hazard mitigation plan - cosmopolis · 2015. 9. 22. · hazard mitigation plan prepared for the...

Hazard Mitigation Plan

Prepared for the City of Cosmopolis, Washington

Final

November 2010

626 Columbia Street NW Suite 2A Olympia, WA 98501-9000 360.570.4400

City of Cosmopolis Hazard Mitigation Plan November 2010 Final i

Table of Contents

Section 1 Plan Development ............................................................................ 1

1.1 Plan Development Process ........................................................................................... 1

1.2 Hazard Mitigation Planning Team .................................................................................. 1

1.3 Public Involvement ......................................................................................................... 2

Section 2 City Profile ....................................................................................... 3

2.1 Physical Setting ............................................................................................................. 3

2.2 Population and Development Trends ............................................................................ 5

2.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ............................................................................... 5

2.4 Implications for Hazard Mitigation Planning................................................................... 6

Section 3 Risk Assessment .............................................................................. 9

3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 9

3.2 Description of Hazards ................................................................................................ 11

3.2.1 Landslide ........................................................................................................ 11

3.2.2 Earthquake Hazard Profile .............................................................................. 15

3.2.3 Tsunami Hazard Profile .................................................................................. 20

3.2.4 Severe Storm Hazard Profile .......................................................................... 23

3.2.5 Flood Hazard Profile ....................................................................................... 28

3.2.6 Volcano (Ash Fallout) ..................................................................................... 32

3.2.7 Wildland Fire Hazard Profile ........................................................................... 35

3.2.8 Hazardous Materials Incident Profile .............................................................. 36

3.3 Prioritization of Hazards .............................................................................................. 41

Section 4 Capability Assessment ................................................................... 43

4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 43

4.2 Legal and Administrative Capability ............................................................................. 43

4.3 Fiscal Capability .......................................................................................................... 44

4.4 Technical Capability .................................................................................................... 44

Section 5 Mitigation Strategy ........................................................................ 45

5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 45

5.2 Mitigation Goals and Objectives .................................................................................. 48

5.3 Mitigation Measures..................................................................................................... 49

5.4 Implementation of Mitigation Measures ....................................................................... 49

City of Cosmopolis Hazard Mitigation Plan November 2010 Final ii

Section 6 Plan Adoption and Maintenance .................................................... 56

6.1 Plan Adoption .............................................................................................................. 56

6.2 Plan Evaluation and Update ........................................................................................ 56

6.3 Plan Implementation through Existing Programs ......................................................... 56

6.4 Continued Public Involvement ..................................................................................... 57

List of Tables

Table 1. City of Cosmopolis Hazard Mitigation Planning Team ................................................... 2 Table 2. Climate Summary for Aberdeen, WA ............................................................................. 3 Table 3. Demographic Profile of Cosmopolis ............................................................................... 5 Table 4. Critical Facilities ............................................................................................................. 7 Table 5. Representative Earthquakes in Grays Harbor County from 1700 to 1989 ................... 17 Table 6. Representative Earthquakes in Grays Harbor County from 1990 to 2004 ................... 17 Table 7. Damage Effects as Measured on the Mercalli Scale and Compared to the Numerical Magnitude of an Earthquake ....................................................................................................... 17 Table 8. Prioritization of Hazards ............................................................................................... 42 Table 9. Cosmopolis’ Technical Capability ................................................................................ 44 Table 10. Hazard Mitigation Measures ...................................................................................... 50

List of Figures

Figure 1. City of Cosmopolis ........................................................................................................ 4 Figure 2. City of Cosmopolis Critical Facilities ............................................................................. 8 Figure 3. City of Cosmopolis Contours ...................................................................................... 13 Figure 4. City of Cosmopolis Slopes .......................................................................................... 14 Figure 5. Cascadia Subduction Zone ......................................................................................... 16 Figure 6. City of Cosmopolis Liquefaction Susceptibility ........................................................... 19 Figure 7. City of Cosmopolis Tsunami Hazard .......................................................................... 22 Figure 8. High Wind Producing Storm Track ............................................................................. 24 Figure 9. City of Cosmopolis 100 Year and 500 Year Flood ...................................................... 31

List of Appendices

Appendix A – Public Involvement Appendix B – Plan Adoption Appendix C – City Participation in the NFIP

City of Cosmopolis Hazard Mitigation Plan November 2010 Final 1

Section 1 Plan Development

1.1 Plan Development Process This hazard mitigation plan (HMP) was developed for the City of Cosmopolis, Washington (City) to reduce the risks to people and property from various natural hazards. The City of Cosmopolis and vicinity are susceptible to many natural hazards which can have significant economic and social impacts. The City has developed this HMP in order to avoid and minimize the potential impacts of natural hazards.

The HMP development process included the following steps:

Characterization of the community to identify areas of greatest risk from potential hazards (Section 2)

Identification of hazards that could affect the community and assessment of the vulnerability of life and property to the potential impacts of those hazards (Section 3)

Assessment of the community’s capability to mitigate the potential impacts of natural hazards (Section 4)

Development of a mitigation strategy, including mitigation goals and mitigation measures intended to implement those goals (Section 5)

Adoption of the HMP and development of a process for maintaining and updating the HMP (Section 6)

This HMP was developed by City staff and representatives from the community. The City contracted with HDR Engineering, Inc. (Jan 6, 2010) to guide the HMP development process and prepare the HMP document. General information relating to the development of HMPs was provided by the Washington State Emergency Management Division (EMD) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

Material developed for the HMP was provided to Bill Sidor, City Building Official, and community representatives for review. Proposed hazard mitigation measures were developed jointly by HDR Engineering, Inc and City staff, and distributed to community representatives for review. Several meetings were held to discuss the materials and review comments. A draft of the HMP was prepared and presented to the City Council at their regular meeting on May 19, 2010. Documentation of these meetings and presentations is included in Appendix A.

Funding for the development of this HMP was provided by a grant from the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Planning Grant Program. Upon approval and adoption of this HMP, the City will become eligible for grant funding from the Washington State Hazard Mitigation Grant Program or FEMA’s Pre-Disaster Mitigation competitive program, which may be used to implement the mitigation measures recommended in this HMP.

1.2 Hazard Mitigation Planning Team A Hazard Mitigation Planning Team (HMPT) was organized to provide input and feedback to help ensure that a variety of perspectives were included in the process. The HMPT included


representatives of local government, industry, and the community at large. A series of workshops were held throughout the HMP development process, during which the HMPT reviewed draft material, provided local knowledge of historical occurrences of hazards in Cosmopolis, and provided comments and feedback on the planning process.

Documentation of these workshops is provided in Appendix A.

The active participation of the HMPT members was integral to the success of the HMP development process. The Cosmopolis HMPT consisted of the individuals listed in Table 1.

Table 1. City of Cosmopolis Hazard Mitigation Planning Team Name Affiliation

Bill Sidor Bldg Official, City of Cosmopolis Darrin Raines Public Works Director, City of Cosmopolis Bob Smith Fire Chief, City of Cosmopolis Casey Stratton Police Chief, City of Cosmopolis Karen Cox Council Person, City of Cosmopolis Carl Sperring Council Person, City of Cosmopolis Julia Gibb/Theresa Julius Grays Harbor Council of Governments Edgar Devore Citizen - Historian Jim Phipps Citizen – Retired College Prof. - Oceanography Dale Andrews Citizen Connie Sipe Citizen Mike Brown Citizen Harry Beeler Citizen – Retired College Prof. Tammi Hickle Superintendent, Cosmopolis School District Jerry Louthain HDR Engineering, Inc Rona Spellecacy HDR Engineering, Inc

1.3 Public Involvement Public involvement was encouraged throughout the HMP development process. Representative members of the community actively participated in the HMPT (see Section 1.2). In addition, a public open house was held on May 11, 2010 to provide information about the HMP process and to collect information and feedback from the public for incorporation into the HMP. Appendix A includes the flyer that was prepared for the announcement of the Open House and the sign-up sheet showing the members of the public who attended. Notices of the Open House were posted around the City and advertised in the Montesano Vidette on April 29 and May 6. The Open House was conducted in a poster session format where maps and exhibits were posted around the room and staff was available to describe the posted information as well as to respond to questions. Information was provided on the activity to date with the HMPT as well as what the overall purpose and what the content would be for the HMP being developed for the City. The members of the public that attended were interested in the plan development process and provided favorable comments on the May 2010 Final Draft. No additional changes in the draft were suggested at the Open House.

Documentation of the various public involvement activities conducted as part of the HMP development process are included as Appendix A.


Section 2 City Profile

2.1 Physical Setting The City of Cosmopolis, Washington is located in Grays Harbor County on the shore of the Chehalis River at the entrance to the Grays Harbor Bay. Incorporated in 1891, the City of Cosmopolis is bordered by the City of Aberdeen to the north and west, and Grays Harbor County to the south and east. Mill Creek runs through the City and drains into the Chehalis River.

Cosmopolis’ land area is 1.23 square miles. The southern and western parts of the City adjacent to Grays Harbor County and Aberdeen are rolling hills, with elevations ranging from 40 to 240 feet in elevation. The northern and eastern parts of the City are relatively flat with elevations ranging from sea level to 40 feet in elevation.

The climate in Cosmopolis is generally mild, although windstorms are frequent in the winter months. Table 2 provides a summary of the climate conditions in nearby Aberdeen, WA.

Table 2. Climate Summary for Aberdeen, WA Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Annual Average Max. Temperature (F)

45.7 49.4 52.9 57.2 61.8 65.5 69.2 69.9 68.5 61.3 52 46.6 58.3

Average Min. Temperature (F)

34.5 35.2 36.7 39.4 43.9 48.5 51.2 51.9 48.7 43.7 38.7 35.7 42.4

Average Total Precipitation (in.)

12.74 9.79 8.88 5.75 3.66 2.68 1.21 1.62 3.5 7.42 12.45 13.56 83.07

Average Total Snowfall (in.)

4.5 2.0 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.1 8.7

Average Snow Depth (in.)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Source: Western Regional Climate Center, accessed July 8, 2009 Aberdeen, WA (450008) Period of Record: 7/1/1891 to 12/31/2008


Figure 1. City of Cosmopolis


2.2 Population and Development Trends Table 3 presents demographic information for Cosmopolis from the 2000 U.S. Census. The total population of Cosmopolis was 1,595 in 2000. The 2005 population, estimated by the Washington Office of Financial Management was 1,590. These figures reflect the relative stability of the City’s population. In 2000, there were 645 occupied housing units identified; this represents 94.7 percent of the total 681 housing units identified in Cosmopolis.

Table 3. Demographic Profile of Cosmopolis General Characteristics Number Percent

Total Population 1,595 N/A Male 785 49.2 Female 810 50.8 Median Age 38.6 N/A Under 5 100 6.3 65 years and over 237 14.9 Average Household size 2.34 N/A Total Housing Units 681 N/A Occupied Units 645 94.7

Source: U.S. Census 2000, accessed July 8, 2009 Source: Washington Office of Financial Management, 2005

The Weyerhaeuser Pulp Mill, which closed in October 2006, along with forestry once accounted for the bulk of employment in the City. In recent years forestry industries have declined and residents have found more diversified job opportunities. Many residents now work at Stafford Creek Corrections Center, the Bio-Diesel Plant in Aberdeen, the Westport Shipyard, Sierra Pacific Industries, Simpson Door Plant, and tourism related industries.

The median household income in 2000 was $51,000 per year. Cosmopolis was also reported by the 2000 Census to have 7.4 percent of the population living at or below the poverty level.

2.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure This section identifies the types and locations of critical facilities and infrastructure in Cosmopolis. For the purpose of this HMP, critical facilities and infrastructure include four categories:

Emergency Response and Public Services – this category includes facilities critical to the function of emergency response and critical public services, such as police and fire departments, hospitals, public works facilities and infrastructure, and evacuation or shelter sites.

Community Services and Vulnerable Populations – this category includes facilities that are utilized by highly vulnerable segments of the population, such as schools, parks and services for the elderly.

Transportation Routes – this category includes key transportation facilities and infrastructure that are essential to facilitate emergency response, including SR 101.

Water Supply Infrastructure – this category includes key water supply infrastructure. The City’s drinking water is supplied by the City of Aberdeen.


Table 4 provides a summary of Cosmopolis’ critical facilities and infrastructure. The locations of Cosmopolis’ critical facilities and infrastructure are identified in Figure 2.

2.4 Implications for Hazard Mitigation Planning The City of Cosmopolis faces several challenges that affect its ability to mitigate potential hazards. The City’s ability to prepare for and respond to disasters is limited by the City’s location and topography. Due to the low elevation in parts of the City, virtually every critical facility is vulnerable to certain hazards. Similarly, the entire population of Cosmopolis could be impacted by several hazards described in this HMP. Limited access to evacuation routes and designated evacuation areas could be exacerbated if key transportation routes are disrupted by a disaster. Certain areas of low elevation are prone to flooding; however, as shown in Figure 3, there are areas of high ground within the City limits that could provide some protection during hazard events.

The implications of these issues with regard to hazard mitigation were considered throughout the development of this HMP.


