Jurisdictions Represented and Participating in the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan

The Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan is the result of a community wide effort to determine appropriate mechanisms to address the various types of hazards facing the Charleston Region. The Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Program Committee, which drafted this plan, consisted of members from each of the local government entities within Charleston County, from State agencies with a focus on hazard mitigation, from Federal agencies with a focus on hazard mitigation, and from the non-profit and public sectors. The Emergency Management Program provides technical assistance consistent with the scope of the mitigation program such as implementing building codes, fire codes, and land-use ordinances. The committees established under the local “Project Impact” initiative also provide input into the projects recommended in the plan. At the initiation of the planning process utilized in drafting this plan, a questionnaire regarding hazard mitigation and project prioritization was distributed through directed mailings as well as through meetings with professional organizations to solicit input into the recommended contents for the plan. Public meetings were also conducted in three areas throughout the Region to obtain additional input from the citizens of the Region regarding the contents of this plan. In 2003, as a result of changes to Federal law under the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, special purpose districts in Charleston County joined the planning process so they would have the opportunity to adopt an approved hazard mitigation plan and meet the new requirements of the Act. All of the original plan signatories have continued to participate in this plan (none have dropped out) and all of the Special Purpose District Governments that adopted the plan during 2004 (see Attachment II-D) have continued to participate in the planning process through 2009. For the 2012-2013 Plan, the Town of James Island was not included due to a court decision in June 2011 that dissolved the town following a lawsuit with the City of Charleston. Residents of the dissolved town were considered part of Unincorporated Charleston County during the update cycle for 2012-2013. The Town of James Island has been included in the plan as its own entity once again, from the 2013-2014 plan onward. Two additional government entities have joined the planning process and adopted the plan since 2004: namely the College of Charleston and the Charleston County School District. Roper St. Francis has requested to be added to this year’s plan. Roper St. Francis will be submitting an “Action Plan” only, due to joining the program as of May 2015. All of the local government entities within Charleston County are now participating in the plan and have adopted the plan. During 2014-2015, a questionnaire was distributed to the plan signatories and others with an interest in hazard mitigation to determine if there were any changes to hazard mitigation and project prioritization since the last questionnaire was distributed in 2006-2007. The results of this survey are included in this plan, as applicable. The planning Executive Summary 9 process is more thoroughly explained in Section II of this plan. The plan has been drafted in such a manner that the local government entities within Charleston County are able to prepare an action plan for their respective entities and adopt this plan for their use within their government entity. This cooperative approach enables the Region to have a more standardized way of addressing hazards which face all of the government entities, and also avoids a duplication of effort that would occur if all of the government entities individually undertook this type of planning initiative. As a strengthening of this cooperation among the communities a Program for Public Information (see Section IV) was established for 2012-2013 as part of the region’s on-going efforts to better inform its citizenry on proper preparedness and mitigation measures to be undertaken to make the region more resilient to those natural hazards that pose the greatest threat of loss and damage. In the upcoming years, the program will be improved upon and enhanced in order to protect lives and raise awareness of important issues. The Charleston Regional Plan is unique in the fact the plan is updated annually. This allows a continual planning process to keep the plan current, the jurisdictions involved, and the history more dynamic. 1.2 – Hazard Assessment The Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan is based upon the results of the questionnaires and the comments received through both committee and public meetings. The plan includes in Section III a ranking of the types of hazards facing the Charleston Region, with hurricanes being the most serious threat, followed by flooding, tornadoes, earthquakes, wildfires, hazardous material incidents, terrorism activities, and other hazards (such as winter storms and drought). Additional hazards for which the possibility of occurrence is much more remote or non-existent, such as tsunamis, dam failure, volcanoes, landslides, avalanches, land subsidence, and expansive soils are also now discussed in the plan to meet Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requirements. The hazard description section of the plan provides a brief description of the nature of the hazard for these types of hazards within the Charleston Region. The discussion section of the plan provides a more detailed description of the history of hazard event incidents in the Charleston Region. As this section illuminates, the Charleston Region has had numerous, mostly localized, hazard events and a few large-scale hazard events (e.g. Hurricane Hugo in 1989, earthquake of 1886) throughout our history. 1.3 – Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (HIRA) A HIRA Report is a systematic way to identify and analyze hazards to determine their scope, impact, and the vulnerability of the built environment to such events. Through the yearly Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan, such a systematic process and assessment has already been put into place for the area. As to not duplicate, a separate HIRA document is not included due to the fact each component of a HIRA is already expressed throughout this plan. Executive Summary 10 Per the Code of Federal Regulations, 44 CFR 201.4 (b), “The purpose of mitigation planning is for State, local, and Indian tribal governments to identify the natural hazards that impact them, to identify actions and activities to reduce any losses from those hazards, and to establish a coordinated process to implement the plan, taking advantage of a wide range of resources.” Each aspect of a typical HIRA report is discussed in the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Among other components, the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan includes identification of hazards, identification of resource requirements, profiles of previous hazardous events, vulnerability assessments, and estimates of potential losses by a variety of simulations, local outreach and education programs, and emergency operations procedures, inventories, plans, and shortfalls. As noted in Section III. Hazard Assessment, the Charleston region is susceptible to hurricanes, flooding, tornadoes, wildfires, earthquakes, drought conditions, terrorism events, and other hazards. Because of such identified risks, mitigation and education are essential. Furthermore, the aforementioned hazards included in Section III. are in a ranked order according in part to a questionnaire found in Section II completed by the Hazard Mitigation Committee. In addition, Due to the fact the Mitigation Plan encompasses a regional perspective rather than a single municipality or organization, the effect is a more complete and coordinated plan to improve the safety of citizens against potential natural and manmade hazards. The Charleston County Hazard Mitigation Committee works with each government or adopting entity and together, this collaborative regional plan for hazard mitigation can also serve as a HIRA report. 