIL UNREST
Civil unrest incidents occur across the country and globally for a wide range of poliƟcal, social, economic, and environmental reasons. In the current climate, it is reasonable to expect that lawful protests and public demonstra Ɵons will con Ɵnue in the City of Fullerton, as these acƟviƟes are protected under the First Amendment. However, peaceful assemblies can escalate into civil disturbances under certain condi Ɵons, making it di ﬃcult to predict when law enforcement intervenƟon may be required. The LHMP Planning Team has determined the probability of civil unrest in Fullerton to be highly likely, re ﬂecƟng a 90 to 100 percent likelihood of occurrence within the next year or a recurrence interval of less than one year.

Fullerton’s urban environment includes several loca Ɵons where people commonly gather, such as City Hall, the Fullerton Transporta Ɵon Center, California State University, Fullerton, and the downtown commercial district. These areas are more likely to serve as focal points for demonstraƟons and public discourse. The presence of law enforcement at planned events is a standard preemp Ɵve measure, and increased intelligence gathering and situa Ɵonal awareness can help miƟgate the risk of escalaƟon. Nonetheless, the unpredictable nature of civil unrest—o Ōen Ɵed to broader societal movements—means that incidents could occur

4-127
anywhere in the city and a ﬀect both public and private property. Given Fullerton’s diverse populaƟon, ac Ɵve civic culture, and regional connec Ɵvity, the city remains moderately vulnerable to future episodes of civil disturbance. Con Ɵnued coordina Ɵon between public safety agencies, community organizaƟons, and local leadership will be essenƟal to maintaining public order and ensuring safe expression of civil liberƟes.

VECTOR-BORNE DISEASE AND PANDEMIC
The probability of future vector-borne disease outbreaks or pandemic events in the City of Fullerton has been determined by the LHMP Planning Team to highly likel. The likelihood of such occurrences has increased in recent decades due to a combina Ɵon of global and local factors, including increased internaƟonal travel, urbanizaƟon, climate change, and changes in land use. Fullerton’s dense populaƟon, acƟve transit systems, and proximity to major regional a i r p o r t s m a k e i t p a rƟcularly suscep Ɵble to rapid disease transmission once an outbreak begins. AddiƟonally, the city’s parks, greenbelts, and urban runoﬀ systems provide favorable condiƟons for vectors such as mosquitoes and rodents, which can carry diseases like West Nile virus, dengue, and hantavirus.

Pandemics, by nature, are di ﬃcult to predict in terms of Ɵming and origin. Future pandemic events are likely to result from viral muta Ɵons that produce novel pathogens to which the populaƟon has li Ʃle or no immunity. While advances in medical technology and global surveillance systems have improved the ability to detect and respond to emerging diseases, enƟrely prevenƟng pandemics remains unlikely. Vector-borne diseases also pose a persistent threat, par Ɵcularly in outdoor environments and areas with poor drainage or unmanaged waste. Vulnerable populaƟons—including the elderly, immunocompromised individuals, and those in overcrowded housing—are at greater risk of severe outcomes.

Given these condiƟons, the probability of future vector-borne disease or pandemic events in Fullerton is considered highly likely, indicaƟng a 90 to 100 percent chance of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of less than one year. ConƟnued investment in public health infrastructure, community educa Ɵon, and emergency preparedness will be essen Ɵal to miƟgaƟng the impacts of future outbreaks.

4.11.5 CLIMATE CHANGE

AIRCRAFT/TRANSPORTATION/TRAIN INCIDENTS
Climate change can impact the stability and safety of transportaƟon infrastructure, increasing the risk of incidents involving railroads, aircra Ō, and other transit systems. Extreme heat can cause rail tracks to expand and buckle—known as “sun kinks”—which may lead to train

4-128
derailments.112 Similarly, prolonged drought can dry out and destabilize soils beneath tracks, while intense rainfall and ﬂooding can erode the ground and wash out rail beds. 113 For aviaƟon, extreme weather events such as high winds, heatwaves, and sudden storms can disrupt ﬂight operaƟons, reduce visibility, and increase the risk of accidents. As climate change intensiﬁes these condi Ɵons, Fullerton’s transportaƟon systems face growing challenges that require proacƟve planning and infrastructure resilience.

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RELEASE/SPILL
Accidental hazardous materials releases are usually caused by human error, unrelated with climate change. However, hazardous materials releases can be a secondary impact as a result of infrastructure failure during a natural hazard event, such as a wild ﬁre or severe storm.

Climate change could cause an increase in destruc Ɵve natural hazards in the City and surrounding region, and thus risk future ha zardous materials spills. Further, hazardous materials releases during wild ﬁre or severe weather events could spread contamina Ɵon to large geographic areas and amplify long-term im pacts to human and ecological health. Spills or releases in challenging clean-up condi Ɵons can result in more severe damage or impacts compared to spills during normal condiƟons.

TERRORISM/CYBERSECURITY /ACTIVE SHOOTER
As terrorism, cybera Ʃacks and ac Ɵve shooter scenarios are human caused, these types of hazards are not directly Ɵed to climate change impacts. However, the interac Ɵon of natural hazards and global climate change could increase the frequency and severity of events.

Signiﬁcant and prolonged climate change impacts can cause con ﬂicts regarding natural resources and livelihood insecurity, as well as food insecurity or water scarcity. Terrorist organizaƟons could operate more easily in fragile and con ﬂict-aﬀected environments, according to the Climate Diplomacy OrganizaƟon.114

CIVIL UNREST
Similar to terrorism and cyber-aƩack, civil unrest is a human-caused hazard and is not directly Ɵed to climate change impacts. However, environmental concerns and climate change implicaƟons could drive con ﬂict on a local, regional, or glob al scale. Academic research has connected climate change in ﬂuenced droughts to periods of societal unrest over the course of many centuries. Research from Columbia University links climate change and unprecedented drought as the key societal stressor that led to uprisings and ini Ɵated the

112 Climate Central, Derailments May Increase as ‘Sun Kinks’ Buckle Tracks, hƩps://www.climatecentral.org/news/climate-change-warp-railroad-tracks-sun-kinks-17470, accessed September 11, 2025.
113 Edwards, F.L., Goodrich, D.C. Climate Change-Related Threats to Railroads: ImplicaƟons for Threat, Hazard and Risk Assessment, September 4, 2025.
114 Climate Diplomacy OrganizaƟon, Insurgency, Terrorism and Organized Crime in a Warming Climate, hƩps://www.climate-diplomacy.org/publicaƟons/insurgency-terrorism-and-organised-crime- warming-climate, accessed September 11, 2025.

4-129
Syrian Civil War.115 Vulnerability associated with limited resources can make periods of civil unrest more likely to occur in the future. Addi Ɵonally, more and more demonstra Ɵons are centered around the environment and climate change. As climate change conƟnues, protests and demonstraƟons may become more extreme, escalaƟng to civil unrest.

VECTOR-BORNE DISEASE & PANDEMIC
Climate change is intensifying the risk of vector-borne diseases and future pandemics by altering ecosystems and increasing human exposure to disease-carrying organisms. Warmer temperatures, shi Ōing precipita Ɵon pa Ʃerns, and more frequent ﬂooding create ideal condiƟons for vectors such as mosquitoes and Ɵcks to thrive and expand into new regions, increasing the transmission of diseases like dengue, West Nile virus, and Lyme disease. 116 At the same Ɵme, climate-driven habitat loss and species migra Ɵon are forcing wild animals— especially bats, which are known reservoirs for novel viruses—into closer contact with human populaƟons. This increases the likelihood of viral spillover events, where pathogens jump from animals to humans, poten Ɵally sparking new pandemics. 117 As climate change con Ɵnues to reshape environmental condi Ɵons, public health systems must adapt to address both the growing threat of vector-borne illnesses and the heightened risk of global disease emergence.

4.11.6 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
Human-caused hazards such as aircra Ō incidents, transporta Ɵon and train accidents, hazardous materials releases, terrorism, cybersecurity threats, ac Ɵve shooter events, civil unrest, vector-borne disease outbreaks, and pandemics are not geographically con ﬁned and may occur anywhere within the City of Fullerton. Therefore, a conservaƟve planning approach assumes that the en Ɵre City is poten Ɵally vulnerable to these threats. This includes all 167 criƟcal facili Ɵes, 69 facili Ɵes of concern, 47,484 occupi ed housing units, and the en Ɵre populaƟon of 141,278 residents.

While certain areas may face elevated risk due to their proximity to speciﬁc infrastructure — such as the Fullerton Municipal Airport, the Amtrak, Metrolink, and freight rail lines, or industrial corridors near Orangethorpe Avenue — the poten Ɵal impacts of human-caused hazards could extend citywide. Cri Ɵcal facili Ɵes such as government buildings, emergency service providers, community centers, parks, u ƟliƟes, and transportaƟon infrastructure may be directly or indirectly a ﬀected. Facili Ɵes of concern, including schools, healthcare and assisted living centers, and other community services, are also vulnerable.

PotenƟal impacts vary by hazard but may include:

115 Columbia University, Can studying climate change help predict civil unrest, hƩps://giving.columbia.edu/can-studying-climate-change-help-predict-civil-unrest, accessed September 11, 2025.
116 CDC, Vector-Borne Diseases, hƩps://www.cdc.gov/climate-health/php/eﬀects/vectors.html, accessed September 11, 2025.
117 US NaƟonal Science FoundaƟon, Study ﬁnds that climate change could spark the next pandemic, hƩps://www.nsf.gov/news/study-ﬁnds-climate-change-could-spark-next, accessed September 11, 2025.

4-130
Transportation and Aircraft Incidents: These could result in injuries, fatali Ɵes, and damage to nearby structures or infrastructure. Train accidents involving hazardous materials may trigger evacuaƟons, health risks, and environmental contaminaƟon.

Hazardous Materials Releases: Spills or leaks could compromise water and power systems, harm natural resources, and require complex cleanup opera Ɵons. Residents and businesses may face health risks and economic disrupƟon.

Terrorism, Cybersecurity, and Active Shooter Events: These threats may target public spaces, schools, infrastructure, or government assets, leading to casual Ɵes, property damage, and long-term service disrup Ɵons. Cybera Ʃacks could cripple communica Ɵons, u ƟliƟes, and emergency response systems.

Civil Unrest: Protests or disturbances may concentrate around government buildings or downtown areas, posing risks to businesses and public safety. Escalated events could result in vandalism, looƟng, or arson.

Vector-Borne Disease and Pandemic: These public health hazards can spread rapidly across densely populated areas, straining medical facili Ɵes and disrup Ɵng daily life. Economic impacts may include reduced tourism, business closures, and workforce shortages.

Given the scale and unpredictability of human-caused hazards, it is essen Ɵal to adopt a citywide mi ƟgaƟon strategy that priori Ɵzes resilience across all sectors. Protec Ɵng cri Ɵcal infrastructure, supporƟng vulnerable popula Ɵons, and enhancing emergency preparedness will be key to minimizing the impacts of these threats and ensuring Fullerton’s ability to respond and recover eﬀecƟvely.

4.11.7 CHANGES IN VULNERABILITY (PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS/NEXT FIVE YEARS) Since the 2020 LHMP , the City of Fullerton has experienced less than one percent populaƟon growth and a 4.2 percent increase in housing units, primarily through residenƟal inﬁll, mixed- use redevelopment, and rehabilitaƟon of exisƟng structures. Human-caused hazards such as hazardous materials release/spill, terrorism, cybersecurity threats, ac Ɵve shooter incidents, civil unrest, vector-borne disease, and pandemic are considered non-mapped hazards and have the poten Ɵa l t o i m p a c t t h e e nƟre city. As such, any increase in popula Ɵon or development—regardless of loca Ɵon—contributes to a marginal rise in vulnerability to these hazards. TransportaƟon and train-related incidents present a more localized risk, par Ɵcularly around the Fullerton TransportaƟon Center and along ac Ɵve rail corridors. These areas have historically supported commercial and industrial land uses, some of which may have been redeveloped or intensi ﬁed under recent in ﬁll and mixed-use projects, slightly increasing exposure to transportaƟon-related hazards.

4-131
corridors experience increased residen Ɵal and mixed-use development, vulnerability to transportaƟon and train-related incidents may rise due to greater popula Ɵon density and proximity to high-tra ﬃc transit hubs. Addi Ɵonally, because other human-caused hazards— such as hazardous materials release, terrorism, cybersecurity threats, civil unrest, and public health emergencies—can a ﬀect the en Ɵre city, future growth will contribute to a broader increase in exposure across Fullerton.

In summary, vulnerability to human-caused hazards in Fullerton has increased slightly over the past ﬁve years due to modest popula Ɵon and development growth. Looking ahead, planned development under the HIOZ program, par Ɵcularly near transporta Ɵon corridors, may elevate exposure to train and transit-related incidents. Meanwhile, citywide hazards such as hazardous materials release, terrorism, civil unrest, and public health threats will conƟnue t o p o s e r i s k s t o a l l a r e a s o f F u l l e r t o n . A s t h e c i t y g r o w s , i t w i l l b e i m p o r t a n t t o i n t e g r a t e emergency preparedness, public safety planning, and infrastructure resilience into future development eﬀorts to miƟgate the impacts of human-caused hazards.