Table 4. Critical Facilities Facility Type Facility ID Facility Name

Emergency Response And Public Services

E-1 Cosmopolis Police Station – 1312 1st St E-2 Cosmopolis City Hall – 1300 1st St E-3 Cosmopolis Fire Hall – 111 D St E-4 Cosmopolis Public Works – 1820 1st St E-5 Main Pump Station (sewer) – 901 1st St E-6 Pump Station (sewer) – 507 H St E-7 Pump Station (sewer) – 524 1st St E-8 Pump Station (sewer) – 259 Holly Ln E-9 Pump Station (sewer) – 308 Andrews Ave E-10 Mill Creek Dam – Mill Creek Park E-11 Retention Ponds - Paisley (2) – Andrews Ave E-12 Weyerhaeuser Pulp Mill – 1701 1st St E-13 Ind. Water Line (Junction City to Pulp Mill Site E-14 Bonneville Substation – 2100 Arcadia E-15 GH PUD Substation – 1107 2nd St E-16 Dike/Levee – 100 to 900 Blk 1st St E-17 Flood Gates – 500 Blk 1st St E-18 Pump Station (sewer) – 1019A Stanford Dr. E-19 Retention Pond – Green Crow Prop E-20 GH PUD Node – 221 Myrtle St

Facility Type Facility ID Facility Name

Community Services and Vulnerable Populations

C-1 Old Police/Fire Facility – 1101 1st St/19 F St C-2 City Cemetery – 1220 Altenau C-3 Makarenko Park – 1200 Stanford Dr C-4 Maxi-Mini Mart – 1025 1st St C-5 Post Office – 114 F St C-6 Lions Club Park – 601 2nd St C-7 Cosmopolis Grade School – 1439 4th St C-8 Ferrell Gas – 1620 1st St C-9 Toy Room Day Care – 117 I St C-10 Highlands Golf Course – 1709 5th St C-11 Fire Museum – 1500 5th St C-12 Cosi Gospel Chapel – 302 F St C-13 GH County Shop – 632 4th St C-14 Assisted Living Facility


Water Supply Infrastructure (Water Supplied by City of Aberdeen)

W-1 Pump Station – 1200 Stanford Dr W-2 Pump Station – 1429 Franklin Dr W-3 Pump Station – 101 Alder Dr W-4 Water Storage Tank – 1500 Washington


Transportation Routes T-1 Highway 101(First St)/ Bridge (500 Blk 1st St) T-2 Blue Slough Rd


Figure 2. City of Cosmopolis Critical Facilities


Section 3 Risk Assessment

3.1 Introduction The 2007 Washington State Hazard Mitigation Plan, the 2005 Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, the 2003 City of Aberdeen Hazard Mitigation and Preparedness Plan, the 2009 City of Hoquiam Hazard Mitigation Plan and the 2008 City of Westport Hazard Mitigation Plan were reviewed and selected information from these plans were incorporated into the Cosmopolis HMP. These Plans were used as the basis for selecting the hazards to be addressed in the Cosmopolis HMP. The State and County Plans identified and described the natural hazards that have the greatest potential to adversely affect people, environment, economy, and property in the State of Washington and Grays Harbor County, respectively. The natural hazards identified and described by the State include: avalanche, drought, earthquake, flood, landslide, severe storm, tsunami, volcano, and wildland fire. The State selected these natural hazards through a rigorous review process that considered scientific data, history of occurrences, damage reports, and potential impacts to people.

Of the hazards identified by the State, Grays Harbor County included the following hazards in the County’s All Hazards Mitigation Plan: earthquake, flood, hazardous materials incidents, landslide, tornado, tsunami, volcano, wildland fire, windstorm, and winter storm.

The City of Aberdeen Plan primarily addressed the flooding and tsunami hazards, but also addressed earthquake, winter storm, landslide, wildland or forest fire, volcano, hazardous materials, and school violence, as potential hazards.

Based on a review of the hazards identified in the State, County, City of Aberdeen, City of Hoquiam and City of Westport plans, and a review of these hazards which have impacted the City of Cosmopolis, the planning team selected the following natural hazards to be included in this HMP: severe storm (including windstorm and winter storm), flood, earthquake, tsunami, wildland fire, landslide, volcano (ash fallout), and hazardous materials incidents.

These hazards were selected because they are considered the most likely to occur and/or cause significant impacts to life and property in Cosmopolis. Each hazard is described in detail below. Applicable information relating to the description and occurrence of these hazards that was included in the State and County Plans was incorporated into this HMP. It assesses vulnerability by providing information on the impact of the hazard on the community, in terms of identifying assets and estimating losses.

The vulnerability analysis describes characteristics and locations of the uses and populations who are susceptible to damage. The purpose of the vulnerability analysis is to define the planning context within which the reconstruction, mitigation, and preparedness plans are implemented. In order to accomplish this task, the City reviewed the information contained in the Grays Harbor County HMP. While the study was conducted in July 2001, it was determined by the planning team, based on review and analysis, that this data remained current. In order to conduct its own analysis, the City utilized a ranking system of High, Moderate, or Low for each hazards probability of occurrence, vulnerability and risk rating.


These levels are assigned based on a subjective estimate of their combination impact on the City of Cosmopolis. The risk rating is assigned on the probability of a hazard occurring over the next 20 years.

The risk rating will help focus the emergency management program on the hazards of greatest risk.

A HIGH risk rating warrants major program efforts to prepare for, respond to, recover from and mitigate the hazard.

A MODERATE risk rating warrants modest program efforts to prepare for, respond to, recover from, and mitigate the hazard.

A LOW risk rating warrants minimal efforts to prepare for, respond to, recover from, or mitigate the hazard beyond general awareness training.

Based on the County and other local jurisdictional Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Analysis (HIVA) reports – severe storms, earthquakes, floods, hazardous materials releases, and landslides have been identified as the most likely natural hazards to occur in the Grays Harbor Region. They have been analyzed in the plan for the Grays Harbor region because they fall into the following criteria:

1) There is a high probability of the natural hazard occurring in Grays Harbor County within the next 20 years.

2) There is potential for significant damage to impacted buildings and infrastructure.

3) There is potential for loss of life.

According to the Grays Harbor County Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Analysis, the following natural hazards meet the above criteria:

Hazard Grays Harbor County HIVA Assessment Earthquake High Probability of Occurrence High Vulnerability High Risk Severe Storm High Probability of Occurrence High Vulnerability High Risk Flood High Probability of Occurrence High Vulnerability High Risk Landslide High Probability of Occurrence Low Vulnerability Moderate Risk


Tsunami Low Probability of Occurrence High Vulnerability High Risk Wildfire Low Probability of Occurrence Moderate Vulnerability Low Risk Volcano Ash Fallout Low Probability of Occurrence Moderate Vulnerability Low Risk Hazardous Materials High Probability of Occurrence Releases High Vulnerability High Risk

3.2 Description of Hazards This section provides a description of each of the hazards included in this HMP. Each hazard profile includes: a definition of the hazard; a description of the hazard; the history of occurrences of the hazard in Cosmopolis and its vicinity; potential effects of the hazard; and an assessment of the vulnerability of the City’s critical facilities and people to the hazard. This information is used to prioritize hazards, mitigation goals and mitigation measures in this HMP.

3.2.1 Landslide Definition

A landslide is the movement of rock, soil and debris down a hillside or slope.

Description

The term landslide includes a wide range of ground movement, such as rock falls, deep failure of slopes, and shallow debris flows. Ground failures that result in landslides occur when gravity overcomes the strength of a slope (Washington State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2007). While gravity is the primary reason for a landslide, there can be contributing factors, including:

Saturation, by snowmelt or heavy rains, that weaken rock or soils on slopes

Erosion by rivers, glaciers, or ocean waves that create over-steep slopes or remove support from the base of the slopes

Ground shaking caused by earthquakes greater than magnitude 4.0 that destabilize slopes.

Volcanic eruptions that produce loose ash deposits and debris flows

Excess weight, from accumulation of rain or snow, from stockpiling of rock or ore, from waste piles, or from manmade structures, that stress weak slopes.

Human action, such as construction, logging or road building that disturbs soils and slopes.


Landslides are most likely to occur where certain combinations of geologic formations are present. For example, groundwater can accumulate and zones of weakness can develop when layers of sand and gravel lay above less permeable silt and clay layers (Washington State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2007).

Landslides typically occur on slopes and in areas where they have taken place before. Areas in Washington State historically subject to landslides include the Columbia River Gorge, the banks of Lake Roosevelt, the Interstate 5 corridor, U.S. 101 Highway corridor along the Pacific Coast and from the coast to Olympia, in the Cascades, Olympics, and Blue Mountains and along Puget Sound coastal bluffs (Washington State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2007).

History

Landslides take lives, destroy buildings, interrupt transportation systems, damage utilities, and cover marine habitat. Washington has a history of landslides; however, Cosmopolis is not known as an area that is considered to be at high risk for landslides (Washington State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2004).

Although there is not a history of significant damage from landslides in Cosmopolis, there is a continuing potential source of concern for landslides along Mill Creek Drive in an area where the hillside is very close to Mill Creek Drive and Mill Creek. In this area, a slide contributed to the failure of Mill Creek Dam in November 2008. In addition, Figure 3 shows elevation contours and Figure 4 shows the location of steep slopes, which have the greatest potential to cause landslides in Cosmopolis.

Effects

The most likely effects of a landslide in Cosmopolis are road closures and associated economic effects, particularly for evacuation routes such as US 101 South and Blue Slough Road. A significant landslide could also result in damage to homes and other property.

Vulnerability of Critical Facilities and People

A significant landslide from the Mill Creek area could have devastating effects on people living along the Mill Creek drainage area. In addition, infrastructure such as roads and utilities would be affected. A sewer line located along Mill Creek Drive from Holly Lane could be vulnerable to landslide.


Figure 3. City of Cosmopolis Contours


Figure 4. City of Cosmopolis Slopes


3.2.2 Earthquake Hazard Profile Definition

An earthquake is the sudden release of stored energy. Most earthquakes occur along a fracture within the earth, called a fault. The shaking caused by this sudden shift is often very small, but occasionally large earthquakes produce very strong ground shaking. It is this strong shaking and its consequences – ground failure, landslides, liquefaction, and tsunami – that damage buildings and structures and disrupt the regional economy (Washington State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2007).

Description

Cosmopolis is subject to frequent earthquakes, but most of the events are small and not noticed. Occasionally a large earthquake will strike the region with serious repercussions. The Washington State Hazard Mitigation Plan estimates the probability of an earthquake event similar to the 2001 Nisqually earthquake, which had a noticeable impact in Cosmopolis, is one in every 35 years. The probability of an occurrence of an earthquake similar to the 1949 Olympia event, the largest recorded earthquake in Washington State history, is one in every 110 years (Washington State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2007).

Earthquakes are caused when a fracture in blocks of earth causes the blocks to move relative to one another resulting in a sudden release of energy. Shaking or ground motion is produced by this sudden slip, which releases a series of seismic waves causing the ground to vibrate. The intensity of the ground shaking depends on the peak velocity, depth, acceleration, frequency, energy released, and duration of the seismic waves radiating from the earthquake source. Soft soils can amplify the ground motion when seismic waves pass from bedrock to sediment. This will produce a variation in ground shaking effects from one location to another. Aftershocks may follow the main shock, but this has not been typical of earthquakes in Grays Harbor County.

Factors influencing the strength of an earthquake are: intensity, depth, distance from the source, and local soil conditions. An earthquake is felt as ground shaking and is measured in units of magnitude. Magnitude is a number that characterizes the relative size of an earthquake measured by a seismograph. For example, an earthquake reported as a magnitude of less than 3.0 would not be noticeable, while an earthquake with a magnitude of 5.0 or greater will generally cause damage to structures. Earthquake magnitude is a logarithmic measure of earthquake size. In simple terms, this means that at the same distance from the earthquake, the shaking will be 10 times as large during a magnitude 5 earthquake as during a magnitude 4 earthquake. The total amount of energy released by the earthquake, however, goes up by a factor of 32.

Washington State is vulnerable to earthquakes originating from three sources: in the subducting slab, in the overriding plate, and between the colliding plates. Statewide, the most damaging events have historically occurred at depths of 15-60 miles in the subducting plate.

Cosmopolis is vulnerable to damaging earthquakes. The major threat creating earthquakes in the area originates in the Cascadia Subduction zone. Washington is situated near a tectonic plate boundary where the Juan de Fuca plate dives beneath the North American plate. As the Juan de Fuca plate slips under the North American plate, faults develop at their boundaries and at the surface. Figure 5 shows this boundary graphically


Figure 5. Cascadia Subduction Zone

Source: Wikipedia Encyclopedia

Within the Juan de Fuca plate, earthquakes occur at a depth of up to 60 miles and are referred to as deep quakes, while shallow quakes will occur within 20 miles of the earth’s surface. A strong earthquake off-shore can cause shaking across an entire region. Earthquakes along shallow faults are likely to cause intense local shaking. A very powerful event occurring at the interface between the tectonic plates rarely happens. The last interface quake along the Washington coast was in 1700. Scientists estimate an event of this magnitude will only happen every 350 to 500 years.

Ground failures due to shaking include ground cracking, rock falls, landslides, slumps and liquefaction. Liquefaction, a process caused by shaking where water saturated soils temporarily lose their strength, causes sediment strength to temporarily fail. This phenomenon can cause serious damage to structures and buildings during an earthquake. Fill dirt along marine fronts are also vulnerable to liquefaction.

History

Reports of earthquakes in Grays Harbor County are available from pioneer accounts in the 1800s to current real time observations found on the internet. The 1949 Olympia earthquake measured 7.1 magnitude and was large enough to be recorded at many seismograph stations around the world. Table 5 presents a summary of representative earthquakes that have affected Grays Harbor County in the past.

The two most recent damaging earthquakes to affect Grays Harbor County were the 1999 Satsop and the 2001 Nisqually events. A magnitude 5.8 deep earthquake occurred 11 miles north of Satsop on July 2, 1999. There were no fatalities, but there was heavy damage to the Grays Harbor County Courthouse. The PUD Station in Aberdeen, which is the main connection between Grays Harbor and the Bonneville Power Administration, was also damaged. Considering the magnitude and proximity to so many buildings and structures, the impact to Grays Harbor County was relatively minimal. There were no reported damages however, from either of these earthquakes within the City of Cosmopolis. There have been no significant


earthquakes affecting Grays Harbor County since 2004. Table 6 presents a summary of recent earthquakes that impacted Grays Harbor County.

The Nisqually earthquake occurred February 28, 2001 with the epicenter about 11 miles northeast of the City of Olympia. It was a deep magnitude 6.8 event and due to extensive damage in several counties, was declared Federal Disaster #1361. Impacts included major traffic disruptions; small power outages; and temporary closure of state offices. Cracks in roads and buildings and falling bricks also resulted from the shaking.