1.4 – Problem Assessment The Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan also addresses the vulnerability of the Region to each of the major types of hazards facing the region in Section IV, Problem Assessment. Each of the major hazard types are discussed in terms of which types of buildings are most vulnerable to each type of hazard with an estimation of the number of vulnerable buildings within the Region to flood/hurricane damage being provided (e.g. a total of 78,355 buildings are estimated to be vulnerable to flood damage in the Region based upon their location in the Special Flood Hazard Area only, and of these, an estimated 47,169 buildings are estimated to be vulnerable based upon both their date of construction and location within the Special Flood Hazard Area) (Section A). Estimated potential building and other property losses due to earthquakes and tornadoes are also discussed (Section A). The types of hazards that pose a threat to the infrastructure to the Region and in what manner (Section B), known flood damages (Section C), past flood impacts (Section D), Emergency Warning Needs (Section E), Critical Facilities (Section F), Natural and Beneficial Functions of floodplains (Section G), Development and Population Trends (Section H), and Economic Impact of hazard events (Section I) are also reviewed. The overall determination from this section is that the Charleston Region is potentially vulnerable to loss as a result of a hazard event to a relatively high degree, particularly considering the increasing Executive Summary 11 population of elderly people and increasing number of residents not necessarily familiar with the types of hazards facing the region and how best to prepare and protect themselves from these hazards. Since tourism plays such a predominant role in the local economy and is often negatively affected by large-scale hazard events with national media coverage, the potential economic losses associated with a hazard event are potentially high. 1.5 – Goals The goals of the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Section V) compliment the goals of the Charleston County “Project Impact” initiative and the Community Action for a Renewed Environment program. In general, these goals are intended to minimize future losses of life and property associated with hazard events facing the Charleston Region. Since this plan is a regional plan intended for adoption by the local government entities, the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Program Committee provided flexibility within this plan to enable local government entities with specific goals to include those in this section as they deemed appropriate. 1.6 – Review of Possible Activities The Possible Activities section of the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Section VI) provides prioritization factors to be utilized in selecting projects to be performed as well as a description of the on-going activities currently being performed within the Region. This section also lists suggested other activities that possibly could be performed to enhance the hazard mitigation within the Charleston Region. This section discusses Preventive Activities (e.g. primarily regulatory activities designed to provide improved resistance of development to hazard events) in Section A, Property Protection Activities (e.g. activities designed to improve the ability of the citizens or the existing building stock/infrastructure to withstand hazard events) in Section B, Natural and Beneficial Functions of Floodplains/Resource Preservation Activities (e.g. activities geared towards the preservation of the natural and historic resources of the Region) in Section C, Emergency Services (e.g. activities geared towards hazard event warning and government response) in Section D, Structural Projects (e.g. activities which are infrastructure improvements designed to enhance the hazard resistance of the Region) in Section E, and Public Information Activities (e.g. activities geared towards educating the citizens of the Region regarding hazard preparation and response) in Section F. The overall view provided within this section is that the Region is already doing many activities for the enhancement of our hazard mitigation however; there are also additional activities which may be done to further prepare our residents for the hazard events to which the Region is vulnerable. This section has been utilized by the respective government entities to draft their individual action plans regarding which types of activities they intend to pursue in the future to reduce their hazard vulnerability. The prioritization factors within these sections also play a major role in additional project determination under “Project Impact” as new possible activities are considered under this initiative. Executive Summary 12 1.7 – Adopting Resolution As each government entity adopts this plan, the adopting resolution is to be included within section seven. This plan is intended to be a working document which may be subject to revision as the Community Rating System schedule changes or as “Project Impact” decision making committees request revisions that would enhance their ability to perform their functions. The adopting resolutions for the government entities therefore generally include a section recognizing the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Program Committee as a continuing entity to be charged with maintaining and making revisions to this plan as needed, and making periodic reports regarding this plan to the respective Governing Councils or Commissions for the adopting government entities. 1.8 – Action Plan Each government or other adopting entity has included within the plan for their entity a specific action plan regarding activities that they propose be undertaken or continued during each year. This action plan includes activities from several of all of the types of activities discussed within Section VI of the plan. While it is the intention of the entities to undertake the activities included within the action plan, it is also recognized that circumstances may change and the activities listed may not be able to be accomplished within the time frame indicated, depending upon the circumstances encountered. The Community Rating System (CRS) program recognizes that as circumstances change, action plans may also need to change accordingly, and therefore does not punish communities for not performing activities listed within the action plan as long as in the annual review of the plan includes an explanation as to why the activity was not accomplished. The action plan for each entity is periodically updated to reflect changes and to indicate activities for the time period for each year. Each entity that adopted the plan when it was originally developed has also completed a status report on the action plan annually from 1999 - 2016, indicating the progress towards the activities listed within this plan. Those entities that adopted the plan for the first time during 2004 or in a later year also generated status reports of their action plan items in the year(s) following their initial plan adoption. 1.9 – Conclusion The Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan is the result of a cooperative effort of the public and private sectors intended to enhance the ability of all of the local jurisdictions within the Charleston Region to prepare for and respond to hazard events. The plan is comprehensive and complements other initiatives such as “Project Impact” and Community Action for a Renewed Environment currently being undertaken throughout the Charleston Region to help make the Region more resistant to disasters and to reduce environmental pollution within the Region. Additional information regarding this plan is available through the local jurisdictions or Charleston County Building Inspection Services. Executive Summary 13 New to the 2015-2016 Hazard Mitigation Plan In 2014-2015 Roper St. Francis adopted the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan, and was subsequently added to all applicable lists and tables as a participant. Their action plan for 2015-2016 is also displayed in Section 7.27. Annual updates are a necessary component of the plan’s 5-year update cycle. Between May 1st, 2014 and April 30th, 2015 Charleston County was faced with a variety of different hazards. A summary of the historic data, which has been added to the plan, is included below. ? There were 13 total coastal flood, flash flood, and other flooding events. ? There were 638 fire incidents of various types, including outside fires and vehicle fires. ? In May 2014, there was 1 EF0 tornado spotted in Rockville, SC. There was no reported damage. ? In October 2014, there was an earthquake in the Ladson/Summerville area which registered 2.2 on the Richter scale. ? There were 363 hazardous materials incidents, including fuel spills and gas leaks. ? There were 3 rip current events which resulted in the death of 1 person. ? Over a period of 9 total days, there were 7 strong wind events as the result of thunderstorms, 2 hail storms, and 1 lightning strike event which in total resulted in $31,000 worth of damage. ? Over a period of 12 total weeks, Charleston County was listed as being in a drought condition of D0 – abnormally dry. ? There were 118 reported suspicious package and bomb threat incidents. ? There were no hurricanes, tropical storms, or tropical depressions, nor any extreme winter weather events that affected the Charleston region. ? There were also no pandemic events, dam failures, nor tsunamis that affected the region and statistically, there is no substantial risk that these events will ever affect the Charleston region. Planning Process 14 Section 2 Planning Process 2.1 – Direction of Professional Planner The former Charleston County Administrator, Mr. Mack Canterbury, a Professional Planner, provided direction and guidance regarding the planning process utilized in the production of this plan since its initial development until his retirement in 2008. The planning process used in the initial production of the plan continues to be utilized through the plan revision process. Mr. Carl Simmons, Building Inspection Services Department Director, now oversees the planning process. 