4.11.8 LIMITED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY AND AFN POPULATIONS
SecƟon 3.8, Whole Community and Access and Func Ɵonal Needs , includes a detailed determinaƟon of vulnerable popula Ɵons within the planning area, including those with AFN or limited adap Ɵve capacity. Human-caused hazards—including aircra Ō, transportaƟon, and train incidents; hazardous materials release or spill; terrorism, cybersecurity threats, and acƟve shooter events; civil unrest; vector-borne disease; and pandemic—have the poten Ɵal to impact any area within the City of Fullerton. As such, the enƟre city is considered potenƟally vulnerable to these hazards, including all census tracts formally designated as having high concentraƟons of limited adap Ɵve capacity and AFN popula Ɵons: Census Tracts 001404, 001801, 001802, 086701, 011000, 001902, 011601, 011602, 011403, 011502, 011504, and 011711. AddiƟonally, limited adapƟve capacity and AFN populaƟons are understood to reside throughout the City, beyond the boundaries of these designated tracts.

Vulnerable groups—including older adults, individuals with disabili Ɵes, linguisƟcally isolated households, and residents in mulƟ-unit, crowded households or group housing—face dis Ɵnct challenges during human-caused hazard events. Older Adults may experience di ﬃculty evacuaƟng or responding quickly to sudden emergencies such as transporta Ɵon accidents, hazardous material spills, or ac Ɵve shooter events. They are also more suscep Ɵble to health complicaƟons during pandemics or vector-borne disease outbreaks, and may rely on caregivers or medical equipment that could be disrupted by civil unrest or cybersecurity failures. Individuals with DisabiliƟes may face barriers to mobility, communicaƟon, and access to emergency services during fast-moving or chao Ɵc events. Those dependent on powered medical devices or assis Ɵve technologies are especially vu lnerable during infrastructure disrupƟons or cybersecurity incidents that a ﬀect healthcare systems. Linguis Ɵcally Isolated Households may not receive or understand emergency alerts, evacua Ɵon instruc Ɵons, or public health guidance during events such as hazardous material releases, civil unrest, or pandemics. Language barriers can delay protec Ɵve ac Ɵons and reduce access to cri Ɵcal resources. Residents in mulƟ-unit, crowded households or group quarters are at elevated risk due to building density, limited escape routes, and shared infrastructure. These condiƟons can

4-132
exacerbate exposure during transportaƟon incidents, hazardous material spills, or infec Ɵous disease outbreaks, and may complicate evacuaƟon or shelter-in-place eﬀorts.

ConsideraƟons for vulnerable groups throughout the planning area were incorporated into the miƟgaƟon strategy in SecƟon 5. Speciﬁcally, the LHMP Planning Team tailored MiƟgaƟon AcƟons 1, 3, 11, 18 and 39 with these groups in mind, including eﬀorts to improve mulƟlingual emergency communica Ɵons, strengthen cybersecurity protec Ɵons for cri Ɵcal services, enhance public health outreach, and support evacua Ɵon planning and con Ɵnuity of care for AFN populaƟons during human-caused hazard events.

4.12 SUMMARY OF DECLARED DISASTERS AFFECTING THE PLANNING AREA As required by the recently updated FEMA policy guidelines, a summary of federally declared disasters and state declared disasters speci ﬁcally aﬀecƟng the planning area within the last ﬁve years is included below as Table 4-30. Speci ﬁc e ﬀects are also outlined in the hazard proﬁles, previous occurrences secƟons (where applicable).

TABLE 4-30: SUMMARY OF DECLARED DISASTERS AFFECTING THE PLANNING AREA

DECLARATION
DATE

DISASTER
NUMBER

INCIDENT

SUBCATEGORY

INCIDENT

DESCRIPTION

EFFECT ON

PLANNING
AREA
Federally Declared Disasters
January 20,
2020
DR-4482-CA Biological Covid-19
Pandemic
See EM-3428
below
January 20,
2020
EM-3428-CA Biological Covid-19 The COVID-19
pandemic,
began in
December 2019
leading to
signiﬁcant
health, social,
and economic
disrupƟons. As
of 2024, Orange
County has
conﬁrmed over
550,000 cases
and nearly 7,000
deaths due to
COVID-19.

October 26,
2020
FM-5381-CA Fire Blue Ridge Fire Fullerton
experienced air
quality issues,
ash and
potenƟal
evacuaƟon.

October 26,
2020
FM-5380-CA Fire Silverado Fire Fullerton
experienced air

4-133

DECLARATION
DATE

DISASTER
NUMBER

INCIDENT

SUBCATEGORY

INCIDENT

DESCRIPTION

EFFECT ON

PLANNING
AREA
quality issues,
ash and
potenƟal
evacuaƟon.

December 3,
2020
FM-5383-CA Fire Bond Fire Fullerton
experienced air
quality issues,
ash and
potenƟal
evacuaƟon.

January 8, 2023 EM-3591-CA Flood Severe Winter
Storms,
Flooding, and
Mudslides
Fullerton
experienced
heavy rain and
localized
ﬂooding during
this storm.

March 9, 2023 EM-3592-CA Flood Severe Winter
Storms,
Flooding,
Landslides, and
Mudslides
Fullerton
experienced
heavy rain and
localized
ﬂooding during
this storm.

State Declared Disasters
February 2024 146 Winter Storms Severe Winter
Storms
Fullerton
experienced
heavy rain and
localized
ﬂooding during
this storm.

August 2023 142 Tropical Storm Tropical Stom
Hilary
Fullerton
experienced
heavy rain and
localized
ﬂooding during
this storm.

February 2023
to March 2023
141 Winter Storms Severe Winter
Storms
Fullerton
experienced
heavy rain and
localized
ﬂooding during
this storm.

December 2022
to January 2023
140 Winter Storms Severe Winter
Storms
Fullerton
experienced
heavy rain and
localized

4-134

DECLARATION
DATE

DISASTER
NUMBER

INCIDENT

SUBCATEGORY

INCIDENT

DESCRIPTION

EFFECT ON

PLANNING
AREA
ﬂooding during
this storm.

December 2021 127 Winter Storms December
Winter Storms
Fullerton
experienced
heavy rain and
localized
ﬂooding during
this storm.

4.13 SUMMARY OF VULNERABILITY
Table 4-30: Risk Assessment Summary Table shows a summary of criƟcal faciliƟes and faciliƟes of concern that are vulnerable to iden Ɵﬁed hazards. For mapped hazards including ﬂood, landslide, liquefacƟon and wild ﬁre, assets that are located within mapped hazard zones are considered vulnerable. These are marked with a “Y” and a red-shaded cell to note that they are vulnerable. Assets that are not located in mapped hazard zones, and thus not vulnerable, are marked with a “N” and a green-shaded cell. For security purposes, some assets were not mapped. These assets are marked as “N/A” for mapped hazards. AddiƟonally, some hazards are considered to apply to the enƟre City, including all criƟcal faciliƟes and faciliƟes of concern.

These hazards include dam failure, extreme weather, land subsidence, fault rupture and ground shaking, and human-caused hazards. For these hazards, all assets are considered vulnerable and marked with a “Y” and a red-shaded cell.

4-135
TABLE 4-31: RISK ASSESSMENT SUMMARY TABLE
ASSET
DAM

FAILURE FLOOD

EXTREME

WEATHER LANDSLIDE SUBSIDENCE
FAULT/
GROUND

SHAKING LIQUEFACTION WILDFIRE
HUMAN-
CAUSED
CriƟcal FaciliƟes
City Hall Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
City Yard Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Fire StaƟon 1 Y N Y N Y Y Y N Y
Fire StaƟon 2 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Fire StaƟon 3 Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Fire StaƟon 4 Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Fire StaƟon 5 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Fire StaƟon 6 Y N Y N Y Y Y Y Y
Police StaƟon Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Garnet Community Center Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Maple Community Center Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Richman Community Center Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Main Library Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Gilbert Community Center Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Amerige Park Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Brea Dam Park Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Fullerton Museum Center Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
St Jude Medical Center Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Fullerton Community Center Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Fullerton Tennis Center Y N Y N Y Y Y N Y
Independence Park Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Laguna Lake Park Y N Y N Y Y Y Y Y
Fullerton Airport Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
TransportaƟon Center Y N Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0147 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0290 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0292 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0288 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y

4-136
ASSET
DAM

FAILURE FLOOD

EXTREME

WEATHER LANDSLIDE SUBSIDENCE
FAULT/
GROUND

SHAKING LIQUEFACTION WILDFIRE
HUMAN-
CAUSED
Bridge 55C0293 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0291 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0224 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0228 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0226 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0225 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0227 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0229 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0386 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0230 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0120 Y N Y Y Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0346 Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Bridge 55C0289 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0602 Y N Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0638 Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Bridge 55C0584 Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Bridge 55C0233 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0231 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0235 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0294 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0243 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0242 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0244 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0234 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0418 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0703 Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Bridge 55C0297 Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Bridge 55C0298 Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Bridge 55C0296 Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Bridge 55C0387 Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Bridge 55C0345 Y N Y N Y Y N N Y

4-137
ASSET
DAM

FAILURE FLOOD

EXTREME

WEATHER LANDSLIDE SUBSIDENCE
FAULT/
GROUND

SHAKING LIQUEFACTION WILDFIRE
HUMAN-
CAUSED
Bridge 55C0586 Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Bridge 55C0384 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0308 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0236 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0526 Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Bridge 55C0232 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0263 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0585 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0310 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0311 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0312 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0664 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0383 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0385 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0309 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0307 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0295 Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0525 Y N Y N Y Y Y N Y
Bridge 55C0685 Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Bridge 55C0681 Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Coyote Pump StaƟon (1) Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Coyote Pump StaƟon (2) Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Coyote Pump StaƟon (3) Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Coyote Reservoir Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Hawks Point Pump StaƟon
(1)

Y N Y Y Y Y N Y Y
Hawks Point Pump StaƟon
(2)

Y N Y Y Y Y N Y Y
Hawks Pointe Reservoir Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Hermitage Pump StaƟon (1) Y N Y N Y Y Y Y Y
Hermitage Pump StaƟon (2) Y N Y N Y Y Y Y Y

4-138
ASSET
DAM

FAILURE FLOOD

EXTREME

WEATHER LANDSLIDE SUBSIDENCE
FAULT/
GROUND

SHAKING LIQUEFACTION WILDFIRE
HUMAN-
CAUSED
Hermitage Pump StaƟon (3) Y N Y N Y Y Y Y Y
Hermitage Pump StaƟon (4) Y N Y N Y Y Y Y Y
Hermitage Pump StaƟon (5) Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Hermitage Reservoir Y N Y N Y Y Y Y Y
Hillcrest Pump StaƟon (1) Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Hillcrest Pump StaƟon (2) Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Hillcrest Reservoir Y N Y Y Y Y N N Y
Kimberly2 Pump StaƟon (1) Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Kimberly2 Pump StaƟon (2) Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Kimberly2 Pump StaƟon (3) Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Laguna Pump StaƟon (2) Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Laguna Pump StaƟon(1) Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Laguna Reservoir Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Las Palmas Pump StaƟon (1) Y N Y Y Y Y N Y Y
Las Palmas Pump StaƟon (2) Y N Y Y Y Y N Y Y
Las Palmas Reservoir Y N Y Y Y Y N Y Y
Lower Acacia Pump StaƟon
(1)

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Lower Acacia Pump StaƟon
(2)

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Lower Acacia Pump StaƟon
(3)

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Lower Acacia Pump StaƟon
(4)

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Lower Acacia Pump StaƟon
(5)

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Lower Acacia Pump StaƟon
(6)

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Lower Acacia Reservoir Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Main Plant Pump StaƟon (1) Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Main Plant Pump StaƟon (2) Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y

4-139
ASSET
DAM

FAILURE FLOOD

EXTREME

WEATHER LANDSLIDE SUBSIDENCE
FAULT/
GROUND

SHAKING LIQUEFACTION WILDFIRE
HUMAN-
CAUSED
Main Plant Pump StaƟon (3) Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Main Plant Pump StaƟon (4) Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Main Plant Pump StaƟon (5) Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Main Plant Reservoir Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
State College Pump StaƟon
(1)

Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
State College Pump StaƟon
(2)

Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
State College Reservoir Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Tank Farm Pump StaƟon (1) Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Tank Farm Pump StaƟon (2) Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Tank Farm-T1 Reservoir Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Tank Farm-T2 Reservoir Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Tank Farm-T3 Reservoir Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Tank Farm-T4 Reservoir Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Tank Farm-T5 Reservoir Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Upper Acacia Pump StaƟon
(1)

Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Upper Acacia Pump StaƟon
(2)

Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Upper Acacia Pump StaƟon
(3)

Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Upper Acacia Pump StaƟon
(4)

Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Upper Acacia-T1 Reservoir Y N Y Y Y Y N Y Y
Upper Acacia-T2 Reservoir Y N Y Y Y Y N Y Y
Kimberly Well 1A PFAS Water
Treatment Plant

Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Main Plant Treatment Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Southern California Edison Facility not mapped for security reasons Southern California Edison Facility not mapped for security reasons

4-140
ASSET
DAM

FAILURE FLOOD

EXTREME

WEATHER LANDSLIDE SUBSIDENCE
FAULT/
GROUND

SHAKING LIQUEFACTION WILDFIRE
HUMAN-
CAUSED
Carbon Canyon Dam Facility not mapped for security reasons Prado Dam Facility not mapped for security reasons
Caltrans Undercrossing 55
0466
Facility not mapped for security reasons
Caltrans Undercrossing 55
0465
Facility not mapped for security reasons
Caltrans Undercrossing 55
0456
Facility not mapped for security reasons
Caltrans Overhead
SeparaƟon 55 0502r
Facility not mapped for security reasons
Caltrans ConnecƟon
Overhead 55 0503g
Facility not mapped for security reasons
Caltrans Undercrossing 55
0287
Facility not mapped for security reasons
Caltrans Diversion Channel
55 0528
Facility not mapped for security reasons
Caltrans Oﬀramp Overhead
55 0472s
Facility not mapped for security reasons
Caltrans Undercrossing 55
0296l
Facility not mapped for security reasons
Caltrans Undercrossing 55
0296r
Facility not mapped for security reasons
Caltrans Undercrossing 55
0296f
Facility not mapped for security reasons
Caltrans Undercrossing 55
0464
Facility not mapped for security reasons
Caltrans Undercrossing 55
0483
Facility not mapped for security reasons
Caltrans Overhead
SeparaƟon 55 0293l
Facility not mapped for security reasons
Caltrans Overhead 55 0468 Facility not mapped for security reasons

4-141
ASSET
DAM

FAILURE FLOOD

EXTREME

WEATHER LANDSLIDE SUBSIDENCE
FAULT/
GROUND

SHAKING LIQUEFACTION WILDFIRE
HUMAN-
CAUSED
ExtracƟon Well (1) Facility not mapped for security reasons ExtracƟon Well (2) Facility not mapped for security reasons ExtracƟon Well (3) Facility not mapped for security reasons ExtracƟon Well (4) Facility not mapped for security reasons ExtracƟon Well (5) Facility not mapped for security reasons ExtracƟon Well (6) Facility not mapped for security reasons ExtracƟon Well (7) Facility not mapped for security reasons ExtracƟon Well (8) Facility not mapped for security reasons InjecƟon Well (1) Facility not mapped for security reasons InjecƟon Well (2) Facility not mapped for security reasons InjecƟon Well (3) Facility not mapped for security reasons InjecƟon Well (4) Facility not mapped for security reasons InjecƟon Well (5) Facility not mapped for security reasons FaciliƟes of Concern
Buena Park High School Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Fullerton Union High School Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
La Habra High School Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
La Sierra High School Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
La Vista High School Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Sonora High School Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Sunny Hills High School Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Troy High School Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Acacia Elementary School Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Beechwood School Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Commonwealth Elementary
School

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Fern Drive Elementary School Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Robert C. Fisler School Y N Y N Y Y Y N Y
Golden Hill Elementary
School

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y

4-142
ASSET
DAM

FAILURE FLOOD

EXTREME

WEATHER LANDSLIDE SUBSIDENCE
FAULT/
GROUND

SHAKING LIQUEFACTION WILDFIRE
HUMAN-
CAUSED
Hermosa Drive Elementary
School

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Ladera Vista Junior High
School Of The Arts

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Laguna Road Elementary
School

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Maple Elementary School Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Nicolas Junior High School Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Orangethorpe Elementary
School

Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Paciﬁc Drive Elementary
School

Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Parks Jr High School Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Raymond Elementary School Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Richman Elementary School Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Rolling Hills Elementary
School

Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Sunset Lane Elementary
School

Y N Y N Y Y Y N Y
Valencia Park Elementary
School

Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Woodcrest Elementary
School

Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
California State University,
Fullerton

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Fullerton College Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Hope University Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Marshall B. Ketchum
University

Y N Y N Y Y Y N Y
Ruby Drive Elementary Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y

4-143
ASSET
DAM

FAILURE FLOOD

EXTREME

WEATHER LANDSLIDE SUBSIDENCE
FAULT/
GROUND

SHAKING LIQUEFACTION WILDFIRE
HUMAN-
CAUSED
Sierra Vista Elementary
School

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Topaz Elementary School Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Kids Adventure Learning
Center

Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Stepping Stones Academy Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
St Juliana Falconieri School Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Arborland Montessori School
- Valencia Campus

Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Arborland Montessori School
- Hughes Campus

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Ivycrest Montessori Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Eastside ChrisƟan Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Rosary Academy Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
James A. Whitaker
Elementary

Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Sunnycrest Senior Living Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Sunrise of Fullerton Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Park Vista Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Acacia Villas Assisted Living Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Cambridge Court Assisted
Living

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Fullerton Rosewood Assisted Y N Y N Y Y Y N Y
Oasis Assisted Senior Living Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Glencrest Manor Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Applecrest Homes Assisted
Living

Y N Y N Y Y Y N Y
Glenwood Care Assisted
Living

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
D'Best Care Board and Care Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Senior Living Community Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y

4-144
ASSET
DAM

FAILURE FLOOD

EXTREME

WEATHER LANDSLIDE SUBSIDENCE
FAULT/
GROUND

SHAKING LIQUEFACTION WILDFIRE
HUMAN-
CAUSED
Cherub Home Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Fullerton Gardens Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Kindred Hospital Brea -
Subacute

Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y
Gordon Lane Convalescent
Hospital

Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y
Terrace View Care Center Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
The Pavilion at Sunny Hills Y N Y Y Y Y N N Y
Windsor Garden of Fullerton Y N Y N Y Y Y N Y
Genesis - St. Elizabeth
Healthcare and
RehabilitaƟon Center

Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Greenﬁeld Care Center Y N Y N Y Y N N Y
Park Vista at Morningside Y N Y N Y Y N Y Y
Santa Ana Armory Cold
Weather Shelter

Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y
Women's TransiƟonal Living
Center
Facility not mapped for security reasons
New Vista Immediate
Response Housing
Facility not mapped for security reasons

5-2
WHAT’S DIFFERENT ABOUT THE 2026 PLAN?
• Five miƟgaƟon acƟons idenƟﬁed in the previous 2020 LHMP were completed; 36 mi ƟgaƟon projects have been ini Ɵated since the approval of the previous 2020 LHMP .
• Ten new mi ƟgaƟon ac Ɵons have been added as part of the 2026 LHMP Update.

SECTION 5: MITIGATION STRATEGY
Hazard mi ƟgaƟon strategies are used to reduce hazard impacts on criƟcal faciliƟes or other infrastructure idenƟﬁed by the City and LHMP Planning Team. This secƟon is developed from an in-depth review of the vulnerabili Ɵes and capabili Ɵes described in the previous plan secƟon. Overall, the miƟgaƟon strategies are acƟons which represent the City’s approach to reducing and/or eliminaƟng potenƟal losses as idenƟﬁed in SecƟon 4.0, Hazards Assessment.

5.1 HAZARD MITIGATION OVERVIEW

5.1.1 FEMA’S NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM
The Na Ɵonal Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) provides a ﬀordable ﬂood insurance to property owners, renters, and businesses by encouraging communi Ɵes to adopt and enforce ﬂoodplain
management regula Ɵons. Par ƟcipaƟon in the NFIP is op Ɵonal; however, property owners who live in a non-parƟcipaƟng community with ﬂood-prone areas are not able to purchase ﬂood insurance through the program. Communi Ɵes with mapped ﬂoodplains cannot receive federal grants or loans for development ac ƟviƟes in ﬂood- prone areas and cannot receive federal disaster assistance to repair ﬂood damaged buildings or structures in mapped ﬂoodplains if the jurisdicƟon is not a parƟcipant of the NFIP .

The City is a parƟcipant of the NFIP and implements the requirements of NFIP through the Fullerton Municipal Code Chapter 14.01, ProhibiƟons. Speciﬁc administraƟon and enforcement regulaƟons are outlined in Sec Ɵon 14.01.015, Flood Zone Development. Sec Ɵon

14.01.015 states: “The areas of special ﬂood hazard iden Ɵﬁed by Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for Orange County, California and Incorporated Areas, dated December 3, 2009, and accompanying Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and all subsequent amendments and/or revisions thereto, are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this chapter.” The latest FIRM maps adopted for the City are dated eﬀecƟve December 3, 2009.

5-3
The Fullerton Municipal Code Sec Ɵon 14.01.015(25)(c)(1) desi gnated the City Engineer responsible for administering and implemenƟng the provisions of the NFIP . All development, including new construc Ɵon and substan Ɵal improvements, within designated special ﬂood hazard zones must be in full compliance with Chapter 14.01. The terms “new construc Ɵon” and “substan Ɵal improvement” are de ﬁned in Sec Ɵon 14.01.015(25) and Sec Ɵon

14.01.015(24) of the Municipal Code, respec Ɵvely. All new construc Ɵon and substan Ɵal improvement are subject to the development standards outlined in Chapter 14.01, which implement NFIP requirements. Requirements for new construc Ɵon and signi ﬁcant improvement would also apply a Ōer any event where the property has been impacted by ﬂood. No other speci ﬁc regula Ɵons or requirements are outlined in the City code for implementaƟon aŌer any event where a property had substan Ɵal improvement or damage.

Signiﬁcant ﬂood events are rare within the City, even during heavy precipitaƟon years. To date, the City contains zero Severe Repe ƟƟve Loss (SRL) and two Repe ƟƟve Loss (RL) proper Ɵes within the jurisdicƟon. No further data about the development type at either RL property is available at this Ɵme.

5.1.2 HAZARD MITIGATION PRIORITIZATION
The LHMP Project Management Team and the LHMP Planning Team discussed each miƟgaƟon acƟon to idenƟfy priority, using the following as guidance:
• High Priority: Top organizaƟonal priority and is a well-detailed project idea. Protects populaƟon, resource, facility, or property at considerable risk. Uses feasible methods, techniques, or technology.
• Medium Priority: A promising idea that needs more informa Ɵon or is an ac Ɵon that addresses a moderate hazard.
• Low Priority: An idea that needs more informa Ɵon or will take a lot of preliminary acƟon to build support.

The hazard ranking exercise was completed as part of LHMP Planning Team Mee Ɵng #1.

AddiƟonal discussion during focus group mee Ɵngs and the LHMP Planning Team MeeƟng #2 inﬂuenced the ul Ɵmate priority and Ɵmeline of each hazard. The LHMP Planning Team considered the frequency and severity of the hazard; the vulnerability of cri Ɵcal faciliƟes or infrastructure; the impacts the mi ƟgaƟon acƟon would avoid or reduce; the bene ﬁts of the acƟon on the community; the criƟcal faciliƟes that would beneﬁt; the environmental beneﬁts of the acƟon; and the capability of the City to implement the acƟon. For example, acƟons may require further study or informaƟon but were idenƟﬁed as a high priority because of current condiƟons (i.e., heightened risk of the hazard, pr obability of future occurrences, or lack of redundancy established in a speci ﬁc por Ɵon of the community). Several ac Ɵons were idenƟﬁed as high priority, while the nature and complexity of the acƟon involves a “long-term” Ɵmeline of ﬁve or more years.

5-4

Completed
Mitigation Actions
Mitigation Actions
In Progress
5 36

MITIGATION STRATEGY

AT A GLANCE
As part of this update, the LHMP Planning
Team focused mitigation actions to include
capital improvement projects and community
engagement campaigns that make the
community safer and establish eligibility for
FEMA hazard mitigation grant programs.
60 Total Actions
10 New Actions
10 Actions
Removed
18 Hazards
Addressed

5-5
The LHMP Planning Team used the STAPLE/E (Social, Technical, AdministraƟve, PoliƟcal, Legal, Economic, and Environmental) criteria, as described in Table 5-1: STAPLE/E Review and Selection Criteria when considering and priori Ɵzing the most appropriate mi ƟgaƟon alternaƟves for the City. This methodology, as endorsed by FEMA, requires that social, technical, administra Ɵve, poli Ɵcal, legal, economic, and environmental considera Ɵons be considered when reviewing potenƟal acƟons. This process was used to help ensure that the most equitable and feasible ac Ɵons would be undertaken based on the City’s unique capabiliƟes.