Table 5. Representative Earthquakes in Grays Harbor County from 1700 to 1989 Date Features

January 26, 1700 Cascadia interface event

December 12, 1880 Two shocks felt

March 27, 1884 Earthquake felt in Hoquiam, WA November 30, 1891 Slight earthquake on Grays Harbor

March 6, 1904 Washington coast to Aberdeen and Hoquiam January 11, 1909 Grays Harbor earthquake

November 13, 1939 Slight damage April 13, 1949 Magnitude 7.1

December 13, 1971 Magnitude 3.6 August 23, 1982 Magnitude 3.6

Source: Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005

Table 6. Representative Earthquakes in Grays Harbor County from 1990 to 2004 Date Magnitude and Depth in Kilometers (km)

October 1991 Magnitude 3.4; depth 38.7 km August 1997 Magnitude 3.4; depth unknown July 1999 Magnitude 5.8; depth 40.7 km February 2001 Magnitude 6.8; depth 52 km June 2001 Magnitude 5.0; depth 40.7 km August 2004 Magnitude 3.5; depth 12.4 km

Source: Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005

Effects

An earthquake, depending on the magnitude, location, and depth, can go unnoticed or cause significant destruction. Potential damage based on what people feel and their observations is measured on the Mercalli Modified Intensity Scale and can be equated to an earthquake’s magnitude to provide a useful picture of possible effects. (See Table 7)

Table 7. Damage Effects as Measured on the Mercalli Scale and Compared to the Numerical Magnitude of an Earthquake

Modified Mercalli Intensity Magnitude Potential Damage

V 4.3 – 4.9 Very Light VI 4.9 – 5.4 Light

VII 5.5 – 6.1 Moderate VIII 6.2 – 6.9 Moderate to Heavy

Source: Geography Exchange


The intensity of an earthquake will produce conditions such as ground cracking, liquefaction, tsunamis, and/or landslides that cause the actual harm to people, buildings, and structures. For example, people could be injured or killed in a collapsing building; ground could give way under bridge supports, disrupting delivery of emergency services and traffic flow; landslides could block streams and have serious repercussions on fisheries. There can also be temporary closures of government offices, schools and businesses, loss of power and damage to facilities such as water and sewer systems.

Earthquake damage can be slight to moderate in well-built structures, but considerable in older or poorly constructed buildings. Of particular concern is damage to masonry buildings built before 1950. Falling bricks, especially from chimneys, are a typical consequence of ground shaking. Water towers or tanks located on steep slopes subject to liquefaction are also vulnerable.

Power and communication disruptions can be expected, and there is the potential for ruptures in gas or other utility lines. A significant earthquake could also have a devastating effect on the local economy. People would be faced with damage to homes and businesses; the tourism industry would be impacted; temporary or permanent business closures due to damage could lead to loss of jobs.

A significant earthquake, occurring nearby or at a distant location, could generate a tsunami which could be devastating to the coastal area, including major portions of the city. The tsunami hazard is described in Section 3.2.3. Landslides could also result from an earthquake as described in Section 3.2.1.


Due to the geography of Cosmopolis and its proximity to the Cascadia Subduction Zone, all areas of the City are vulnerable to structural damage due to liquefaction and ground shaking. All of the City’s critical facilities and people are vulnerable to the impacts of earthquakes, with the severity of the damages dependent upon the location and severity of the quake. There could be from 20 to 100 % of the population and critical facilities affected by an earthquake. In addition, there are many buildings in the City, both residential and non-residential, which are very old and as such, are more vulnerable to earthquakes than buildings constructed more recently. Also, many of these older buildings are constructed in low-lying areas, some of which may be constructed on fill material, which makes these buildings more vulnerable to earthquakes than buildings constructed on natural ground. The City’s water distribution lines and more significantly, the water transmission line from the City of Aberdeen, which is the City’s only water source, are also vulnerable.

Damage from an earthquake occurs to structures in areas subject to liquefaction where soil, especially water-saturated soil, loses strength in response to ground shaking. Damage to structures will increase based on ground shaking during an earthquake. Ground shaking will generally be stronger on soft soils (See Figure 6). A method for classifying the intensity of ground shaking was developed based on studies of near surface geology by Robert Borcherdt, USGS, in the mid 1990’s. This methodology was simplified and the modification was implemented by the Building Seismic Safety Council and FEMA in the 1997 edition of the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program. The classification system is included in the 2003 International Building Code adopted for use in Washington State.


Figure 6. City of Cosmopolis Liquefaction Susceptibility


3.2.3 Tsunami Hazard Profile Definition

A tsunami is a series of waves generated by an undersea disturbance, such as a large earthquake, major sub-marine slide, or volcanic eruption. From the area of the disturbance, waves will travel outward in all directions, much like the ripples caused by throwing a rock into a pond (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

Description

Tsunami waves come onshore resembling a series of quickly rising tides. The waves are often preceded by a dramatic lowering of the water level, which can result in the tragic effect of attracting people to the water’s edge to observe the disturbance. The energy of the waves is squeezed into smaller and smaller volumes as they move toward the shore, creating higher waves and faster currents. When the tsunami reaches and runs up on the shore, the force of the water can cause devastating damage and loss of life. Tsunami events also typically consist of a series of waves of varying heights, so in some cases a second or third wave may be higher than the initial wave.

There are two types of tsunamis: distant source and local source. A distant source event is a series of waves traveling great distances across the Pacific Ocean generated by an undersea disturbance such as an earthquake in Alaska or Japan. Waves from a distant source tsunami take a number of hours to reach shore and there would be a reasonable amount of time to warn people near the coast. All tsunamis that have struck the Pacific coast in the past 100 years have been distant source events.

A local source event is a series of waves caused by an undersea disturbance near the coast and could be expected to cause massive damage and loss of life. The most likely local source tsunami would come from an earthquake in the Cascadia Subduction zone off the west coast of Washington (see Section 3.2.2).

When a tsunami is detected, a warning is issued to threatened areas. The Alaska Tsunami Warning Center monitors disturbances and issues tsunami warnings for the Washington coast. The Center calculates the danger and notifies communities at risk. Warnings for distant tsunamis will help communities react; however, a distant source tsunami could cause extensive damage to structures and potential loss of life.

There will be little or no time to send out widespread warnings of an imminent tsunami from a substantive local source earthquake in the Cascadia Subduction zone. The Tsunami Evacuation Map for Cosmopolis and South Aberdeen, published by the Washington Department of Natural Resources in July 2007, states: “A wave as high as 10 feet could reach the Cosmopolis/South Aberdeen area within an hour and a half of an earthquake.”

History

Although a tsunami is an extremely unusual event, several have been reported along the Pacific coast, December 1853, April 1868 and August 1872. The largest tsunami to impact Cosmopolis in recent history was a result of the March 27, 1964 Alaska earthquake. Cosmopolis was fortunate in that wave heights were not extremely high and no serious damage or loss of life occurred.

Although the 1964 Alaska earthquake produced the largest 20th-century tsunami on the Washington coast, the state has its own sources of tsunamis, and these have produced great waves recorded geologically in the last few thousand years. The most recent of these historic


tsunamis from the Cascadia Subduction zone was reported in January 1700; however, there is little or no recorded documentation of the magnitude or impacts on the West Coast from this major tsunami.

In 1700 a massive tsunami hit the Washington coast. Impacts were recorded as far west as Japan. Among the impacts to the Washington coast were significant inundation and subsidence upstream of coastal rivers including the Copalis River in Grays Harbor. Elevations dropped suddenly inland from the Copalis beach area, and a seawater deluge resulted in forested areas being killed. The remains of some of these standing dead evergreens can still be seen today, and are known as “The Ghost Forest” (from The Orphan Tsunami of 1700, Brian Atwater, UW Press, 2005).

Effects

The floodplain and coastal areas would be most harmed in the short term by a tsunami; however, the immediate impacts to emergency service providers would be felt county-wide.

The long term aftermath of a large tsunami event could be anticipated to have a devastating effect on the local economy in Cosmopolis.

Loss of life would be an expected outcome of a significant local source tsunami. Most deaths during a tsunami result from drowning, but death can also result from other health or stress-related issues such as heart attacks. There is a high probability of numerous casualties of varying degrees from such an event, as traffic accidents and structural failures would be expected not only from a tsunami event.

A significant tsunami event can be expected to cause disruption of power and other utilities, damage or loss of roads and bridges, contamination of water supplies, loss of essential communication systems, a large amount of debris, and traffic congestion. Dealing with evacuees would be a major challenge in the first days after the event. Damaged public facilities would have to be restored or replaced at considerable cost.


Although extremely rare, a tsunami potentially could have a devastating impact on Cosmopolis with the potential for large scale property damage and loss of life. The U.S. Geological Survey has estimated a 300-500 year frequency of occurrence of a Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake that would generate a local tsunami, as documented in the Washington State Hazard Mitigation Plan.

Figure 7 is a reproduction of a portion of the Tsunami Evacuation Map for the Cosmopolis and South Aberdeen area, published in July 2007 by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources. This figure shows a portion of the land area within the City as being in a Tsunami Hazard Zone-Greatest Risk with the remainder shown as Higher Ground. These zones are based on existing ground elevations.

Due to location and topography of Cosmopolis, and its proximity to the Pacific Ocean and Cascadia Subduction Zone, some of the critical facilities and people located in the lowland portion of the city are vulnerable to the effects of the tsunami hazard as shown on Figure 7.

Even though the elevation of any particular tsunami wave or the frequency of occurrence cannot be accurately predicted, this map can be used however by local residents and visitors to see where the higher ground areas are and the relative degree of safety from a tsunami, based strictly on elevation.


Figure 7. City of Cosmopolis Tsunami Hazard


3.2.4 Severe Storm Hazard Profile Definition

This profile includes descriptions of high winds and winter storms. The National Weather Service defines high winds as storms with sustained winds of 40 miles per hour (mph) or gusts of 58 mph or greater, not caused by thunderstorms, expected to last for an hour or more. A winter storm is defined as a storm with significant snowfall, ice and/or freezing rain; the quantity of precipitation varies by elevation. Heavy snowfall is four or more inches in a 12-hour period or six or more inches in a 24-hour period in a non-mountainous area. Winter storms of this magnitude are very rare in Cosmopolis, but the ice and snow associated with such storms can be a concern.

High winds also have the potential to contribute to coastal flooding caused by storm surge, astronomical high tides, or a combination of both. The severe storm hazard does not include potential impacts from heavy rainfall. The potential impacts of significant rain events and tidal flooding events are included in the discussion of the flood hazard (Section 3.2.5).

Description

High Winds

High winds are a serious hazard in Cosmopolis from October through March. In the fall and winter, surface winds from the southwest and west associated with storms move onto the coast from the Pacific Ocean. Most storms come on shore with a southwest to northeast airflow with the strongest winds from the south or southwest. These storms cause the most significant damage in the Cosmopolis area.

Windstorms and associated storm surges can cause coastal flooding. Although there is typically a direct relationship between windstorms and coastal flooding, this type of flooding will be addressed with the other types of flooding in the discussion of the flood hazard (Section 3.2.5).

The entire county is vulnerable to windstorms. High winds are particularly common along the coast. It is estimated that extreme wind velocities can be expected to reach 50 mph or greater at least once in every two years (State of Washington Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2007). Figure 8 depicts typical airflow patterns of windstorms in Cosmopolis.

A significant portion of the City is considered vulnerable to flooding; the most significant flooding occurs as a result of windstorms and wind-driven tides and waves. Floodplains in Cosmopolis are designated on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) produced by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and will be further discussed in the Flood Hazard Profile.

Winter Storms

Winter storms with snowfall or freezing rain in Cosmopolis result from atmospheric conditions due to warm high pressure from the south combining with cold low pressure from the northeast. The entire county is vulnerable to winter storms. Winter storms usually last three to five days and snow conditions have immobilized Grays Harbor County in the past causing both property and economic damages. The lowest winter temperatures are associated with easterly winds and it can take up to 36 hours for the temperature to warm up after a winter storm as weather conditions moderate and cloud cover traps daytime warmth.


Figure 8. High Wind Producing Storm Track

Source: National Weather Service, 2006

Effects

High Winds

Most storms with winds of more than 40 mph can be expected to cause some damage. Problems resulting from past windstorms include: power outages, property damage, transportation disruptions, coastal flooding, and school closures. Downed trees and blowing debris on roads have caused traffic problems. Debris alone scattered across roads may be enough to present dangerous driving conditions.

Power outages have caused large numbers of people in the county to be without electric power for extended periods of time over the years. For example, 50% of Grays Harbor PUD customers were without power in 1979 following a windstorm; a more recent storm in December 2007 caused power outages in over 90% of the county, leaving some customers without power for up to seven days. Power outages, a common occurrence during most windstorms, are usually a result of tree branches, limbs and downed trees falling or blowing on power lines. Sub stations can be knocked out disrupting power service.

It is important to recognize the length of outages in Grays Harbor, because this leads to a lot of the hardship to people and damage to livelihoods, and in most other areas of the state power outages do not last nearly as long. In Grays Harbor County residents need to be able to survive significantly longer than the three days that is usual in public announcements for disaster preparedness. A week is more like what people need to plan for. This fact makes the provision of shelters and food bank services that much more vital to each community here, than in non-coastal areas.

Also, a high number of elderly and poor residents live in this area. Grays Harbor has among the highest unemployment percentages of all 39 counties in Washington State. These people do not have reserves of food and water – they are very vulnerable to long periods of cold, cold food, etc.


It has been reported that the December 2007 storm was clocked locally at more than 100 mph gusts, but because there is no local Doppler radar, the severity was completely missed and is still under-reported to this day. Small cities during that event were unable to respond to the needs, e.g. provide public shelter, food and water; make welfare checks on seniors and sick and poor; communicate with residents re availability of services, etc.

Winter Storms

While snow accumulations during a winter storm tend to differ throughout the county; the most significant problems countywide result from traffic accidents and utility interruptions. Most problems due to winter storms are a result of vehicle accidents due to accumulation of snow and/or glaze ice on roads. Most accidents are caused by snow over frozen rain or during above-freezing temperatures, which melt snow and create a glaze of ice on road surfaces. Because of the low speed limits in Cosmopolis, most accidents caused by this type of road condition in Cosmopolis result in non-injury accidents such as “fender benders” and vehicles sliding into ditches, although serious injury accidents may occur. Snow and ice conditions also commonly constrain traffic flow which may result in injuries or fatalities.

Snowstorms cause problems on most county roads and highways. Highway 101 was closed due to heavy snow in 1996. In 2003, the Washington State Patrol responded to 22 accidents in the county in a 24-hour period due to snowy roads.

Utility interruptions have been a factor in all historical winter storms in the county. Power outages due to downed or damaged trees falling on power lines have resulted in service disruptions lasting from several hours to in excess of 24 hours. Telephone and other communication disruptions have also occurred; however, such disruptions are less frequent as new technologies have become available.