2.2 – Pre Planning Request for Input from Interested Parties The questionnaire included as Attachment II-A to this section, or a slightly modified version for non-governmental entities, was distributed by mail/email to eighty (80) organizations or individuals with a request for their input at the beginning of the planning process. The recipients of the questionnaire via mail were considered to be knowledgeable regarding hazards experienced in the Charleston Region and the potential vulnerabilities of the Region to these hazards. Completing a questionnaire was considered to be one form of participation in the planning process. Alternate means of participation in the planning process include, but are not limited to, attendance at committee meetings, or having one or more representatives on a committee that develops or provides input into the plan, since multiple opportunities are provided for committee members to provide input into the plan, even if they are unable to attend committee meetings due to schedule conflicts. This questionnaire asked the respondents to assess the hazards indigenous to the Charleston Region, assess the nature of the problem these hazards create, rate/provide potential goals for the plan, rate/provide possible activities for the plan to address, and rate/provide criteria for prioritizing projects under the plan. The questionnaire also asked the respondents to provide copies of existing hazard-related mitigation plans, if available. A list of the mail recipients of the questionnaire is provided as Attachment 2-B to this section. Responses were received from forty-one (41) of the recipients of the mail questionnaire (51.3%). Two of these respondents did not complete the questionnaire but responded with a letter or specific information. Two of the responses were received too late to be included in the analyses of the questionnaire included in this plan. The highest response rate (%) was from the local jurisdictions (73.3%, n = 12), followed by Charleston County Departments Heads/Administrators (61.5%, n = 8), Charleston Regional Agencies (50%, however, only 2 questionnaires were initially mailed for this category; n = 1), State agencies (41.9%, n = 14), Federal agencies (33.3%, n = 3), and private sector organizations (30%, n = 2). For the purpose of the data analyses provided throughout this plan, the Planning Process 15 responding regional agency (the Charleston County Parks and Recreation Commission) was grouped with the Charleston County Department Heads/Administrators. Responses received but not included in the data analysis were considered during deliberations at the planning committee meetings. In addition to those questionnaires mailed to prospective respondents, questionnaires were discussed at “Project Impact” presentations to community professional organizations/ advisory groups (e.g. Master Plumber’s Association, Earthquake Advisory Committee, Construction Specifications Institute, Charleston Chapter of the American Institute of Architects), and those interested in completing questionnaires were asked to do so and return the questionnaires as quickly as possible. Questionnaires were also hand delivered to several contractors/business owners with a request for their input. No responses were received in time from these requests for the data analysis included in this plan. Responses received that were not included in the data analysis were considered during deliberations at the planning committee meetings. A second questionnaire for local government and special purpose district governments was distributed during 2004 to applicable committee members for the purpose of obtaining additional information on other plans adopted by the local government entities, anticipated future development trends, critical facilities planned to be constructed in the future, and anticipated population trends in 20 years. The information obtained through this questionnaire has been included in the applicable tables and text of this plan for the 2005 update to the plan. Questionnaire responses were received from the local government entities in Charleston County that had adopted this plan in or prior to 2004, or alternate means of obtaining the needed information were utilized. The questionnaire originally used for the development of this plan was also modified slightly to indicate the addition of more hazards either indicated by FEMA as needing to be addressed in the plan or hazard events identified through the plan update processes as hazards potentially affecting the Charleston County Region. This modified questionnaire was distributed during 2006 to the members of the committees that update the plan and other stakeholders in the community with potential interest or input into the planning process. The analyzed results of this questionnaire were used as a part of the 2007-2008 plan update. The results of this questionnaire reflected a few changes, particularly regarding additional hazards added to the plan (rip currents, avian flu, tsunami, drought) and in the prioritization factors for projects. These changes are discussed in more detail in the applicable sections of this plan. The questionnaire was again sent out in the summer of 2014 to nearly eighty local governments, special purpose districts, community organizations, and various state and federal agencies with representation in the area who deal with hazard mitigation, weather, and the natural environment. In an effort to reduce cost and increase response, the survey was digitalized and responses were recorded in a Google poll. Planning Process 16 A simplified version of the survey designed for the general public was also produced. The public survey link was placed on the Charleston County Building Services website, sent to several citizens that had previously requested to be involved in mitigation planning, and the condensed survey was printed and placed in the lobby of the Building Services office to capture input from regional contractors and construction professionals. The public survey asked participants to simply describe the area within the County that they lived, rank the natural and man-made hazards previously identified in order of severity, and provided an opportunity to leave an email address if they were interested in receiving additional communication regarding the plan. Response numbers were lower than expected considering the new electronic format, but responses received were right in line with previous surveys, confirming the fact the priorities established for outreach and mitigation are still appropriate. Hurricanes were again perceived as the biggest threat to the Lowcountry, with flooding, earthquakes, and tornadoes earning very high marks as well. No substantial new risks were identified through either the public or jurisdiction/government survey. 2.3 – Planning Committee Based upon input received from the questionnaires, a planning committee was established to draft this plan. The members of this committee are listed in Attachment II-C to this section. The original composition of the committee included representatives from the local jurisdictions within Charleston County, State agencies, Federal agencies, Charleston County Departments, and the private sector. If a member of the committee was unable to attend a meeting, applicable drafts and/or information that was distributed/discussed at the planning committee meeting was mailed or hand delivered to the member so as to obtain any comments from the committee member as an alternative form of participation in the planning process. In this manner, comments from other agencies were obtained through the members of the committee. Minutes and/or meeting notes, copies of meeting handouts, and attendance rosters for committee meetings are maintained in the Charleston County Building Services Department. Appendix A-7 to this plan provides lists of committee members in attendance at Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Project Committee meetings, and members of the Project Impact (“Disaster Resistant Communities”) committees, who also provide input into the planning process. The governing bodies of the local jurisdictions represented on the planning committee were provided with a list of the members of the committee and a “Project Impact” organizational chart in order for these governing bodies to recognize the committee and approve the proposed organization for “Project Impact”. The Project Impact committees also routinely provide input into the plan as they discuss projects they recommend performing to make the community more resistant to disasters. A list of the governing bodies that have officially recognized the planning committee is included in Attachment II-D of this section. Copies of the governing body actions are available at the local jurisdiction offices, Charleston County Building Services, and are included in this plan in Section VII. Planning Process 17 The planning committee initially met three times to discuss the hazard assessment, problem, goals, and possible activities addressed within this plan. The last meeting of the committee prior to the local governments initially adopting the plan occurred after the public hearings in order for the committee to incorporate the public comments into the draft plan prior to its consideration by the governing councils. The committee also meets at least annually to update the plan. This annual update process includes County staff making routine updates that include, but are not limited to, changes to committee membership to reflect personnel changes (Part