TABLE 5-1: STAPLE/E REVIEW AND SELECTION CRITERIA

STAPLE/E REVIEW SELECTION CRITERIA
Social • Is the proposed action socially acceptable to the jurisdiction and surrounding community?
• Are there equity issues involved that would mean that one segment of the jurisdiction and/or community is treated unfairly?
• Will the action cause social disruption?
Technical • Will the proposed action work?
• Will it create more problems than it solves?
• Does it solve a problem or only a symptom?
• Is it the most useful action considering other jurisdiction goals?
AdministraƟve • Can the jurisdiction implement the action? • Is there someone to coordinate and lead the effort?
• Is there sufficient funding, staff, and technical support available?
• Are there ongoing administrative requirements that need to be met?
PoliƟcal • Is the action politically acceptable?
• Is there public support both to implement and to maintain the project?
Legal • Is the jurisdiction authorized to implement the proposed action?
• Are there legal side effects? Could the activity be construed as a taking?
• Will the jurisdiction be liable for action or lack of action? • Will the activity be challenged?
Economic • What are the costs and benefits of this action? • Do the benefits exceed the costs?
• Are initial, maintenance, and administrative costs considered? • Has funding been secured for the proposed action? If not, what are the potential funding sources (public, nonprofit, and private)?

5-6

STAPLE/E REVIEW SELECTION CRITERIA
• How will this action affect the fiscal capability of the jurisdiction?
• What burden will this action place on the tax base or local economy?
• What are the budget and revenue effects of this activity? • Does the action contribute to other jurisdiction goals? • What benefits will the action provide?
Environmental • How will the action affect the environment? • Will the action need environmental regulatory approvals? • Will it meet local and state regulatory requirements? • Are endangered or threatened species likely to be affected?

5.1.3 HAZARD MITIGATION BENEFIT-COST REVIEW
FEMA requires local governments to analyze the bene ﬁts and costs of a range of mi ƟgaƟon acƟons that can reduce the e ﬀects of each hazard within their communi Ɵes. Bene ﬁt-cost analysis is used in hazard mi ƟgaƟon t o show if the bene ﬁts to life and property protected through miƟgaƟon eﬀorts exceed the cost of the mi ƟgaƟon acƟvity. ConducƟng beneﬁt-cost analysis for a mi ƟgaƟon acƟvity can assist communi Ɵes in determining whether a project is worth undertaking now to avoid disaster-related damages later. The analysis is based on calculaƟng the frequency and severity of a hazard, avoided future damages, and risk.

A hazard miƟgaƟon plan must demonstrate that a process was employed which emphasized a review of beneﬁts and costs when prioriƟzing the miƟgaƟon acƟons. The beneﬁt-cost review must be comprehensive to the extent that it can evaluate the monetary as well as the nonmonetary beneﬁts and costs associated with each ac Ɵon. The beneﬁt-cost review should at least consider the following quesƟons:
• How many people will beneﬁt from the acƟon?
• How large an area is impacted?
• How cri Ɵcal are the facili Ɵes that bene ﬁt from the ac Ɵon (e.g., which is more beneﬁcial to protect, the ﬁre staƟon or the administraƟve building)? • Environmentally, does it make sense to implement this project for the overall community?
More details regarding speci ﬁc funding mechanisms (both internal funding and grant resources) are provided within Table 5-3: Hazard Mitigation Actions below.

5.1.4 STATUS OF PREVIOUS PLAN ACTIONS
The previous 2020 LHMP idenƟﬁed 65 miƟgaƟon acƟons for the City of Fullerton. The LHMP Project Management Team reviewed previous mi ƟgaƟon ac Ɵons from the 2020 LHMP and determined that several listed miƟgaƟon acƟons were completed by the City; these miƟgaƟon acƟons are listed in Table 5-2: Completed 2020 Mitigation Actions with notes regarding acƟon

5-7
implementaƟon. Because these mi ƟgaƟon acƟons were completed, these mi ƟgaƟon acƟons are not carried over into the plan update.

Most miƟgaƟon acƟons idenƟﬁed in the 2020 LHMP were included in this plan update with revisions. Revisions ranged from including informa Ɵon about mi ƟgaƟon acƟon progress, or providing addiƟonal context and clarity from the best available data. Addi Ɵonally, about ten miƟgaƟon ac Ɵons from the previous plan were re-organized to reduce redundancy. For example, the previous LHMP included mul Ɵple direcƟves to examine generator capacity at criƟcal faciliƟes and procure new equipment. These miƟgaƟon acƟons were consolidated into one concise ac Ɵon to enhance plan clarity. New mi ƟgaƟon ac Ɵons and mi ƟgaƟon ac Ɵons carried over with revisions are appropriately labeled in the matrix below.

MiƟgaƟon acƟons in this LHMP update were adjusted to account for the increased risk and vulnerability associated with the current hazards experienced by the planning area. Priority acƟons include capital improvement projects and community engagement campaigns that make the City more resilient.

TABLE 5-2: COMPLETED 2020 LHMP MITIGATION ACTIONS
COMPLETED 2020 MITIGATION ACTION NOTES
MiƟgaƟon AcƟon P .2: Update the
Community Forest Master Plan,
incorporaƟng drought strategies and
wildﬁre vulnerabiliƟes into the planning
framework.

City staﬀ completed preparaƟon of the
Community Forest Master Plan, and began
implementaƟon programs including
opportuniƟes to obtain trees to forest the
City.

MiƟgaƟon AcƟon P .3: Hire a full-Ɵme
Emergency OperaƟons Coordinator for
Fullerton.

The City hired a full-Ɵme Emergency
Manager, who served as the project
manager for this LHMP update.

MiƟgaƟon AcƟon P .5: Update Safety
Element to incorporate the 2019 Local
Hazard MiƟgaƟon Plan.

The City integrated the previous 2020
LHMP into the Safety Element Update in
compliance with AB2140.

MiƟgaƟon AcƟon 5.2: Create a hillside
weed abatement pilot program using goats
or other livestock to reduce fuel loads in
ﬁre-prone areas.

The City successfully launched a hillside
weed abatement program using goats to
clear excess vegetaƟon. This pilot program
was successful, and included conƟnued use
of grazing goats for fuel modiﬁcaƟon is
included in this LHMP update.

MiƟgaƟon AcƟon 5.3: Obtain a Type 3 Fire
Engine to respond to potenƟal ﬁre threats
in the ﬁre-prone areas of the City.

The City procured both a Type 1 and Type 3
Fire Engine to respond to ﬁre threats within
the planning area.

5.2 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTIONS
The LHMP Planning Team worked together to iden Ɵfy mi ƟgaƟon ac Ɵons and establish the responsible department, priority level, and Ɵmeline. The process used is outlined below:
• Review of the Vulnerability and Risk Assessment presented in Sec Ɵon 4.0, Hazards Assessment;

5-8
• Review of the Capabili Ɵes Assessment presented in Sec Ɵon 5.3, CapabiliƟes Assessment;
• Review of the results of the community survey and feedback received as part of the community outreach; and,
• The LHMP Planning Team’s discussion of concerns/issues that need to be addressed to reduce hazards to criƟcal faciliƟes and the community.

Table 5-3 Hazard Mitigation Actions iden Ɵﬁes the mi ƟgaƟon ac Ɵon, hazard(s) addressed, agency and/or department responsible for implementa Ɵon, poten Ɵal funding source(s), Ɵmeline for implementaƟon, and priority.

The Ɵmeline for implementaƟon is deﬁned as follows:
• Ongoing: currently in process; or 1-2 years and ongoing thereaŌer; • Short-Term: 1 to 2 years;
• Medium-Term: 3 to 4 years; and
• Long-Term: 5+ years.

MiƟgaƟon ac Ɵons below may be funded through the City budget, par Ɵcularly mi ƟgaƟon acƟons iden Ɵﬁed as “ongoing.” However, the City will also explore funding for speci ﬁc miƟgaƟon acƟons through local, State, or federal grant programs. PotenƟal grant programs or funding mechanisms are idenƟﬁed for speciﬁc miƟgaƟon acƟons as applicable, below.

The City maintains and annually updates a Capital Improvement Project (CIP) budget that idenƟﬁes priority City projects and major equipment purchases for all City departments.

IdenƟﬁed capital improvement projects were integrated into the LHMP mi ƟgaƟon ac Ɵons where appropriate for projects with a nexus to resilience or natural hazards. In addi Ɵon, as part of the annual review and update of the CIP budget, mi ƟgaƟon acƟons will be reviewed and integrated.

All miƟgaƟon acƟons considered for the City were included in the LHMP and Table 5-3: Hazard Mitigation Actions. There were no miƟgaƟon acƟons considered but excluded from the LHMP .

The mi ƟgaƟon ac Ɵon development process is documented in Appendix B, LHMP Planning Team Documenta Ɵon and was a key area of focus during all focus group mee Ɵngs and Stakeholder MeeƟng #2. Appendix B, LHMP Planning Team Documenta Ɵon also documents revisions, comments, and feedback, from the LHMP Planning Team, Project Management staﬀ and the City’s consultant, Michael Baker InternaƟonal.

5-9
TABLE 5-3: MITIGATION ACTION TABLE
ACTION
# MITIGATION ACTION HAZARD

ADDRESSED

RESPONSIBLE

PARTIES

POTENTIAL

FUNDING SOURCES TIMELINE PRIORITY
1 ConƟnue to support Fullerton
Community Emergency Response
Team (CERT) to build community
capacity in personal emergency
preparedness and response [new
miƟgaƟon acƟon].

All Hazards Internal: Fire
Department
FEMA: Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program (HMGP), Safeguarding
Tomorrow Revolving Loan
Fund (RLF)
Cal FIRE: Wildfire Prevention
Grants, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
Cal OES: Wildfire Mitigation
Program, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
EPA: Wildfire Smoke
Preparedness in Community
Buildings Grant Program
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing Medium
Priority
2 Promote and assist residents and
business owners in developing and
regularly updaƟng personal
emergency preparedness plans.

Promote the exisƟng Alert OC
system [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan, carried over with
revisions].

All Hazards
Internal: Fire
Department,
Police
Department, City
Manager’s Oﬃce
FEMA: HMGP, RLF, EMPG
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Ongoing Medium
Priority
3 Organize frequent educaƟonal
workshops on personal emergency
preparedness topics (e.g., essenƟal
items for emergency kits,
evacuaƟon routes, landscaping to
reduce runoﬀ and ﬁre risk) for
residents and business owners
[miƟgaƟon acƟon from previous
plan, carried over with revisions].

All Hazards Internal: Fire
Department
FEMA: HMGP
Cal FIRE: Wildfire Prevention
Grants Program, including
funding through Proposition 4
– Climate Bond
Cal OES: Wildfire Mitigation
Program, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
EPA: Environmental Education
Grants
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing Medium
Priority
4 Conduct interjurisdicƟonal training
with partner ﬁrst-responder All Hazards Internal: Fire
Department and FEMA: HMGP, RLF, EMPG Ongoing High Priority

5-10
ACTION
# MITIGATION ACTION HAZARD

ADDRESSED

RESPONSIBLE

PARTIES

POTENTIAL

FUNDING SOURCES TIMELINE PRIORITY
agencies in the area, including CAL
FIRE, OCFA, Orange County Sheriﬀ’s
Department, CSUF University Police,
local uƟlity providers, BSNF, WEROC
police and ﬁre departments of
adjacent ciƟes, and any other
agencies that Fullerton may select
in the future. Include trainings for
response on both natural and
human-caused hazards [miƟgaƟon
acƟon from previous plan, carried
over with revisions].

Public Works
Department, in
coordination with
all City
Departments
External: Cal Fire,

OCFA, OCSD,
uƟliƟes (SCE,
SoCalGas), BNSF,

WEROC, CSUF,
neighboring ciƟes
Cal FIRE: Wildfire Prevention
Grants, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
Cal OES: Wildfire Mitigation
Program, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
5 InvesƟgate the feasibility and cost
for smart transportaƟon demand
management systems, to allow City
staﬀ to eﬀecƟvely direct
evacuaƟons [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan, carried over with
revisions].

All Hazards
Internal: Public
Works
Department,
Police
Department, Fire
Department
External: OCSD
Emergency
Management
FEMA: RLF
Cal FIRE: Evacuation Route
Planning and Development
Grant, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
Cal OES: Wildfire Mitigation
Program, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Long-Term Low Priority
6 Develop an Open Data Plaƞorm to
make hazard layers available to the
public to aid future risk analysis as
well as inform the public of hazard
threats in their community
[miƟgaƟon acƟon from previous
plan].

All Hazards
Internal:

Community
Development
Department,
Public Works
Department
LCI: ICARP Adaptation Planning
and Regional Resilience Grants
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Long-Term Low Priority
7 Support local businesses in
preparing organizaƟon evacuaƟon
and emergency preparedness plans.

Provide resources or support when
requested [new miƟgaƟon acƟon].

All Hazards
Internal: Police
Department, Fire
Department
External: Local
businesses
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Medium-
Term
Medium
Priority
MulƟple Hazards
8 ConƟnue to install, maintain and
replace backup generators at key
criƟcal faciliƟes (City Hall, Fire
All Hazards
Internal: Public
Works
Department, Fire
FEMA: HMGP
Cal OES: Prepare CA – Match Ongoing Medium
Priority

5-11
ACTION
# MITIGATION ACTION HAZARD

ADDRESSED

RESPONSIBLE

PARTIES

POTENTIAL

FUNDING SOURCES TIMELINE PRIORITY
StaƟons, Police StaƟons, water
pumps, etc.) in the event of power
loss during an emergency. Install
portable generators in City-owned
water faciliƟes [miƟgaƟon acƟon
from previous plan, carried over
with revisions].