School delays and/or closures may occur due to snow accumulation or unsafe driving conditions. Business closures have occasionally occurred, most often in the tourism industry. Other problems that can accompany winter storms are structure fires due to dangerous heating sources, loss of heat in homes of elderly or disabled residents, and freezing or broken pipes. Wind chill, a cumulative effect of temperature and wind speed, is a factor which can cause health problems for children and the elderly.

History

High Winds

Windstorms have historically been frequent and important events in Cosmopolis and Grays Harbor County. Early settlers such as Henry Coonse recorded accounts of hard wind, southerly gales and rain during the winter of 1852. In 1855, “rough, squally weather on Grays Harbor, very cold, wind blowing a gale from the northwest” is described in the Michael Luark diary. P. W. Gilette writes that the hardest windstorm in 10 years occurred late December 1862. A severe windstorm was noted on May 6, 1889 and a gale blew down trees in Hoquiam on Christmas Day 1890.

Windstorms continued to make headlines in the early 1900s. They hampered jetty construction at Grays Harbor in late May 1900 and a storm on May 17, 1909 isolated the Grays Harbor area causing heavy damage. A huge storm destroyed the Moclips Beach Hotel, a fashionable resort, and other structures at Moclips Beach in February of 1911.


Several windstorms of impressive magnitude have occurred in Grays Harbor County which made national headlines, as described below.

The Great Blow Down

In January of 1921 there was a severe windstorm which became know as the “great blow down.” Wind velocity on Grays Harbor was estimated at 100 miles per hour. Ships and river craft broke loose of moorings, in some cases smashing into bridges, and whole sections of timber were blown down all along the west side of the Olympic Peninsula. The storm was reported to have caused significant damage to property and timber stands in the Cosmopolis area.

The Columbus Day Storm

On October 12, 1962 the strongest non-tropical windstorm recorded in the lower 48 states in American history struck Grays Harbor County. Peak wind gusts of 100 mph were recorded. This storm was compared to the devastating storm of 1921 and was selected the top weather event to occur in Washington State from 1900 to 1999. There was extensive damage with power and telephone outages throughout the entire county. Trees were blown down in the North Beach area and the Markham Branch of the Northern Pacific Railroad was blocked. Many trees were blown down in Copalis Beach and along the highway and the road was blocked from Montesano west to Grass Creek. Total damages in the county reported to be approximately 2.5 Million dollars.

The Inauguration Day Storm

January 20, 1993 a fierce windstorm hit western Washington. Five people were killed, state government was shut down, and at the height of the storm more than 750,000 residential and commercial customers were without power. Due to damages from the storm in the county, Grays Harbor County was included in federal disaster declaration #981 specified for this storm. There were widespread power outages.

Other recent windstorm events:

On October 31, 1994, rain and high winds downed trees and power lines, leaving 20,000 residents from Taholah to Elma without power.

On March 31, 1997, a windstorm with gusts to 71 mph caused power outages and resulted in three deaths in the region. It was reported that a kerosene lamp being used during the power outage caused a fire that heavily damaged a house north of Hoquiam.

In November 1998, 15,000 customers lost electricity as a result of high winds.

In 2002, toppled trees knocked out power to about 3,500 customers on December 14th and 1,000 customers on December 15th. Nearly one-third of Grays Harbor PUD customers were without power during parts of the night on November 23 and 24, 2002.

In November 2006, a windstorm toppled trees and knocked out power to about 8,000 customers. Wind gusts of 78mph were reported in Aberdeen.

December 2 – 4, 2007, severe windstorm caused many road blockages and power outages for up to one week. Approximately 90% of the county residences were without power.


Winter Storms

Winter storms with snow and icy conditions presented a challenge to early pioneers. The Henry Coonse diary describes a winter storm the first week of March 1852 with “west wind with hail, snow on ground and ice.” Ten days of very cold weather was reported in December 1856 and also snow and cold in the winter of 1862. Snow and ice was reported in the Grays Harbor region in December 1884 and a snowfall of 40” at Copalis was described in a letter John Porter sent to his father. The Grays Harbor area experienced a severe winter in 1893 with 26” of snow reported on February 1st and 2nd.

The most momentous winter storm in Grays Harbor County began on December 29, 1949 and continued throughout the month of January 1950. The winter of 1949 - 1950 is the coldest winter on record, with snow sweeping over the entire county from New Year’s Eve continuing throughout the next several days causing enormous damage and disruption. Snow depths ranged up to four or more inches throughout the county. Schools were closed, several Grays Harbor lumber mills were shut down, and ice flows in the south bay pounded the Elk River Bridge at Bay City. There were scattered power outages throughout the county and dangerous road conditions. Frozen water pipes left many residents in Aberdeen and Hoquiam without water for up to 24 hours. In Aberdeen, the Fire Chief reported that at least two house fires had been caused by residents using blow torches to thaw frozen pipes.

Other more recent winter storm events affecting the region include:

In February 1989, cold temperatures disrupted water supply to Aberdeen’s reservoir and caused mills in the area to shut down. Economic loss to the City was estimated at $100,000. The Washington State Department of Transportation was forced to spend approximately $43,000 per day to plow and sand roads in the area.

In December 1989 and January 1990, cold temperatures and high winds iced streets and left nearly 150,000 western Washington residences without power for several hours.

An ice storm in December 1996 lasted for four days and left almost 14 inches of snow and ice in western Washington.

In December 2008, there was a significant snow storm with power outages, and Grays Harbor was included in a state disaster declaration.


The majority of the City’s critical facilities and people are vulnerable to the impacts of severe storms resulting in high winds or winter storms. The most severe windstorms would result in significant areas of the City subject to hazardous road conditions, power outages and utility disruptions affecting the entire City and all critical facilities.

Impacts of high winds range from minor impacts such as damaged fences, partial loss of roofing shingles to siding, minor blocking of roadways or drainage ways, to major impacts including damage to and/or extended blocking of roadways, major damage to structures and potential injuries to people by falling trees. Extended power outages associated with high winds or winter storms also can result in the potential for loss of potable water and sewer service. Because these storms typically occur during the colder months, extended power outages (over 24 hours) also can result in health risks to people.


3.2.5 Flood Hazard Profile Definition

A flood is a general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas from (1) the overflow of inland or tidal waters (2) the unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source, or (3) mud flows or the sudden collapse of shoreline land (FEMA). For the purpose of this HMP, the definition of flood will include to the occurrence of inundation of the City’s drainage system by stormwater during significant rain events, as well as coastal flooding, which is a combination of rainfall, wind, and low barometric pressure typically caused by wind and is therefore included in the severe storm hazard.

Description

Floods are one of the most common natural disaster in Grays Harbor County. The two dominant types of flood events experienced in Grays Harbor County are river and stream floods and coastal flooding. One type occurs in conjunction with the other, for example, rivers flowing into Grays Harbor experience tidal flooding. The lowlands area of the City is vulnerable to these conditions. Both types can also be caused by or increase in combination with other natural disaster events. Smaller, more localized flood events in Cosmopolis can result from flash floods caused by intense rainfall within a short period of time combined with saturated soils and ground water flooding, a result of heavy rain on saturated soils in areas with a high water table. Flooding most commonly occurs due to windstorms and the associated low barometric pressure. The flooding discussed in this section results from the mild, wet climate, high water table, and impact from impervious surfaces and other hindrances to stormwater drainage.

A significant portion of the City is considered vulnerable to flooding; the most significant flooding occurs as a result of windstorms and wind-driven tides and waves. Floodplains in Cosmopolis are designated on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) produced by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (See Figure 9). The FIRM and associated Flood Insurance Study were completed with an effective date of 11/3/82 as part of the City’s participation in FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and was updated on 9/3/98 upon the completion of the dike project along the Chehalis River in South Aberdeen and Cosmopolis.

Effects and NFIP Status

The consequences of flood events in Grays Harbor County over the years have been very costly in terms of people, property, and the economic health of the county. Significant damage has occurred to both public and private investments: damaged structures; interrupted public services and schools; and closed businesses. The dollar cost of flood damages can be substantial for both the private and public sectors in the county.

While Cosmopolis has historically experienced fewer effects from floods than the County as a whole, the potential impacts of flooding associated with both the severe storm and flood hazards remains a concern. The City is participating in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and as such individuals can purchase flood insurance through the NFIP. There are currently 19 flood insurance policies in effect in Cosmopolis, for a total of $2.7 million in coverage (FEMA, 2010). The premiums paid for this insurance total approximately $12,500, with an annual average policy premium of $658.00.


As stated in a letter from the Department of Ecology dated September 8, 2009, the City is a participating member in good standing in the NFIP (see Appendix C).

The mitigation strategy identifies, analyzes, and prioritizes actions which will assist the City in continuing to maintain its’ status in good standing in the NFIP.

History

Over the years, flood events have consistently increased in frequency in Grays Harbor County. There is little documentation of flooding in the 1800s, and not until the 1900s did floods become a significant issue for county residents.

The impacts of flooding in Cosmopolis have been relatively minimal when compared to Grays Harbor County. Flood insurance claims in Cosmopolis have been minimal since the City entered into the NFIP in 1982 (FEMA, 2010). A total of three flood insurance claims were filed between 1982 and 2010. All three of these claims were paid, for a total of $2,022.00. The City has no repetitive loss properties.

There has been very little damage associated with flooding caused by rain-only events other than the failure of the Mill Creek dam on November 12, 2008. The City intends to conduct an evaluation of the feasibility, estimated costs, and funding options relating to replacement or reconstruction of the dam and Mill Creek Park. Another option may be to remove the dam, which was built in the 1970s, and restore the stream channel. The City has included this evaluation in the Mitigation Strategy of this HMP.

In addition, slides have occurred outside of the City on US 101 South, Blue Slough Road, and other isolated slide areas on steep slopes during winter storms.

Mill Creek Dam Breach on November 12, 2008


Figure 9 shows the locations of the City’s critical facilities and infrastructure with respect to the floodplain areas identified on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the City and the surrounding floodplain areas for Aberdeen and Grays Harbor County. Most of the City’s critical facilities are not located within the 100-year floodplain, which is identified as Zone A on the FIRM for the City. The initial FIRM for the City had an effective date of November 3, 1982, which


was the date of the Flood Insurance Study for the City. The FIRM and Flood Insurance Study were revised by a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) to the City from FEMA dated September 3, 1998. This LOMR was based on the effects of the construction of a levee along the Chehalis River which resulted in changes in the 100-year flood elevation of the Chehalis River and removal of some areas from the 100-year floodplain within the City. As described above, most of the mapped floodplain areas within the City are a result of coastal flooding overflow.

There is also a 100-year floodplain area shown on Figure 9 associated with Mill Creek, which runs through the City, which overflows and floods the adjacent land as a result of a combination of runoff from heavy rainfall and coastal flooding. This area contains very few critical facilities and as a result, the vulnerability to this type of flooding is very low within the City.

Preliminary updates to the 1982 FIRMs for all of Grays Harbor County, including the City of Cosmopolis, are being developed and will be used as an updated Figure 9.


Figure 9. City of Cosmopolis 100 Year and 500 Year Flood


3.2.6 Volcano (Ash Fallout) Definition

A volcano is a vent in the earth’s crust through which magma, rock fragments, gases, and ash are ejected from the earth’s interior. Over time, accumulation of these erupted products on the earth’s surface creates a volcanic mountain (Washington State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2007)

Description

Washington State has five active volcanoes – Mount Baker, Glacier Peak, Mount Rainier, Mount St. Helens, and Mount Adams. These volcanoes are all capable of generating destructive lahars, ash fall, lava, and pyroclastic flows, and debris avalanches. The phenomena that pose the greatest threat are ash fall and lahars (Washington State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2007).

There are no volcanoes in Grays Harbor County, but volcanoes dominate the Cascade Mountain range approximately 60 miles to the east. Mt Rainier is considered the “giant” of the Cascade Range volcanoes and the consequences of a major eruption would be cataclysmic for the entire Pacific Northwest. Mt St. Helens, located in southwest Washington State, is currently the most active volcano in the Cascade Range (Grays Harbor All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

An eruption from either Mt. Rainier or Mt St. Helens could be expected to affect the County to some degree, how much depends on the magnitude of the eruption, size of the eruption column and prevailing winds. Based on a history of intermittent activity at Mt. St. Helens, scientists feel the mountain poses a hazard for the foreseeable future. A large scale volcanic eruption is extremely rare and Grays Harbor is not vulnerable to any direct impacts from and initial blast or mud flows; however, impacts related to ash fall from a large eruption could be widespread based on the direction of prevailing winds. The immediate danger area around a volcano is approximately 20 miles while ash fall problems may occur as much as 100 miles or more from a volcano’s location. Ash fall, while a secondary impact, is the factor of most concern to Grays Harbor County (Grays Harbor County All Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2005)

Grays Harbor County is vulnerable to ash fall from a volcanic plume. Wind direction and speed influence the dispersal pattern of falling ash. Generally wind patterns along the coastal plain toward the Cascade Range are south and southwest which would direct an ash cloud from a volcanic eruption in the Cascade Range toward the east. Winds from the southeast or east would carry ash fall to the county (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005)

The amount of ash fall is directly related to the size of an eruption. Volcanic ash is composed of tiny pieces of rock and glass. The size of ash particles and the thickness of deposits decrease in size as they spread farther from the erupting volcano. Falling ash initially appears as a dusty haze, often a murky yellow or gray color and can even turn daylight into darkness. Ash fall will progress from east to west over the county (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005)


History

Mount St Helens

Observation by local Indians and early settlers as well as scientific studies indicates Mt. St Helens has been active over time. Explorers, traders, and missionaries all heard reports of a major explosive eruption about 1800. Other descriptions indicating possible activity included: a physician at Fort Vancouver writing of darkness and haze in 1831 and reports by Reverend Josiah Parrish, corroborated by missionaries at the Dalles, Oregon of an eruption (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005)