II), additional hazard events that have occurred during the year (Part III), changes to building vulnerability based on revised building counts or valuations obtained from the Assessor’s Office (Part IV), and government entities providing updates to applicable sections of the plan (drainage projects status (Part VI), repetitive flood loss properties (Part IV), changes to critical facilities (Part IV), and so forth). Project Impact committee members also provide input throughout the year as to activities to include on action plans (Parts VI and VII) for the coming year as they discuss projects they would recommend for hazard mitigation during their routine meetings throughout the year. Each signatory to the plan also develops an action plan for each year and provides a status report on the proposed activities in the previous year’s action plan on an annual basis and provides their recommended revisions to any sections of the plan, as applicable. The committee members are also provided sample action plans and status reports each year as a part of the update process for them to provide input into these portions of the plan (Part VII). Changes are made to the goals section of the plan (Part V) on an as needed basis as determined by the multiple committees involved in the plan update process. The Executive Summary (Part I) is updated to reflect any needed changes based on the revisions made to the plan for that year, as applicable. The update process is an evaluation of the plan for any revisions needed. The criteria used for this update/evaluation are whether all hazards have been included, whether the plan meets the needs of the signatory governments, and whether the updates are in accordance with FEMA planning guidelines. The Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Project committee meets as a group on at least an annual basis to review the updates made to the plan, to suggest any further updates, and to approve the updates made to the plan for that year. Details as to the changes made to the plan are provided to the committee members in advance of the committee meeting (see Appendix A-5 for summary reports of revisions made to the plan from previous years. The committee also approves an annual report of plan changes for the Governing Councils/Commissions during this meeting. With the passage of the Federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, additional “local government entities” were required to adopt approved hazard mitigation plans in order to remain eligible for specific types of federal post-event financial assistance. In 2003, these additional government entities were invited to join the committee that developed and updates the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan, and by 2008 all of the local government entities in Charleston County had joined this hazard mitigation plan (with the College of Charleston and the Charleston County School District joining after the 2004 edition of the plan was approved by FEMA for Disaster Mitigation Act compliance), and none of the other government entities that were signatories to the plan had dropped out of Planning Process 18 the plan (all local government entities in Charleston County are signatories to and participants in this plan.). In addition, the Berkeley-Charleston-Dorchester Council of Governments (BCD COG) was asked by the South Carolina Emergency Management Agency to develop a hazard mitigation plan for Berkeley and Dorchester Counties during 2003. The Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan was included by reference in this plan for the government entities within Charleston County. Representatives from Charleston County local governments also participated in planning committee meetings for the BCD COG plan. 2.4 – Public Input Public input into the plan when it was originally developed was obtained through the use of the questionnaire previously described and through public meetings specifically designed to obtain public input into the plan. Members of the general public also served on the planning committee. Three public hearings were held to discuss the plan. One hearing was held East of the Cooper River for the residents of the Awendaw, the Isle of Palms, McClellanville, Mount Pleasant, Sullivan’s Island, Christ’s Church and other unincorporated areas of Charleston County East of the Cooper River, including the service areas of the Mt. Pleasant Water Works. Residents of Berkeley County of the City of Charleston were also provided an opportunity to discuss the plan at this meeting. Another public hearing was held in the southern and central portions of the County for the residents of Folly Beach, Hollywood, James Island, Johns Island, Kiawah Island, Meggett, Ravenel, Rockville, Seabrook Island, and unincorporated areas of Charleston County, including residents of the St. Paul’s Fire District, St. John’s Fire District, and the James Island Public Service District. The Charleston County Parks and Recreation Commission main office is also located in the area where this public hearing was held, and their entire service area was covered between all of the public hearings. A third public hearing was held in North Charleston for residents of the City of Charleston, City of North Charleston (which includes portions of Dorchester County), Town of Lincolnville, and unincorporated Charleston County, including areas serviced by the St. Andrews Public Service District, the North Charleston Public Service District and Sewer District, and the Cooper River Parks and Playground Commission and the St. Andrews Parks and Playground Commission. The Commissions of Public Works provide water and sewer utility services throughout the Charleston County area, so these public hearings also provided opportunities for those living within their service area to comment on the plan. These locations were selected since the Charleston County satellite service centers are located in these regions of the County and the residents of any areas of the County are within a maximum of a 20-30 minute drive to at least one of these locations. Ample free parking was also available in the locations selected for the public hearings. Public input into the plan is also obtained on a routine basis through the Project Impact Disaster Resistant Communities committees as they determine projects to recommend, as each of these meetings are open to the public and advertised through the local media. The notices for the public meetings exceed Freedom of Information Act requirements, since they are sent to six local newspapers, including the Post and Courier, which is the newspaper with the largest general circulation in the Region. These notices are also sent to four local television stations and to three radio station groups, which include most of the local radio Planning Process 19 stations. Additional opportunities for public input were also available since, beginning in 2003, the plan was posted on the Charleston County internet site and an e-mail address for anyone interested in commenting on the plan was provided. The government entities that have internet sites within Charleston County also linked to the County internet site where the plan was posted for their residents to have direct access to the plan and the ability to provide comments or suggested revisions to the plan. In addition, the Project Impact Disaster Resistant Communities committees, which are comprised of representatives from multiple private, non-profit and public sector organizations, reviewed the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan and provided comments on the plan and proposed revisions to the plan. Additional public hearings on the plan are also conducted on a five- year cycle to obtain further public comments on the plan, including any revisions that have been made or are proposed for the plan. A public hearing was conducted in late 2003 for the latest five-year cycle. This public hearing is being held in a strategic location readily accessible to the residents of Charleston County and is being advertised through the local media to make the local citizens aware of the meeting. Another public hearing was held in the summer, 2008 to obtain input from the public on the changes made to the plan during the 5-year update process. In the summer of 2012, the final public hearing was held during the 5-year update process completing the 2007/08 through 2012/13 5-year process. The meeting was publicized through major local media and public input from the meeting was incorporated into all aspects of the plan and is expected to be approved by FEMA in the fall of 2013 with the local municipalities and entities formally adopting the plan in the winter or 2013. Yearly update meetings, which when combined represent the foundation for the 5- year formal plan, are publicized and the public is invited. Furthermore, the planning committee is composed of both local governments and non-governmental groups, ensuring that representation from all areas and aspects of the County are present. Public input into the Plan continues as the Project Impact committee and Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Project Committee meetings are public meetings advertised as indicated above through the local media outlets. The version of the plan posted on the Charleston County internet site is also updated as revisions to the