Department,
Police
Department
CA SWRCB: Backup Generator
Funding Program
EPA: Water Infrastructure
Resilience Grants
CEC: Distributed Electricity
Backup Assets Program,
including funding through
Proposition 4 – Climate Bond.

Staﬀ Time, General Fund
9 Encourage uƟlity and transportaƟon
providers (SoCalGas, Southern
California Edison, Orange County
SanitaƟon District, Metropolitan
Water District of Orange County,
BNSF Railway, Amtrak, and Orange
County Water District) to harden
their infrastructure in the city to
reduce the risk of breach [miƟgaƟon
acƟon from previous plan, carried
over with revisions].

All Hazards
Internal: City
Manager’s Oﬃce,
City Council, Fire
Department
FEMA: HMGP
DOT: PROTECT Grant Program
HCD: CDBG-MIT Resilient
Infrastructure Program (MIT-
RIP)
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing Medium
Priority
10 Plant ﬁre-resistant, drought-tolerant
groundcover on slopes, inclines, and
hillsides to reduce runoﬀ and
erosion during heavy rainfall
[miƟgaƟon acƟon from previous
plan].

All Hazards
Internal: Public
Works
Department,
Community
Development
Department
FEMA: HMGP
Cal FIRE: Wildfire Prevention
Grants Program, including
funding through Proposition 4
– Climate Bond
Cal OES: Wildfire Mitigation
Program, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Long-Term Medium
Priority
11 Inform residents in areas of
elevated hazard risk of the risks and
proper preparaƟon techniques and
evacuaƟon procedures. Develop an
Open Data Plaƞorm to make hazard
data available to the public to aid in
communicaƟng risk to the
community [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan, carried over with
revisions].

All Hazards
Internal: City
Manager’s Oﬃce,
AdministraƟve
Services, Police
Department, Fire
Department
FEMA: HMGP
Cal FIRE: Wildfire Prevention
Grants Program, including
funding through Proposition 4
– Climate Bond
Cal OES: Wildfire Mitigation
Program, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
Ongoing Medium
Priority

5-12
ACTION
# MITIGATION ACTION HAZARD

ADDRESSED

RESPONSIBLE

PARTIES

POTENTIAL

FUNDING SOURCES TIMELINE PRIORITY
EPA: Environmental Education
Grants
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
12 PosiƟon new criƟcal faciliƟes
outside of elevated hazard risk areas
and relocate exisƟng criƟcal
faciliƟes outside of hazard risk
areas, as feasible. Regularly assess
criƟcal facility vulnerability and risk
based on updated hazard data and
mapping [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan, carried over with
revisions].

All Hazards
Internal: Public
Works
Department,
Community
Development
Department
FEMA: HMGP
HCD: CDBG-MIT Resilient
Infrastructure Program (MIT-
RIP)
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing High Priority
13 Address structural or operaƟonal
weaknesses in bridges, retaining
walls, or other key infrastructure to
reduce risk of failure during a
hazard [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan, carried over with
revisions].

All Hazards
Internal: Public
Works
Department,
Community
Development
Department
External: Caltrans
FEMA: HMGP
DOT: PROTECT Grant Program
HCD: CDBG-MIT Resilient
Infrastructure Program (MIT-
RIP)
EPA: Water Infrastructure
Finance and Innovation Act
(WIFA)
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing High Priority
14 InvesƟgate the feasibility of early
warning systems to be acƟvated
across the City of Fullerton in the
event of a disaster [miƟgaƟon
acƟon from previous plan].

All Hazards
Internal: Public
Works
Department,
Police
Department, Fire
Department
FEMA: Next Generation
Warning System Grant
Program (NGWSGP),
Safeguarding Tomorrow
Revolving Loan Fund (RLF),
Emergency Management
Performance Grant (EMPG),
Homeland Security Grant
Program (HSGP)
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Long-Term Low Priority
15 Program pre-recorded alert and
warning messages in mulƟple
languages within police cruisers to
assist in evacuaƟon messaging
during a disaster. UƟlize standard
messaging produced and deployed
by OCSD for regional consistency
[new miƟgaƟon acƟon].

All Hazards
Internal: Police
Department, Fire
Department,
InformaƟon
Technology
FEMA: Next Generation
Warning System Grant
Program (NGWSGP), Homeland
Security Grant Program
(HSGP), EMPG
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Medium-
Term
Medium
Priority

5-13
ACTION
# MITIGATION ACTION HAZARD

ADDRESSED

RESPONSIBLE

PARTIES

POTENTIAL

FUNDING SOURCES TIMELINE PRIORITY
16 Adopt an update to the City of
Fullerton Safety Element,
incorporaƟng the LHMP Update by
reference in accordance with
AB2140 requirements. Adopt a new
Environmental JusƟce Element to
idenƟfy policies applicable to
individuals with access and
funcƟonal needs within Fullerton
[new miƟgaƟon acƟon].

All Hazards
Internal:

Community
Development
Department
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Short-Term Medium
17 Support American Red Cross
programming, awareness, and
training campaigns geared toward
preparedness educaƟon toward
both adults and children. Support
the Red Cross in deploying the
“Prepare with Pedro” programming
for children [new miƟgaƟon acƟon].

All Hazards
Internal: Fire
Department
External:

American Red
Cross, Fullerton
School District
FEMA: EMPG
US DOE: Readiness and
Emergency Management for
Schools (REMS) Grants
EPA: Environmental Education
Grants, Community Change
Grants
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing Low Priority
18 Update the City’s EvacuaƟon Annex
as part of an Emergency OperaƟons
Plan Update and implement
direcƟves to meet Cal FIRE
requirements [new miƟgaƟon
acƟon].

All Hazards
Internal: Fire
Department,
Police
Department
FEMA: EMPG, Homeland
Security Grant Program (HSGP)
Cal OES: Wildfire Mitigation
Program, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
Cal FIRE: Wildﬁre PrevenƟon
Grants, including funding
through ProposiƟon 4 –
Climate Bond
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Short-Term High Priority
Dam/Reservoir Failure
19 Coordinate with local, state and
federal agencies to collecƟvely
idenƟfy threats dam infrastructure
within or upstream of the City.

Support dam owners in eﬀorts to
regularly reassess dam inundaƟon
exposure and vulnerability,
especially where criƟcal faciliƟes
intersect with dam inundaƟon
zones. Support structural
Dam/Reservoir
Failure
Internal: Fire
Department,
Public Works
Department,
Parks and
Recreation
Department, City
Manager’s Office
External: Army
Corps of
FEMA: National Dam Safety
Program (NDSP)
EPA: Water Infrastructure
Finance and Innovation Act
(WIFA), Clean Water State
Revolving Fund (CWSRF)
Dept. of Water Resources:

Dam Safety and Climate
Resilience funding, including
Ongoing Medium
Priority

5-14
ACTION
# MITIGATION ACTION HAZARD

ADDRESSED

RESPONSIBLE

PARTIES

POTENTIAL

FUNDING SOURCES TIMELINE PRIORITY
improvement projects to strengthen
dam infrastructure [miƟgaƟon
acƟon from previous plan, carried
over with revisions].

Engineers and
Metropolitan
Water District
funding through Proposition 4
– Climate Bond.

USACE: Corps Water
Infrastructure Financing
Program
SWRCB: Drinking Water State
Revolving Fund (DWSRF)
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Wildﬁre and Urban Fire
20 ConƟnue to remove highly
ﬂammable and non-naƟve
vegetaƟon in Very High, High, and
Moderate Fire Hazard Severity
Zones and replant with ﬁre-adapted
specimens. Clear dead vegetaƟon in
reservoir footprints, railroad rights-
of-way, parks, and open spaces,
especially during and aŌer a
drought episode. Deploy a variety of
fuel modiﬁcaƟon eﬀorts, including
previously successful goat grazing
programs in diﬃcult to reach terrain
[miƟgaƟon acƟon from previous
plan, carried over with revisions].

Wildﬁre and
Urban Fire
Internal: Public
Works
Department, Fire
Department, City
Manager’s Office
External: Cal

FIRE, OCFA, BNSF
FEMA: HMGP, RLF
Cal FIRE: Wildfire Prevention
Grants, Forest Health Grants,
including funding through
Proposition 4 – Climate Bond
Cal OES: Wildfire Mitigation
Program, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing Medium-
Priority
21 Create a rapid response plan from
among Fullerton’s and Orange
County’s ﬁrst responders to secure
and provide evacuaƟon support for
hospital (St. Jude), nursing and
assisted living faciliƟes, with focus
on unique needs for wildﬁre
evacuaƟons. ConƟnue working with
idenƟﬁed liaisons for regular
coordinaƟon and training
[miƟgaƟon acƟon from previous
plan, carried over with revisions].

Wildﬁre and
Urban Fire
Internal: Fire
Department and
Police
Department

External:

Providence St.

Jude Medical
Center, assisted
living faciliƟes
and nursing
homes
FEMA: EMPG, Homeland
Security Grant Program
(HSGP), Hospital Preparedness
Program (HPP)
Cal FIRE: Wildfire Prevention
Grants, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
Cal OES: Wildfire Mitigation
Program, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Short-Term Medium
Priority
22 Reinforce and regularly inspect ﬁre
retardant infrastructure such as
sprinklers, ﬁre hose terminals, and
Wildﬁre and
Urban Fire
Internal: Fire
Department,
Cal FIRE: Wildfire Prevention
Grants, Fire Technology Grants, Ongoing Medium
Priority

5-15
ACTION
# MITIGATION ACTION HAZARD

ADDRESSED

RESPONSIBLE

PARTIES

POTENTIAL

FUNDING SOURCES TIMELINE PRIORITY
ﬁre suppression systems in City
faciliƟes [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan].

Public Works
Department
including funding through
Proposition 4 – Climate Bond
Cal OES: Wildfire Mitigation
Program, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
23 ConƟnue to maintain models to
evaluate the water system to ensure
it meets ﬁre ﬂow requirements
throughout wildﬁre hazard zone
areas in alignment with the City’s
Water Master Plan [miƟgaƟon
acƟon from previous plan, carried
over with revisions].

Wildﬁre and
Urban Fire
Internal: Public
Works
Department and
Fire Department
FEMA: HMGP, Assistance to
Firefighters Grant (AFG)
Cal FIRE: Wildfire Prevention
Grants, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
Cal OES: Wildfire Mitigation
Program, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
EPA: Water Infrastructure
Finance and Innovation Act
(WIFA)
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Medium-
Term High Priority
24 ConƟnue ﬁre hazard prevenƟon
awareness campaign to residents in
the High and Very High Fire Hazard
Severity Zones. Expand the exisƟng
home preparedness assessment
program to assist more residents in
understanding and addressing their
wildﬁre risk [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan, carried over with
revisions].

Wildﬁre and
Urban Fire
Internal: Fire
Department,
Public Works
Department,
Community
Development
Department
FEMA: HMGP, Emergency
Preparedness Performance
Grant (EMPG), Fire Prevention
and Safety (FP&S) Grants
Cal FIRE: Wildfire Prevention
Grants, California Wildfire
Mitigation Program (CWMP),
including funding through
Proposition 4 – Climate Bond
Cal OES: Wildfire Mitigation
Program, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
US Forest Service: Community
Wildfire Defense Grant
(CWDG)
US DOE: Readiness and
Emergency Management for
Schools (REMS) Grants
Ongoing High Priority

5-16
ACTION
# MITIGATION ACTION HAZARD

ADDRESSED

RESPONSIBLE

PARTIES

POTENTIAL

FUNDING SOURCES TIMELINE PRIORITY
EPA: Environmental Education
Grants, Community Change
Grants
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
25 Require all new development in
Very High, High, and Moderate Fire
Hazard Severity Zones to use
noncombusƟble building materials
such as masonry, brick, stucco,
concrete, steel, or others as
appropriate. Establish zones of
defensible space around homes in
Very High, High, and Moderate Fire
Hazard Severity Zones [miƟgaƟon
acƟon from previous plan].

Wildﬁre and
Urban Fire
Internal:

Community
Development
Department, Fire
Department
FEMA: HMGP, Ignition-
Resistant Construction
Funding, Safeguarding
Tomorrow Revolving Loan
Fund (RLF)
Cal FIRE: Wildfire Prevention
Grants, California Wildfire
Mitigation Program (CWMP)
including funding through
Proposition 4 – Climate Bond,
Cal OES: Wildfire Mitigation
Program, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
US Forest Service: Community
Wildfire Defense Grant
(CWDG)
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing High Priority
Flood
26 DraŌ an ecosystem restoraƟon plan
and upgrade of drainage systems in
Gilman Park and other similar areas
in Fullerton [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan].