An eruption of Mt St Helens in 1980 is the only completely documented volcanic event to affect Grays Harbor County. After about a 150-year time span, a catastrophic eruption occurred on May 18, 1980. A new period of unrest began in September of 2004. Initial increases in seismic activity were followed by magma rising to the surface on September 23rd. After 14 days, new lava was visible and seismic activity and dome building continues to the date of this report (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005) The May 18th eruption carried huge amounts of ash to the east all the way to the State of Montana in a matter of hours. Grays Harbor County escaped the initial ash fall because of prevailing wind direction; however, a smaller but significant eruption on May 25th affected the county for a short period of time. Prevailing winds from the southeast during this eruption deposited ash from the volcanic plume over Grays Harbor County east to west (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005) Mt St. Helens eruption on May 18, 1980. Source: U.S. Forest Service

Effects

The expected consequence of a major volcanic eruption with prevailing winds from the east on Grays Harbor County is ash fall. Any accumulations of volcanic ash can create traffic problems, damage machinery and electronics, clog sewage disposal systems, and contaminate water treatment plants. Ash particles can affect public health and, in extreme cases, cause death. Several of the deaths from the Mt. St. Helens eruption were attributed to ash inhalation. Additionally, ash is very difficult to clean up. There can be other impacts as well; traffic can bring highways to a standstill and the closure of institutions can overwhelm temporary shelters (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

There was not direct impact to Grays Harbor County from the May 18, 1980 eruption of Mt St Helens; however, there were immediate effects. As the realization of the catastrophic nature of


the eruption became clear, one of the necessary actions taken by state officials was to divert traffic. There were traffic jams in Montesano and Oakville due to the rerouting of Interstate 5. Traffic from Portland was rerouted to Astoria and then north adding to congestion on Highways 101 and 12 as people tried to reach destinations in the Puget Sound region (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

Also of immediate concern was the potential need to house evacuees from the Longview-Kelso area. Cowlitz County Emergency Services Director, Bill Langford, estimated there could be as many as 50,000 people in need of shelter. The local Red Cross made preparations to house evacuees at the Grays Harbor Fairgrounds and the old Armory in Aberdeen, but these facilities were not needed (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005)

Ash fall from the May 25th eruption caused power outages, hazardous traveling conditions and stranded tourists. Rainfall did help keep the dust down minimizing damage to engines; although, it made many roads very slippery and muddy. The ash hit residents of East County the hardest. Oakville received ¾ inch of ash. In McCleary, an accumulation of ash of up to ¼ inch mixed with rain coating the streets and creating hazardous driving conditions (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

Traveling conditions were dangerous not only from slippery ash deposits, but also for a time, reduced visibility, and speed limits were lowered on roads. Six school districts in East County were closed because of muddy roads and ash covered playgrounds. Sgt John Weaver of the Washington State Patrol estimated there were up to 50,000 tourists celebrating Memorial Day at the coastal beaches. People choosing to leave the beaches on Sunday caused significant traffic jams, especially along Highway 12 (Grays Harbor County All Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2005)

East County farmland received ½ to ¾ inch of ash according to reports. Farmers, in the midst of harvesting cattle feed crops, were concerned the ash would cause problems with their machinery as well as limit yields. Some clover fields were knocked down, but other crops were not damaged. Milk production dropped, but this was only a temporary issue. Ash created a massive clean up problem for officials at the Satsop nuclear project. No damage was reported, but clean up took several days before construction could resume (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

A number of people with chronic respiratory ailments were seen at the Grays Harbor Community Hospital. Initial health concerns did not materialize and no deaths were reported due to ash fall inhalation in the County (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).


A moderate amount of ash fall can affect the entire county, but it is probable that any injuries, fatalities, or damage to structures will decrease east to west. East County is most likely to experience problems with impacts decreasing toward the ocean beaches. A catastrophic of Mt rainier or Mt St Helens with strong prevailing winds from the east could bring heavy ash fall across the entire County (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).


3.2.7 Wildland Fire Hazard Profile Definition

Wildland fires are fires caused by nature or humans that result in the uncontrolled destruction of forests, brush, field crops, grasslands, and real and personal property (Washington State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2004).

Description

Wildland fires are a very unusual event in Gray Harbor County, normally occurring during years of drought periods when fuel is dry and precipitation is below normal. The county is not identified as a high risk area for wildland fire in the Washington State Hazard Mitigation Plan, but the potential was discussed in the Grays Harbor County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan. This plan suggests a moderate probability for a wildland fire in the county; however, there are few historical examples of wildland fires in the county or in Cosmopolis.

Wildfires depend on four factors: available fuel, moisture, terrain, and an ignition source. There is available fuel south of Cosmopolis, but annual precipitation normally keeps moisture content relatively high in vegetation materials.

Both natural forces and human causes produce wildfires. Lightning, in combination with an accumulation of fuels and very dry conditions, is the most likely natural cause of a wildland fire. Wildland fires attributed to human behavior can be ignited by recreational fires, fireworks, intentional debris burning, or arson. Strong, dry winds in late summer and early fall combined with below-average precipitation can make areas vulnerable to wildland fire if fuels are dry.

History

The frequency of occurrence of wildfire in the vicinity of Cosmopolis has been relatively low.

The famous fire of 1902”…crept to the outskirts of Elma and Montesano. Sweeping from Summit to Satsop, it cut a swath 13 miles long and from one to two miles wide, leaving a strip of charred and burning ruins. A dam on the west branch of the Hoquiam (River) burned and the New London community was destroyed. Travel on the Wishkah road was impossible. The White Star mill and a million board feet of lumber turned into smoke. Telephone and telegraph lines to Puget Sound were cut by burning and falling timber.” The smoke was so thick it blocked out the sun and sent the county into darkness (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005). The frequency of occurrence of any significant wildland fires within the City is very low.

Effects

The effects of a large-scale wildfire in Grays Harbor County and Cosmopolis would be primarily economic. There is always the concern for loss of life, but there is no history of wildfire fatalities in the County. A significant fire in forestlands has the potential to create both short – and long – term consequences. In the short-term, traffic disruptions are likely and heavy smoke can pose a health risk. Long-term economic impacts will be destruction of timber and equipment and loss of industry jobs. Secondary impacts will be erosion on the burned slopes that increases runoff contributing to flooding and landslide problems (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).


A significant concern for the City with regard to wildland fire is the safety of the City’s water supply. The City of Cosmopolis receives its water supply from the City of Aberdeen. Aberdeen’s watershed is heavily forested and vulnerable to fire. If a fire were to occur in the City’s watershed, it is likely that the City of Cosmopolis’ drinking water supply would be disrupted for an extended period of time.


A wildland or forest fire that would be the most likely to impact the City would be to the area surrounding the water storage tank on Washington St. or to the City of Aberdeen’s water shed. The water storage tank is the only critical facility for the City of Cosmopolis located in a forested area. In the City of Aberdeen’s watershed, they have two primary water sources and a water treatment plant. These facilities are critical to the City’s continuing operation since the water source is from the City of Aberdeen, so it is extremely important that these facilities continue to have the ability to be operational.

3.2.8 Hazardous Materials Incident Profile Definition

Chemicals labeled “Hazardous materials” play a valuable role in most aspects of life. They fuel vehicles, increase farm production, make drinking and waste water safe, serve our health care needs, and form key ingredients in many manufactured products. Considerable quantities of hazardous materials are present throughout the county and the City at any one time without any threat to people and environment. However, accidents do happen occasionally that become “hazardous materials incidents.”

Hazardous materials incidents are accidental, not deliberate, and their consequences are unintentional; the term “terrorism” often includes technological hazards that are intentional, criminal, or malicious in intent (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

Description

Hazardous materials incident occur during the manufacture, transportation, storage, and use of hazardous materials. Hazardous materials cover a broad category of substances that pose a potential risk to life, health, the environment, or property when not properly contained. These materials may be in solid, liquid, or gaseous forms that exhibit explosive, flammable, combustible, corrosive, reactive, poisonous, biological, or radioactive characteristics (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

Incidents most often occur due to human error, natural hazards, or a breakdown in equipment or monitoring systems. The widest area of vulnerability to the public occurs during airborne releases of acutely toxic gases while liquid spills create immediate concerns, to the environment (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).


Weyerhaeuser Pulp Mill site in Cosmopolis

There are two main arenas in Grays Harbor County for hazardous materials incidents: Fixed facilities and transportation systems.

Fixed Facilities

Fixed facilities are buildings and other stationary structures on a single site that manufacture, produce, use, transfer, store, supply, or distribute any hazardous materials. The term includes railroad yards and truck terminals, but does not include vehicles, vessels, airplanes, or other modes of transportation.

Most hazardous materials incidents at fixed facilities are due to equipment failures and human error. Extreme natural hazards, such as earthquakes and tsunamis, can destroy structures with hazardous materials on site (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005). The Weyerhaeuser Pulp Mill site in Cosmopolis represents one such fixed facility. The Pulp Mill is owned and operated by the Weyerhaeuser Company.

Another source of hazardous materials in Grays Harbor County is the growing number of illegal methamphetamine laboratories, or as they are more commonly referred to as “meth labs.” The most common hazardous materials found at meth labs include flammable, volatile solvents, such as methanol, ether, benzene, methylene chloride, or trichloroethane, as well as toluene. Other common household chemicals include muriatic acid, sodium hydroxide, table salt, and ammonia (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

Because of the typically careless manufacturing process used, many of the chemicals contaminate a property. Some household materials, such as carpeting, wallboard, ceiling tile, or fabric, may actually absorb spilled chemicals. Furniture or draperies may also become contaminated. Soil or groundwater (including nearby drinking wells) may become contaminated if chemicals are dumped in a septic system or on the ground. A Washington Department of Health study found that of the total number of injuries sustained from meth labs, 38% were law enforcement officers or fire fighters, 33% were members of the general public (most were the manufacturers of the meth), and 29% were employees of a business. The most frequent injuries involved respiratory irritation, eye irritation, and gastrointestinal problems (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005)

Transportation Systems

Highways, railways, marine routes, and pipelines are the primary transportation corridors for transporting hazardous materials within Grays Harbor County. Each of these transportation corridors is a potential avenue for hazardous materials incidents, especially within the unincorporated areas.


Highways

The principle routes for hazardous materials include US 101, SR 12, SR 8, and SR 105. Most shipments of hazardous materials along these corridors by private trucking carriers terminate in Grays Harbor County, although conceivably there is some traffic continuing to communities beyond county lines to such destinations as Forks to the north and Raymond/South Bend to the south (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

Under the law, private motor carriers are responsible for tracking and maintaining records of all shipments. Because these records are not readily available for review, there is no data source available to identify hazardous materials or private motor carriers that carry these materials on Grays Harbor County highways. Therefore, it is safer to assume that any hazardous materials used at fixed facilities in the county may reach them via the highways (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

US 101 traverses the entire City corridor and is a main transportation route between Aberdeen and the communities of Raymond/South Bend and points farther south along US 101.

Railways

The Puget Sound and Pacific railroad (PSAP), a subsidiary of RailAmerica, Inc., is the only rail carrier operating within Grays Harbor County. The company operates a 150-mile rail service carrying approximately 14,000 carloads annually. Based at Elma, PSAP has links to the national rail network via connections to the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) at Centralia, Washington and the Union Pacific railroad (UP) at Blakeslee Jct., WA. PSAP provides significant rail links to manufacturing and port facilities in the county as far west as Hoquiam as well as north to Shelton and the US Naval Facilities at Bangor, Keyport, and Bremerton (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

PSAP carries several hazardous materials through Aberdeen, including sulfuric acid, sodium chlorate, and caustic soda. PSAP has an extensive emergency response plan that addresses hazardous materials and natural hazards along its rail lines. Derailments present the greatest threat of creating a hazardous materials incident on railroads. These may occur because of a natural hazard (flooding, earthquake, or tsunami), equipment failures, unsuitable tracks, or collision with motor vehicles. Mechanical failures and negligence by operators can also cause rail accidents that result in hazardous materials incidents (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005)

Marine Traffic

Grays Harbor County marine waters and the Grays Harbor Estuary are vital transportation conduits for commercial shipping, commercial fishing, and recreation vessels. While the bulk of this traffic is off the Pacific coastline, many vessels use the Grays Harbor Estuary as well. Large commercial vessels rely on a dredged channel to access port facilities within the estuary. The Port of Grays Harbor operates cargo-handling facilities in Aberdeen and Hoquiam. The US Coast Guard and other private businesses maintain smaller docking facilities within Hoquiam and Aberdeen that serve special or limited vessel traffic (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

No state or federal agency keeps a database regarding the type and quantity of hazardous materials cargoes of vessels passing through Grays Harbor County coastal or estuarine waters.


None of the cargo facilities within the county regularly handles materials rated as hazardous, although commercial shipping vessels may already have such cargo onboard that is destined for other ports. Likewise, ships navigating waters off the Pacific coast are not required to provide information to any local, state, or federal authorities on their type and amount of cargoes (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005)

The one known category of hazardous materials always associated with marine traffic is petroleum products. Petroleum products, especially diesel, gasoline, and oil, are common to all ships’ stores regardless of size. Barge traffic of bulk petroleum supplies is very common as well (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

Weather, collisions, equipment failure, and operator error are the main causes of marine hazardous materials incidents. Hazardous materials incidents most often involve liquids – diesel and gasoline. Accidents in Washington Pacific coastal areas more frequently involve barges pulled by tugboats. Studies show that when petroleum spills occur, recovery rates seldom exceed 20% (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005)

Pipelines

Grays Harbor County has two major underground pipelines that deliver natural gas: the Northwest Pipeline (Williams Companies) Grays Harbor Lateral, and the Cascade Natural gas Vail-to-Aberdeen line. The Grays Harbor Lateral is 49 miles long and ties into Northwest Pipeline’s main interstate line near the town of Rainier in Thurston County. Northwest Pipeline manages the lateral to stockpile gas, especially in the fall and winter months to satisfy peak demands. Northwest Pipeline also extends its McCleary Lateral into Grays Harbor County for about 30 miles, whereby the gas transfers to the Cascade Natural Gas Line. The Cascade natural gas line is 8-inch and provides natural gas to the communities of McCleary, Elma, Montesano, Aberdeen, and Hoquiam. A 4-inch line stems from the main line at Satsop to serve the Satsop Industrial Park to the south (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005)

Natural gas is stable, non-corrosive, and non-polymerizing. However, when released, it readily mixes with air to form a combustible atmosphere. If mixed with some strong oxidizing agents such as chlorine, bromine, pentafluoride, oxygen difluoride, and nitrogen trifluoride in a confined space, natural gas can burn or explode. It will ignite spontaneously when mixed with chlorine dioxide. Natural gas can ignite if there is a heat source from 900 – 1200 degrees Fahrenheit and if it exits at 4% to 16% of the present air by volume. If it exists at proportions below or above those limits, it will not burn or explode (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

Explosion and fire are the primary hazards associated with natural gas pipeline incidents. These incidents most frequently happen due to puncture of the line during ground disturbance or construction that causes the rupture of underground lines. Other incidents may result from leaky transmission lines caused by corrosion or faulty equipment utilizing natural gas (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

History

Hazardous materials incidents occur in Grays Harbor County frequently. However, most incidents involve small quantities and/or happen at a fixed facility with very limited to no impact to people or the environment. For example, the log at the Grays Harbor County division of emergency and risk Management for 2003 through 2004 showed 15 separate incidents, 10 at


fixed facilities, three involving transportation systems, and two miscellaneous situations. The number of drug labs reported was 50 in 2003 and 24 in 2004 (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005). Members of the HMPT reported that meth labs have been a problem in Cosmopolis in the past, but that they have not posed a significant threat in recent years and appear to be on the decline in the county.