plan are done annually, for those who do not attend committee meetings or public hearings to have an opportunity to comment on the latest edition of the plan. (An e-mail address for comments is provided on the internet site.) Finally, for the first time in 2014, a separate and simplified version of the hazard assessment survey was created to be distributed publically. The survey was also electronic and utilized Google poling. A link to the survey was forwarded to all municipalities that were participants in the Hazard Mitigation Planning and Project Committee with the request the link be made available to active citizens or anyone else they wished to distribute it to. A printed version of the same survey was made available in the Charleston County Building Inspection Services Department in the hopes of capturing contractors, builders, and citizens as they waited on permit or other building related issues. While just 16 public responses were recorded during the roughly one month span of the survey, the links are still active and can capture additional feedback. It is planned to re-issue the survey with more Planning Process 20 intensive marketing and outreach effort in the coming years. Any additional feedback recorded will be included in future meetings and editions of this plan. 2.5 – Local Jurisdiction Adoption The plan was adopted by the local government entities listed in Attachment II-D by the respective Governing Councils or Commissions for these entities. The local government entities were able to modify the plan to fit their individual needs if desired. The plan was also re-adopted by the participating “local governments” in the Charleston Region in 2004 as a part of the five-year cycle process and again in 2008. The 5 year plan originally submitted in 2012 was finally approved by FEMA on September 10, 2013. Following FEMA approval, local governments and non-governmental jurisdictions began re-adopting the plan in late 2013. 2.6 – Implementation Plan The plan is intended to serve as the guiding document for prioritization of hazard mitigation projects undertaken within the Charleston Region. Actual project selection for any projects undertaken as “Project Impact” initiatives are carried out in accordance with this plan by six committees that correspond to the activity classifications of this plan (e.g. preventive activities, property protection activities, natural and beneficial function-related activities, emergency service-related activities, structural projects, and public information activities). As the plan is utilized in this capacity, suggested revisions are considered and incorporated where appropriate into the plan on an as needed basis. The Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Project Committee maintains the plan and makes any necessary revisions as may be required to continue receiving Community Rating System credit for the plan. A review of the plan occurs at least annually. A progress report on the plan is submitted to the governing councils of the adopting jurisdictions at least annually. The local media are notified of the availability of the latest edition of the plan and progress reports on an annual basis. Every five years, public hearings on the plan, including its amendments, are conducted, and the local Governing Councils and Commissions are asked to re-adopt the plan as revised. The plan is also provided to applicable planning entities for potential use in updates to other plans, including but not limited to the County of Charleston Comprehensive Plan, Emergency Operations Plan, or other applicable plans. Similarly, applicable updates to other plans are considered for inclusion in the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan, as appropriate. Table 2-1 provides a list of other specific plans in use by the jurisdictions within Charleston County that are considered for updates to the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan, and which include applicable provisions of the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan by reference or through excerpts [this table indicates whether and how information from the indicated plan is included in the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan and whether and how information from the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan is included in the indicated plan, when appropriate] : Planning Process 21 Table 2-1 Jurisdiction Name of Plan(s) Information from this plan in the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan (CRHMP) Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan (CRHMP) included in this plan Town of Awendaw Town of Awendaw Comprehensive Plan Not applicable Applicable excerpts from CRHMP included in this plan. City of Charleston Charleston Century V City Plan Not applicable Preservation of open space is a mutual goal of both plans – no need for cross-referencing. Charleston County (Unincorporated) Charleston County Comprehensive Plan; Charleston County Emergency Operations Plan; Charleston Region Toxics Risk Assessment; Charleston County Watershed Master Plan; Greenbelt Plan; Repetitive Loss Area Analysis (RLAA) Applicable excerpts included in CRHMP. Applicable excerpts from CRHMP included in these plans. City of Folly Beach Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Town of Hollywood Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable City of Isle of Palms Updated Comprehensive Plan for the City of Isle of Palms Not applicable Entire CRHMP included by reference, CRHMP is referenced on the City's web site (www.iop.net) with a link to the plan. Town of Kiawah Island Town of Kiawah Island Emergency Preparedness Plan, Comprehensive Plan, Municipal Code, Article 12, Land Use and Zoning Not applicable Entire CRHMP included in some plans by reference; applicable excerpts from the CRHMP included in others. Town of Lincolnville Town of Lincolnville Comprehensive Plan Not applicable Applicable excerpts from CRHMP included in plan. Town of McClellanville Comprehensive Plan for the Town of McClellanville Not applicable Entire CRHMP included by reference, and applicable excerpts from the CRHMP in this plan. Town of Meggett Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Town of Mt. Pleasant Community Rating System, 2003 Comprehensive Land Use Plan, NPDES Phase II Applicable excerpts included in CRHMP. Entire CRHMP included by reference. City of North Charleston North Charleston Comprehensive Development Plan, North Charleston Emergency Operations Plan Not applicable References to CRHMP included in other plans. Town of Ravenel Town of Ravenel Comprehensive Plan, 1999 Not applicable Entire CRHMP included by reference. Town of Rockville Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Hazard-Related, Land Use and/or Development Plans in the Charleston Region file:///C:/Users/bsawth/AppData/Roaming/Microsoft/Word/Attachments and Tables for Plan/Section 2 - Planning Process/Table 2-1- Hazard Related, Land Use, andor Development Plans 2015-2016.xlsx Planning Process 22 2.7 – Planning Process Summary The public was invited to participate in the mitigation planning process through yearly planning meetings that involve all participating jurisdictions and entities. All planning meetings are open to the public (see Appendix A-6 the public notices for the meetings). Each municipality/entity’s representative in the yearly planning and update meeting speaks for the public input they have received within their own district. Public feedback is encouraged through Project Impact outreach activities that are held throughout the tri-county region. During the 2008-2013 plan update there have been more than 130 Project Impact events including hurricane awareness expos, school science fair partnerships, educator and classroom grants, neighborhood presentations, industry meetings, emergency planning sessions, and more. Hundreds of thousands of residents are impacted continuously by televisions messages, targeted mailings, radio interviews, and emergency preparedness billboards just to name a few. (See appendix A-7 for the minutes from the planning committee meeting). To keep the information in the plan current and up to date, Charleston County performs a plan update each year addressing any changes in hazard events, drainage Town of Seabrook Island Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Town of Sullivan’s Island Town of Sullivan’s Island Comprehensive Plan 1998, revised June 19, 2000 Not applicable Entire CRHMP included by reference. Charleston County Parks & Recreation Commission CCPRC Mission Statement; CCPRC Comprehensive Development Plan; CCPRC Hurricane Plan Not applicable Entire CRHMP included by reference. Charleston CPW Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Cooper River Parks & Playground Commission North Charleston Comprehensive Development Plan; North Charleston Emergency Operations Plan Not applicable Include reference to CRHMP in other plans. James Island Public Service District Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Mt. Pleasant Water Works Mt. Pleasant Waterworks Emergency Plan Not applicable Entire CRHMP included by reference. North Charleston District Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable North Charleston Sewer District Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable St. Andrews Parish Parks & Recreation Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable St. Andrews Public Service District Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable St. John’s Fire District St. John’s Fire District Strategic Plan Goals & Objectives and Risk Assessment information included in CRHMP. Entire CRHMP included by reference, and applicable excerpts from the CRHMP in this plan. St. Paul’s Fire District St. Paul’s Fire District Emergency Operations Plan Not applicable Entire CRHMP included by reference. file:///C:/Users/bsawth/AppData/Roaming/Microsoft/Word/Attachments and Tables for Plan/Section 2 - Planning Process/Table 2-1- Hazard Related, Land Use, andor Development Plans 2015-2016.xlsx Planning Process 23 improvement projects, repetitive loss areas, etc. Each of the 31 participating jurisdictions and other government entities submits an annual status report which is compiled to reflect the formal 5 year update cycle. Each jurisdiction also has the opportunity to clarify and add items to their Action Plan. All annual changes are reviewed and approved at a public meeting with representatives from all jurisdictions, media, and public invited to attend and provide input. The yearly meetings and yearly updates ensure the plan is continually being monitored, evaluated and updated to reflect the most current hazard information possible. Public meetings to update this plan were held on: ? April 30th, 2008 ? July 8th, 2009 ? July 21st, 2010 ? July 20th, 2011 ? July 25th, 2012 ? August 7th, 2013 ? July 8th, 2014 ? September, 24th, 2014 The plan will continue to be updated annually, involving all jurisdictions, partners, and the public. A variety of stakeholders outside of Charleston County have the opportunity to be involved in the planning process and Project Impact Outreach activities. In addition to the fact all municipalities within Charleston County participate in Project Impact and other County-wide initiatives, several municipalities have physical borders that extend beyond Charleston County. The City of North Charleston, for instance, is located within Charleston County, Berkeley County and Dorchester County. Additionally, many residents of neighboring communities, like Summerville, commute into Charleston County for work, shopping, services etc. Project Impact and Charleston County also work with the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) which in addition to meeting monthly has a quarterly meeting with neighboring Berkley and Dorchester County’s Emergency Management Departments to discuss preparedness and hazard mitigation. Many of the events where Project Impact outreach activities take place also includes local businesses, insurance agents, and non- profits, all of which have impacts beyond Charleston County. Project Impacts Outreach activities and messages affect the region, reaching the public from Beaufort, south of Charleston County, to Georgetown which is well north of Charleston County. The public and all stakeholders are invited to attend and participate in the public meetings. Local jurisdictions are alerted to meetings and events by email as well as public notices. The Hazard Mitigation Plan Questionnaire survey was mailed to a variety of local, regional, state and federal stakeholders (see attachment II-B for a list of survey recipients, and appendix A- 6 for the public notices for the meetings). The same organizations received an updated Hazard Mitigation Plan Questionnaire in 2014. All planning meetings are open to the public (see appendix A-6 for the public notices for the meetings). Each municipality/entity’s representative in the yearly planning and update Planning Process 24 meeting speaks for the public input they have received within their own jurisdiction. Public feedback is incited through Project Impact outreach activities that are held throughout the tri-county region including activities such as regular seminars, lectures, expos, and meetings. In addition to public meetings and events, the plan is permanently available on the Charleston County Website for public review and comment. Project Impact has a presence on social media to further connect with the public. Twitter, Facebook, and a web-based blog on Tumblr.com all help raise awareness for hazard vulnerability, risk, and mitigation, and encourage public participation. All publications and events have contact information available for public feedback or specific questions. Charleston County engages the public through professional and trade organizations as well, speaking monthly with the Homebuilders Association and regularly involved with specific trade groups. These interactions are not only educational opportunities, but provide valuable feedback. Public input is regularly reviewed and incorporated into the document. To continue to include public participation in the planning process for the upcoming 5 year cycle a new expanded questionnaire will be distributed to the public, local jurisdictions, regional partners, state and federal agencies, and interested parties through a targeted email survey campaign. Charleston County and Project Impact Outreach events, websites, and social media networks will also provide access to the questionnaire, extending the access and increasing in public feedback. (see attachment II-A for a copy of the survey that is currently in use and attachment II-B for a list of recipients ). The new survey was distributed to stakeholders and made available to the public in 2014 during the planning stage of the next five year update and for the 2013-14 yearly update. Charleston County is in the process of redeveloping Project Impact to gain even greater participation from other jurisdictions, local non-profit organizations and business as well as the public in general. Charleston County performs a plan update each year that addresses any changes in hazard events, drainage improvement projects, repetitive loss areas, etc. Each of the 31 participating jurisdictions and government entities submits an annual status report which is compiled to reflect the formal 5 year update cycle. Each jurisdiction also has the opportunity to clarify and add items to their Action Plan. All of the annual changes are reviewed and approved at a public planning meeting. In 2014, two public meetings were held on July 8th, 2014, and September 24th, 2014. For the following years the meeting is tentatively scheduled for the last Wednesday of each July. Those dates are July 29th in 2015m the 27th in 2016 and the 26th in 2017. The yearly meetings ensure that the plan is continually being monitored, evaluated and updated to reflect the most current hazard information available. (See appendix A-7 for the minutes from the planning meeting and A-5 for the summary of changes made to the plan, approved at these meetings). Project Impact also holds committee meetings throughout the planning process that are open to the public and provide invaluable feedback for the Hazard Mitigation Plan. Charleston County’s Floodplain Manager is in charge of maintaining the plan, serves as the principal contact for public questions concerning local hazards, and is responsible for Planning Process 25 coordinating the yearly update and the formal five-year full update cycle. While the plan is not formally approved annually by FEMA, Charleston County and several other local Councils and governing boards request to see changes on an annual basis to have the most current information. The most recent formal five-year Hazard Mitigation Plan Approval was given by FEMA on September 10, 2013. Planning Process 26 Attachment 2-A: Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan Questionnaire Return completed questionnaires to Charleston County Building Services, 4045 Bridge View Drive, A-311, North Charleston, SC 29405-7464. Please answer the following questions for your jurisdiction/agency: I. Jurisdiction/Agency Point of Contact Information A. Name of Jurisdiction/Agency: B. Your Name/Title: C. Your Mailing Address D. Your Telephone/Fax Numbers: ___________________________ Fax: E. Your E-Mail Address: II. Hazard Assessment Information A. Please rank order the following types of hazards in terms of which are most pressing for your jurisdiction/agency (1 being most pressing, 8 being least pressing): Earthquake ___ Fire ___ Flood ___ Hazardous Material Incident ___ Hurricane ___ Terrorism ___ Tornado ___ Other: (Please specify) ___ B. Does your jurisdiction/agency have GIS capability or the ability to generate computerized maps? (Please circle response) Yes No C. If you are GIS capable who is the contact person for your jurisdiction/agency regarding computerized maps? 1. Name: 2. Mailing Address: 3. Telephone/Fax Numbers: ____________________________ Fax: 4. E-Mail Address (if available): D. Does your jurisdiction have a “repetitive loss property” map? Yes No If yes, please provide a copy of the map. III. Problem Assessment Information A. Vulnerability Assessment 1. Please circle your answer for the following questions indicating how vulnerable the indicated item is to damage from the indicated hazard type utilizing the following vulnerability scale: 0 = Don’t Know 1 = Minimally Vulnerable 2 = Moderately Vulnerable 3 = Severely Vulnerable 1. How vulnerable to damage are the structures within your jurisdiction; a. to earthquakes? 0 1 2 3 b. to fire? 0 1 2 3 c. to flooding? 0 1 2 3 Planning Process 27 d. to hazardous material incidents? 