Flood, Heavy
Rains
Internal: Public
Works
Department
FEMA: HMGP
EPA: Sewer Overflow and
Stormwater Reuse Municipal
Grants, Green Infrastructure
Program Grants
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Long-Term Medium
Priority
27 Create areas with permeable
pavements and/or catchwater
systems as an interim soluƟon to
ﬂood control channel expansion.

These soluƟons can help to absorb
runoﬀ and prevent the ﬂood control
channels from exceeding capacity
during a storm. Integrate low
impact design principles into future
developments or redevelopment
Flood, Heavy
Rains
Internal: Public
Works
Department
EPA: Sewer Overflow and
Stormwater Reuse Municipal
Grants
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing Medium
Priority

5-17
ACTION
# MITIGATION ACTION HAZARD

ADDRESSED

RESPONSIBLE

PARTIES

POTENTIAL

FUNDING SOURCES TIMELINE PRIORITY
[miƟgaƟon acƟon from previous
plan, carried over with revisions].
28 Update the City’s Drainage Area
Master Plan to study the exisƟng
storm drain system and drainage
paƩerns within the City. Implement
recommendaƟons for construcƟon
of new or modiﬁed system
components [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan, carried over with
revisions].

Flood, Heavy
Rains
Internal: Public
Works
Department
FEMA: HMGP, Safeguarding
Tomorrow Revolving Loan
Fund (RLF)
EPA: Sewer Overflow and
Stormwater Reuse Municipal
Grants
SWRCB: Storm Water Grant
Program (SWGP)
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Short-Term High Priority
29 Keep all City and County ﬂood
control channels clear of debris and
plant detritus that could aﬀect the
capacity of the channel during
heavy rainfall events. Install large
grilles over storm drain inlets to
screen out large debris [miƟgaƟon
acƟon from previous plan, carried
over with revisions].

Flood, Heavy
Rains
Internal: Public
Works
Department
External: OCPW
FEMA: HMGP, Safeguarding
Tomorrow Revolving Loan
Fund (RLF)
EPA: Sewer Overflow and
Stormwater Reuse Municipal
Grants
SWRCB: Storm Water Grant
Program (SWGP)
USDA: Emergency Watershed
Protection (EWP)
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing High Priority
30 ConƟnually update the mapped
boundaries of ﬂoodplain inundaƟon
zones within the City and update
the City’s Floodplain Ordinance as
appropriate [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan, carried over with
revisions].

Flood, Heavy
Rains
Internal: Public
Works Staﬀ Time, General Fund Ongoing Low Priority
31 ConƟnuously pursue FEMA
elevaƟon cerƟﬁcaƟon for all
structures in Fullerton [miƟgaƟon
acƟon from previous plan].

Flood, Heavy
Rains
Internal: Public
Works
FEMA: HMGP, Flood Mitigation
Assistance Program (FMA)
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing Medium
Priority
32 Elevate and ﬂood-proof public uƟlity
boxes above expected ﬂood depth
elevaƟon in ﬂood hazard inundaƟon
areas [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan].

Flood, Heavy
Rains
Internal: Public
Works
FEMA: HMGP, RLF
DWR: Floodplain Management,
Protection, and Risk Awareness
(FMPRA) Grants
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Long-Term Medium
Priority
33 Require new criƟcal faciliƟes to be
built a minimum of 1 foot higher
Flood, Heavy
Rains
Internal: Public
Works Staﬀ Time, General Fund Long-Term Medium
Priority

5-18
ACTION
# MITIGATION ACTION HAZARD

ADDRESSED

RESPONSIBLE

PARTIES

POTENTIAL

FUNDING SOURCES TIMELINE PRIORITY
than the anƟcipated 500-year ﬂood
elevaƟon height, where feasible
[miƟgaƟon acƟon from previous
plan].

Department,
Community
Development
Department
34 Explore the feasibility of joining
FEMA’s Community RaƟng System
(CRS) program to reduce ﬂood
insurance costs for property owners
in Fullerton [new miƟgaƟon acƟon].

Flood, Heavy
Rains
Internal: Public
Works
Department, Fire
Department,
Community
Development
Department
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Long-Term Low Priority
35 Reduce localized ﬂooding and
stormwater runoﬀ hazards in
Fullerton, parƟcularly at Euclid &
Commonwealth and in the
Hollydale neighborhood, by
conƟnuing to distribute sandbags
during heavy rain events, upgrading
drainage infrastructure, and
implemenƟng ﬂood-resilient design
strategies [new miƟgaƟon acƟon].

Flood, Heavy
Rains
Internal: Public
Works
Department
FEMA: HMGP, RLF
EPA: Sewer Overflow and
Stormwater Reuse Municipal
Grants
SWRCB: Storm Water Grant
Program (SWGP)
DWR: Floodplain Management,
Protection, and Risk Awareness
(FMPRA) Grants
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Long-Term Medium
Priority
Geologic (Landslide, Subsidence)
36 Build retaining walls, install
shotcrete, and drape catch-fall nets
on slopes or areas where landslides
are likely to occur on public
property. For private property,
idenƟfy potenƟal incenƟves for
property owners to construct these
improvements [miƟgaƟon acƟon
from previous plan].

Geologic
(Landslide,
Subsidence)
Internal: Public
Works
Department,
Community
Development
Department
FEMA: HMGP, RLF
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Long-Term Medium
Priority
37 Install water runoﬀ catchment
troughs to channelize and divert
rainwater away from hillsides on
public property. For private
property, idenƟfy potenƟal
incenƟves for property owners to
construct these improvements
[miƟgaƟon acƟon from previous
plan].

Geologic
(Landslide,
Subsidence)
Internal: Public
Works
Department,
Community
Development
Department
FEMA: HMGP, RLF
EPA: Sewer Overflow and
Stormwater Reuse Municipal
Grants
SWRCB: Storm Water Grant
Program (SWGP)
DWR: Integrated Regional
Water Management (IRWM)
Grants
Long-Term Medium
Priority

5-19
ACTION
# MITIGATION ACTION HAZARD

ADDRESSED

RESPONSIBLE

PARTIES

POTENTIAL

FUNDING SOURCES TIMELINE PRIORITY
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
38 Conduct visual inspecƟons of
roadways that abut slopes or hills to
assess potenƟal for landslides prior
to large rain events and follow up
inspecƟons aŌer events [miƟgaƟon
acƟon from previous plan].

Geologic
(Landslide,
Subsidence)
Internal: Public
Works,
Community
Development
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Ongoing Medium
Priority
Human-Caused Hazards (AircraŌ/TransportaƟon Incidents, Hazardous Materials Spill, Terrorism/Cybersecurity, Civil Unrest/Civil Disturbance, Vector- Borne Disease)
39 Coordinate with surrounding
jurisdicƟons, local health care
providers, businesses, schools, the
Orange County Health Care Agency,
and the California Department of
Public Health to inform community
members about current public
health trends or issues, free and
low-cost healthcare opƟons,
treatments, and where to ﬁnd local
healthcare faciliƟes [miƟgaƟon
acƟon from previous plan].

Vector-Borne
Disease
Internal: City
Manager’s Office,
Fire Department
External: Orange
County Health
Care Agency,
Orange County
Public Health
Department,
California
Department of
Public Health and
Centers for
Disease Control
FEMA: Emergency
Management Preparedness
Grant (EMPG)
Cal OES: Listos California Grant
Program
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing Medium
Priority
40 Cooperate with the Orange County
Mosquito and Vector Control
District to inform community
members on best pracƟces for
mosquito-prooﬁng homes and
businesses and how to avoid
mosquito bites [miƟgaƟon acƟon
from previous plan].

Vector-Borne
Disease
Internal: City
Manager’s Office,
Fire Department,
Public Works
Department
External: Orange
County Mosquito
and Vector
Control District
FEMA: EMPG
EPA: Environmental Education
Grants
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing Medium
Priority
41 Work to reduce the local mosquito
populaƟon and miƟgate the risk of
vector-borne disease in Fullerton by
collaboraƟng with the Orange
County Mosquito and Vector
Control District to idenƟfy and treat
high-risk areas such as drainage
Vector-Borne
Disease
Internal: City
Manager’s Office,
Fire Department,
Public Works
Department
External: Orange
County Mosquito
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Ongoing High Priority

5-20
ACTION
# MITIGATION ACTION HAZARD

ADDRESSED

RESPONSIBLE

PARTIES

POTENTIAL

FUNDING SOURCES TIMELINE PRIORITY
systems and stagnant water sources
[new miƟgaƟon acƟon].
and Vector
Control District
42 ConƟnue to work with residents,
business owners, and uƟliƟes to
remove dead, dying, and diseased
trees weakened by disease/pests
[miƟgaƟon acƟon from previous
plan].

Vector-Borne
Disease
Internal: Public
Works
Departments,
Community
Development
Department
Cal FIRE: Wildfire Prevention
Grants, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
Cal OES: Wildfire Mitigation
Program, including funding
through Proposition 4 –
Climate Bond
CNRA: Competitive grants for
urban greening, including
funding through Proposition 4
– Climate Bond
US Forest Service: Community
Wildfire Defense Grants
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing Medium
Priority
43 Promote proper disposal of
hazardous material items at regional
collecƟon centers operated by the
County [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan].

Hazardous
Materials Spill
Internal: City
Manager’s Oﬃce,
Fire Department
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Ongoing Medium
Priority
44 Develop a parcel-level database, in
coordinaƟon with Orange County,
that tracks the status of hazardous
materials storage and use,
prioriƟzed by potenƟal threat to
surrounding properƟes [miƟgaƟon
acƟon from previous plan].

Hazardous
Materials Spill
Internal: Fire
Department,
Police
Department
External: OCSD
Emergency
Management
Division
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Long-Term Medium
Priority
45 Coordinate with the Orange County
Intelligence Assessment Center
(OCIAC) to monitor potenƟal
incidents resulƟng in civil
disturbance events (riots, mass
shooƟngs, etc.). ParƟcipate in
regional conƟnuing educaƟon and
training oﬀerings hosted at OCIAC
[miƟgaƟon acƟon from previous
plan, carried over with revisions].

Terrorism/Cybe
rsecurity, Civil
Unrest/Civil
Disturbance
Internal: Police
Department, Fire
Department, City
Manager’s Office
External: OCSD,
OCFA
FEMA: EMPG, HSGP
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Ongoing High Priority

5-21
ACTION
# MITIGATION ACTION HAZARD

ADDRESSED

RESPONSIBLE

PARTIES

POTENTIAL

FUNDING SOURCES TIMELINE PRIORITY
46 Disseminate informaƟon on cyber
threats or potenƟal terrorist acƟvity
to City staﬀ and conƟnually follow
up with informaƟon on further
developments in the situaƟon
[miƟgaƟon acƟon from previous
plan].

Terrorism/Cybe
rsecurity
Internal: City
Manager, Police
Department
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Ongoing High Priority
47 Regularly update cyber security
soŌware and educate business
owners and residents on current
internet-based threats [miƟgaƟon
acƟon from previous plan].

Terrorism/Cybe
rsecurity
Internal:

InformaƟon
Technology,
AdministraƟve
Services, City
Manager’s Oﬃce,
Police
Department
FEMA: Emergency
Management Preparedness
Grant (EMPG), Homeland
Security Grant Program (HSGP)
CISA: State and Local
Cybersecurity Grant Program
(SLCGP)
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing Medium
Priority
48 Retroﬁt all criƟcal faciliƟes, City
administraƟon buildings, and other
buildings the City may deem to be
important in the future with
counterterrorism design and
building materials in alignment with
Crime PrevenƟon Through
Environmental Design (CPTED)
principles [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan, carried over with
revisions].

Terrorism/Cybe
rsecurity, Civil
Unrest/Civil
Disturbance
Internal: Public
Works
Department,
Police
Department
FEMA: Homeland Security
Grant Program (HSGP)
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Long-Term Medium-
Priority
Seismic Hazards (Fault Rupture, Ground Shaking, LiquefacƟon) 49 Work with California Geologic
Survey and the US Geologic Survey
to idenƟfy and map the uncharted
extents of fault lines within the City
[miƟgaƟon acƟon from previous
plan].

Seismic
Hazards
Internal:

Community
Development
Department
External: USGS,
CGS
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Long-Term Low Priority
50 Create an inventory of seismically
vulnerable infrastructure, including
soŌ-story buildings, unreinforced
masonry buildings or non-ducƟle
concreate buildings. AŌer
vulnerability is inventories, create a
plan to bring structures into
Seismic
Hazards
Internal:

Community
Development
Department,
Public Works
Department
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Ongoing Medium
Priority

5-22
ACTION
# MITIGATION ACTION HAZARD

ADDRESSED

RESPONSIBLE

PARTIES

POTENTIAL

FUNDING SOURCES TIMELINE PRIORITY
compliance [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan, carried over with
revisions]. 51
IncenƟvize individual property
owners to upgrade and retroﬁt
buildings or structures that are
suscepƟble to damage or
destrucƟon during a seismic event.