Information about serious hazardous materials incidents in Grays Harbor County is available through the county records, state documents, and archived newspapers. The vast majority of these reports were considered minor. Most hazardous waste enforcement actions in Grays Harbor County have focused on small, routine, or periodic releases beyond what state or federal permits allow. For instance, this has happened frequently with several local manufacturing firms who exceed their air and water pollution control permit standards (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

Many reported hazardous materials incidents involve small-scale spills and atmospheric releases of hazardous materials due to human error or equipment failure that require minimal response. Between 1995 and 2004, the Department of Ecology received reports of over 1,200 such incidents. While the cumulative consequences of small toxic releases into the environment can be extremely dangerous to humans and the environment over the long-term, they are not equivalent to a serious one-time hazardous materials incident (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005)

Effects

The effects of a hazardous materials incident depend largely on the nature of the spill, location of the spill, local weather conditions, and area of incidence. Any incident in which hazardous materials are involved has the potential for escalation from a minor incident into a full-scale disaster. The hazardous properties of chemicals, motor fuels and other potentially dangerous materials range from explosive to highly flammable to poisonous.

These materials have the potential to contaminate the air, water, and land and can be harmful to human, animal and plant life. In addition they can cause destruction of property, business interruption, contamination of land, buildings and property, and long term environmental degradation. The release of hazardous materials may also result in the short term or long term evacuation of the affected area. In the case of some radioactive materials the effects of a spill could last generations.


The frequency and severity of historic hazardous materials incidents in the county suggest that the risk of a serious hazardous materials incident within the county overall is relatively low for fixed facilities but slightly higher for some transportation systems (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

Fixed facilities present an overall lower vulnerability to the unincorporated county than transportation systems. The very fact that they are “fixed” in a relatively controlled environment is a benefit at reducing vulnerability through containment. Stringent regulations governing hazardous materials at fixed facilities are a mitigation measure that limits overall vulnerability. These regulations establish a thorough system from how to handle hazardous materials on a daily basis to clear and immediate response during emergencies. Fixed facilities also are highly


controlled environments that have external emergency response resources immediately available during emergencies (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

Hazardous materials incidents associated with transportation systems do not share the same beneficial attributes, particularly with regard to containment. Rail or marine routes do not always share the same accessibility to an incident site as fixed facilities. In some situations, incident sites can be quite remote and uncontrollable, as seen in the case of the United Transportation Barge event when heavy seas, surf, and remote location made recovery slow and containment impossible, thereby expanding the vulnerability of the surrounding area. Rail lines can be highly inaccessible in certain locations, slowing recovery, which in turn increases vulnerability. Highway incidents may be more accessible, but the distance of a site from a response team can be much longer than a fixed facility, thereby increasing the potential vulnerability of people, property, and the environment to the incident (Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, 2005).

One of the key concerns to the City is the potential vulnerability of their water supply to a hazardous material spill along Highway 101.

3.3 Prioritization of Hazards Each hazard was evaluated and prioritized by the HMPT to provide a basis for the development of the goals, objectives and measures included in the mitigation strategy (Section 5). Hazards were ranked using the following criteria:

Frequency of Occurrence – The frequency of occurrence of each type of hazard occurring in Cosmopolis was estimated based on historical evidence, the Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan, and the State Hazard Mitigation Plan. The frequency categories of high, moderate, and low are based generally on the following ranges for each of the frequencies. High=every 1 to 5 years, Moderate=every 6 to 30 years, Low=every 31 years or greater.

Location of Assets – The location of critical assets, such as utilities and hospitals, and highly vulnerable facilities such as schools and public buildings, was evaluated with respect to the probable location of and area impacted by each hazard.

Impact Potential – This represents a combination of factors used to determine the likely impact of each hazard, including: the likely strength of the event; the size of the area affected; and the density of human activity in that area.

Hazard Strength Index – This reflects the risk of each hazard relative to its potential likelihood of occurrence. Some hazards have extraordinary impacts but occur infrequently, while other hazards may occur annually but cause less damage. Each hazard was assigned a rank of high, moderate, or low for each criterion. An overall rank was assigned to each. The prioritization of hazards is summarized in Table 8.


Table 8. Prioritization of Hazards

Hazard Frequency of Occurrence

Location of Assets

Impact Potential

Hazard Strength Index Rank

Severe Storm High High High High 1

Flood Moderate High Moderate Moderate 2

Earthquake Moderate High High Moderate 3

Tsunami Low High High Moderate 4

Haz Mat Incident Low Moderate High Moderate 5

Landslide Low Moderate Moderate Moderate 6

Wildland Fire Low Moderate Moderate Moderate 7

Volcano Low High Moderate Low 8


Section 4 Capability Assessment

4.1 Introduction The capability assessment provides an inventory and analysis of the City’s ability to address the various threats associated with the hazards described in the HMP. The purpose of the capability assessment is to attempt to identify and evaluate existing policies, regulations, programs, and practices that might have an impact on the City’s ability to deal with hazards. This assessment will help to identify any of the following circumstances that could hinder the City’s ability to mitigate hazards:

Types of mitigation measures that may be prohibited by law

Limitations that may exist on the City’s ability to undertake certain measures

The range of local, state or federal administrative, programmatic, regulatory, financial, and technical resources available to assist the City in implementing mitigation measures

The ability of the City to develop and implement an effective HMP depends upon its legal, administrative, fiscal, and technical capabilities to implement plans, policies, programs, and measures to mitigate potential losses from hazards.

4.2 Legal and Administrative Capability The City of Cosmopolis has jurisdictional authority over land use decisions, permitting activities, and public services, and has the ability to levy taxes on its citizens to fund these activities. The Mayor of Cosmopolis and the Cosmopolis City Council provide political leadership and, with the assistance of City staff, lead the hazard mitigation effort.

The City’s capability to mitigate hazards lies primarily in its ability to regulate development. The following plans and regulations are utilized by the City to regulate development and mitigate potential effects of hazards:

Building Code and Permitting

Zoning Code

Flood Plain Management Code

Comprehensive Plan

Shoreline Master Program

Critical Areas Ordinance

The City must also coordinate regulation and enforcement with adjacent and overlapping jurisdictions, including the City of Aberdeen and Grays Harbor County, as well as state and federal authorities.


4.3 Fiscal Capability Although the City has the ability to levy taxes on its citizens, this ability is limited to what the economic and political climate in the community will allow. Thus it is likely that the City will not have the fiscal capability to fully implement all of the mitigation measures identified in this HMP without funding assistance from external sources. Upon approval and adoption of this HMP, the City will be eligible for a variety of state and federal grants, which the City will seek as necessary to implement mitigation measures.

4.4 Technical Capability City staff have the technical capability required for implementation of many of the mitigation measures that are identified in this HMP. Table 9 provides a list of City Staff with expertise that will help in the City’s hazard mitigation planning efforts.

Table 9. Cosmopolis’ Technical Capability Name Position/Expertise

Darrin Raines Public Works Director/Community Development Bill Sidor Bldg Official/Code Enforcement/Deputy Public Works Director Casey Stratton Police Chief Bob Smith Fire Chief Kathy Welch Clerk/Treasurer

In addition, the City may utilize resources available through FEMA, the EMD, and Grays Harbor County Emergency & Risk Management. The City also contracts as necessary with local professionals for services including legal counsel, engineering, accounting, planning, and other consulting services.

It is important to note that the City does not have funding available for a full time emergency response planning position. This is relatively common in communities of similar size around the state; however, such communities often rely upon the services of a county level emergency services coordinator. In Grays Harbor County, this position is funded as part-time; this situation limits the amount of technical assistance the City can expect to receive from Grays Harbor County in planning for emergency response.


Section 5 Mitigation Strategy

5.1 Introduction This section includes hazard mitigation goals and objectives to avoid or minimize the City’s long-term vulnerability to the hazards identified in the Risk Assessment, and a comprehensive range of specific hazard mitigation measures for consideration by the City for implementation to reduce the potential effects of each hazard.

The development of this mitigation strategy began with a review of the mitigation goals and objectives identified in the Washington State Hazard Mitigation Plan and the Grays Harbor County All Hazards Mitigation Plan. The HMPT drew from these materials to develop goals and objectives for the City’s HMP. The HMPT then identified and prioritized specific mitigation measures intended to meet the goals and objectives.

Of the five goals identified by the City, two of the goals, Establish and Strengthen Partnerships for Implementation, and Provide Emergency Services are not directly related to hazard mitigation. However, the City believes that these goals are key to two of the other goals which are directly related to hazard mitigation, Increase Public Preparedness and Protect Life and Property. This is because the primary concern related to hazards in the City is the need for improvement in advance communications and a warning system for the City’s residents and visitors relating to the potential for the devastating effects of a tsunami. Many of the mitigation measures proposed are related to meeting this objective, which must include successful partnerships with Grays Harbor County and other state and local jurisdictions for the protection of the City’s residents and visitors.

The process that the HMPT used to prioritize the identified mitigation measures was based on the City’s staff and financial capability to implement the particular measures. In general, a proposed mitigation measure that could be implemented with existing staff and budget capabilities was considered as a High Priority. Included as High Priority measures were those that were related to securing additional funding for mitigation measures that the City does not currently have funding available for. If a proposed mitigation measure involved a significant cost that the City does not have current funding available for, it was considered as a Medium Priority and the implementation timeline was extended to allow time for securing the required funding. No mitigation measures were identified that were considered to be a Low Priority.

Two of the identified mitigation measures that specifically relate to reducing the effects of hazards on existing buildings or infrastructure are included under Capital Improvements, and address the need for retrofitting the existing critical facilities within the identified hazard areas. Funding will need to be identified and secured before the City will be able to implement this mitigation measure.

No mitigation measures are shown relating to reducing the effects of hazards on new buildings or infrastructure, since the City believes that the necessary mitigation for new buildings or infrastructure can be achieved through compliance with the City’s existing ordinance requirements.


Title 18 ZONING of the Cosmopolis Municipal Code contains chapters relating to floodplain management contained in Chapter 18.48 Title 15 ENVIRONMENT contains chapters relating to shoreline management contained in Chapter 15.08 and State Environmental Policy Act in 15.04, of the Cosmopolis Municipal Code. The City’s building code is contained in Chapter 14. BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION of the Cosmopolis Municipal Code and the City has adopted the 2006 International Building Code and the 2006 International Residential Code by reference in Chapter 14.04. Chapter 12 DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS of the Cosmopolis Municipal Code contains specific requirements for developments and some specific standards in 12.12. for storm drainage.

As a member in good standing in the National Flood Insurance Program as stated in the Department of Ecology letter dated September 8, 2009, (See Appendix C) the City’s flood damage prevention ordinance has been approved by FEMA and the Department of Ecology as meeting or exceeding the minimum State and Federal floodplain management requirements. The following are some of the provisions in Chapter 18.48 that address new development in identified floodplains which will preclude the need for additional mitigation measures for new development in the City:

18.48.170 All new construction and substantial improvement to any residential structure shall have the lowest floor level (including basement) elevated ”to or above” the base flood elevation

18.48.170 All new construction and substantial improvement of any commercial, industrial or other non-residential structure shall either have the lowest floor, (including basement) elevated one foot or more above the base flood elevation or be floodproofed so that below one foot above the base flood level the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water.

The shoreline management ordinance contains provisions relating to the location and construction of structures in areas designated as shorelines, which include floodplain areas and geologically hazardous areas such as steep slopes, wetland areas, and floodplain areas. Many of the requirements contained in the shoreline management ordinance, although not designed specifically for flood hazard mitigation, are more restrictive than floodplain regulations, in that structures are not allowed to be constructed under any conditions in certain areas under these ordinances.

The following are some excerpts from the City’s Building Code and the City’s procedures for building construction under this section of the Municipal Code.

The City of Cosmopolis has adopted and will continue to adopt the most recent editions of the following Codes under Municipal Code Chapter 14. The codes include:

International Building, Residential, Fuel Gas, Mechanical, Fire, Existing Building and Property Maintenance Codes.

Uniform Plumbing Code

Washington State Energy, Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality Code.

National Electrical Code

1997 Edition of the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings.


Design criteria specific for the City of Cosmopolis includes: Seismic zone D-2, Wind speed 105 mph, and ground snow load of 25 pounds per square foot.

Post disaster safety assessments of structures are conducted by City Building and Fire Inspectors.

Assessed structures are classified as one of the following:

Inspected – Lawful Occupancy permitted (Grn Placard)

Restricted Use (Yellow Placard)

Unsafe - Do Not Enter or Occupy (Red Placard)

A pre-printed placard, displaying one of the above classifications, is posted in a visible location on the assessed structure. Inspection reports are composed and served on the property owners. Utility providers are notified to disconnect unsafe or potentially unsafe utilities. Records of such assessments are maintained in Building Department files.

The provisions of the above listed codes shall apply to the Construction, alteration, movement, enlargement, replacement, repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location, maintenance, removal and demolition of every building or structure or any appurtenances connected or attached to such buildings or structures.

Permits are required for any owner or authorized agent who intends to perform any of the listed work that is not specifically exempted in the applicable codes. Construction or work for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the Building Official. Any portion of the work that is inspected and fails to meet minimum code requirements shall be corrected and not concealed until authorized by the Building Official.