0 1 2 3 e. to hurricanes? 0 1 2 3 f. to terrorist incidents? 0 1 2 3 g. to tornados? 0 1 2 3 h. to other hazards? 0 1 2 3 Please specify: 2. How vulnerable to damage are the critical facilities within your jurisdiction; your critical facilities (e.g. police stations, fire stations, emergency operation centers, hazardous material storage facilities, etc.) 0 = Don’t know 1 = Minimally Vulnerable 2 = Moderately Vulnerable 3 = Severely Vulnerable a. to earthquakes? 0 1 2 3 b. to fire? 0 1 2 3 c. to flooding? 0 1 2 3 d. to hazardous material incidents? 0 1 2 3 e. to hurricanes? 0 1 2 3 f. to terrorist incidents? 0 1 2 3 g. to tornados? 0 1 2 3 h. to other hazards? 0 1 2 3 Please specify: 3. How vulnerable to damage is your infrastructure; a. to earthquakes? 0 1 2 3 b. to fire? 0 1 2 3 c. to flooding? 0 1 2 3 d. to hazardous material incidents? 0 1 2 3 e. to hurricanes? 0 1 2 3 f. to terrorist incidents? 0 1 2 3 g. to tornados? 0 1 2 3 h. to other hazards? 0 1 2 3 Please specify: 4. Do you have a vulnerability assessment for the hazards facing your jurisdiction/agency or the Charleston region? Yes No If yes, please provide a copy of the assessment or bibliographic citation if a published document. 5. Do you have a record of damages incurred during past flood events? Yes No If yes, please provide a copy of the record. B. Emergency Warning Needs 1. Please circle your answer providing your rating for the following emergency warning methods utilizing the following scale: 0 = Don’t know 1 = Minimal Need 2 = Moderate Need 3 = Major Need a. Weather warning radios that operate during normal sleep hours 0 1 2 3 b. Automatic telephone calling system for all hours 0 1 2 3 c. Emergency Vehicle Public Address Systems 0 1 2 3 d. Emergency Warning Sirens 0 1 2 3 e. Emergency Warning Signs/Flags 0 1 2 3 f. Other (Please Specify) ________________________________ 0 1 2 3 Planning Process 28 2. Please utilize this space to provide any specific comments regarding the vulnerability of your jurisdiction/agency to hazard events. What is your assessment of the vulnerability of the Charleston region to these hazards? IV. Goals A. Please rate the following potential goals for the regional plan according to the following scale: 0 = Don=t Know 1 = Minimal Importance 2 = Moderately Important 3 = Very Important 1. Reduce existing flood damage 0 1 2 3 2. Minimize future flood damage 0 1 2 3 3. Improve water quality 0 1 2 3 4. Preserve Open Space 0 1 2 3 5. Encourage recreational activities 0 1 2 3 6. Protect the public health, safety and welfare 0 1 2 3 7. Promote long term economic prosperity 0 1 2 3 8. Minimize future earthquake damage 0 1 2 3 9. Minimize future hurricane damage 0 1 2 3 10. Minimize future fire damage 0 1 2 3 11. Minimize future hazardous material incidents 0 1 2 3 12. Minimize future terrorist incidents 0 1 2 3 13. Minimize future tornado related loss of life 0 1 2 3 14. Improve hazard resistance of infrastructure 0 1 2 3 15. Preserve historic building inventory 0 1 2 3 16. Preserve environmental resources 0 1 2 3 17. Others (Please Specify) ___________________________________________ 0 1 2 3 ______________________________ 0 1 2 3 V. Possible Activities A. Preventive Activities 1. Please circle the letter of the following activities your jurisdiction/agency currently performs related to hazard preparation/prevention: a. Floodplain Management Regulations g. Stormwater Management Regulations b. Preservation of Open Space h. Stream Dumping Regulations c. Water Quality Regulations i. Beachfront Management Regulations d. Earthquake Building Regulations j. Wind Building Regulations e. Coastal Erosion Regulations k. Wetlands Protection Regulations f. Fire Protection Regulations l. Public Education Activities m. Other (Please Specify) 2. Please rate the effectiveness of these hazard preparation/prevention activities per the following scale: 0 = Don’t Know 1 = Minimal Importance 2 = Moderately Important 3 = Very Important a. Floodplain Management Regulations 0 1 2 3 Planning Process 29 b. Stormwater Management Regulations 0 1 2 3 c. Preservation of Open Space 0 1 2 3 d. Stream Dumping Regulations 0 1 2 3 e. Water Quality Regulations 0 1 2 3 f. Beachfront Management Regulations 0 1 2 3 g. Earthquake Building Regulations 0 1 2 3 h. Wind Building Regulations 0 1 2 3 i. Coastal Erosion Regulations 0 1 2 3 j. Wetlands Protection Regulations 0 1 2 3 k. Fire Protection Regulations 0 1 2 3 l. Public Education Activities 0 1 2 3 m. Other 0 1 2 3 (Please Specify) 3. Do your floodplain management regulations currently exceed minimal National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) requirements? Yes No If yes, please provide a copy of your floodplain management regulations. B. Property Protection Activities 1. Please circle the letter of the following activities your jurisdiction/agency currently performs related to property protection: a. Acquisition and Relocation of repetitively damaged properties b. Elevating/Retrofitting repetitively damaged properties c. Demolition of repetitively damaged properties d. Purchasing flood insurance for jurisdiction/agency owned properties e. Providing information regarding flood insurance to citizens f. Purchasing earthquake insurance for jurisdiction/agency owned properties g. Purchasing wind insurance for jurisdiction/agency owned properties h. Designing new jurisdiction/agency owned structures to exceed minimal hazard resistance requirements. i. Retrofitting existing jurisdiction/agency owned structures to meet or exceed minimal hazard resistance requirements. j. Providing information regarding earthquake insurance to citizens. k. Other (Please Specify) 2. Please rate the importance of these hazard preparation/prevention activities in your jurisdiction per the following scale: 0 = Not Sure 1 = Minimal Importance 2 = Moderately Important 3 = Very Important a. Acquisition and Relocation of repetitively damaged properties 0 1 2 3 b. Elevating/Retrofitting repetitively damaged properties 0 1 2 3 c. Demolition of repetitively damaged properties 0 1 2 3 d. Purchasing flood insurance for jurisdiction/agency owned properties 0 1 2 3 e. Providing information regarding flood insurance to citizens 0 1 2 3 f. Purchasing earthquake insurance for jurisdiction/agency owned properties 0 1 2 3 g. Purchasing wind insurance for jurisdiction/agency owned properties 0 1 2 3 h. Designing new jurisdiction/agency owned structures to exceed minimal hazard resistance requirements. 0 1 2 3 i. Retrofitting existing jurisdiction/agency owned structures to meet or exceed minimal hazard resistance requirements. 0 1 2 3 j. Providing information regarding earthquake insurance to citizens. 0 1 2 3 Planning Process 30 k. Other 0 1 2 3 (Please Specify) ___________________________________________ C. Natural and Beneficial Functions of Floodplains 1. Please list any activities your jurisdiction/agency performs related to the protection of natural and beneficial functions of floodplains: D. Emergency Services 1. Please circle which of the following activities your jurisdiction/agency currently performs related to the provision of hazard related emergency services: a. Flood Warning d. Hurricane Warning g. Tornado Warning b. Hazmat Incident Warning e. Wild Fire Warning h. Sandbagging c. Terrorist Activity Warning f. Fire Suppression i. Water Quality Warning Other (Please Specify) 2. Please rate the importance/effectiveness of these emergency service activities per the following scale: 0 = Don’t Know 1 = Minimal Importance 2 = Moderately Important 3 = Very Important a. Flood Warning 0 1 2 3 b. Hurricane Warning 0 1 2 3 c. Tornado Warning 0 1 2 3 d. Haz. Mat. Incident Warning 0 1 2 3 e. Wild Fire Warning 0 1 2 3 f. Sandbagging 0 1 2 3 g. Terrorist Activity Warning 0 1 2 3 h. Fire Suppression 0 1 2 3 i. Water Quality Warning 0 1 2 3 j. Other 0 1 2 3 (Please Specify) E. Structural Projects 1. Please circle which of the following structural project activities your jurisdiction/agency currently performs a. Drainage Improvement Projects d. Stream Channel Modification b. Beach Re-nourishment e. Dam Construction/Modification/Repair c. Levee Construction/Modification/Repair f. Infrastructure Construction/Modification/Repair g. Other (Please specify) 2. Please rate the importance/effectiveness of these structural project activities per the following scale: 0 = Don’t Know 1 = Minimal Importance 2 = Moderately Important 3 = Very Important a. Drainage Improvement Projects 0 1 2 3 b. Stream Channel Modification 0 1 2 3 c. Beach Re-nourishment 0 1 2 3 Planning Process 31 d. Dam Construction/Modification/Repair 0 1 2 3 e. Levee Construction/Modification/Repair 0 1 2 3 f. Infrastructure Construction/Modification/Repair 0 1 2 3 g. Other 0 1 2 3 (Please Specify) 3. Is your jurisdiction/agency currently planning/performing any structural projects which may benefit the Charleston area in its hazard mitigation? Yes No If Yes, please provide a brief description of the project(s) and point of contact information for these projects (attach additional sheets if necessary). F. Public Information Activities 1. Please circle the public information activities currently performed by your jurisdiction/agency a. Mailing hazard brochures to residents d. Participating in Hazard Awareness Weeks b. Providing literature to citizens at offices e. Newspaper Advertisements c. Television Advertisements f. Providing speakers for schools/groups g. Other (Please specify) 2. Please rate the importance/effectiveness of these public education activities per the following scale: 0 = Don’t Know 1 = Minimal Importance 2 = Moderately Important 3 = Very Important a. Mailing hazard brochures to residents 0 1 2 3 b. Participating in Hazard Awareness Weeks 0 1 2 3 c. Providing literature to citizens at offices 0 1 2 3 d. Newspaper Advertisements 0 1 2 3 e. Television Advertisements 0 1 2 3 f. Providing speakers for schools/groups 0 1 2 3 g. Other 0 1 2 3 (Please specify) G. Project Prioritization Please rate the importance/effectiveness of these issues in determining project priorities per the following scale: 0 = Don’t Know 1 = Minimal Importance 2 = Moderately Important 3 = Very Important a. Property effected by project is repetitive loss property (flood) 0 1 2 3 b. Property owner(s) are in agreement with/support project 0 1 2 3 c. FEMA cost benefit analysis software used for ranking project 0 1 2 3 d. Jurisdiction in agreement with/support project 0 1 2 3 e. Historic nature of property 0 1 2 3 f. Income of property owner (e.g. prioritize projects in lower income areas first) 0 1 2 3 g. Location of project (e.g. spread project expenditures across region?) 