Encourage homeowners located
near fault lines to seismically retroﬁt
natural gas lines. Gas lines should
be properly braced and equipped
with automaƟc seismic safety shut-
oﬀ valves at all structure entry
points to prevent ﬁres or explosions
from ruptures caused by an
earthquake [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan, carried over with
revisions].

Seismic
Hazards
Internal:

Community
Development,
Public Works
Department
CEA: Earthquake Retrofit
Grants, Brace & Bolt Retrofit
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Long-Term Medium
Priority
52 Conduct regular inspecƟons at all
City-designated criƟcal faciliƟes,
parƟcularly City Hall and emergency
response locaƟons and complete
any seismic retroﬁƫng, as
necessary [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan, carried over with
revisions].

Seismic
Hazards
Internal: Public
Works
Department,
Community
Development
Department
FEMA: Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program (HMGP)
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing Medium
Priority
53 Conduct a feasibility study to
develop a revolving loan program
for residents and businesses to
assist with the cost of seismic and
ﬁre miƟgaƟon improvements, such
as upgraded water lines that
withstand seismic shaking impacts,
indoor sprinkler systems that meet
Chapter 7 A requirements, and/or
structural modiﬁcaƟons to meet
current seismic requirements
[miƟgaƟon acƟon from previous
plan].

Seismic
Hazards
Internal: Public
Works
Department,
Community
Development
Department
FEMA: Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program (HMGP)
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Medium Medium
Priority

5-23
ACTION
# MITIGATION ACTION HAZARD

ADDRESSED

RESPONSIBLE

PARTIES

POTENTIAL

FUNDING SOURCES TIMELINE PRIORITY
54 NoƟfy local residents when seismic
retroﬁt funding becomes available
from state and federal resources,
such as the California Earthquake
Brace and Bolt Program [new
miƟgaƟon acƟon].

Seismic
Hazards
Internal: Public
Works
Department,
Community
Development
Department, Fire
Department
External: Cal OES
CEA: Earthquake Retrofit
Grants, Brace & Bolt Retrofit
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing Medium
Priority
Extreme Weather (Drought, Extreme Heat, Severe Winds/Santa Ana Winds, Heavy Rain, Power Outage/UƟlity Failure) 55 ConƟnue to expand smart water
meter program to track water usage
in commercial and industrial
properƟes across the City
[miƟgaƟon acƟon from previous
plan].

Drought,
Extreme Heat,
Heavy Rain
Internal: Public
Works
Department
USBR: WaterSMART Grants
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Ongoing Medium
Priority
56 IdenƟfy opportuniƟes (grant
funding, design assistance, etc.) to
sponsor homeowner retroﬁts from
lawns to low-water-consuming
plants [miƟgaƟon acƟon from
previous plan].

Drought,
Extreme Heat
Internal: Public
Works
Department,
Community
Development
Department
External: MWD
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Ongoing Medium
Priority
57 NoƟfy residents through public
service announcements a couple of
days in advance of a severe weather
event. Focus on media methods
that target vulnerable populaƟons,
such as elderly, disabled, lower-
income, or persons with limited
mobility to beƩer ensure they have
adequate Ɵme to prepare for a
heatwave in advance [miƟgaƟon
acƟon from previous plan].

Extreme Heat,
Severe
Winds/Santa
Ana Winds,
Heavy Rain,
Power
Outage/UƟlity
Failure
Internal: City
Manager’s Oﬃce,
Police
Department, Fire
Department
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Ongoing Medium
Priority
58 Evaluate the long-term capacity of
designated cooling centers and
shelters in the City to provide
suﬃcient relief from extreme heat.

Assess the need to expand services
as the frequency, length, and
severity of future heatwaves that
Extreme Heat
Internal: Public
Works
Department,
Parks and
RecreaƟon
Department,
Library
LCI: Extreme Heat and
Community Resilience Grant
(EHCRP)
Staﬀ Time, General Fund
Ongoing High Priority

5-24
ACTION
# MITIGATION ACTION HAZARD

ADDRESSED

RESPONSIBLE

PARTIES

POTENTIAL

FUNDING SOURCES TIMELINE PRIORITY
coincide with Public Safety Power
Shutoﬀs (PSPS) [miƟgaƟon acƟon
from previous plan, carried over
with revisions].
59 Promote the Fullerton Community
Center and Fullerton Public Library
as SCE designated Community
Resource Centers during a Public
Safety Power Shutoﬀ (PSPS), where
SCE is available to support
customers during PSPS or other
public safety acƟvaƟons [new
miƟgaƟon acƟon].

Severe
Winds/Santa
Ana Winds,
Power
Outage/UƟlity
Failure,
Extreme Heat
Internal: Fire
Department, City
Manager’s Office
External:

Southern
California Edison
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Ongoing High Priority
60 Trim trees that the City determines
could blow over during a severe
wind event. Move power lines
underground when feasible
[miƟgaƟon acƟon from previous
plan].

Severe
Winds/Santa
Ana Winds,
Power
Outage/UƟlity
Failure
Internal: Public
Works
Department,
Community
Development
Department
Staﬀ Time, General Fund Ongoing High Priority

5-25

5.3 CAPABILITIES ASSESSMENT
The capabiliƟes assessment idenƟﬁes exisƟng local agencies, personnel, planning tools, public policy and programs, technology, and fundin g resources that can support the hazard miƟgaƟon measures in this Plan. This assessment helps determine the current ability of Fullerton to reduce damage from hazard events, providing a foundaƟon to develop, consider, and prioriƟze future hazard miƟgaƟon measures.

5.3.1 Key Resources
The City of Fullerton has resources to support the implementa Ɵon of mi ƟgaƟon ac Ɵons including:
• Planning and regulatory capabiliƟes are based on the implementaƟon of ordinances, policies, local laws, and State statutes, and plans and programs that relate to guiding and managing growth and development.
• AdministraƟve and technical capabili Ɵes refer to the sta ﬀ and their skills and tools that can be used for miƟgaƟon planning and to implement speciﬁc miƟgaƟon acƟons.

It also refers to the ability to access and coordinate these resources eﬀecƟvely. • Financial capabiliƟes are the resources that a jurisdicƟon has access to or is eligible to use to fund miƟgaƟon acƟons.
• EducaƟon and outreach capabiliƟes are programs and methods already in place that could be used to implement mi ƟgaƟon ac Ɵvi
Ɵes and communicate hazard-related
informaƟon.

Refer to Table 5-4: City of Fullerton Capabilities Assessment below for a summary of City capabiliƟes.

TABLE 5-4: CITY OF FULLERTON CAPABILITIES ASSESSMENT

ORDINANCE/PLAN
/POLICY /PROGRAM

RESPONSIBLE AGENCY

OR DEPARTMENT

DESCRIPTION/COMMENTS
Planning and Regulatory
General Plan Community and
Economic Development
Department
The Fullerton General Plan is the long-
term, comprehensive blueprint for
development and changes in the
community. The policies in the general
plan address land uses, public safety,
environmental protecƟon, transportaƟon,
and others. The general plan serves as a
framework for miƟgaƟon acƟons,
establishing the overarching policies for
miƟgaƟon acƟviƟes. MiƟgaƟon acƟons
may be directly incorporated into the
general plan to provide a stronger
enforcement mechanism.

Urban Water
Management Plan
(UWMP)
Public Works
Department
The UWMP provides an assessment of
the present and future water supply
sources and demand within the City’s

5-26

ORDINANCE/PLAN
/POLICY /PROGRAM

RESPONSIBLE AGENCY

OR DEPARTMENT

DESCRIPTION/COMMENTS
service area. It presents an update to the
2015 UWMP on the City’s water resource
needs, water use eﬃciency programs,
water reliability assessment and
strategies to miƟgate water shortage
condiƟons.

Water Shortage
ConƟngency Plan
(WSCP)
Public Works
Department
The WSCP is a strategic planning
document that provides a structured
guide for the City to deal with water
shortages. This WSCP complies with
California Water Code (Water Code)
SecƟon 10632, which requires that every
urban water supplier shall prepare and
adopt a WSCP as part of its UWMP .

Emergency
OperaƟons Plan
(EOP)
Fire Department The City’s EOP establishes a
comprehensive framework of direcƟon
and guidance for emergency and disaster
response operaƟons related to natural
and human-caused hazards. The EOP can
be used as a tool alongside the LHMP to
provide miƟgaƟon and response
strategies for hazard events.

County of Orange
and Orange County
Fire Authority
Hazard MiƟgaƟon
Plan
Orange County Sheriﬀ’s
Department /Orange
County Fire Authority
The County of Orange and Orange County
Fire Authority Hazard MiƟgaƟon Plan
idenƟﬁes Orange County's natural
hazards and presents a variety of acƟons
and projects, proposed or in progress,
which can help miƟgate the risks these
hazards pose. This Plan was uƟlized as a
reference document in the formaƟon of
this updated LHMP .

NaƟonal Flood
Insurance Program
(NFIP)
Community and
Economic Development
Department
The City of Fullerton parƟcipates in the
NFIP and implements ﬂoodplain
management requirements through its
zoning, land use, and development
regulaƟons, informed by FEMA’s
regulatory ﬂood mapping products.

ConƟnued enforcement of these
regulaƟons supports ﬂood risk reducƟon
and maintains the City’s eligibility for
federally backed ﬂood insurance.

Floodplain
Management
Ordinance
Community and
Economic Development
Department
The ordinance establishes addiƟonal
standards for development acƟviƟes in
the ﬂoodplain, enforced by Building and
Safety Division staﬀ in coordinaƟon with
the City’s ﬂoodplain manager. This

5-27

ORDINANCE/PLAN
/POLICY /PROGRAM

RESPONSIBLE AGENCY

OR DEPARTMENT

DESCRIPTION/COMMENTS
ordinance can be amended to implement
addiƟonal ﬂood miƟgaƟon strategies
from this Plan.

Building Code Community and
Economic Development
Department
The building code speciﬁes how all new
construcƟon in the City shall be built.

These requirements can be amended to
require new construcƟon to be more
resilient to emergency situaƟons.

MiƟgaƟon acƟons to construct buildings
to safer standards to enhance resilience
during hazard events could be considered
as part of future building code updates.

Fire Code Community and
Economic Development
Department
The ﬁre code contains speciﬁc ﬁre safety
requirements for all structures. These
requirements can be modiﬁed to require
increased ﬁre safety measures and
support hazard miƟgaƟon acƟons
idenƟﬁed in this Plan.

City Budget Administra Ɵve Services
Department
The Fullerton City Council adopts a
budget every ﬁscal year, which idenƟﬁes
sources of revenue for the City and how
this money will be spent. The budget can
direct funding toward hazard miƟgaƟon
acƟviƟes, including increased staﬃng,
planning eﬀorts, and capital
improvements.

Development Code Community and
Economic Development
Department
The code contains land use regulaƟons,
including requirements for all new
construcƟon. The code can be used to
implement hazard miƟgaƟon measures
related to land use and development.

Water
ConservaƟon
Ordinance
Community and
Economic Development
Department
The City’s water conservaƟon ordinance
establishes the water management
requirements necessary to conserve
water, enable eﬀecƟve water supply
planning, and ensure adequate water
supply. These standards help miƟgate the
impact of drought-related emergency
events. The tools and strategies of the
water conservaƟon ordinance can be
used to develop this Plan’s drought
miƟgaƟon acƟons.

AdministraƟve and Technical
Police Services Police Department Sta ﬀ provides police protecƟon services and community programs and educaƟon
campaigns. Police Staﬀ are a key

5-28

ORDINANCE/PLAN
/POLICY /PROGRAM

RESPONSIBLE AGENCY

OR DEPARTMENT

DESCRIPTION/COMMENTS
component of implemenƟng miƟgaƟon
acƟons, including but not limited to,
coordinaƟng, and communicaƟng with
the public and other agencies, ensuring
safe and eﬃcient evacuaƟons, if
necessary, and providing or parƟcipaƟng
in public educaƟon and preparedness
acƟviƟes that support miƟgaƟon of risks.

Fire Services Fire Department The Fire Department is a key component of implemenƟng miƟgaƟon acƟons. Staﬀ
provide ﬁre protecƟon and ﬁreﬁghƟng
services in Fullerton. The department’s
responsibiliƟes include taking
preparatory steps to prevent ﬁres or limit
their destrucƟon. MiƟgaƟon acƟons
related to reducing the likelihood of ﬁres
or minimizing injury and damage from
ﬁres may be implemented through Fire
Department staﬀ.

Code Compliance
Division Staﬀ
Community and
Economic Development
Department
Staﬀ helps to maintain a safe, orderly,
and healthy environment by ensuring
compliance with building codes, property
maintenance standards, land use
regulaƟons, signage rules, and the City
Municipal Code. MiƟgaƟon acƟons
related to ensuring development
requirements, along with plans and
programs, are updated to reﬂect most
current hazard informaƟon.