No building or structure shall be used or occupied until repairs have been made, no violations have been found, and the Building Official has issued a Certificate of Occupancy.

The City recognizes that this listing of mitigation measures may be more than can be accomplished in the estimated Implementation Timeline. However, these are all high or medium priorities for the City and important to identify and document in this HMP.

The City will utilize a cost-benefit review process to determine mitigation measures for implementation by preparing cost estimates and an analysis of the expected benefits that will be achieved prior to implementation of identified mitigation measures. Mitigation measures that are shown to have higher cost-benefit values will be selected for implementation.


5.2 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The City’s hazard mitigation goals and objectives are:

Goal – Increase Public Preparedness

Make available programs and information to assist residents, businesses, and visitors in preparing for disasters and recognizing what actions to take during and after a hazard event.

Continue the public involvement process to inform the public of mitigation measures that are being implemented to reduce the potential impact of hazards.

Provide public education and outreach to improve the public’s understanding of potential hazards to allow them to make better informed decisions.

Goal – Protect Life and Property

Promote the use of appropriate hazard resistant design, construction, and maintenance of all structures, both public and private.

Encourage retrofit of critical facilities in hazard areas to protect public health and safety.

Identify and prioritize the need for new structural projects to increase protection of life, property, and the natural environment.

Goal – Establish and Strengthen Partnerships for Implementation

Coordinate with Grays Harbor County and other adjacent jurisdictions in the design and implementation of mitigation measures.

Strengthen communications and coordinate participation among and within public agencies, citizens, businesses and industry in the design and implementation of hazard mitigation measures.

Ensure a system is in place to facilitate effective communication with all local, state, and federal agencies before, during and after a hazard event.

Goal – Provide Emergency Services

Provide for a well-trained group of professional and volunteer emergency personnel with the capability to effectively respond to hazard events.

Maintain a secure, dedicated emergency communication system with built-in redundancy.

Minimize disruption to public facilities and services during a hazard event.

Goal – Protect Natural Resources

• Conserve and rehabilitate natural resources to serve hazard mitigation functions.

Advocate responsible practices for land development, recreational activities, and commercial operations to reduce damage or loss of natural resources.


Coordinate with appropriate local, state, and federal agencies, and interested parties to ensure that mitigation measures are implemented in a manner that protects natural resources.

5.3 Mitigation Measures To help achieve the goals and objectives described above, mitigation measures were identified to be implemented by the City to avoid or minimize the risk of each hazard. The Risk Assessment associated with each of the potential hazards (see Section 3) was integral to the process of selecting mitigation measures. The following criteria were also used to select mitigation measures to be included in this HMP:

Mitigation goals and objectives addressed

Relative costs and benefits of measure

Potential funding sources

Lead jurisdiction for implementation

Timeline for implementation

Life expectancy of measure

Table 10 provides a summary of mitigation measures identified in this HMP. Mitigation measures are categorized as follows:

Capital Improvements – these measures involve the design and construction of physical improvements to critical facilities and infrastructure.

Public Preparedness – these measures are designed to improve the publics understanding of hazards and what they can do to prepare for and mitigate them.

Programs and Partnerships – these measures involve new programs the City will implement on its own or in partnership with other entities.

Funding Strategies – these measures are intended to help the City generate the funding necessary to implement other measures.

Each mitigation measure is assigned a priority rank (high or medium), an estimated time line for implementation, a City department that will take the lead in implementation of the measure, and potential funding sources that could be utilized for implementation.

Table 10 also identifies the hazard(s) that each measure is intended to address. Some mitigation measures may address multiple hazards, while others might address only one hazard.

5.4 Implementation of Mitigation Measures The mitigation measures identified in this HMP are intended to be implemented by the City as funding becomes available. As discussed in the Capability Assessment (see Section 4), the City’s ability to fund the implementation of mitigation measures is limited.

The City intends to pursue grants from state and federal sources to help implement the mitigation measures identified in this HMP.


Table 10. Hazard Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure Type Mitigation Measure Description P

rio

rity

*

Imp

lem

enta

tio

n T

ime

Lin

e (y

ears

)

Res

po

nsi

ble

Cit

y

Dep

artm

ent

**

Po

ten

tial

Ass

ista

nce

/ F

un

din

g S

ou

rce

***

Hazards Addressed

Lan

dsl

ide

Ear

thq

uak

e

Tsu

nam

i

Sev

ere

Sto

rm

Flo

od

Vo

lcan

o

Wild

lan

d F

ire

Haz

ard

ou

s M

ater

ials

Ter

rori

sm

Capital Improvements

Purchase generators or similar equipment to avoid disruption of power or critical City facilities during storm events.

H 1-2 CBOC G O

Evaluate and prioritize critical facilities in hazard areas to assess their resistance to hazard events.

H 1 CBOPW

C

Retrofit critical facilities in hazard areas to increase their resistance to hazard events.

H 2-5 CBOPW

G O

Conduct analysis of existing storm water drainage system H 1-2 PW

G O

Implement recommended improvements to storm water drainage system H 2-5 PW

G O

Expand/improve city-owned Emergency Operations Center Facility M 1-5

PD PWFD

G O

Complete formal analysis of all slide areas located near transportation routes including Mill Creek Drive and Altenau

M 1-5 PW P C O

Evaluate options, estimated costs, available grants, etc., for repair or removal of Mill Creek Dam.

H 1-2 PWCBO

G O P

* Priority categories: H = high priority; M = medium priority ** Responsible City Departments: CBO = City Building Official; PD = Police Department; FD = Fire Department; PW = Public Works Department; N =

Neighborworks Grays Harbor *** Potential Assistance/Funding Sources: C = City; P = County, State, or Federal agency partners; G = Grants; O = Other Sources


Mitigation Measure

Type Mitigation Measure Description Pri

ori

ty*

Imp

lem

enta

tio

n T

ime

Lin

e (y

ears

)

Res

po

nsi

ble

Cit

y D

epar

tmen

t **

Po

ten

tial

A

ssis

tan

ce/

Fu

nd

ing

So

urc

e **

*

Hazards Addressed

Lan

dsl

ide

Ear

thq

uak

e

Tsu

nam

i

Sev

ere

Sto

rm

Flo

od

Vo

lcan

o

Wild

lan

d F

ire

Haz

ard

ou

s M

ater

ials

Ter

rori

sm

Public Preparedness

Purchase quick attack vehicle for emergency response. H 1-2 PW

FDG O

Conduct annual Disaster PreparednessWorkshops to educate the public about actions they should take before, during and after a disaster.

Provide the public with information on the proper use of 9-1-1 during a hazard event using such tools as telephone books, bookmarks for school children, and posters in public buildings.

Distribute hazard mitigation information and publications published by FEMA, EMD, Red Cross, and other agencies and organizations to the Timberland Regional Library, public schools, and other public facilities to promote citizen commitment to hazard mitigation.

M 1 CBO C

Encourage citizens and businesses to have access to the NOAA Weather Radio (NWR) service, including supporting efforts to purchase NWR receivers for low-income households as well as provide public information about using receivers efficiently.

Create a Quick Reference Guide for all City personnel and each vehicle to be used in a disaster.


Neighborworks Grays Harbor


*** Potential Assistance/Funding Sources: C = City; P = County, State, or Federal agency partners; G = Grants; O = Other Sources

Mitigation Measure


ori

ty*

Imp

lem

enta

tio

n T

ime

Lin

e (y

ears

)

Res

po

nsi

ble

Cit

y D

epar

tmen

t **

Po

ten

tial

Ass

ista

nce

/ F

un

din

g S

ou

rce

***

Hazards Addressed

Lan

dsl

ide

Ear

thq

uak

e

Tsu

nam

i

Sev

ere

Sto

rm

Flo

od

Vo

lcan

o

Wild

lan

d F

ire

Haz

ard

ou

s M

ater

ials

Ter

rori

sm

Public Preparedness

Cont.

Work with County to develop and maintain a list of assets and capabilities of public and private entities in the City that could be utilized for emergency response to hazards

M 1 CBO C

Create a Disaster Information Section on the City’s website with up-to-date information on current storm watches and warnings, road closures, evacuation routes, shelter locations, emergency contacts, and hazard mitigation planning and implementation.

H 1 PD C

Develop partnerships with Cosmopolis School District to teach children about weather watches and warnings, hazard mitigation, emergency actions, early release plans and emergency service providers.

H 1-2 PD FD

CBO

O C P




Mitigation Measure


ori

ty*

Imp

lem

enta

tio

n T

ime

Lin

e (y

ears

)

Res

po

nsi

ble

Cit

y D

epar

tmen

t **

Po

ten

tial

Ass

ista

nce

/ F

un

din

g S

ou

rce

***

Hazards Addressed

Lan

dsl

ide

Ear

thq

uak

e

Tsu

nam

i

Sev

ere

Sto

rm

Flo

od

Vo

lcan

o

Wild

lan

d F

ire

Haz

ard

ou

s M

ater

ials

Ter

rori

sm

Programs and

Partnerships

Work with Washington State Department of Transportation and Grays Harbor County to augment current tsunami evacuation signs with safe elevation markers in key areas and signs painted directly on roadways.

H 1 FD C P

Coordinate interagency radio links between the City and the Grays Harbor Emergency Operations Center, law enforcement agencies, fire districts, emergency medical services, the 9-1-1 call center, and state and federal agencies to ensure coordinated communication during hazard events.

H 1 PD FD

P

Update Hazard Mitigation Plan every 5 yrs M 1-5 CBO

C G

Complete City Emergency Response PlanH 1-2 CBO C




Mitigation Measure

Type Mitigation Measure Description

Pri

ori

ty*

Imp

lem

enta

tio

n T

ime

Lin

e (y

ears

)

Res

po

nsi

ble

Cit

y D

epar

tmen

t **

Po

ten

tial

Ass

ista

nce

/ F

un

din

g S

ou

rce

*** Hazards Addressed

Lan

dsl

ide

Ear

thq

uak

e

Tsu

nam

i

Sev

ere

Sto

rm

Flo

od

Vo

lcan

o

Wild

lan

d F

ire

Haz

ard

ou

s M

ater

ials

Ter

rori

sm

Program and Partnerships,

Cont

Make available to first responders a current list of citizens on life support, who are homebound with special needs and elderly populations for emergency response and/or rescue during a hazard event.

H 1

FD PD PWCBO

C

Review and update as appropriate flood damage reduction ordinance Chapter 14.08.(Last updated June 2009)

H 0-1 CBO C

Floodplain administrator training and seek certification as a Certified Floodplain Manager.

H 0-2 CBO C

Maintain supplies of FEMA/NFIP materials as handouts for property owners, builders, and surveyors.

H 0-1 CBO C

Hold work session on floodplain management requirements for planning commission appointees.

H 0-2 CBO C




Funding Strategies

Set funding priorities for hazard mitigation projects annually based on urgency and need.

H 1-5 FD PW

C

Establish and maintain a disaster contingency fund within the City budget. H 1-5

FD PD

C O

Actively search for grants and loans to fund hazard mitigation projects and programs.

H 1-5 All C

Research and maintain a list of grant and low interest loan programs that assist homeowners and businesses undertaking hazard mitigation projects.

M 1-5 CBO

N P G




Section 6 Plan Adoption and Maintenance

6.1 Plan Adoption A final draft of the HMP was submitted for pre-adoption review by the EMD and FEMA Region X. Revisions to the HMP were made based on any comments resulting from the pre-adoption review, and the HMP was produced in final form for adoption by the Cosmopolis City Council.

Once adopted, the HMP was submitted formally to the EMD for review and approval and submittal to FEMA Region X. Upon approval by FEMA, the City will be eligible for the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and the Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Grant Program funding.

A copy of the FEMA pre-adoption review letter relating to approval of the HMP and a copy of the City Council Resolution adopting the HMP are included as Appendix B.

6.2 Plan Evaluation and Update The City Building Official will have the lead role in monitoring and updating the HMP. Other City officials that will be included in this effort are the Public Works Director, the Police Chief, and the Fire Chief. It is intended that the HMP will be formally updated and submitted to the EMD and FEMA on a five year cycle. Particular attention will be paid to identifying needs and developing the appropriate updates to the HMP following any type of hazard event which impacts the City.

City staff under the direction of the City Building Official will assume the lead role in the process of evaluating and updating the HMP. If a hazard event occurs during the five-year update cycle, records will be kept on any effects on people or property in the City that may result from the hazard, and what type of mitigation measures might have reduced or eliminated the effects. In addition, any mitigation measures that have already been implemented will be monitored to determine if they were effective.

It is intended that the HMP will be monitored as an ongoing program of the City. At a minimum of one year intervals, the City Building Official will review the HMP and the implementation of any projects or activities described in the HMP and report progress to the Mayor and City Council as part of the annual budget and capital facilities needs review. Notes will be kept on ongoing monitoring activities and the annual review process for incorporation into the formal five-year update and adoption process for the HMP.

6.3 Plan Implementation through Existing Programs The City intends to incorporate hazard mitigation goals into other programs and policies as they are updated. These programs and policies include the City’s Comprehensive Plan, Flood Damage Prevention Code, Critical Areas Ordinance, and Shoreline Master Program, among others. As these programs and policies are updated, the City Building Official will ensure that


provisions included in the HMP will be incorporated into them to ensure that these programs and policies are consistent with the HMP.

In addition, the City will coordinate with county, state, and federal hazard mitigation and pre-disaster planning efforts, and will cooperate and participate, as feasible and necessary, in the implementation of hazard mitigation measures at various levels of government.

6.4 Continued Public Involvement The City will continue to involve the public in the hazard mitigation planning process through City Council meetings and public education efforts. The public will be informed of the implementation of any mitigation activities, descriptions of damages from hazards identified in the HMP, and the performance of implemented mitigation measures during hazard events.

It is intended that the City will retain the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team that was formed for the development of this HMP, and that the City Building Official will reconvene this Team on an annual basis as part of the monitoring and review process for this HMP.

Appendix A – Public Involvement

HDR Engineering, Inc.