0 1 2 3 h. Nature of structure (e.g. foundation type, framing type, reinforcement, etc.) 0 1 2 3 i. Use of structure 0 1 2 3 j. Ability to recover expenditures (e.g. liens) 0 1 2 3 k. Environmental considerations (e.g. wetlands, wildlife, etc.) 0 1 2 3 Planning Process 32 l. Project technical feasibility 0 1 2 3 m. Other 0 1 2 3 (Please specify) VI. Existing Plans/Interest in Participation A. Does your jurisdiction/agency have any existing hazard - related mitigation plans? Yes No If Yes, please provide a copy of your plan. B. Is your jurisdiction/agency interested in participating in the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Planning Process? Yes No If Yes, please indicate point of contact information for this project: 1. Name: Mailing Address: Telephone/Fax Numbers:_____________________________ Fax: Planning Process 33 Attachment 2-B: CRS/Hazard Mitigation Plan Questionnaire Distribution Jurisdictions Town of Awendaw City of Charleston City of Folly Beach Town of Hollywood City of Isle of Palms Town of Kiawah Island Town of Lincolnville Town of McClellanville Town of Meggett Town of Mt. Pleasant City of North Charleston Town of Ravenel Town of Rockville Town of Seabrook Island Town of Sullivan’s Island State/Federal Agencies SCEPD USDOI SC Sea Grant Consortium USGS SC Dept. of Insurance SC Dept. of Education SC Dept. Archives & History SC DHEC OCRM NOAA - Coastal Service Ctr. FEMA SC DNR SC DOT SC DNR - State Hydrologist SC DHEC - Dam Safety SC DHEC - Env. Health USACOE NOAA NWS USC Hazards Research Lab State Fire Marshal SC Budget & Control Board SC Dept. of Commerce The Citadel MUSC College of Charleston USDA DNR Non-Point Source Polln. SCDOT FEMA Div. Health Fac. Const. Planning Process 34 SCDHEC SC LLR - Real Estate SCDNR - Cons. Districts Clemson University Charleston Regional Agencies BCD COG Chas. Co. PRC Charleston County Administrators/Directors County Administrator DCA Assessment & Mapping DCA Community Service DCA Operations DCA Support Assessor EPD Grants Administration Libraries Planning Public Works Risk Management Solid Waste Private Sector Organizations Mun. Assoc. of SC ISO SCAHM SC Assoc. of Co. Nat. Trust for Historic Pres SCAPA Anchor Post Co. American Red Cross Boy Scouts of America Neighborhood Reinvestment Corp. Charleston Southern University Dewees Island Planning Process 35 Attachment 2-C: Members of the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Project Committee Name Representing Randy Pierce, Town Administrator Seabrook Island Michelle McClellan, Town Administrator McClellanville Randy Robinson, Building Official Sullivan’s Island Eric DeMoura, Town Administrator Mt. Pleasant Ellie Brabham, Town Administrator Meggett Linda Tucker, City Administrator Isle of Palms Rick Williams, Building Official North Charleston Bruce Spicher, Building Official Kiawah Island Riley Bradham, Mayor Rockville Jacquelyn Heyward, Mayor Hollywood Laura Cabiness, Director, Public Service Dept. Charleston William Wallace, Town Administrator Awendaw Mark Bloomer, Planning Administrator Ravenel Eric Lutz, Floodplain Manager Folly Beach Charles B. Duberry, Mayor Lincolnville Robert Wise, District Manager James Island PSD Mary Trussell, District Manager North Charleston District and the North Charleston Sewer District Charles Feather, Manager St. Andrews PSD Chief Colleen Walz, Fire Chief St. John’s Fire District Chief Doc Matthews, Fire Chief St. Paul’s Fire District Kin Hill, General Manager Charleston Water System H. Clay Duffie, General Manager Mt. Pleasant Water Works Thomas J. O’Rourk, Executive Director Charleston County PRC Kevin Walsh, Executive Director St. Andrews Park & Playground Commission Gary McJunkin, Director Cooper River Parks & Playground Commission Dana Enck, Campus Safety Coordinator Charleston County School District Dr. Norman Levine, Associate Professor College of Charleston Randy Beaver, Director of Environmental Health & Safety College of Charleston Carl Simmons, Director Charleston County Jordan Bradway, Emergency Manager Roper St. Francis Jurisdictions file:///C:/Users/bsawth/AppData/Roaming/Microsoft/Word/Attachments and Tables for Plan/Section 2 - Planning Process/Attachment 2-C - Members of the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Project Committee 2015-2016.xlsx Planning Process 36 Members of the Project Impact committees also provide input into the planning process as they determine projects to perform under this initiative. These committees have broad-scale representation from multiple public, private, and non-profit organizations with an interest in hazard mitigation in the Charleston County Area. Name Representing Maria Cox Lamm, State NFIP Coordinator SC Dept. of Natural Resources Michael Black, District Maintenance Engineer SC Dept. of Transportation Elizabeth Von Kolnitz, Coastal Services Project Coordinator SC DHEC Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management Ann Roberson, Executive Assistant to the Director SC Dept. of Insurance Melissa Berry Potter, Planner SC Emergency Management Division Sara Brown, Floodplain Mgmt. Services Program Manager US Army Corps of Engineers Noel M. Hurley, Jr., Assistant District Chief US Geological Survey Name Representing Fredric R. Durrette, Safety Officer Chas. Co. Parks & Recreation Commission Toy Glennon, County Tax Assessor Chas. Co. Assessor John Carullo, Planner III Chas. Co. Planning Cathy Haynes, Chief of Opperations Chas. Co. Emergency Preparedness Dept. Neil Desai, Stormwater Engineer Chas. Co. Public Works Mario Formisano, EM / Director of Emergency Services Dorchester County Name Representing Dr. Peter Jenkins, Assistant Professor Charleston Southern University Ben Myers, Volunteer Carolina Lowcountry Chapter of the American Red Cross Scott Sampson, President (Architect with Schmitt Sampson Architects) Construction Specification Institute Catherine S. Robinson, Executive Director Historic Charleston Foundation Bill Hyatt, HEPACO, Inc. Local Emergency Planning Committee Private Sector Organizations Charleston Regional Agencies/County Administrators/Directors State/Federal Agencies file:///C:/Users/bsawth/AppData/Roaming/Microsoft/Word/Attachments and Tables for Plan/Section 2 - Planning Process/Attachment 2-C - Members of the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Project Committee 2015-2016.xlsx Planning Process 37 Attachment 2-D: Recognizing & Adopting the Committee/Plan Name of Jurisdiction/Entity Date Originally Recognized by Governing Council Town of Lincolnville June 2, 1999 Town of Awendaw June 3, 1999 Town of McClellanville June 7, 1999 Town of Mt. Pleasant June 8, 1999 Unincorporated Charleston County June 15, 1999 Town of Rockville June 21, 1999 Town of Kiawah Island June 22, 1999 Town of Seabrook Island June 22, 1999 Town of Ravenel June 29, 1999 Town of Meggett July 15, 1999 Town of Sullivan’s Island July 20, 1999 City of North Charleston September 9, 1999 City of Charleston September 20, 1999 City of Folly Beach August 22, 2000 City of Isle of Palms August 27, 2002 Commissioners of Public Works – Town of Mt. Pleasant May 19, 2003 Town of James Island January 20, 2004 North Charleston District Commission January 12, 2004 North Charleston Sewer District Commission January 12, 2004 Cooper River Park & Playground Commission January 19, 2004 St. John’s Fire District Commission February 4, 2004 St. Paul’s Fire District Commission February 5, 2004 James Island Public Service District March 8, 2004 Charleston County Park & Recreation Commission March 29, 2004

Jurisdictions Represented and Participating in  the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan

Jurisdictions Represented and Participating in the Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan is rated 4.8/5 based on 797 customer reviews.

Are you in need of homework help?
Place your order and get 100% original work.




Get Homework Help Now



Related Posts

Why Choose Us
  1. Confidentiality and Privacy
  2. 100% Original Work
  3. 24/7 Customer Support
  4. Unlimited Free Revisions
  5. Experienced Writers
  6. Real-time Communication
  7. Affordable Prices
  8. Deadline Guaranteed