Building and Safety
Division Staﬀ
Community and
Economic Development
Department
Staﬀ is responsible for regulaƟng the
construcƟon, alteraƟon, use and
occupancy of buildings. Staﬀ reviews all
proposals for new development in
Fullerton to ensure it meets all applicable
laws and ordinances and complies with
all hazard-related requirements.

MiƟgaƟon acƟons related to ensuring
development requirements, along with
plans and programs, are updated to
reﬂect most current hazard informaƟon.

Planning
Commission
Community and
Economic Development
Department
The Planning Commission advises the City
Council on growth, development, and
beauƟﬁcaƟon of the City of Fullerton,
including public spaces and vacant lots.

The Planning Commission prepares and
recommends updates to the General Plan

5-29

ORDINANCE/PLAN
/POLICY /PROGRAM

RESPONSIBLE AGENCY

OR DEPARTMENT

DESCRIPTION/COMMENTS
and reviews the Capital Improvement
Program for consistency with the General
Plan, ensuring that development is in
accordance with miƟgaƟon acƟons.

City Council City Council The Fullerton City Council consists of ﬁve elected members, including a Mayor and
Mayor Pro Tem selected annually by the
Council. Supported by the City Manager
and staﬀ, the Council serves as the city's
primary legislaƟve body. The Council
meets on the ﬁrst and third Tuesdays of
each month to adopt policies, approve
plans, allocate funding, and enact local
laws. The Council will be responsible for
adopƟng this Plan and overseeing the
implementaƟon of its miƟgaƟon acƟons.

City Manager City Manager’s O ﬃce The City Manager allocates and manages City resources to carry out City policy and
operaƟons as directed by the City
Council, including allocaƟng and
managing staﬀ and funding to support
implementaƟon of hazard miƟgaƟon
acƟviƟes. The City Manager’s Oﬃce is
staﬀed by the City Manager, Deputy City
Manager, ExecuƟve Assistant, Senior
AdministraƟve Analyst, and
AdministraƟve Assistant.

Finance Division
Staﬀ
AdministraƟve Services
Department
The AdministraƟve Services Department
(Finance) is responsible for providing full
ﬁscal transparency and ﬁnancial reporƟng
in accordance with state and federal laws.

While the AdministraƟve Services
Department (Finance) does not
implement miƟgaƟon acƟons, the
department plays an important role to
facilitate implementaƟon by working with
the various departments to ensure
miƟgaƟon acƟons are incorporated into
the City budget and to administer grant
support.

Public Works
Department Staﬀ
Public Works
Department
The Public Works Department is
responsible for building and maintaining
Fullerton’s publicly owned infrastructure
and is a key lead for miƟgaƟon acƟons.

Staﬀ can construct and retroﬁt
infrastructure to reduce hazard risks in

5-30

ORDINANCE/PLAN
/POLICY /PROGRAM

RESPONSIBLE AGENCY

OR DEPARTMENT

DESCRIPTION/COMMENTS
the community, or to be more resilient to
hazard events.

Community
Development
Department Staﬀ
Community and
Economic Development
Department
The Community and Economic
Development Department is comprised
of Building & Safety, Code Enforcement,
Housing, Planning and Economic
Development Divisions, and is
responsible for administering and
enforcing the City’s Zoning Code, other
provisions of the Municipal Code, the
General Plan, and Building Codes.

MiƟgaƟon acƟons related to the
construcƟon of new structures, retroﬁts,
or improvements to exisƟng structures
may be implemented through future plan
processing by Community Development
Department staﬀ.

Parks and
RecreaƟon
Department Staﬀ
Parks and RecreaƟon
Department
The Parks and RecreaƟon Department
maintains 53 City parks, trails, and
recreaƟon faciliƟes within the City.

MiƟgaƟon acƟons involving community
outreach and designaƟons of Parks and
RecreaƟon faciliƟes as emergency
shelters may be implemented by this
Department.

Human Resources
Division Staﬀ
Human Resources
Department
The Human Resources Department is
responsible for staﬀ recruitment and
training, as well as Risk Management
funcƟons for the City. MiƟgaƟon acƟons
that relate to staﬀ training may be
implemented through the Human
Resources Department.

AdministraƟve
Services
Department
AdministraƟve Services
Department
The AdministraƟve Services Department
is composed of four divisions:

AdministraƟon, Fiscal Services, Budget &
Purchasing, and Revenue and UƟlity
Services. The Department manages the
City’s ﬁnances and provides ﬁnancial
support to all departments.

City AƩorney N/A The City AƩorney represents the City and handles civil cases, advising the City on
legal maƩers and represenƟng it in court.

Republic Services
Staﬀ
Republic Services The City contracts with Republic Services to provide collecƟon and disposal
services for solid waste in the community.

The responsibiliƟes of Republic Services

5-31

ORDINANCE/PLAN
/POLICY /PROGRAM

RESPONSIBLE AGENCY

OR DEPARTMENT

DESCRIPTION/COMMENTS
include providing services for the safe
disposal of some types of hazardous
material. Staﬀ can coordinate their eﬀorts
with the relevant miƟgaƟon acƟons
outlined in this Plan.

Southern California
Edison (SCE) Staﬀ
Southern California
Edison
SCE is the electrical service provider for
Fullerton. SCE also owns the electrical
distribuƟon grid in the community.

MiƟgaƟon acƟons relaƟng to the
resiliency of Fullerton’s electrical grid may
use the agency’s data and be
implemented through coordinaƟon with
SCE.

Southern California
Gas Company
(SoCalGas) Staﬀ
Southern California Gas
Company
SoCalGas is the natural gas provider for
Fullerton and also owns the natural gas
infrastructure in the community.

MiƟgaƟon acƟons that address the
resiliency of natural gas infrastructure
and services in Fullerton may use the
agency’s data and be implemented
through coordinaƟon with SoCalGas.

Financial
General Fund N/A Serves as the main operaƟng fund for the City and is used to ﬁnance the most
common municipal funcƟons (e.g., police,
ﬁre, parks, and recreaƟon, etc.).

Capital
Improvement
Program
N/A Long-range plan for individual capital
improvement projects and funding
sources. Projects are considered unique
construcƟon projects that provide
improvements or addiƟons such as land,
buildings, and infrastructure. The Capital
Improvement Program budget is an
important part of the City’s budget. The
draŌ FY 2025/2026 to FY 2029/2030
budget presents over 40 capital
improvement projects with expenditures
totaling over $32 million. These projects
provide funding for needed repairs,
replacements, and improvements to
streets, water infrastructure, drainage
and sewage systems, parks and medians,
public faciliƟes, and other improvements.

California
Governor’s Oﬃce
N/A Cal OES is responsible for overseeing and
coordinaƟng emergency preparedness,
response, recovery, and homeland

5-32

ORDINANCE/PLAN
/POLICY /PROGRAM

RESPONSIBLE AGENCY

OR DEPARTMENT

DESCRIPTION/COMMENTS
of Emergency
Services
security acƟviƟes within California. Cal
OES regularly dispatches team members
to join ﬁrst responders, emergency
leaders and those aﬀected by disasters
that threaten public safety, to provide
informaƟon essenƟal to the public. Cal
OES can assist in obtaining funding for
miƟgaƟon acƟons idenƟﬁed in the plan
and providing guidance on future plan
updates. AddiƟonally, Cal OES is
responsible for administraƟon and
distribuƟon of federal grant funding for
the FEMA grant programs listed above.

Federal Emergency
Management
Agency – Hazard
MiƟgaƟon
Assistance Grants
N/A FEMA is the federal agency responsible
for hazard miƟgaƟon, emergency
preparedness, and emergency response
and recovery acƟviƟes. It provides
guidance to State and local governments
on hazard miƟgaƟon acƟviƟes, including
best pracƟces and how to comply with
federal requirements. FEMA also provides
funding for hazard miƟgaƟon acƟons
through two grant programs: Hazard
MiƟgaƟon Grant Program (HMGP) and
Flood MiƟgaƟon Assistance (FMA) Grant.

The HMGP requires a presidenƟal hazard
declaraƟon before funding is available;
aŌer a hazard is declared, grant
applicaƟons can be submiƩed on a
rotaƟng basis. FMA applicaƟons typically
open during the fall. Outside of the
Hazard MiƟgaƟon Assistance Grants,
FEMA also administers Preparedness
Grants and Resilience Grants that may be
applicable to future City projects.

Department of
Housing and Urban
Development –
Community
Development Block
Grants
N/A The Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) EnƟtlement Program
provides annual grants on a formula basis
to enƟtled ciƟes and counƟes to develop
viable urban communiƟes by providing
decent housing and a suitable living
environment, and by expanding
economic opportuniƟes, principally for
low- and moderate-income persons. The
program is authorized under Title 1 of the
Housing and Community Development

5-33

ORDINANCE/PLAN
/POLICY /PROGRAM

RESPONSIBLE AGENCY

OR DEPARTMENT

DESCRIPTION/COMMENTS
Act of 1974, Public Law 93-383, as
amended; 42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.

HUD awards grants to enƟtlement
community grantees to carry out a wide
range of community development
acƟviƟes directed toward revitalizing
neighborhoods, economic development,
and providing improved community
faciliƟes and services, which may be
applicable to future City projects.

EducaƟon and Outreach
American Red
Cross
CoordinaƟon with
Fullerton Police and
Fire
Provide access to natural hazard
informaƟon and resources, as well as
educaƟonal and training programs.

PromoƟng parƟcipaƟon in American Red
Cross educaƟonal and training programs
would serve to miƟgate hazards by
increasing awareness and preparedness.

Staﬀ Training CoordinaƟon with
Fullerton Police, Fire,
and other City
Departments as
relevant
The City provides staﬀ training on
emergency response and preparedness.

MiƟgaƟon acƟons may include updaƟng
or enhancing staﬀ training on emergency
response and preparedness.

City Website Administra Ɵve Services The website provides news and announcements to the community,
including community events related to
safety and emergency preparedness and
miƟgaƟon. It maintains informaƟon and
resources pertaining to hazards and
miƟgaƟon. The City Website provides an
opportunity to convey informaƟon and
implement miƟgaƟon acƟons speciﬁc to
educaƟng and informing the community
regarding all hazards and ways to reduce
impacts from the hazards.

How can these capabiliƟes be expanded upon and improved to reduce risk? MulƟple miƟgaƟon measures are priority projects to expand Fullerton’s capabiliƟes, including new plans and programs. Examples of opportuniƟes to expand capabiliƟes include the following miƟgaƟon acƟons:

Planning/Regulatory: MiƟgaƟon AcƟons #5, 9, 12, 25, 33, 48, 53, 58 AdministraƟve/Technical: MiƟgaƟon AcƟons #1, 2, 4, 9, 18, 21, 26, 39, 41, 47 Financial: MiƟgaƟon AcƟons #54, 56
EducaƟon/Outreach: MiƟgaƟon AcƟons #3, 17, 45

5-34

6-2
WHAT’S DIFFERENT ABOUT THE 2026 PLAN?
• Renewed focus on eﬀorts to complete established miƟgaƟon acƟons.
• Renewed emphasis on conƟnuous public involvement
throughout the planning horizon of the LHMP .

SECTION 6: PLAN MAINTENANCE
This secƟon idenƟﬁes the formal process by which that City can ensure the LHMP remains an ac Ɵve and relevant document for the City of Fullerton. The LHMP maintenance process includes a schedule for monitoring and evalua Ɵng the LHMP annually and producing an update every ﬁve years to ensure the City maintains eligibility for federal and State hazard miƟgaƟon funding. This secƟon of the LHMP also describes how the City can integrate public par ƟcipaƟon throughout LHMP maintenance and implementa Ɵon process. Finally, this sec Ɵon describes how City sta ﬀ can incorporate the mi ƟgaƟon acƟons outlined in this LHMP into exis Ɵng planning mechanisms and programs and future acƟons and decision-making.

6.1 PURPOSE OF THE LHMP AND AUTHORITY
Under the direc Ɵon of the LHMP Project Management Team (led by KrisƟ HofsteƩer BaƟste, Emergency Manager with the Fullerton Fire Department), the LHMP Planning Team will be responsible for the on- going maintenance of this LHMP . The Project Management Team will take the lead in LHMP maintenance by coordinaƟng with the Planning Team, including undertaking the formal review process and future updates. Key City departments are idenƟﬁed below:
• Fire Department
• Police Department
• Public Works Department
• Community and Economic Development Department
• Parks and RecreaƟon Department
• City Manager’s Oﬃce
• City Clerk's Oﬃce
• City Council
In addiƟon to City staﬀ, the following partner agencies who were part of the LHMP Planning Team should be included in the maintenance and update acƟviƟes:
• American Red Cross
• Amtrak

City Council - Successor Agency - Housing AuthorityJune 16, 2026

City Council - Successor Agency - Housing Authority
June 16, 2026