626 Columbia Street NW, Suite 2A

Olympia, WA 98501

www.hdrinc.com

Telephone (360) 570-4400

Fax (360) 570-7272

Page 1 of 1

Meeting Agenda

Subject: City of Cosmopolis Hazard Mitigation Planning Team Kickoff

Meeting Date: January 20, 2010, 5:30 – 7:00 pm Meeting Location: Cosmopolis Fire Hall

Notes by:

Attendees:

Agenda:

Welcome and introductions (Bill Sidor, all)

What is a HMP? Why are we doing this? (Bill)

Background and Introduction to the HMP process (Jerry Louthain/Rona Spellecacy(HDR) )

Existing June 2009 Draft of HMP, City information sources, reports, maps, etc. (Bill)

State and County Hazard Mitigation Plans (Jerry)

Local issues and potential hazards that should be addressed in the Cosmopolis HMP (all)

Proposed project schedule (Jerry and Rona)

Next steps and future HMPT meetings (all)

Action/Notes:



Olympia, WA 98501

www.hdrinc.com

Telephone (360) 570-4400

Fax (360) 570-7272

Page 1 of 2

Meeting Notes Subject: City of Cosmopolis Hazard Mitigation Planning Team Kickoff

Meeting Date: January 20, 2010, 5:30 – 7:00 pm Meeting Location: Cosmopolis Fire Hall

Notes by: Rona Spellecacy, HDR

Attendees:

Bill Sidor, Cosmopolis Building Official Darrin Raines, Cosmopolis Public Works Director Casey Stratton, Cosmopolis Police Chief Karen Cox, Cosmopolis City Council Carl Sperring, Cosmopolis City Council Edgar Devore, citizen, historian Jim Phipps, citizen Dale Andrews, citizen Connie Sipe, citizen Mike Brown, citizen Harry Beeler, citizen Jerry Louthain, HDR Rona Spellecacy, HDR Meeting Notes:

Welcome and introductions – Bill welcomed everyone to the kickoff for the Cosmopolis Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP). The Hazard Mitigation Planning Team (HMPT) will serve a critical role in the development of the Cosmopolis HMP.

What is a HMP? – Bill gave an overview of the purpose and goals of the HMP. The primary goal of the HMP process is to reduce hazard risk by taking actions to prepare and mitigate potential hazards before they occur.

Background and Introduction to the HMP process – Jerry Louthain and Rona Spellecacy, the consultant team from HDR, gave some background information about the HMP process and the FEMA grant the City received to complete the HMP. Once the City’s HMP is completed, additional funding will become available for completion of hazard mitigation projects identified in the plan.

Existing June 2009 Draft of HMP – Bill gave an overview of the current draft of the HMP. The HMP includes information compiled from other local and county HMPs, as well as some local information. The job of the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team is to review this information and provide additional local knowledge and details about hazards that have or could occur in Cosmopolis. In particular, Bill asked the team to review and add to the historical information in the descriptions of hazards. The HMPT will also provide important input regarding potential hazard mitigation measures (projects) to be included in the plan.



Olympia, WA 98501

www.hdrinc.com

Telephone (360) 570-4400

Fax (360) 570-7272

Page 2 of 2

State and County Hazard Mitigation Plans – The State and County have hazard mitigation plans which provide information that will be useful in developing the City’s plan.

Local issues and potential hazards that should be addressed in the Cosmopolis HMP – the group discussed potential hazards and issues that could be addressed in the HMP. The Cosmopolis HMP will address the following hazards: severe storm (including wind and winter storm), flood, earthquake, tsunami, wildland fire, landslide, volcano, and hazardous materials incident.

Proposed project schedule – It is expected that the final draft HMP will be ready for review by the State Emergency Management Division by summer 2010. The review of the HMP by the State EMD and FEMA can sometimes take longer than expected, but if all goes well the plan could be approved and finalized by the end of 2010.

Next steps and future HMPT meetings – Bill asked that the HMPT provide comments on the current draft by February 3rd, 2010. The next HMPT meeting is scheduled on February 17, 2010, 5:30 p.m. at the Cosmopolis Fire Hall.

Action Items, Follow-up:

Need to make some edits/additions to the figures that are in the existing Draft HMP

Darrin to send Jerry an e-mail with a drawing showing the locations of the City’s mainline water lines, including the supply lines from the City of Aberdeen

Need to add the assisted living facility at 4th and B Streets to the listing of critical facilities



Olympia, WA 98501

www.hdrinc.com

Telephone (360) 570-4400

Fax (360) 570-7272

Page 1 of 1

Meeting Agenda Subject: City of Cosmopolis Hazard Mitigation Planning Team Meeting No. 2

Meeting Date: February 17, 2010, 5:30 – 7:00 pm Meeting Location: Cosmopolis Fire Hall

Notes by:

Attendees: Team Members Bill Sidor, Building Official Darrin Raines, Public Works Director Casey Stratton, Police Chief Bob Smith, Fire Chief Karen Cox, City Council Carl Sperring, City Council Julia Gibb, Grays Harbor Council of Governments Edgar Devore, citizen, historian Jim Phipps, citizen Dale Andrews, citizen Connie Sipe, citizen Mike Brown, citizen Tina Palmer, citizen Harry Beeler, citizen Tammi Hickle, Superintendent Cosmopolis School District Jerry Louthain, HDR Rona Spellecacy, HDR Agenda:


Previous meeting summary, including next steps (Bill)

Comments received from Julia Gibb and Theressa Julius of Grays Harbor COG

Updates/edits to June 2009 Draft HMP in Track Changes (Jerry Louthain/Rona Spellecacy(HDR) )

Comments/discussion of February 2010 Draft (All)

o Critical Facilities Table and Figure (all)

o Additional edits to Figures (Jerry)

o Table 8-Prioritization of Hazards (all)

o Table 9-Mitigation Measures (all)

Next steps/Update of project schedule (Jerry and Rona)

Date/Time for Open House (all)

Date for Final HMPT meeting (all)



Olympia, WA 98501

www.hdrinc.com

Telephone (360) 570-4400

Fax (360) 570-7272

Page 1 of 2

Meeting Notes Subject: City of Cosmopolis Hazard Mitigation Planning Team Meeting No. 2

Meeting Date: February 17, 2010, 5:30 – 7:00 pm Meeting Location: Cosmopolis Fire Hall

Notes by: Rona Spellecacy, HDR

Attendees: Team Members

Bill Sidor, Building Official Casey Stratton, Police Chief Bob Smith, Fire Chief Karen Cox, City Council Carl Sperring, City Council Julia Gibb, Grays Harbor Council of Governments Jim Phipps, citizen Dale Andrews, citizen Mike Brown, citizen Harry Beeler, citizen Tammi Hickle, Superintendent Cosmopolis School District Jerry Louthain, HDR Rona Spellecacy, HDR Team Members not in Attendance:

Darrin Raines, Public Works Director Edgar Devore, citizen, historian Connie Sipe, citizen Tina Palmer, citizen (will be removed, since unable to attend meetings on Wed. nights) Meeting Notes:

Welcome and previous meeting summary – Bill welcomed everyone and the group briefly reviewed the notes from the kickoff meeting.

Comments received on the draft HMP – to date, comments on the HMP were received from Julia Gibb and Theressa Julius of Grays Harbor COG. These comments, as well as some edits from the consultant team, have been incorporated into a second draft of the HMP. These changes were reviewed with the group and additional comments were provided by some group members.

HMPT members mentioned that had not received Draft No. 2 dated February 2010 prior to this meeting, so they were not prepared with any comments on this updated draft. This was noted and Bill said he would send this out electronically to everyone (which was done on Feb.18) Comments on this draft were requested to be provided to Bill or Jerry

Comments / discussion of current draft HMP – the team discussed several key sections of the HMP:



Olympia, WA 98501

www.hdrinc.com

Telephone (360) 570-4400

Fax (360) 570-7272

Page 2 of 2

o Critical Facilities Table and Figure – the table and figure of critical facilities were reviewed. Jerry is working with the COG to finalize the figure.

o Additional edits to Figures – several other figures require edits and Jerry is working with the COG to incorporate changes.

o Table 8-Prioritization of Hazards – the team reviewed the table, prioritizing and ranking the hazards to suit the needs of the community. The table will be updated in the next draft of the HMP.

Next steps/Update of project schedule – Comments received on Draft 2 will be incorporated into Draft 3 which will be sent out prior to the next and final meeting of the HMPT which is scheduled on March 17, 2010, 5:30 p.m. at the Cosmopolis Fire Hall. The meeting will be focused on review of the hazard mitigation strategy and potential hazard mitigation measures. Following the meeting, a final draft of the HMP will be prepared and provided to the HMPT for review and comment. Following this review and the public open house, the final draft HMP will be submitted to the State Emergency Management Division for review and approval.

Public open house – a public open house will be scheduled sometime during the week of May 10th, 2010. The purpose of the open house is to provide information to the public about the HMP process and provide an opportunity for public comment on the HMP.



Olympia, WA 98501

www.hdrinc.com

Telephone (360) 570-4400

Fax (360) 570-7272

Page 1 of 1


Meeting Date: March 24, 2010, 5:00 – 7:00 pm Meeting Location: Cosmopolis Fire Hall

Notes by:


Bill Sidor, Building Official Darrin Raines, Public Works Director Casey Stratton, Police Chief Bob Smith, Fire Chief Karen Cox, City Council Carl Sperring, City Council Julia Gibb, Grays Harbor Council of Governments Edgar Devore, citizen, historian Jim Phipps, citizen Dale Andrews, citizen Connie Sipe, citizen Mike Brown, citizen Tina Palmer, citizen Harry Beeler, citizen Tammi Hickle, Superintendent Cosmopolis School District Jerry Louthain, HDR Rona Spellecacy, HDR Agenda:


Previous meeting summary, including next steps (Bill)

Comments received on the Draft HMP (Jerry)

Section 5-Hazard Mitigation Strategy (all)

Table 10-Hazard Mitigation Measures (all)

Next steps/Update of project schedule (Jerry and Rona)

Date/Time for Open House (all)



Olympia, WA 98501

www.hdrinc.com

Telephone (360) 570-4400

Fax (360) 570-7272

Page 1 of 2


Meeting Date: March 24, 2010, 5:00 – 7:00 pm Meeting Location: Cosmopolis City Hall

Notes by: Rona Spellecacy


Bill Sidor, Building Official Darrin Raines, Public Works Director Bob Smith, Fire Chief Karen Cox, City Council Carl Sperring, City Council Julia Gibb, Grays Harbor Council of Governments Dale Andrews, citizen Mike Brown, citizen Harry Beeler, citizen Jerry Louthain, HDR Rona Spellecacy, HDR Team members not in attendance: Casey Stratton, Police Chief Edgar Devore, citizen, historian Jim Phipps, citizen Connie Sipe, citizen Tammi Hickle, Superintendent Cosmopolis School District Meeting Notes:

Welcome and previous meeting summary – Bill welcomed everyone and the group briefly reviewed the activities from the previous meeting.

Comments received on the Draft HMP – The consultants requested that the HMPT submit all comments on the Draft HMP by no later than April 30, 2010. All comments will be incorporated into a Final Draft HMP for review by the HMPT before the public open house.

Hazard Mitigation Strategy and mitigation measures – the HMPT reviewed the proposed mitigation strategy and mitigation measures to be included in the HMP. The HMPT prioritized the mitigation measures and discussed potential implementation timelines, responsible City departments, and potential funding sources. The results of the discussion will be incorporated into the Final Draft HMP.

Next steps/Update of project schedule – the consultant team will incorporate comments into a Final Draft HMP and distribute to the HMPT before the Public Open House. The open house is tentatively scheduled on May 10, 2010, 7:00 p.m. at the Cosmopolis City Hall. The open house



Olympia, WA 98501

www.hdrinc.com

Telephone (360) 570-4400

Fax (360) 570-7272

Page 2 of 2

will be held in conjunction with the Cosmopolis Planning Commission meeting. The purpose of the open house is to provide information to the public about the HMP process and provide an opportunity for public comment on the HMP. The City will develop information to advertise the Public Open House. The consultant team will work with the Council of Governments for the COG to prepare Figures from the Draft HMP for large scale displays on poster board to be available at the open house.

You’re invited to:

Cosmopolis Hazard Mitigation Planning Open House Please join the City of Cosmopolis for this important event and learn about the hazard mitigation planning activities in your community. Citizens will have an opportunity to get information and ask questions about the goals and objectives of the Cosmopolis Hazard Mitigation Plan, provide information about the history of disasters in Cosmopolis, and suggest and prioritize mitigation actions. What is Hazard Mitigation Planning? While most disasters cannot be avoided, there are things people can do to lessen the loss of life and damage to property. Hazard mitigation planning is about Cosmopolis working with its citizens to choose which actions are appropriate to protect our community BEFORE disasters strike. This is different than an emergency response plan, which deals with handling disasters AFTER they occur. This is also not a meeting where you will learn what to do during in a disaster. The Cosmopolis Hazard Mitigation Plan will, when complete, assess the vulnerability

of people and property in Cosmopolis to natural hazards; set goals and objectives for minimizing the potential impact of those hazards; and provide a strategy for mitigation of potential hazards in Cosmopolis. What Hazards Are We Talking About? The Cosmopolis Hazard Mitigation Plan will focus on disasters caused by natural hazards. These include:

Landslide Earthquake Flood Severe storm Tsunami Wildland fire Volcano (Ash Fallout) Hazardous Materials Incident

Why does Cosmopolis Need a Hazard Mitigation Plan? Recent disasters in other parts of the world have demonstrated the importance of disaster preparedness at the local level. Cosmopolis received a grant from the Washington State Emergency Management Division in October 2009 to prepare a Hazard Mitigation Plan. Hazard mitigation offers many benefits for your community:

• Saves lives, property, economy and the environment; • Reduces vulnerability to future hazards; • Facilitates post-disaster funding from State and Federal government; • Speeds recovery from a disaster; and • Demonstrates commitment to improving community health and safety.

When and Where: Tuesday, May 11, 2010, 7:00 – 9:00PM Cosmopolis City Hall, 1300 First Street Bill Sidor, Building Official at 532-9230

Appendix B – Plan Adoption

1. Copy of pre-adoption approval letter from FEMA 2. Copy of City Ordinance/Resolution to adopt the Cosmopolis HMP

Appendix C – City Participation in the NFIP

hazard mitigation plan - cosmopolis · 2015. 9. 22. · hazard mitigation plan prepared for the...

Documents